|
Objection 1: It would seem that affinity is not an impediment to
marriage. For nothing is an impediment to marriage except what is
contrary thereto. But affinity is not contrary to marriage since it is
caused by it. Therefore it is not an impediment to marriage.
Objection 2: Further, by marriage the wife becomes a possession of
the husband. Now the husband's kindred inherit his possessions after
his death. Therefore they can succeed to his wife, although she is
affine to them, as shown above (Article 5). Therefore affinity is
not an impediment to marriage.
On the contrary, It is written (Lev. 18:8): "Thou shalt
not uncover the nakedness of thy father's wife." Now she is only
affine. Therefore affinity is an impediment to marriage.
I answer that, Affinity that precedes marriage hinders marriage being
contracted and voids the contract, for the same reason as
consanguinity. For just as there is a certain need for
blood-relations to live together, so is there for those who are
connected by affinity: and just as there is a tie of friendship between
blood-relations, so is there between those who are affine to one
another. If, however, affinity supervene to matrimony, it cannot
void the marriage, as stated above (Question 50, Article 7).
Reply to Objection 1: Affinity is not contrary to the marriage
which causes it, but to a marriage being contracted with an affine, in
so far as the latter would hinder the extension of friendship and the
curbing of concupiscence, which are sought in marriage.
Reply to Objection 2: The husband's possessions do not become one
with him as the wife is made one flesh with him. Wherefore just as
consanguinity is an impediment to marriage or union with the husband
according to the flesh, so is one forbidden to marry the husband's
wife.
|
|