|
Objection 1: It would seem that a second marriage is not a
sacrament. For he who repeats a sacrament injures the sacrament. But
no sacrament should be done an injury. Therefore if a second marriage
were a sacrament, marriage ought nowise to be repeated.
Objection 2: Further, in every sacrament some kind of blessing is
given. But no blessing is given in a second marriage, as stated in
the text (Sent. iv, D, 42). Therefore no sacrament is
conferred therein.
Objection 3: Further, signification is essential to a sacrament.
But the signification of marriage is not preserved in a second
marriage, because there is not a union of only one woman with only one
man, as in the case of Christ and the Church. Therefore it is not a
sacrament.
Objection 4: Further, one sacrament is not an impediment to
receiving another. But a second marriage is an impediment to receiving
orders. Therefore it is not a sacrament.
On the contrary, Marital intercourse is excused from sin in a second
marriage even as in a first marriage. Now marital intercourse is
excused [Question 69, Article 1] by the marriage goods which are
fidelity, offspring, and sacrament. Therefore a second marriage is a
sacrament.
Further, irregularity is not contracted through a second and
non-sacramental union, such as fornication. Yet irregularity is
contracted through a second marriage. Therefore it is a sacramental
union.
I answer that, Wherever we find the essentials of a sacrament, there
is a true sacrament. Wherefore, since in a second marriage we find
all the essentials of the sacrament of marriage (namely the due
matter---which results from the parties having the conditions
prescribed by law---and the due form, which is the expression of the
inward consent by words of the present), it is clear that a second
marriage is a sacrament even as a first.
Reply to Objection 1: This is true of a sacrament which causes an
everlasting effect: for then, if the sacrament be repeated, it is
implied that the first was not effective, and thus an injury is done to
the first, as is clear in all those sacraments which imprint a
character. But those sacraments which have not an everlasting effect
can be repeated without injury to the sacrament, as in the case of
Penance. And, since the marriage tie ceases with death, no injury
is done to the sacrament if a woman marry again after her husband's
death.
Reply to Objection 2: Although the second marriage, considered in
itself, is a perfect sacrament, yet if we consider it in relation to
the first marriage, it is somewhat a defective sacrament, because it
has not its full signification, since there is not a union of only one
woman with only one man as in the marriage of Christ with the Church.
And on account of this defect the blessing is omitted in a second
marriage. This, however, refers to the case when it is a second
marriage on the part of both man and woman, or on the part of the woman
only. For if a virgin marry a man who has had another wife, the
marriage is blessed nevertheless. Because the signification is
preserved to a certain extent even in relation to the former marriage,
since though Christ has but one Church for His spouse, there are
many persons espoused to Him in the one Church. But the soul cannot
be espoused to another besides Christ, else it commits fornication
with the devil. Nor is there a spiritual marriage. For this reason
when a woman marries a second time the marriage is not blessed on
account of the defect in the sacrament.
Reply to Objection 3: The perfect signification is found in a
second marriage considered in itself, not however if it be considered
in relation to the previous marriage, and it is thus that it is a
defective sacrament.
Reply to Objection 4: A second marriage in so far as there is a
defect in the sacrament, but not as a sacrament, is an impediment to
the sacrament of Order.
|
|