Dist. 35, Art. 1, Q. 5
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-q5
----------------------------------------
### Question V. *Whether, after a divorce, the man and the woman can be reconciled to each other.*

Fifthly it is asked whether, after a divorce, the man and the wife can be reconciled to each other. And that they can, seems [to be the case].

1. First to the Corinthians, chapter seven: *If the wife depart from her husband,* he commands [her] *to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband:* therefore she can be reconciled to him.

Likewise, that the *innocent man* can reconcile to himself an unwilling wife seems [to be the case]:

2. Because he did not sin, therefore he lost nothing of his right, therefore he can demand the debt: therefore she is bound to render it.

3. Likewise, the man is not bound to be continent, because he is not obligated, neither by vow nor by penalty; and he cannot marry another: therefore he can reconcile to himself his own wife.

Likewise, that a *fornicatress* can reconcile to herself an unwilling husband seems [to be the case]:

4. Granted that she has sufficiently done penance, the fault and the penalty are remitted: therefore the cause of the divorce ceases: therefore « since, the cause ceasing, the effect ceases », it seems, etc.

5. Likewise, it is possible for the man to fornicate; but with the man fornicating, an exception lies against the man demanding a divorce: therefore, by parity of reasoning, an action lies for the woman to reclaim the man.

**On the contrary:**

1. There is a rule in the canon, Cause six, question four: « What has once been well decided ought not to be retracted by any repetition »: therefore, since the divorce has been celebrated by a decision of the Church, it is clear, etc.

2. Likewise, each [party] can keep continence and take a vow after the divorce: therefore the one has no right in the other: therefore, if they have no right in each other, they can no longer be reconciled to each other.

3. Likewise, that no action against the other lies for *the one who has fornicated* seems [to be the case]: because there is a rule in law, that « an action once extinguished is not revived »: therefore, if by fornication she lost the right of demanding the debt, it is clear, etc.

4. Likewise, that *the man* cannot reconcile to himself a fornicatress seems [to be the case], because in judgment he sought and obtained the separation: therefore he renounced the right of demanding the debt; and if this [is so], since he cannot act on the basis of what he renounced, it seems, etc.

> **Conclusion.** Reconciliation can take place when both parties consent, or when only the guilty party resists; but not when both dissent, or when the innocent party resists.

**I respond:** It must be said that, for making a reconciliation, either *both agree,* or *both disagree,* or *one seeks it and the other refuses.* — If *both agree,* it takes place without doubt; if *both disagree,* it neither can nor ought to take place, unless it be done on account of scandal to the Church, which is scandalized because both fornicate publicly. But if *one* seeks it, either the *guilty* one seeks the *innocent;* and thus [the innocent] ought not to be compelled to reconciliation. Or the *innocent* [seeks] the *guilty,* as a chaste husband [seeks] an adulterous wife; and thus, though she be unwilling, she ought to be reconciled by the judgment of the Church, because, as the laws say, « what has been introduced in my favor ought not to be turned to my harm ». Or the guilty seeks the guilty, as when a woman, who first fornicated, reclaims a husband who fornicated after the divorce; and thus the husband must be restored to the wife *unwillingly,* not because the woman's action has been revived, but as a penalty for the man's fornication, because he has abused the privilege of liberty. However much, nevertheless, the woman may do penance, she never acquires a right in the man, against his will, unless the man fornicates; and this on account of the affront which she inflicted on the matrimony, because she sinned directly against the good of fidelity. — From these things the solution of the objections to the first part is clear.

*To 1.* To that, then, which is objected, that the sentence must not be retracted; it must be said that this is true as far as the rigor of the law is concerned, yet not as far as the favor of the innocent person is concerned, as has been said.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that each [party] can vow continence; it must be said that this is false, because the one who fornicates cannot [do so], unless the other consents; and unless, after penance, he wishes to receive her back, the bishop can grant her leave to enter religion.

*To 3, 4.* To that which is objected, that the woman's action is extinguished, and that the man renounced his right; it must be said that this is false: because the woman's action is not extinguished *simply,* but *under a condition,* namely if the man shall have remained continent; and the reason for this is that the bond always remains. — Or it can be said that the action is not revived, but is granted or acquired anew from the law on account of the man's sin. — Likewise the following [point] is false, because the man does not renounce his right simply, but *for a time*.

---