Dist. 35, Art. 1, 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/35/q/bon-sent-IV-d35-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether to dismiss an adulterous wife is a matter of precept.*

Secondly it is asked whether to dismiss an adulterous wife is a matter of precept. And that it is not, seems [to be the case]:

1. On First Corinthians, chapter seven, the Gloss says: « The Lord permitted a wife to be dismissed for the cause of fornication »; but a permission is not a precept: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, granted that the husband has not sinned, then he therefore has a right and an action in demanding the [conjugal] debt from his wife, however much the wife may sin: therefore in whatever way she sins, he is not bound to dismiss her.

3. Likewise, the husband himself is not bound to be continent unless he wishes: therefore since, once his wife is dismissed, he would be bound to be continent, he is not bound to dismiss his wife.

4. Likewise, anyone can remit an injury done to himself and spare the one who sins, nor is he bound to exact a penalty from the one who sins: therefore however often the woman has sinned against her husband by committing adultery, the husband can remit [it]: therefore he is not bound to dismiss her.

**On the contrary:** 1. Chrysostom: « Just as he is cruel and unjust who dismisses a chaste [wife], so he is foolish and unjust who retains a harlot »: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, Jerome: « When a woman has separated herself from her husband by fornication, he ought not to be bound [to her], lest he make her husband also to be under a curse, as Scripture says: *He who keeps an adulteress is foolish and impious* », in the eighteenth [chapter] of Proverbs.

3. Likewise, it belongs to the husband to restrain and correct his wife: therefore if he cohabits with an adulterous woman with marital affection, he consents to the crime: therefore if he is bound not to consent, it is evident etc.

4. Likewise, a woman who fornicates plays the harlot; but *he who cleaves to a harlot is made one body [with her]*: therefore since the members of Christ ought not to become members of a harlot, he is bound to be separated from her.

> **Conclusion.** A wife who commits adultery publicly and persistently the husband is bound to dismiss by precept; but he cannot do this if she sins in secret, nor is he bound [to] if she repents.

**I respond:** It must be said that a spouse who fornicates either fornicates in *secret* or in the *open*. If in *secret*, then he cannot dismiss [her], because he cannot prove [it], and it is not for us to judge concerning hidden things. If in the *open*, either she *perseveres* in her wickedness, or she *is converted* to penitence. If she perseveres in wickedness, then, because she gives scandal, and because the husband is bound to correct his wife according to the evangelical command, he is bound to dismiss her. But if she *repents* and corrects herself, he is not bound [to]. — And in the first case the authorities of the Saints and of the canons are speaking; whence Jerome: « If a husband knows that his wife has offended, and the woman has persisted in fornication, and the husband lives with her, he is a participant in her sin ». Therefore the husband is bound to correct his wife, and hence also to dismiss the fornicating [wife] and by reason of this to be continent for a time; nor does he lose his right over his wife, as will be shown; and although he ought to *remit the injury*, he ought nevertheless to *correct the fault*. — And thus the reasons are to be conceded, that he is not bound to dismiss [her] simply, but in [a particular] case; nor then for all time, but for some [time], for the reason that he is not bound to be continent perpetually; but just as, when the wife is sick bodily, he is bound to be continent for a time, so, when the wife is sick spiritually, for her correction he is bound to repel her for a time, since, although he can *pardon* the fault, he ought nevertheless to *correct* [it]. For these two things were commanded together by the Lord to everyone, namely that each one spare his neighbor; and again, that in sparing he correct. And these two are touched upon together in Matthew, the eighteenth [chapter]. Similarly the reasons for the opposite are to be conceded in that case in which the woman needs some manifest correction on account of the infamy and evidence of the crime. 4. Yet as to what is objected, that she is a harlot; it must be said that a harlot can be known in two ways: either according as [she is] a *harlot*, and thus she is known by one who is not her own, and in this way the Apostle censures this, because it is unto the reproach of Christ; she can also be known as a *wife*; and thus it is unto no one's reproach, but rather she is known in an orderly way. — Likewise, when it is said that to know a harlot is an evil, the proposition must be understood with reduplication, namely inasmuch as she is a harlot, or with harlot-like affection. And thus the whole [matter] is evident.

---