Dist. 32, Art. 3, Q. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/32/q/bon-sent-IV-d32-a3-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether during solemn days the debt may licitly be sought and paid.*

Secondly it is asked, whether during solemn days the debt may licitly be sought and paid. And that it may, it seems.

1. In the first [letter] to the Corinthians, chapter seven: *Do not defraud one another, except by consent for a time, that you may have leisure for prayer*: therefore it is not licit to abstain even for the sake of prayer, unless with both consenting: therefore if [one] has no need to consent, the other can seek, and the other must render.

2. Likewise, it seems so by reason: because conjugal intercourse, by reason of rendering the debt, has of itself no fault: therefore on a solemn day to render is not a sin.

3. Likewise, marriage is established as a remedy for concupiscence, that fornication may be avoided; but it is possible that a weak man be more tempted concerning the work of the flesh on a solemn day: therefore then it is licit to apply the remedy.

4. Likewise, if one of the spouses were to seek the debt out of mere lust to be satisfied, the one from whom it is sought would be bound to pay, because he renders to him what is his own: therefore it seems much more strongly [licit] if in sacred time he seek [it] for the sake of avoiding fornication.

**On the contrary:** 1. That at such a time it ought neither to be sought nor rendered, is shown by the authority of Augustine, which is contained in the text: «To a Christian it is licit sometimes to come together with his wife, sometimes not, on account of the days of procession and of fastings» etc.

2. Likewise, this is seen by the example of Gregory in the first [book] of the Dialogues, that a woman who by night had known her husband, when by day she came to a procession, was seized by the devil; but this would not be, unless it were a grave sin: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, this is seen by reason, namely that it ought neither to be sought nor rendered: because there can be a solemn day, such as Easter or Christmas, on which both are bound to communicate; but it is a constitution of the Church that no one should approach communion when he has known his wife: therefore since they cannot stand together, and [each] is bound to do the one: therefore not to do the other.

4. Likewise, this is seen through the account of virtue, which considers not only the act, but also the due circumstances; but a due circumstance is in discerning a sacred day from a non-sacred one: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, this is seen through a likeness: because it is not licit in every place to seek or render the debt, as in a church: therefore similarly it seems that [it is] not [licit] at every time either.

6. Likewise, this is seen by reason: because the delight in intercourse is greater than in food: therefore if the ecclesiastical institution as regards abstinence from food is to be necessarily observed, much more strongly [is it to be observed] as regards intercourse.

### Conclusion.

> *On solemn days to seek the debt is a fault at least venial, but not [so] to render it.*

**I respond:** It must be said that, as the Master says, «the debt is always to be paid to the one requesting, yet it is not always licit to seek [it]». The reason of this is that to render is [a matter] of necessity, but to seek is [a matter] of will; and on sacred days to seek is [a matter] of disordered pleasure, which is evident thus. For marriage, by reason of its act, is a remedy, yet not altogether healing, but excusing; hence in the conjugal act there is a work of the flesh, which drags the soul downward and toward tasting earthly things and also toward feeling pleasure. Since, therefore, there are some days on which the soul ought to be sanctified and to rise up to divine things, such as the illustrious solemnities; there are also [days] on which the soul ought to be afflicted, such as [those] of fastings and processions: therefore it is fitting at such times to cease from that act; and therefore the holy Fathers instituted [this], yet they did not institute [it] as a precept, on account of the slipperiness of the flesh, which in many is great. And because they did not institute [it] as a precept nor take away the right of seeking the debt; therefore, when it is sought, the necessity of rendering remains.

Therefore it must be said that it can be rendered without all fault on those days, provided however that one render with displeasure and grief; but it cannot be sought without fault; and if the gaze be toward pleasure, the fault is grave, but if toward the slipperiness of the flesh and his own weakness, of which he is conscious, or [if] his conscience vehemently fears, and on account of this he seeks [it]; the sin can be venial; yet it scarcely happens that on the chief days it is not a grave sin. — The reasons are therefore to be granted, that it ought to be rendered, because they cannot defraud except by consent. Hence the time of prayer does not suffice for abstaining, unless there be present also mutual consent, as the Apostle intimates.

1. 2. To that, therefore, which is objected, that to a Christian it is not licit to come together; it must be said that he does not say this on account of this, that it be a mortal sin, and its opposite be [enjoined] in a precept; but because it has a certain unseemliness. And this is evident in the same authority, because it says that on such days they ought to abstain from licit things; and this I say, unless contempt of the solemnity intervene, as was [the case] in that woman of whom Gregory speaks, who went to the procession.

3. To that indeed which is objected, that it ought not to be rendered on account of communion; it must be said that since the one rendering renders with grief and unwillingly, he is not constrained either from entering the church or from communion; yet communion could, by the counsel of a priest, be deferred.

4. To that which is objected, that there is there an excess; it must be said that there is no excess on the part of the one rendering, but rather necessity, but [there is] on the part of the one seeking; if however he do it on account of danger, it is not a mortal excess, but a venial one.

5. To the other it must be said that it is not alike concerning place, because in a place there is the consecration of the Sacrament and the deputation to divine works alone; therefore the sacred place is profaned, for it is a proper table; but time is not so wholly deputed.

6. To the last it must be said that there is not so much danger nor slipperiness in taste as in touch; and therefore [something] was instituted concerning fasting under precept, but concerning cessation from embrace there is [only] counsel, especially for the married, who dwell together with one another.

Let this be said without prejudice, for the reason that the Saints seem to aggravate such intercourse, as the authorities of Jerome in the text seem to hold. But it must be understood that the Saints did not prohibit this, especially since the Apostle says that on account of prayer they ought not to defraud one another except by consent; and therefore it must be granted that this is rather [a matter] of fittingness and honorableness than of necessity, unless conscience oblige, whereby one believe it to be prohibited and a mortal sin; or unless contempt of the sacred day intervene, of which he can greatly fear who then is not ashamed to seek the debt.

---