Summa on Marriage

Description

Raymond of Penyafort's Summa de matrimonio (Summa on Marriage) is a significant 13th-century canon law text, a practical handbook for confessors, detailing marriage law, impediments (like forced consent, prohibited degrees), engagement, separation, children's legitimacy, and dowries, building on his Summa de pœnitentia but treated as a separate work to guide priests on marital issues encountered during confession.

"The birth and flowering of canonical jurisprudence in the twelfth century is one of the most striking and fruitful developments of the age, marking an important turn in the history of the Church and in framing the essential elements of the rule of law in political and social life.

" "Raymond of Penyafort was an important participant in these developments. Born near Barcelona in 1175, he became a teacher of canon law at Bologna, the greatest centre of legal studies. He joined the newly founded Order of Preachers (Dominicans), and championed multilingual education of the friars for a more effective evangelization of Muslims and Jews. He became Master General of the Order in 1238, and died in 1275. He was canonized in 1601 and has been declared the patron saint of canon lawyers.

" "Pope Gregory IX appointed Raymond to produce a comprehensive compilation of papal legal decisions. The result, the Decretals of Gregory IX (1234), would remain normative in the Catholic Church until 1917. Raymond drew on it to compose his Summa on Marriage, a summary of learned reflection on the law of marriage, to aid his Dominican brothers in hearing confessions, where numerous problems touching on marriage would have been encountered. The definition of marriage and of its ends, stages and impediments, arrangements and consequences are the subject of the work. This translation of it offers students and scholars alike a comprehensive presentation of the medieval teaching on marriage - learned in content, practical in orientation.

"--BOOK JACKET.

---

p. 7 (PDF_EXTRA p. 13): "Raymond of Penyafort, Summa de matrimonio, edited by X. Ochoa and A. Díez, Universa bibliotheca iuris, vol. 1, tomus C (Rome, 1978)." is the most recent critical ed. in 🇻🇦.

---

PDF_EXTRA is vector format, but it only contains cover → p. 18, downloaded from PIMS.ca.

PDF_OLD is the Scantailer Advanced-improved version that Tesseract OCRed, which is the PDF version. Both these have PDF bookmarks, generated with the assistance of jpdfbookmarks.

PDF_ORIGINAL is the primary source.

---

03/31/26: 12

About half of Raymond’s summa deals with the diriment impediments to marriage

03/31/26: 25

her duty is more apparent in marriage than is the duty of the husband.

03/31/26: 27

An evil life or someone’s misguided intention does not contaminate the sacrament of marriage.

03/31/26: 29

Another effect is that the husband must be compelled to pay the marital debt to his wife even if he has not known her carally, and she to him, notwithstanding any affinity which has meanwhile sinfully arisen between them.

03/31/26: 31

Again, note that the. third good of marriage is called sacrament, not that it is the marriage itself but because it is a sign of a holy thing itself, that is, of the spiritual and inseparable union of Christ and the Church.

04/01/26: 53

I adrogate one who is his own, and he is necessarily mine.
I adopt one who is his father’s, and he does not cease being the father’s.
Canon law doesn't seem to make the adrogate vs. adopt distinction anymore; this stems from Roman law.

04/01/26: 53

Anyone can be adopted, male as well as female, as long as he or she is younger than the adoptive father, so that they could be his natural children.

age difference requirement for adoption

04/01/26: 53

A head of household who is independent and who can procreate can adopt, since whoever is unable to procreate, such as a eunuch or one who is frigid, cannot adopt.

frigid or impotent cannot adopt

---

04/02/26: 64

as soon as the first returns she must leave the second and return to the first.

Is "return to the first" in current canon law?

04/02/26: 70

Integard to constriction, which is in women on account of which they are not suited to male embraces, it is to be held that, although it is by nature, if she can be aided by the benefit of medicine or through assiduous use with 2 man of suitable size, it does not impede marriage.”

04/02/26: 70

if, because of constriction she separates from a first man, who is unable to know her, and

04/02/26: 70

through the use of another with whom she joins afterwards she becomes suited to the first, she must be separated from the second and returned to the first?

Is "return to the first" in current canon law?

04/02/26: 70

how it is known whether the bewitchment is temporary or perpetual,

04/02/26: 70

If the impediment lasts after cohabiting for three years and attempting carnal union, the bewitchment is presumed to be perpetual.

04/02/26: 70

it would offer material for homicide if a man were to stay with his wife and was not able to know her, but he was potent and suited to another woman.

sexual frustration leads to uxoricide?

04/02/26: 72

the second marrage is to be separated and the first restored since it seems the Church was deceived.”

so declarations of nullity can err?

04/02/26: 72

unless the impediment for which they qualify to be separated is immediately evident, as was said, they must be commanded to cohabit again, giving themselves to intercourse in good faith.

04/02/26: 72

giving themselves to intercourse in good faith.

so unknowingly committed onanistic or sodomical acts are excused if such partially/temporarily impotent couples are in bona fide

04/02/26: 73

the oath of the man must stand because he is the head of the woman,”

04/02/26: 77

dissolve, either the divorce is proclaimed completely so that both of them can contract marriage [again], or one alone,

∃ unilateral annulments?

04/02/26: 77

those who are separated on account of adultery, or fornication, or by reason of religious life.

divortium imperfectum

04/02/26: 79

suppose that the Church, deceived by false witnesses or in another way, proclaims a divorce between a couple. Then the man becomes a priest. Afterwards it is discovered that the Church was deceived. Is the priest to be restored to his wife? I believe that if he cannot be induced to continence the man ought to be testored to her because even a monk would be restored to her. He is bound to pay the debt to his wife when she asks, but must not ask because he solemnized a vow as far as he himself was concerned.”

re: whether annulments can be erroneous

04/02/26: 79

if 2 woman says she fears her husband will harm her in her person or possessions,

why also possessions?

04/02/26: 81

both spouses as well as strangers at one time were prohibited from making an accusation in reference to length of time, namely if the spouses remained together without question for twenty or eighteen years.

annulment statute of limitations

04/02/26: 84

either he knows that perpetual impediment exists between himself and his wife, or he believes it. In the first case he should neither demand nor pay [the debt]. In the second, if he believes for a probable reason, he should pay, but not ask. However, if he believes for a slight or inconsiderable reason, he should pay, and if he can, lay aside his erroneous conscience and afterwards demand.”

how to deal with doubt

04/02/26: 84

he should pay, and if he can, lay aside his erroneous conscience and afterwards demand.”

∃ (unconditional) obligation to demand?

04/02/26: 85

In sum, it must not be overlooked that in a marriage already contracted there is place for accusation, but not in the contracting, because accusation has no place since there is nothing that can be accused.

∄ defective consent sans impediments

04/02/26: 87

the sodomitic crime so that a wife is able to dismiss her husband for it, and vice versa.

divortium imperfectum?