Section — Marc, Institutiones Morales

§ 1. On Fornication

¶772.
Show the text of this paragraphHide it again
  1. Definition. Fornication, in the broad sense, is sometimes called every illicit concubitus. In the strict sense, it is defined: Concubitus of an unmarried man with an unmarried woman, by mutual consent (III, 432; H. Ap., IX, 11).

It is said: 1. Concubitus, namely such as is required for generation, so that it may be distinguished from sins against nature; hence copulation of a castrated man with an unmarried woman is not fornication. 2. Of an unmarried man with an unmarried woman, that is, one who is free from vow, marriage, religion, etc.; for from these a new species would be added to the sin. 3. By mutual consent, to exclude violence, because otherwise it would be stuprum.

¶773.
Show the text of this paragraphHide it again
  1. Principle. Fornication can never be excused from grave sin. It is established: 1. From Sacred Scripture (Eph., 5, 5): Every fornicator or unclean person ... does not have inheritance in the kingdom of Christ. 2. From reason: fornication is directly intended lust, because of itself it provokes carnal pleasure. Besides, the end assigned by God to congress is not generation alone, but also good education of offspring. But offspring conceived from fornication ordinarily cannot be well educated. St. Thom., 2.2, q. 154, a. 2.

"Therefore fornication, from the right of nature, is always intrinsically evil, although sometimes by accident offspring would be well educated by the fornicator. The reason is, both because in this, on account of the great danger of hallucination because of excessive pleasure, one can most easily err; and because nature considers the things that commonly happen, not those that happen by accident; and because of itself it is against the right of nature to subject reason to the flesh, as happens in fornication, on account of the pleasure of the act. But in matrimony, although the same pleasure intervenes, God nevertheless by special providence disposes that such disorder be absent" (III, 432; cf. I, 199). Hence, proposition 48 was deservedly condemned by Innocent XI: "It seems so clear that fornication according to itself involves no malice, and is evil only because forbidden, that the contrary seems altogether discordant with reason." But whether fornication is forbidden from the primary principles of the natural law is not so clear.

¶774.
Show the text of this paragraphHide it again
  1. Corollaries. 1. Fornication of betrothed persons does not assume a different species of sin. The reason is that "neither hands over to the other any right over his own body, so that he could not use it according to his own discretion without injury to the other" (H. Ap., IX, 13).

Yet if fornication introduced danger lest the betrothed man be compelled to support another's offspring, justice would be injured.

  1. Concubinage and meretricious life are rightly referred to fornication, as to the same species. For more or less does not change the species. Yet sometimes, especially in meretricious life, other species can be added.

a) Concubinage, which is the keeping of a woman as if she were a wife, is defined (according to the sense of Canon Law): "Frequent fornication with the same person, with the mind of retaining her as enslaved to one's own lasciviousness, whether in the same house or otherwise." It is a greater sin than simple fornication, because it adds a vicious habit and has joined to itself a continuous purpose of sinning, at least virtual. - Hence the Council of Trent (Sess. 24, c. 8, de Ref.) established against concubinarii both excommunication of a sentence to be passed after a threefold warning, and the penalty of expulsion outside the town, or even outside the diocese, with the help of the secular arm implored: would that it still could be implored in every region! Hence also it is why, in many dioceses, concubinage is numbered among reserved cases. See as regards clerics, for whom particular penalties are prescribed, n. 2233.

b) Meretricious life is the state of a woman who lies open to the lust of many, whether for gain, or for lasciviousness. Hence, in order that someone can be called a prostitute, she ought to admit at least more than two. Meretricious life is either clandestine, or public, i.e. permitted by civil power under certain norms. It is a most grave sin, by reason of the disposition of soul, scandal, and harm to offspring, which rarely is born from meretricious life, and if sometimes it is born, is accustomed to be educated very badly.

¶775.
Show the text of this paragraphHide it again
  1. Special question: On Prostitution. In our times also the question is sharply disputed: Whether prostitutes are to be permitted?

Resp. One opinion, and this probable, affirms with St. Augustine (de Ord., l. 2, c. 4, n. 12) and the Angelic Doctor (2.2, q. 10, a. 11). The sole reason is because in this way greater evils are impeded, namely acts of sodomy, adulteries, prevarication of honorable women, etc. "Take away," says St. Augustine, "prostitutes: you will disturb all things with lusts."2 But the other opinion, which is practically more probable, denies. The reasons are: a) from such permission the way is not closed to the aforesaid evils; - b) because prostitutes can be approached easily, lust fixes deeper roots; c) other evils arise, namely: more girls are prostituted, adolescents reject honorable marriages, neglect studies, etc. Thus St. Alphonsus (III, 434). - In every case, as Venerable Januarius Sarnelli proves (op. de Abusu meretr., aggiunta, § 2), meretricious life cannot be permitted except in great cities, and this under certain conditions, for removing scandals. Cf. Noldin, n. 18, at the end.

Note. For practice, three things are to be noted: 1. The circumstance of concubinage or meretricious life is not indeed of itself to be manifested in confession, since it does not constitute a species; but it is to be manifested both by reason of the occasion to be removed, and especially by reason of the intention had from the beginning and embracing many sins in number. - 2. Neither concubinarii nor prostitutes can be absolved unless it has been plainly established concerning the removed occasion and amendment (III, 435). Say the same of procurers and procuresses, who, for the sake of gain, prostitute their own women or those of others (see n. 1822). - 3. Fornicators are to be asked by the confessor whether offspring has been born from fornication, or is about to be born; whether they have attempted to impede conception of offspring or procure abortion, or have neglected offspring born.

(2) Yet it should be noted that the aforesaid words rather report the opinion of a friend of St. Augustine. If we consider what the Holy Doctor teaches in his retractions and in his exposition against Faustus, he seems to adhere to the second opinion. Cf. Rosler, Frauenfr., p. 221, 222.