Dist. 40, Divisio Textus
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/40/q/bon-sent-IV-d40-divisio
----------------------------------------
### Commentary on Distinction XL.
#### *On the impediment of consanguinity.*

> *It now remains to say something concerning kinship,* etc.

### Division of the text

Above the Master treated of the impediment which comes from disparity [of cult]. In this part he treats of the impediment which comes from nearness. And since nearness is twofold, namely carnal and spiritual, therefore he first treats of nearness or carnal kinship; but secondly of the spiritual, below, in the forty-second distinction: *On the degrees of parentage,* etc.

The first part has two [parts]. In the first he treats of consanguinity. In the second, of affinity, below, in the forty-first distinction: *Now affinity must be considered.* — The first part has three. In the first part he determines the truth, showing that consanguinity is to be observed up to the seventh degree. In the second he determines how the degrees are to be reckoned, there: *But how the degrees of consanguinity,* etc. In the third he removes a doubt, there: *But to these there occurs that,* etc.

### Treatment of the questions

#### Preliminary notes

Toward the understanding of this part one must proceed first by the way of *narration*; but secondly, by the way of *inquiry*.

As to the first, in order that the things which are said in this part may be made intelligible, a threefold definition and a threefold note or rule must be set out beforehand.

First, therefore, it must be seen what *consanguinity* is. Now *consanguinity* is defined thus: "Consanguinity is the bond of persons descending from the same stock, contracted by carnal propagation." And *stock* is the name given to the person from whom certain persons have drawn their origin, from whom those descending are blood-relations to one another, and also to him from whom they are.

Secondly, it must be seen what the *line of consanguinity* is, which is defined thus: "A line is an ordered collection of persons joined by consanguinity, descending from the same stock, containing diverse degrees." Hence it is called an *ordered collection*, because, just as there is order in the predicamental line according to higher and lower, so in the line of consanguinity according to prior and posterior. Since order can be taken in three ways — either with respect to what is above, or to what is below, or to what is beside — therefore three lines have customarily been assigned. For one is of *ascendants*, another of *descendants*, another of *collaterals*. — According to the *ascending* line the degrees are reckoned thus, namely father and mother, grandfather and grandmother, great-grandfather and great-grandmother, great-great-grandfather and great-great-grandmother. — According to the *descending* line, son and daughter, grandson and granddaughter, great-grandson and great-granddaughter, great-great-grandson and great-great-granddaughter. — According to the *collateral* line, two brothers, the sons of two brothers, the grandsons of two brothers, the great-grandsons of two brothers, and there is the limit.

Thirdly, it must be seen what a *degree* is, which is defined thus: "A degree is the relation of distant persons, by which it is known by how great a distance of generation two persons differ from each other." — And note that this definition is according to the *canon* laws. For according to the *civil* laws degrees are taken according to the number of persons gathered in the line. Hence the legists say that brother and sister make *two* degrees; but the decretist says that they make *one* and the first degree. Nor is there a contradiction, because of one relation there are two extremes; and because according to the canon laws a degree is a *relation*, since of a twofold extreme there is one relation, one degree is posited; but because there are two persons, and each has its own respect to the principle, therefore according to the [civil] laws two degrees are reckoned.

These things having been seen, three notes are here to be noted. — The first is that it is lawful for no one to contract [marriage] with any woman up to the fourth degree inclusive; and the prohibition of this kind is such that "if anyone shall have presumed to be joined against it, let him not be defended by any length of years, since length of time does not lessen sin, but increases it; and crimes are the graver the longer they hold the unhappy soul bound"; and this is proved in the *Extra*, *On Consanguinity*, [the decretal] *Non oportet*, etc.

The second note is that "persons descending from a stock stand apart from one another by as great a degree as that by which they stand apart from the stock"; and therefore, if anyone wishes to know in what degree certain persons are related to one another, since such relatedness draws its origin from the stock, it is necessary that he go back to that person to whom he is more immediately joined. Manifest examples: as if from A there proceed B and G, and B beget C, and C [beget] D, and D E, and E F; similarly, let G beget H, and H beget I, and I beget K, and K L; if you wish to know by how great a degree F and I stand apart, you must trace back the generation of each to A, because they differ from one another by as great a degree as that by which they stand apart from the stock.

The third rule is that when persons stand unequally distant from the stock — as, for instance, when one is in the second degree and the other in the fifth — then the line of consanguinity and the degree ought to be reckoned according to the distance of the more remote. And this rule is confirmed by that which is said in the *Extra*, *On Consanguinity*, in the last decretal, which is Gregory's. — Now the reason for this is that the whole account of nearness has its rise from the stock: therefore no one is nearer to any collateral than to the stock. If, then, he stands apart from the stock by five degrees, by parity of reasoning he stands apart from the collateral — whether that one stand apart by one degree, or stand apart by two degrees — in the fifth. But if he stands apart by more, the reckoning must be made according to the more distant; and therefore he who stands apart in the fifth degree can contract [marriage] with him who stands apart in the second.

These things, however, having been presupposed by way of narration, by way of inquiry a doubt can arise here concerning three matters.

The first is whether consanguinity is any bond.

Secondly, granted that it is, it is asked whether it constitutes an impediment to marriage.

Thirdly, granted that it does constitute one, it is asked up to what degree.

---