Chapter 21

[138]The following is the form of theiuramentum de reconciliatione coniugatorumtaken byGeffcken(op. cit., 79) from cc. 241, 242, ofRegino'sbook: The man shall swear: "Ab isto die in antea istam tuam coniugem, nomine illam, quam iniuste dimiseras, ita tenebis, sicut per rectum maritus suam debet habere coniugem in dilectione et debita disciplina, nec eam per ullum malum ingenium a te separabis, nec ea vivente aliam accipies. Sic te Deus adiuvet." The oath of the woman runs: "A modo in antea istum tuum maritum, quem iniuste dimiseras, ita tenebis et amplexaberis, et ei in servitio, in amore et in timore ita eris subiecta et obediens, sicut per rectum uxor suo debet subiecta esse marito, nec unquam ab eo te separabis, nec illo vivente alteri viro te sociabis in coniugio aut adulterio. Sic te Deus adiuvet."[139]SeeWunderlich'sexcellent edition ofTancredi summa de matrimonio, especially 16 ff., on the impediments, and 70 ff., on causes of separation.[140]Thus, for example, Gratian accounts for the liberty of divorce and remarriage accorded in the letter of Gregory II. (confusing him with Gregory I.) by assuming that it was in consequence of a papal dispensation in favor of the English (Decret. Grat.,dictumto c. 18, C. XXXII, qu. 7), although elsewhere he more sensibly rejects Gregory's action as unorthodox. Peter Lombard makes no mention of Gregory's letter and with Gratian rejects as false the passage of pseudo-Ambrose allowing separation and remarriage for adultery (Esmein,op. cit., II, 76); while others get out of the difficulty through the gratuitous assumption that pseudo-Ambrose refers, not to simple adultery, but to a case of incest committed by a woman with a relative of her husband,affinitas superveniens. Gratian will not accept this explanation, on the ground that, according to the theory ofaffinitas superveniens, husband and wife are treated alike. Yet, with delicious inconsequence, he proceeds to explain why pseudo-Ambrose had given the man alone the right to remarry in case of the wife's adultery, without granting the woman the reciprocal privilege. In the text of Ambrose, he says, the wordsvirandmulierare not employed in their proper sense, but figuratively. Each is used for man irrespective of sex.Viris fromvirtus, and means man as a strong being resisting temptation;mulieris frommollities(softness), and it is used to denote the weak-minded man guilty of sin (Dec. Grat.,dictumto c. 18, C. XXXII, qu. 7.Cf.Esmein,op. cit., II, 76;Freisen,op. cit., 582, 805). Ivo of Chartres, bent on sustaining the rigid theory of indissolubility, cites cc. 5 and 9 of the decree of Verberie in its favor, deliberately suppressing the clauses allowing the man to remarry (see hisDecretum, X, 169; VIII, 189; also hisPanormia, VI, 91:Geffcken,op. cit., 82); and Gratian, by adopting Ivo's text for c. 9 instead of the original, gets around a similar difficulty (Freisen,op. cit., 803). Celestin III. and Urban III. allowed the faithful spouse divorce and remarriage when the other becomes an infidel or a heretic; but the later canonists evaded this authority by claiming that these popes spoke merely as "simple doctors" (Esmein,op. cit., II, 80).On the wide use of "metaphor" in the history of the church seeLecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 217; and especially hisHist. of European Morals, II, 326, 327, 356-58.[141]For once at least we can almost pardon Milton for using strong language.Selden'swork,Of the Law of Nature and of Nations, he holds more useful than anything which "pontifical clerks have doted on, ever since that unfortunate mother famously sinned thrice, and died impenitent of her bringing into the world those two misbegotten infants, and for ever infants, Lombard and Gratian, him the compiler of canon iniquity, the other the Tubalcain of scholastic sophistry, whose over-spreading barbarism hath not only infused their own bastardy upon the fruitfullest part of human learning, not only dissipated and dejected the clear light of nature in us, and of nations, but hath tainted also the fountains of divine doctrine, and rendered the pure and solid law of God unbeneficial to us by their calumnious dunceries."—"Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce,"Prose Works, III, 269.[142]Cf.especiallyDecretum Gratiani, cc. 1-24,causaxxxii, qu. 7:Richter-Friedberg,Corpus Juris Can., I;Peter Lombard,Sententiae, IV, D. xxvii ff.[143]Esmein,op. cit., II, 79, 80. The early canonists are discussed byGeffcken,op. cit., 58-62, 75-82;Cigoi,Unauflösbarkeit, 93 ff.; but for the most minute examination of them all seeFreisen,op. cit., 793-847; also the very clear account ofEsmein,op. cit., II, 71 ff. On the formation of the canon law seeTissot,Le mariage, 111 ff.[144]Esmein,op. cit., II, 73, 85-89, who gives a brief account of the evolution of the uses of the termdivortium. Originally, among the canonists, there was but one kind ofdivorce,i. e., any judicial separation between man and wife, whether or not with the right to remarry. This led to confusion; and so the distinction between divorcea vinculoorquoad vinculumanda mensa et toroorquoad mensam et torumwas differentiated. Beginning with Bernard of Pavia, the first compiler of the Decretals, the termdivortiumappears regularly as a rubric in the later collections of the canon law.[145]For the exceptions seeEsmein,op. cit., II, 91, 92;Freisen,op. cit., 833-36;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 288, 289.[146]More exactly speakingfornicatio spiritualis"as opposed tofornicatio carnalis," the first cause mentioned.[147]Crimes against nature, idolatry, etc.:Esmein,op. cit., II, 90 n. 1.[148]Such as forcing a spouse to idolatry or to some heinous crime. This case is regarded as an enlargement of the conception offornicatio spiritualis:Esmein,op. cit., II, 90 n. 4, 92 nn. 8, 9.Cf.Freisen,op. cit., 836.[149]Esmein,op. cit., II, 93, 94. Earlier divorcea mensa et thorowas not granted on this ground unless there was real danger to the life of one of the parties; but at last it was decided thatnimia saevitiawould suffice, but the term is not defined:idem,loc. cit.In general on this species of divorce seeFreisen,op. cit., 830-47;Geary,Marriage and Family Relations, 238, 239, 350;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 286-91.[150]Decret. Grat., II,caus.xviii, qu. 2, C. 2; andDecretalsIV, 19,de divortiis, c. 7: seeRichter-Friedberg,Corpus juris can., I.[151]This isFreisen'sargument,op. cit., 825-27, 817 ff. See alsoScheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 276-78. The canon law maintains the validity of a marriage between two infidels contracted before conversion. According toPeter Lombard, the believer may, indeed, put away his unconverted consort, but may not remarry. Only when the infidel is the active party, the Christian being the passive, is the latter released from the marriage bond:Sententiae, IV., D. 39, § G;Freisen,op. cit., 814. This privilege is much discussed in modern theological literature: see the references inFreisen,op. cit., 826 n. 27. In general compareWoolsey,Divorce, 74 ff., 125;Esmein,op. cit., I, 220-32; II, 268 ff., 307;Scheurl,op. cit., 276, 277.[152]Pollock and Maitland,Hist, of Eng. Law, II, 391, 392: citing for the first caseTovey,Anglia Judaica, 84;Co. Lit., 31b, 32a; and for the second,Calend. Geneal., II, 563.[153]So in India:Pollock and Maitland,op. cit., II, 391 n. 2: citing Maine's speech on the "Remarriage of Native Converts," inMemoir and Speeches and Minutes(London, 1892), 130.Cf.especiallyEsmein,op. cit., II, 268 ff., who discusses some of the "curious problems" growing out of this rule.[154]For the evils arising in clandestine marriagede praesenti, the complexity of the law of forbidden degrees, and the conflicting jurisdiction of the temporal and spiritual courts, see chap. viii above.[155]Freisen,op. cit., 826 ff., 212 ff., shows that thedispensatio summi pontificis a matrimonio rato nondum consummatooriginated with the reforms of Alexander III.; and argues rightly that these two kinds of dissolution—dispensation and orders—are in harmony with the rule of indissolubility according to the doctrine of Gratian, but not according to the existing theory. Thus, of the old eight causes which were sufficient of themselves to dissolvematrimonium initiatum—identical with the latersponsalia de praesenti—holy orders alone remains; the papal dispensation has taken the place of the other seven:ibid., 827, 829;cf.on these exceptionsScheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 278-86.[156]See chaps. vii and viii, above.[157]Jeaffreson,Brides and Bridals, II, 299 ff., conjectures that during the Middle Ages there must have been many irregular self-divorces; and he cites the famous case of William Paynel and Margaret his wife who, in 1302, "petitioned the king for the dower that was due to her as widow of her first husband John de Camoys," who with her consent had "openly and before witnesses 'given, granted, released, and quit-claimed' the said Margaret to 'her chivalric knight,'" the said William. The court refused the dower on the ground of desertion and adultery.Cf.on this casePollock and Maitland,Hist. of Eng. Law, II, 393, 394.[158]Jeaffreson,op. cit., II, 306-9.[159]Pollock and Maitland,op. cit., II, 391 n. 1. Read the interesting remarks ofLecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 193-96, who cites, as illustrative of the policy of the Roman church, the divorce case of Napoleon and Josephine. See alsoLaw Review(English), I, 353-56.[160]Before Innocent III., 1215, who reduced the number to four:Woolsey,Divorce, 121.[161]Thwing,The Family, 83.Cf.Woolsey,op. cit., 118 ff.[162]It is interesting to find Wolsey writing in Henry VIII.'s name "to remind her of the 'divine ordinance of inseparable matrimony first instituted in paradise,' protesting against 'the shameless sentence sent from Rome'":Tait, inDict. of Nat. Biog., XXXVI, 155.[163]Henry Stuart (Stewart) was made Lord Methven by Margaret's son, James V. She "attempted to get rid of that nobleman by a sentence of the ecclesiastical court, on the ground that before the marriage she had been (as the record expresses it)carnaliter cognitaby her husband's fourth cousin, the earl of Angus."—Riddell,Scots' Peerage Law, 187;Law Review, I, 354. On Margaret's marriages and divorces compareThwing,The Family, 83;Woolsey,Divorce, 169, who says she "got from Rome a separation from her second husband, the Earl of Angus, on the pretext of a pre-contract between him and another lady;" and especially the very accurate account ofTait, inDict. of Nat. Biog., XXXVI, 150-57.[164]Jeaffreson,Brides and Bridals, II, 310, who quotes the following verses entitled "A Poem on the Times of Edward II." from thePercy Society Publication:"If a man have a wyf,And he love her nowt,Bring her to the constery,There trewth schuld be wrowt.Bring twei fals wytnes with hym,And hymself the thrydde,And he shall be deperted,As fair as he wold bydde,From his wyf;He schal be maynteyned fulle wellTo lede a sory lyf."When he is depertedFrom hys trew spowse,Take hys neyghboures wyfAnd bryng her to howse,Yif he have selverAmong the clerkes to send,He may have hir to hys wyfTo hys life's end,With onskylle,Thei that so fair with falseness deleGodde's corse on her bille."[165]Lecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 194. For other examples seeHuth,Marriage of Near Kin, 118-20.[166]32 H. VIII., c. 38:Statutes at Large(London, 1763), II, 298.The facility with which dispensations could be secured is illustrated by a Scotch case in 1426-28. On April 11, 1426, Pope Martin V. granted a dispensation to Alexander of Hume and Marion of Lander to marry, though of double fourth degree of consanguinity. Curiously enough, perhaps because this dispensation had not yet been received, on Oct. 6, 1427, Hume appeared before the rector sitting as judge and proposed that his marriage could not stand of right because of consanguinity. The marriage was therefore pronounced null and void, and the parties were given license to marry whom they pleased. On the fourth day of the following January Hume and his former wife presented a petition to the papal see, announcing that, aware of their consanguinity, they had contracted marriageper verba de praesentiand begotten children; that when their ordinary heard of the consanguinity he rightly celebrated a divorce, which they obeyed; but they feared scandal, and for this and other reasons they desired to be joined in marriage. The pope therefore granted another dispensation and declared their offspring legitimate:Hist. Manuscripts Commission, XII. Report, App. VIII, 122, 123. In another case, 1459, the earl of Rothes declares on oath that he had within the last year obtained certain knowledge of the impediment of consanguinity as set forth in his libel, and that formerly, for the space of thirteen years after birth of the last of his living children, he was altogether ignorant of it:ibid.,IV. Report, 507.[167]In general seeCigoi,Unauflösbarkeit, 149 ff.;Perrone,De mat. christ., III, 376 ff., 389 ff., 398 ff.;Godolphin,Repartorium canonicum, 61, 62, 492-512;Esmein,Le mariage en droit canonique, II, 295 ff., 308 ff.;Schulte,Lehrbuch, 359-61;Lecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 193, 196, 197;Glasson,Le mariage civil et le divorce, 216, 217;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 275, 276, where the canons adopted at the twenty-fourth session are given.[168]By the bishop of Barcelona, who proposed the wordseparatiofor divorcequoad torum:Esmein,op. cit., II, 309. On the misleading names for the two kinds of separation seePollock and Maitland,Hist. of Eng. Law, II, 392 n. 5. However, a "modern distinction of some Catholic writers betweenanullatioandseparatioremoves all ambiguity."—Woolsey,Divorce, 124.[169]"viii. Si quis dixerit ... vel Ecclesiam errare, dum ob alias causas, praeter adulterium, facit divortium quoad thorum seu cohabitationem, ad tempus vel perpetuo: anathema sit."—Theiner,Acta, II, 313:Esmein,op. cit., II, 309 n. 1.[170]Distinction is made betweendispensatio super matrimonio, that is, for dissolving an unconsummate marriage; anddispensatio matrimonialis, that is, to remove an impediment which otherwise would invalidate a proposed contract. In all cases of dispensation careful judicial inquiry as to the grounds of application is made:Geary,Marriage and Family Relations, 510-14.Cf.Woolsey,op. cit., 122, 123; and especially the convenient manual ofPompen,De dispensationibus, 122-68. For a full discussion of the intricate law and custom as to dispensation seeEsmein,op. cit., II, 315-68;Freisen,Geschichte des can. Eherechts, 891-906;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 281 ff. In the oriental church dispensation from the forbidden degrees is in general not allowed,Zhishman:Das Eherecht der orient. Kirche, 709-17.[171]The writings of Luther, Milton, and other Reformation and Puritan writers abound in examples of such charges. "For no cause, honest or necessary," saysMartin Bucer, "will they permit a final divorce: in the meanwhile, whoredoms and adulteries, and worse things than these, not only tolerating in themselves and others, but cherishing and throwing men headlong into these evils. For although they also disjoin married persons from board and bed, that is, from all conjugal society and communion, and this not only for adultery, but for ill usage, and matrimonial duties denied; yet they forbid those thus parted to join in wedlock with others: but, as I said before, any dishonest associating they permit."—"The Judgment of Martin Bucer," inMilton'sProse Works, III, 292.[172]Goeschen,Doctrina de mat., 60; alsoMejer, "Zur Geschichte des ält. prot. Eherechts," inZKR., XVI, 47;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 139 ff.[173]Cf.Esmein,Le mariage en droit canonique, II, 308, 309. Throughout hisDoctrine and Discipline of Divorce, as elsewhere in his writings,Miltoninsists that a real marriage implies a full spiritual as well as conjugal companionship, with which the theory of separation without dissolution is inconsistent; and this is the common Puritan view.[174]For example, seeMilton'sspecious argument, following the allegorical method of some of the early theologians, to show the scope of the term "fornication" as used by Jesus and Moses: "Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce,"Prose Works, III, 251-58, 394-401.[175]SeeMilton'ssummary of their views: "Tetrachordon,"loc. cit., 423-33.[176]Richter,Beiträge zur Gesch. des Ehescheidungsrechts in der evang. Kirche, 11 ff., 15 ff., 56 ff.;idem,Kirchenrecht, 1177.[177]Adultery and desertion are the only grounds of full divorce recognized byBrenz,Wie yn Ehesachen ... zu Handeln, inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 152-57, andidem,Corpus juris mat., 183 ff.; with which may be compared the passages from the writings ofBrenzquoted byRichter,Beiträge, 19-23;Bugenhagen,Vom Ehebruch und Weglauffen: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 138-51; orCorpus juris mat., 171-84;Chemnitz,Examen conc. trid., II, 430; Calvin, inRichter,op. cit., 25, 26;Beza,Tract. de repud. et divort.(Geneva, 1569), 228 ff., 275 ff.;Kling,Tract. mat. causarum(Frankfort, 1577), 89 ff.;Beust,Tract. de jure connub.;idem,Tract. de spons. et mat., 147 ff.;Schneidewin,Com. in inst.;idem,De nupt., lib. primi com.(Jena, 1585), §§ 7 ff.These and other writers are discussed byRichter,Kirchenrecht, 1175 ff.;idem,Beiträge, 15 ff.;Mejer,Zum Kirchenrechte der Reformat., 147 ff.;Hauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 209 ff. In general, compareGreve,Ehescheidung, 225 ff.;Popp,Ehescheidung, 80 ff.;Strippelmann,Das Ehescheidungsrecht, 54 ff., 128 ff.;Stölzel,Ehescheidungsrecht, 9 ff.;Glasson,Le mar. civ. et le divorce, 224, 225, 329, 330;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 291 ff.;Buchka,Das meckl. Ehescheidungsrecht, 20 ff.;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 43 ff.;Friedberg,Lehrbuch, 366-78;idem, "Beiträge,"ZKR., VII, 56-127; andSchulte,Lehrbuch, 414-28.[178]Chemnitz,Examen conc. trid.(Frankfort, 1615), II, 430 says: "We have, then, two cases in Scripture where the bond of matrimony is dissolved—not as by men, but by God himself. 1. On account of adultery a man lawfully, rightfully, and without sin, can repudiate his wife." 2. Desertion of the believer by the unbeliever, according to 1 Cor., 7.Cf.Woolsey,Divorce, 131;Richter,Beiträge, 27, 28. On the adoption of these two general causes at the Reformation seeHubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 44 ff.[179]1 Cor. 7:15.[180]As early as 1520 in hisVon dem bab. Gefängniss der Kirche(Strampff, 349, 350, 381, 382)Lutheradmits the two grounds of divorce, adultery and desertion; the latter when either spouse abandons the other "über zehen Jahr oder nimmer wiederkommen." Two years later, in hisVom ehelichen Leben, he appears to regard refusal of conjugal duty as equivalent to desertion. "We may find an obstinate woman," he says, "who stiffens her neck, and if her husband should fall ten times into unchastity, cares nothing about it. Here it is time for a man to say, 'if you won't, another can be found that will. If the wife will not, let the maid come.' Yet let it be so that the husband give her two or three warnings beforehand, and let the matter come before other people, so that her obstinacy may be known and rebuked before the congregation. If she will not, let her be gone, and procure an Esther for yourself and let Vashti be off, as Ahasuerus did."—As rendered byWoolsey,Divorce, 130, 131. For the original seeStrampff, 350, 351, 394, 395;Luther'sKleinere Schriften, II, 26-31; andSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 137, 138.Cf.Richter,Beiträge, 16;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 300 ff. InLuther'sVon Ehesachen(1530) the refusal of conjugal duty is not mentioned; but it is doubtless included under malicious desertion; and besides in 1531 he commends the book of Brenz in which this position is taken.Cf.Richter,op. cit., 18, 19;Strampff, 394. In theTischredenflight on account of theft is regarded as desertion:Richter,loc. cit.On the use made of "definition" by the Protestants seeHubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 51.[181]Quasi malitiosa desertiocomprehends not only refusal of conjugal duty, but also applies to the case of a defendant who abandoned a consort, but who does not necessarily, as in malicious desertion, remain in a place unknown or one beyond the reach of judicial process:Strippelmann,Ehescheidungsrecht, 146 ff.Cf.Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht, 25 ff.;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 80, 88 ff. See especiallyLuther,Vom ehel. Leben;Strampff, 394, 395, who says the "weltliche Ubirkeit das Weib zwingen oder umbbringen" soll.[182]Luther does not allow absolute divorce on account of anger or incompatibility,insidiae, or attempts upon life, exile, sickness, incurable disease, misfortune to an innocent spouse, or similar grounds: see hisVon Ehesachen, inStrampff, 398, 399;Vom ehel. Leben:ibid., 400;Predigt von dem Ehestande(1525):ibid., 400; andAuslegung des 17. Cap. 1 Cor.(1523):ibid., 397, 398, where only temporary separation is allowed, unless one of the parties refuses reconciliation and the other "kunnt nicht halten;" but in this case the "separation has the refusal of conjugal duty as a consequence, or it has become malicious desertion":Strampff, 396, 351, 352, 382 ff.Cf.Brenz,Wie yn Ehesachen ... zu Handeln: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 155 ff.;Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht, 31 ff.;Hauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 242 ff.[183]Richter,Beiträge, 14, who points out that, through reaction against the papal system the theologians for the most part were in favor of the Roman law, while the majority of the jurists were opposed to it. The Protestant leaders are thus divided on the question whether the canon law should be accepted as binding:Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 45. On the admission of other grounds of divorce seeStrippelmann,Ehescheidungsrecht, 151 ff.;Schulte,Lehrbuch, 416.[184]Erasmus,Annot. in Nov. Test.(Basel, 1515); quoted byRichter,Beiträge, 8-10.[185]Richter,op. cit., 6 ff.;Bullinger,Der christ. Ehestand(ed. 1579), lf. 102.[186]Woolsey,Divorce, 132; alsoThwing,The Family, 84. For the ordinance seeRichter,op. cit., 6, 7. Similar causes are approved byBullinger,Der christ. Ehestand, 102, appealing to the laws of the "holy Constantine, Theodosius, Valentinian, Anastasius, and Justinian."[187]Lambert of Avignon,De sacro conjugio(Strassburg, 1524): cited byRichter,op. cit., 31, 32.[188]See hisDe regno Christi(1557), II, 25 ff.; and the elaborate dissertation entitledEtlicher gelerten Theologi bedencken von der Ehescheidung: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 161 ff.; alsoibid.,Corpus juris mat., 196 ff., whichRichter,op. cit., 34 ff., ascribes to Bucer; thoughMejer,Zum Kirchenrecht, 183, doubts the correctness of this view. On Bucer's doctrines see the discussion of Milton below.[189]Melanchthon, "De conjugio,"Opera Omnia(Erlangen, 1828), I, pars II, 236 ff.; or inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 159 ff.; oribid.,Corpus juris mat., 190 ff.Cf.alsoRichter,Beiträge, 32-34; and especiallyMejer,Zum Kirchenrecht, 179-82, who compares the view of Melanchthon with that of Luther, showing that the former goes back to the Theodosian code.[190]Monner,Tract. de mat. et clandes. conjugiis(Jena, 1561):ap.Richter,Beiträge, 40, 41. Representatives of the more liberal tendency in the sixteenth century are Chyträus, Hunnius, Wigand, Osiander, and the Danish theologian Hemming:Richter,op. cit., 42, 43, 28.[191]Of course, after regular process was somewhat developed, as will presently be shown, thetoleramusor permission of the magistrate concluding the decree was requisite to the remarriage even of the innocent person.[192]TheRenovatio ecc. Nord.(1525):Richter,Kirchenordnungen, I, 20, tolerates the second marriage of a person whose spouse has committed adultery. The PrussianLandesordnungof the same year expressly sanctions the divorce and remarriage of the injured spouse whose partner has committed the same offense:Richter,op. cit., I, 32. In 1531 the church ordinance of Goslar and that of Lübeck, drafted by Bugenhagen, recognize malicious desertion as a second ground for dissolving wedlock:Richter,op. cit., I, 156, 148; and a similar provision appears in the Pommer ordinance of 1535, also drafted by Bugenhagen:Richter,op. cit., 250. CompareSchulte,Lehrbuch, 414-28, who gives an account of the provisions of the many ordinances regarding divorce and remarriage.[193]"Wenn der Ehebruch bey dem halse gestraffet würde, so bedürffte man hie nicht viel fragens":Bugenhagen,Vom Ehebruch und Weglauffen: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 138.[194]Richter,op. cit., 31, 45; citingLambert of Avignon,De sacra conjugio, who recommends excommunication in case the magistrate does not execute the criminal.[195]On Beust, Beza, and Brenz seeRichter,op. cit., 45, 46. CompareBeust,Tract. de spons. et mat., 140, where he declares that the penalty for adultery is death; andBrenz,Wie yn Ehesachen ... zu Handeln: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 152, where he leaves the offender to the temporal magistrate, urging rigorous punishment; and in cases of negligence advising excommunication by the parish priest.[196]Melanchthon, "De conjugio,"Opera Omnia, I, pars II, 238: "Respondeo: magistratus politicus adulteria punire debet: ideo persona condemnata, si non punitur durius, pellenda est ex iis locis, ubi vivit persona innocens: cui altera, videlicet condemnata, velut mortua existimanda est; et haec severitas ad politicum magistratum pertinet."[197]Woolsey,Divorce, 138, 139. See Luther,Vom ehel. Leben: inStrampff, 363, 364; or inSarcerius,op. cit., 137. On Calvin seeStrippelmann,Ehescheidungsrecht, 69, 70. The same view is expressed byHooper,Early Writings, 383; and by Bucer:Milton'sProse Works, III, 299.[198]Richter,Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechszehnten Jahrhunderts.In many Protestant lands these ecclesiastical statutes or provisions, with the sanction of the civil authority, took the place of the old canon law. For a discussion of their contents see especially the monographs ofGoeschen,Doctrina de mat., 59 ff.;idem, inHerzog'sEncyclopädie, III, 702 ff.;Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht; and compareHauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 219 ff.;Richter,Beiträge, 51 ff.;idem,Kirchenrecht, 1177, 1178;Strippelmann,Das Ehescheidungsrecht, 78 ff.;Greve,Ehescheidung, 298 ff.;Thwing,The Family, 84, 85;Woolsey,Divorce, 136-38.[199]For example, by theRenovatio ecc. nord.(1525):Richter,Kirchenordnungen, I, 20; the Würtemberg ordinance of 1537:ibid., I, 280; the ordinance of the "Niederländer in London":ibid., II, 115; that of the foreign "Gemeinde zu Frankfurt":ibid., 157.[200]Goeschen,Doctrina de mat., 61, 62, notes.[201]As by the Prussian ordinance of 1584:Richter,op. cit., II, 468.

[139]SeeWunderlich'sexcellent edition ofTancredi summa de matrimonio, especially 16 ff., on the impediments, and 70 ff., on causes of separation.

[140]Thus, for example, Gratian accounts for the liberty of divorce and remarriage accorded in the letter of Gregory II. (confusing him with Gregory I.) by assuming that it was in consequence of a papal dispensation in favor of the English (Decret. Grat.,dictumto c. 18, C. XXXII, qu. 7), although elsewhere he more sensibly rejects Gregory's action as unorthodox. Peter Lombard makes no mention of Gregory's letter and with Gratian rejects as false the passage of pseudo-Ambrose allowing separation and remarriage for adultery (Esmein,op. cit., II, 76); while others get out of the difficulty through the gratuitous assumption that pseudo-Ambrose refers, not to simple adultery, but to a case of incest committed by a woman with a relative of her husband,affinitas superveniens. Gratian will not accept this explanation, on the ground that, according to the theory ofaffinitas superveniens, husband and wife are treated alike. Yet, with delicious inconsequence, he proceeds to explain why pseudo-Ambrose had given the man alone the right to remarry in case of the wife's adultery, without granting the woman the reciprocal privilege. In the text of Ambrose, he says, the wordsvirandmulierare not employed in their proper sense, but figuratively. Each is used for man irrespective of sex.Viris fromvirtus, and means man as a strong being resisting temptation;mulieris frommollities(softness), and it is used to denote the weak-minded man guilty of sin (Dec. Grat.,dictumto c. 18, C. XXXII, qu. 7.Cf.Esmein,op. cit., II, 76;Freisen,op. cit., 582, 805). Ivo of Chartres, bent on sustaining the rigid theory of indissolubility, cites cc. 5 and 9 of the decree of Verberie in its favor, deliberately suppressing the clauses allowing the man to remarry (see hisDecretum, X, 169; VIII, 189; also hisPanormia, VI, 91:Geffcken,op. cit., 82); and Gratian, by adopting Ivo's text for c. 9 instead of the original, gets around a similar difficulty (Freisen,op. cit., 803). Celestin III. and Urban III. allowed the faithful spouse divorce and remarriage when the other becomes an infidel or a heretic; but the later canonists evaded this authority by claiming that these popes spoke merely as "simple doctors" (Esmein,op. cit., II, 80).On the wide use of "metaphor" in the history of the church seeLecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 217; and especially hisHist. of European Morals, II, 326, 327, 356-58.

On the wide use of "metaphor" in the history of the church seeLecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 217; and especially hisHist. of European Morals, II, 326, 327, 356-58.

[141]For once at least we can almost pardon Milton for using strong language.Selden'swork,Of the Law of Nature and of Nations, he holds more useful than anything which "pontifical clerks have doted on, ever since that unfortunate mother famously sinned thrice, and died impenitent of her bringing into the world those two misbegotten infants, and for ever infants, Lombard and Gratian, him the compiler of canon iniquity, the other the Tubalcain of scholastic sophistry, whose over-spreading barbarism hath not only infused their own bastardy upon the fruitfullest part of human learning, not only dissipated and dejected the clear light of nature in us, and of nations, but hath tainted also the fountains of divine doctrine, and rendered the pure and solid law of God unbeneficial to us by their calumnious dunceries."—"Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce,"Prose Works, III, 269.

[142]Cf.especiallyDecretum Gratiani, cc. 1-24,causaxxxii, qu. 7:Richter-Friedberg,Corpus Juris Can., I;Peter Lombard,Sententiae, IV, D. xxvii ff.

[143]Esmein,op. cit., II, 79, 80. The early canonists are discussed byGeffcken,op. cit., 58-62, 75-82;Cigoi,Unauflösbarkeit, 93 ff.; but for the most minute examination of them all seeFreisen,op. cit., 793-847; also the very clear account ofEsmein,op. cit., II, 71 ff. On the formation of the canon law seeTissot,Le mariage, 111 ff.

[144]Esmein,op. cit., II, 73, 85-89, who gives a brief account of the evolution of the uses of the termdivortium. Originally, among the canonists, there was but one kind ofdivorce,i. e., any judicial separation between man and wife, whether or not with the right to remarry. This led to confusion; and so the distinction between divorcea vinculoorquoad vinculumanda mensa et toroorquoad mensam et torumwas differentiated. Beginning with Bernard of Pavia, the first compiler of the Decretals, the termdivortiumappears regularly as a rubric in the later collections of the canon law.

[145]For the exceptions seeEsmein,op. cit., II, 91, 92;Freisen,op. cit., 833-36;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 288, 289.

[146]More exactly speakingfornicatio spiritualis"as opposed tofornicatio carnalis," the first cause mentioned.

[147]Crimes against nature, idolatry, etc.:Esmein,op. cit., II, 90 n. 1.

[148]Such as forcing a spouse to idolatry or to some heinous crime. This case is regarded as an enlargement of the conception offornicatio spiritualis:Esmein,op. cit., II, 90 n. 4, 92 nn. 8, 9.Cf.Freisen,op. cit., 836.

[149]Esmein,op. cit., II, 93, 94. Earlier divorcea mensa et thorowas not granted on this ground unless there was real danger to the life of one of the parties; but at last it was decided thatnimia saevitiawould suffice, but the term is not defined:idem,loc. cit.In general on this species of divorce seeFreisen,op. cit., 830-47;Geary,Marriage and Family Relations, 238, 239, 350;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 286-91.

[150]Decret. Grat., II,caus.xviii, qu. 2, C. 2; andDecretalsIV, 19,de divortiis, c. 7: seeRichter-Friedberg,Corpus juris can., I.

[151]This isFreisen'sargument,op. cit., 825-27, 817 ff. See alsoScheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 276-78. The canon law maintains the validity of a marriage between two infidels contracted before conversion. According toPeter Lombard, the believer may, indeed, put away his unconverted consort, but may not remarry. Only when the infidel is the active party, the Christian being the passive, is the latter released from the marriage bond:Sententiae, IV., D. 39, § G;Freisen,op. cit., 814. This privilege is much discussed in modern theological literature: see the references inFreisen,op. cit., 826 n. 27. In general compareWoolsey,Divorce, 74 ff., 125;Esmein,op. cit., I, 220-32; II, 268 ff., 307;Scheurl,op. cit., 276, 277.

[152]Pollock and Maitland,Hist, of Eng. Law, II, 391, 392: citing for the first caseTovey,Anglia Judaica, 84;Co. Lit., 31b, 32a; and for the second,Calend. Geneal., II, 563.

[153]So in India:Pollock and Maitland,op. cit., II, 391 n. 2: citing Maine's speech on the "Remarriage of Native Converts," inMemoir and Speeches and Minutes(London, 1892), 130.Cf.especiallyEsmein,op. cit., II, 268 ff., who discusses some of the "curious problems" growing out of this rule.

[154]For the evils arising in clandestine marriagede praesenti, the complexity of the law of forbidden degrees, and the conflicting jurisdiction of the temporal and spiritual courts, see chap. viii above.

[155]Freisen,op. cit., 826 ff., 212 ff., shows that thedispensatio summi pontificis a matrimonio rato nondum consummatooriginated with the reforms of Alexander III.; and argues rightly that these two kinds of dissolution—dispensation and orders—are in harmony with the rule of indissolubility according to the doctrine of Gratian, but not according to the existing theory. Thus, of the old eight causes which were sufficient of themselves to dissolvematrimonium initiatum—identical with the latersponsalia de praesenti—holy orders alone remains; the papal dispensation has taken the place of the other seven:ibid., 827, 829;cf.on these exceptionsScheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 278-86.

[156]See chaps. vii and viii, above.

[157]Jeaffreson,Brides and Bridals, II, 299 ff., conjectures that during the Middle Ages there must have been many irregular self-divorces; and he cites the famous case of William Paynel and Margaret his wife who, in 1302, "petitioned the king for the dower that was due to her as widow of her first husband John de Camoys," who with her consent had "openly and before witnesses 'given, granted, released, and quit-claimed' the said Margaret to 'her chivalric knight,'" the said William. The court refused the dower on the ground of desertion and adultery.Cf.on this casePollock and Maitland,Hist. of Eng. Law, II, 393, 394.

[158]Jeaffreson,op. cit., II, 306-9.

[159]Pollock and Maitland,op. cit., II, 391 n. 1. Read the interesting remarks ofLecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 193-96, who cites, as illustrative of the policy of the Roman church, the divorce case of Napoleon and Josephine. See alsoLaw Review(English), I, 353-56.

[160]Before Innocent III., 1215, who reduced the number to four:Woolsey,Divorce, 121.

[161]Thwing,The Family, 83.Cf.Woolsey,op. cit., 118 ff.

[162]It is interesting to find Wolsey writing in Henry VIII.'s name "to remind her of the 'divine ordinance of inseparable matrimony first instituted in paradise,' protesting against 'the shameless sentence sent from Rome'":Tait, inDict. of Nat. Biog., XXXVI, 155.

[163]Henry Stuart (Stewart) was made Lord Methven by Margaret's son, James V. She "attempted to get rid of that nobleman by a sentence of the ecclesiastical court, on the ground that before the marriage she had been (as the record expresses it)carnaliter cognitaby her husband's fourth cousin, the earl of Angus."—Riddell,Scots' Peerage Law, 187;Law Review, I, 354. On Margaret's marriages and divorces compareThwing,The Family, 83;Woolsey,Divorce, 169, who says she "got from Rome a separation from her second husband, the Earl of Angus, on the pretext of a pre-contract between him and another lady;" and especially the very accurate account ofTait, inDict. of Nat. Biog., XXXVI, 150-57.

[164]Jeaffreson,Brides and Bridals, II, 310, who quotes the following verses entitled "A Poem on the Times of Edward II." from thePercy Society Publication:"If a man have a wyf,And he love her nowt,Bring her to the constery,There trewth schuld be wrowt.Bring twei fals wytnes with hym,And hymself the thrydde,And he shall be deperted,As fair as he wold bydde,From his wyf;He schal be maynteyned fulle wellTo lede a sory lyf."When he is depertedFrom hys trew spowse,Take hys neyghboures wyfAnd bryng her to howse,Yif he have selverAmong the clerkes to send,He may have hir to hys wyfTo hys life's end,With onskylle,Thei that so fair with falseness deleGodde's corse on her bille."

[164]Jeaffreson,Brides and Bridals, II, 310, who quotes the following verses entitled "A Poem on the Times of Edward II." from thePercy Society Publication:

"If a man have a wyf,And he love her nowt,Bring her to the constery,There trewth schuld be wrowt.Bring twei fals wytnes with hym,And hymself the thrydde,And he shall be deperted,As fair as he wold bydde,From his wyf;He schal be maynteyned fulle wellTo lede a sory lyf."When he is depertedFrom hys trew spowse,Take hys neyghboures wyfAnd bryng her to howse,Yif he have selverAmong the clerkes to send,He may have hir to hys wyfTo hys life's end,With onskylle,Thei that so fair with falseness deleGodde's corse on her bille."

"When he is depertedFrom hys trew spowse,Take hys neyghboures wyfAnd bryng her to howse,Yif he have selverAmong the clerkes to send,He may have hir to hys wyfTo hys life's end,With onskylle,Thei that so fair with falseness deleGodde's corse on her bille."

[165]Lecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 194. For other examples seeHuth,Marriage of Near Kin, 118-20.

[166]32 H. VIII., c. 38:Statutes at Large(London, 1763), II, 298.The facility with which dispensations could be secured is illustrated by a Scotch case in 1426-28. On April 11, 1426, Pope Martin V. granted a dispensation to Alexander of Hume and Marion of Lander to marry, though of double fourth degree of consanguinity. Curiously enough, perhaps because this dispensation had not yet been received, on Oct. 6, 1427, Hume appeared before the rector sitting as judge and proposed that his marriage could not stand of right because of consanguinity. The marriage was therefore pronounced null and void, and the parties were given license to marry whom they pleased. On the fourth day of the following January Hume and his former wife presented a petition to the papal see, announcing that, aware of their consanguinity, they had contracted marriageper verba de praesentiand begotten children; that when their ordinary heard of the consanguinity he rightly celebrated a divorce, which they obeyed; but they feared scandal, and for this and other reasons they desired to be joined in marriage. The pope therefore granted another dispensation and declared their offspring legitimate:Hist. Manuscripts Commission, XII. Report, App. VIII, 122, 123. In another case, 1459, the earl of Rothes declares on oath that he had within the last year obtained certain knowledge of the impediment of consanguinity as set forth in his libel, and that formerly, for the space of thirteen years after birth of the last of his living children, he was altogether ignorant of it:ibid.,IV. Report, 507.

[166]32 H. VIII., c. 38:Statutes at Large(London, 1763), II, 298.

The facility with which dispensations could be secured is illustrated by a Scotch case in 1426-28. On April 11, 1426, Pope Martin V. granted a dispensation to Alexander of Hume and Marion of Lander to marry, though of double fourth degree of consanguinity. Curiously enough, perhaps because this dispensation had not yet been received, on Oct. 6, 1427, Hume appeared before the rector sitting as judge and proposed that his marriage could not stand of right because of consanguinity. The marriage was therefore pronounced null and void, and the parties were given license to marry whom they pleased. On the fourth day of the following January Hume and his former wife presented a petition to the papal see, announcing that, aware of their consanguinity, they had contracted marriageper verba de praesentiand begotten children; that when their ordinary heard of the consanguinity he rightly celebrated a divorce, which they obeyed; but they feared scandal, and for this and other reasons they desired to be joined in marriage. The pope therefore granted another dispensation and declared their offspring legitimate:Hist. Manuscripts Commission, XII. Report, App. VIII, 122, 123. In another case, 1459, the earl of Rothes declares on oath that he had within the last year obtained certain knowledge of the impediment of consanguinity as set forth in his libel, and that formerly, for the space of thirteen years after birth of the last of his living children, he was altogether ignorant of it:ibid.,IV. Report, 507.

[167]In general seeCigoi,Unauflösbarkeit, 149 ff.;Perrone,De mat. christ., III, 376 ff., 389 ff., 398 ff.;Godolphin,Repartorium canonicum, 61, 62, 492-512;Esmein,Le mariage en droit canonique, II, 295 ff., 308 ff.;Schulte,Lehrbuch, 359-61;Lecky,Democracy and Liberty, II, 193, 196, 197;Glasson,Le mariage civil et le divorce, 216, 217;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 275, 276, where the canons adopted at the twenty-fourth session are given.

[168]By the bishop of Barcelona, who proposed the wordseparatiofor divorcequoad torum:Esmein,op. cit., II, 309. On the misleading names for the two kinds of separation seePollock and Maitland,Hist. of Eng. Law, II, 392 n. 5. However, a "modern distinction of some Catholic writers betweenanullatioandseparatioremoves all ambiguity."—Woolsey,Divorce, 124.

[169]"viii. Si quis dixerit ... vel Ecclesiam errare, dum ob alias causas, praeter adulterium, facit divortium quoad thorum seu cohabitationem, ad tempus vel perpetuo: anathema sit."—Theiner,Acta, II, 313:Esmein,op. cit., II, 309 n. 1.

[170]Distinction is made betweendispensatio super matrimonio, that is, for dissolving an unconsummate marriage; anddispensatio matrimonialis, that is, to remove an impediment which otherwise would invalidate a proposed contract. In all cases of dispensation careful judicial inquiry as to the grounds of application is made:Geary,Marriage and Family Relations, 510-14.Cf.Woolsey,op. cit., 122, 123; and especially the convenient manual ofPompen,De dispensationibus, 122-68. For a full discussion of the intricate law and custom as to dispensation seeEsmein,op. cit., II, 315-68;Freisen,Geschichte des can. Eherechts, 891-906;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 281 ff. In the oriental church dispensation from the forbidden degrees is in general not allowed,Zhishman:Das Eherecht der orient. Kirche, 709-17.

[171]The writings of Luther, Milton, and other Reformation and Puritan writers abound in examples of such charges. "For no cause, honest or necessary," saysMartin Bucer, "will they permit a final divorce: in the meanwhile, whoredoms and adulteries, and worse things than these, not only tolerating in themselves and others, but cherishing and throwing men headlong into these evils. For although they also disjoin married persons from board and bed, that is, from all conjugal society and communion, and this not only for adultery, but for ill usage, and matrimonial duties denied; yet they forbid those thus parted to join in wedlock with others: but, as I said before, any dishonest associating they permit."—"The Judgment of Martin Bucer," inMilton'sProse Works, III, 292.

[172]Goeschen,Doctrina de mat., 60; alsoMejer, "Zur Geschichte des ält. prot. Eherechts," inZKR., XVI, 47;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 139 ff.

[173]Cf.Esmein,Le mariage en droit canonique, II, 308, 309. Throughout hisDoctrine and Discipline of Divorce, as elsewhere in his writings,Miltoninsists that a real marriage implies a full spiritual as well as conjugal companionship, with which the theory of separation without dissolution is inconsistent; and this is the common Puritan view.

[174]For example, seeMilton'sspecious argument, following the allegorical method of some of the early theologians, to show the scope of the term "fornication" as used by Jesus and Moses: "Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce,"Prose Works, III, 251-58, 394-401.

[175]SeeMilton'ssummary of their views: "Tetrachordon,"loc. cit., 423-33.

[176]Richter,Beiträge zur Gesch. des Ehescheidungsrechts in der evang. Kirche, 11 ff., 15 ff., 56 ff.;idem,Kirchenrecht, 1177.

[177]Adultery and desertion are the only grounds of full divorce recognized byBrenz,Wie yn Ehesachen ... zu Handeln, inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 152-57, andidem,Corpus juris mat., 183 ff.; with which may be compared the passages from the writings ofBrenzquoted byRichter,Beiträge, 19-23;Bugenhagen,Vom Ehebruch und Weglauffen: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 138-51; orCorpus juris mat., 171-84;Chemnitz,Examen conc. trid., II, 430; Calvin, inRichter,op. cit., 25, 26;Beza,Tract. de repud. et divort.(Geneva, 1569), 228 ff., 275 ff.;Kling,Tract. mat. causarum(Frankfort, 1577), 89 ff.;Beust,Tract. de jure connub.;idem,Tract. de spons. et mat., 147 ff.;Schneidewin,Com. in inst.;idem,De nupt., lib. primi com.(Jena, 1585), §§ 7 ff.These and other writers are discussed byRichter,Kirchenrecht, 1175 ff.;idem,Beiträge, 15 ff.;Mejer,Zum Kirchenrechte der Reformat., 147 ff.;Hauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 209 ff. In general, compareGreve,Ehescheidung, 225 ff.;Popp,Ehescheidung, 80 ff.;Strippelmann,Das Ehescheidungsrecht, 54 ff., 128 ff.;Stölzel,Ehescheidungsrecht, 9 ff.;Glasson,Le mar. civ. et le divorce, 224, 225, 329, 330;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 291 ff.;Buchka,Das meckl. Ehescheidungsrecht, 20 ff.;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 43 ff.;Friedberg,Lehrbuch, 366-78;idem, "Beiträge,"ZKR., VII, 56-127; andSchulte,Lehrbuch, 414-28.

These and other writers are discussed byRichter,Kirchenrecht, 1175 ff.;idem,Beiträge, 15 ff.;Mejer,Zum Kirchenrechte der Reformat., 147 ff.;Hauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 209 ff. In general, compareGreve,Ehescheidung, 225 ff.;Popp,Ehescheidung, 80 ff.;Strippelmann,Das Ehescheidungsrecht, 54 ff., 128 ff.;Stölzel,Ehescheidungsrecht, 9 ff.;Glasson,Le mar. civ. et le divorce, 224, 225, 329, 330;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 291 ff.;Buchka,Das meckl. Ehescheidungsrecht, 20 ff.;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 43 ff.;Friedberg,Lehrbuch, 366-78;idem, "Beiträge,"ZKR., VII, 56-127; andSchulte,Lehrbuch, 414-28.

[178]Chemnitz,Examen conc. trid.(Frankfort, 1615), II, 430 says: "We have, then, two cases in Scripture where the bond of matrimony is dissolved—not as by men, but by God himself. 1. On account of adultery a man lawfully, rightfully, and without sin, can repudiate his wife." 2. Desertion of the believer by the unbeliever, according to 1 Cor., 7.Cf.Woolsey,Divorce, 131;Richter,Beiträge, 27, 28. On the adoption of these two general causes at the Reformation seeHubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 44 ff.

[179]1 Cor. 7:15.

[180]As early as 1520 in hisVon dem bab. Gefängniss der Kirche(Strampff, 349, 350, 381, 382)Lutheradmits the two grounds of divorce, adultery and desertion; the latter when either spouse abandons the other "über zehen Jahr oder nimmer wiederkommen." Two years later, in hisVom ehelichen Leben, he appears to regard refusal of conjugal duty as equivalent to desertion. "We may find an obstinate woman," he says, "who stiffens her neck, and if her husband should fall ten times into unchastity, cares nothing about it. Here it is time for a man to say, 'if you won't, another can be found that will. If the wife will not, let the maid come.' Yet let it be so that the husband give her two or three warnings beforehand, and let the matter come before other people, so that her obstinacy may be known and rebuked before the congregation. If she will not, let her be gone, and procure an Esther for yourself and let Vashti be off, as Ahasuerus did."—As rendered byWoolsey,Divorce, 130, 131. For the original seeStrampff, 350, 351, 394, 395;Luther'sKleinere Schriften, II, 26-31; andSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 137, 138.Cf.Richter,Beiträge, 16;Scheurl,Das gem. deut. Eherecht, 300 ff. InLuther'sVon Ehesachen(1530) the refusal of conjugal duty is not mentioned; but it is doubtless included under malicious desertion; and besides in 1531 he commends the book of Brenz in which this position is taken.Cf.Richter,op. cit., 18, 19;Strampff, 394. In theTischredenflight on account of theft is regarded as desertion:Richter,loc. cit.On the use made of "definition" by the Protestants seeHubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 51.

[181]Quasi malitiosa desertiocomprehends not only refusal of conjugal duty, but also applies to the case of a defendant who abandoned a consort, but who does not necessarily, as in malicious desertion, remain in a place unknown or one beyond the reach of judicial process:Strippelmann,Ehescheidungsrecht, 146 ff.Cf.Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht, 25 ff.;Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 80, 88 ff. See especiallyLuther,Vom ehel. Leben;Strampff, 394, 395, who says the "weltliche Ubirkeit das Weib zwingen oder umbbringen" soll.

[182]Luther does not allow absolute divorce on account of anger or incompatibility,insidiae, or attempts upon life, exile, sickness, incurable disease, misfortune to an innocent spouse, or similar grounds: see hisVon Ehesachen, inStrampff, 398, 399;Vom ehel. Leben:ibid., 400;Predigt von dem Ehestande(1525):ibid., 400; andAuslegung des 17. Cap. 1 Cor.(1523):ibid., 397, 398, where only temporary separation is allowed, unless one of the parties refuses reconciliation and the other "kunnt nicht halten;" but in this case the "separation has the refusal of conjugal duty as a consequence, or it has become malicious desertion":Strampff, 396, 351, 352, 382 ff.Cf.Brenz,Wie yn Ehesachen ... zu Handeln: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 155 ff.;Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht, 31 ff.;Hauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 242 ff.

[183]Richter,Beiträge, 14, who points out that, through reaction against the papal system the theologians for the most part were in favor of the Roman law, while the majority of the jurists were opposed to it. The Protestant leaders are thus divided on the question whether the canon law should be accepted as binding:Hubrich,Das Recht der Ehescheidung, 45. On the admission of other grounds of divorce seeStrippelmann,Ehescheidungsrecht, 151 ff.;Schulte,Lehrbuch, 416.

[184]Erasmus,Annot. in Nov. Test.(Basel, 1515); quoted byRichter,Beiträge, 8-10.

[185]Richter,op. cit., 6 ff.;Bullinger,Der christ. Ehestand(ed. 1579), lf. 102.

[186]Woolsey,Divorce, 132; alsoThwing,The Family, 84. For the ordinance seeRichter,op. cit., 6, 7. Similar causes are approved byBullinger,Der christ. Ehestand, 102, appealing to the laws of the "holy Constantine, Theodosius, Valentinian, Anastasius, and Justinian."

[187]Lambert of Avignon,De sacro conjugio(Strassburg, 1524): cited byRichter,op. cit., 31, 32.

[188]See hisDe regno Christi(1557), II, 25 ff.; and the elaborate dissertation entitledEtlicher gelerten Theologi bedencken von der Ehescheidung: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 161 ff.; alsoibid.,Corpus juris mat., 196 ff., whichRichter,op. cit., 34 ff., ascribes to Bucer; thoughMejer,Zum Kirchenrecht, 183, doubts the correctness of this view. On Bucer's doctrines see the discussion of Milton below.

[189]Melanchthon, "De conjugio,"Opera Omnia(Erlangen, 1828), I, pars II, 236 ff.; or inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 159 ff.; oribid.,Corpus juris mat., 190 ff.Cf.alsoRichter,Beiträge, 32-34; and especiallyMejer,Zum Kirchenrecht, 179-82, who compares the view of Melanchthon with that of Luther, showing that the former goes back to the Theodosian code.

[190]Monner,Tract. de mat. et clandes. conjugiis(Jena, 1561):ap.Richter,Beiträge, 40, 41. Representatives of the more liberal tendency in the sixteenth century are Chyträus, Hunnius, Wigand, Osiander, and the Danish theologian Hemming:Richter,op. cit., 42, 43, 28.

[191]Of course, after regular process was somewhat developed, as will presently be shown, thetoleramusor permission of the magistrate concluding the decree was requisite to the remarriage even of the innocent person.

[192]TheRenovatio ecc. Nord.(1525):Richter,Kirchenordnungen, I, 20, tolerates the second marriage of a person whose spouse has committed adultery. The PrussianLandesordnungof the same year expressly sanctions the divorce and remarriage of the injured spouse whose partner has committed the same offense:Richter,op. cit., I, 32. In 1531 the church ordinance of Goslar and that of Lübeck, drafted by Bugenhagen, recognize malicious desertion as a second ground for dissolving wedlock:Richter,op. cit., I, 156, 148; and a similar provision appears in the Pommer ordinance of 1535, also drafted by Bugenhagen:Richter,op. cit., 250. CompareSchulte,Lehrbuch, 414-28, who gives an account of the provisions of the many ordinances regarding divorce and remarriage.

[193]"Wenn der Ehebruch bey dem halse gestraffet würde, so bedürffte man hie nicht viel fragens":Bugenhagen,Vom Ehebruch und Weglauffen: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 138.

[194]Richter,op. cit., 31, 45; citingLambert of Avignon,De sacra conjugio, who recommends excommunication in case the magistrate does not execute the criminal.

[195]On Beust, Beza, and Brenz seeRichter,op. cit., 45, 46. CompareBeust,Tract. de spons. et mat., 140, where he declares that the penalty for adultery is death; andBrenz,Wie yn Ehesachen ... zu Handeln: inSarcerius,Vom heil. Ehestande, 152, where he leaves the offender to the temporal magistrate, urging rigorous punishment; and in cases of negligence advising excommunication by the parish priest.

[196]Melanchthon, "De conjugio,"Opera Omnia, I, pars II, 238: "Respondeo: magistratus politicus adulteria punire debet: ideo persona condemnata, si non punitur durius, pellenda est ex iis locis, ubi vivit persona innocens: cui altera, videlicet condemnata, velut mortua existimanda est; et haec severitas ad politicum magistratum pertinet."

[197]Woolsey,Divorce, 138, 139. See Luther,Vom ehel. Leben: inStrampff, 363, 364; or inSarcerius,op. cit., 137. On Calvin seeStrippelmann,Ehescheidungsrecht, 69, 70. The same view is expressed byHooper,Early Writings, 383; and by Bucer:Milton'sProse Works, III, 299.

[198]Richter,Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechszehnten Jahrhunderts.In many Protestant lands these ecclesiastical statutes or provisions, with the sanction of the civil authority, took the place of the old canon law. For a discussion of their contents see especially the monographs ofGoeschen,Doctrina de mat., 59 ff.;idem, inHerzog'sEncyclopädie, III, 702 ff.;Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht; and compareHauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 219 ff.;Richter,Beiträge, 51 ff.;idem,Kirchenrecht, 1177, 1178;Strippelmann,Das Ehescheidungsrecht, 78 ff.;Greve,Ehescheidung, 298 ff.;Thwing,The Family, 84, 85;Woolsey,Divorce, 136-38.

[198]Richter,Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechszehnten Jahrhunderts.

In many Protestant lands these ecclesiastical statutes or provisions, with the sanction of the civil authority, took the place of the old canon law. For a discussion of their contents see especially the monographs ofGoeschen,Doctrina de mat., 59 ff.;idem, inHerzog'sEncyclopädie, III, 702 ff.;Dietrich,Evang. Ehescheidungsrecht; and compareHauber,Ehescheid. im Reformat., II, 219 ff.;Richter,Beiträge, 51 ff.;idem,Kirchenrecht, 1177, 1178;Strippelmann,Das Ehescheidungsrecht, 78 ff.;Greve,Ehescheidung, 298 ff.;Thwing,The Family, 84, 85;Woolsey,Divorce, 136-38.

[199]For example, by theRenovatio ecc. nord.(1525):Richter,Kirchenordnungen, I, 20; the Würtemberg ordinance of 1537:ibid., I, 280; the ordinance of the "Niederländer in London":ibid., II, 115; that of the foreign "Gemeinde zu Frankfurt":ibid., 157.

[200]Goeschen,Doctrina de mat., 61, 62, notes.

[201]As by the Prussian ordinance of 1584:Richter,op. cit., II, 468.

Back to Index Next