Title XVI: On Adulteries and Defilement

Latin source headnote: One who defiles a virgin is bound to endow her and take her as wife; and, if he does not wish to contract with her, he will be chastised corporally in addition to furnishing the dowry. It says this together with the following chapter.

In Exodus.

If anyone shall seduce a virgin not yet betrothed and shall lie with her, he shall endow her and shall have [her] as wife. But if the virgin's father shall be unwilling to give her, he shall pay money according to the measure of the dowry that virgins are accustomed to receive.

Latin source headnote: It is summarized in the immediately preceding chapter.

Gregory, to the Bishop of Siponto.

It has come to us that Felix, your nephew, defiled a certain virgin, a thing wicked even to say. If this is true, although he would have to be chastised by a [grave] penalty according to the law, we nevertheless, softening the law's severity to some extent, ordain in this manner: either let him have as wife the woman whom he defiled, or certainly, if he thinks that this should be refused, let him be chastised more strictly in body and excommunicated, and let him be thrust into a monastery in which he is to do penance, from which there is to be no permission for him to depart without [our] command. [Therefore, let your fraternity take care that these things are fulfilled, etc.]

Latin source headnote: A husband retaining an adulterous wife before she has completed penance is a participant in the offense; it is otherwise if she has done penance. Nevertheless, he ought not to receive her repeatedly.

From the Council of Arles.

If a man, knowing that his wife has transgressed, lives with her when she has not done penance but remains in her fornication, the man will be guilty and a participant in her sin. But if the woman after being dismissed shall have done penance and shall wish to return to her husband, he ought to receive the sinner, who has done penance, but not repeatedly.

Latin source headnote: A husband can accuse his wife of adultery on account of suspicion, and in accusing her he is preferred to others.

From the Council of Paris.

It has indeed been permitted to husbands to accuse their wives even upon suspicion, and they themselves more than others can both accuse concerning adultery and defend.

Latin source headnote: On the confession of a woman alone, asserting that she committed adultery with a priest, the priest ought not to be punished; but if he is in ill repute, purgation can be imposed upon him. If he furnishes it, he is absolved, but if he fails, he is suspended from office.

Alexander III.

You informed us that a certain priest, at the instigation of the devil, slept frequently, as you assert, within a church with another man's wife. She publicly disclosed to you indeed that she and he had confessed an offense of this kind to a certain priest, and that same priest said this very thing in your presence while concealing the name of the adulterer. You sought counsel from the Apostolic See concerning what ought to be done in this matter when, although the adulterer denies it, the woman persists in her confession. We therefore command that, imposing a fitting penance upon the aforesaid adulteress, you take care to reconcile the aforesaid church by the sprinkling of holy water. But upon the aforesaid priest, lest, contrary to the Apostle, the hearts of the weak be struck by his ill repute, and lest our ministry be disparaged, and lest priests, becoming more secure, fall more freely into sin, you are to impose, according to your judgment, purgation with five neighboring priests whom you shall know to be unwilling to perjure themselves. If he shall be able to purge himself, you are to permit him to minister in his office; otherwise, you are not to postpone suspending him from his office.

Latin source headnote: A spouse cannot proceed against a spouse for adultery if the former is also proved to have committed adultery.

Innocent III, to the Archbishop of Tours.

We have understood, both through the letters of our venerable brother the Bishop of Poitiers and through those matters which were proposed on behalf of the parties before our beloved son Andrew, our subdeacon and chaplain, who was appointed auditor in this matter, that, when the layman S. had driven H., his wife, from marital consortium without a reasonable cause, the same bishop, their diocesan, hearing that the same woman was fornicating with a certain adulterer, bound her and him by the bond of excommunication. At length, after abjuring the adulterer and receiving absolution before the aforesaid bishop, she petitioned that the aforesaid man be restored to her. But he, objecting against her to this adultery, of which he said that she had begotten offspring, and alleging that she had not been expelled by him but had departed of her own accord, proposed that restoration of himself to her was by no means to be made. The aforesaid woman, wholly denying this, replied against him that he had fornicated and had begotten offspring from the fornication, on account of which he could not use such an exception against her. But when the faculty of proving these matters had been granted to each party, the aforesaid woman proved the same man's adultery through certain witnesses, whom the man himself said ought to be rejected as less suitable, and at length an appeal was made by him to our presence. Therefore, by apostolic writings we command your fraternity that, unless it shall be established to you either through the manifestness of the matter or through a lawful confession of the woman that she had committed adultery voluntarily, if proof of the adultery that the man is said to have committed fails, you compel him to receive her. But if the woman's fornication is established in the aforesaid manner, unless the witnesses through whom the man's adultery was proved shall have been rejected, since the right of marriage remains injured in each party and equal offenses are removed by mutual compensation, you are nevertheless to compel him to receive her and treat her with marital affection; otherwise, you are not to postpone imposing silence upon the aforesaid woman. [Given at the Lateran on the sixth day before the Kalends of May, in the eleventh year, 1208.]

Latin source headnote: A marriage ought not to be separated with respect to the marriage-bed on account of adultery when both spouses have committed adultery.

The same, to the Bishop of Amiens.

Your fraternity asked us whether, when someone denies the conjugal debt to his wife who has been detected in adultery, if he himself afterward manifestly perpetrates adultery with another woman, the wife having done penance for what was committed and humbly sought pardon, the husband ought to be compelled to treat her with marital affection. Concerning this we respond thus to you: since equal crimes are removed by mutual compensation, a husband of this kind cannot decline the consortium of his wife on the pretext of her fornication. [Given at Anagni on the Ides of June, in the eleventh year, 1208.]