John Duns Scotus - Four Questions On Mary

Question Three: The Marriage Between Mary and Joseph

QuesTion Three The Marriage beTween Mary and JosePh John Duns Scotus: Four Questions on Mary 78 de MaTriMonio inTer b. VirgineM Mariae eT s. JosePh1 Secundo quaero, utrum inter Mariam et Ioseph fuierit verum matrimonium. [Argumenta Pro et Contra] Quod non: 1. 17, quaest. 1: Sunt quaedam: “Voventibus non solum nubere, sed velle nubere damnabile est.”2 2. Item, Numeri ultimo3 habetur quod mulieres debuerunt nubere viris suae tribus; ergo Maria non potuit secundum legem nubere nisi viro de tribus sua; sed Ioseph erat de tribu Iuda,sicut habetur Luc. 2:4: Eo quod esset de tribu et domo David; Maria autem erat de tribu Levi, quia cognata Elisabeth, Luc. 1: 36. 3. Item, contrahens matrimonium in aliquid consentit, non tantum in cohabitationem, quia sic frater et soror possunt consentire; ergo in carnalem copulam, quia nihil aliud videtur matrimonium addere super cohabitationem; sed in illam copulam non poterat beata Virgo consentire, quia voverat virginitatem. [Contra]: Oppositum dicit Magister in littera, et accipitur ex evangelio Matt. 1:18: Cum esset desponsata, etc. 1 Ordinatio IV, dist. 30, q. 2 (from the text edited by C. Balić, O.F.M. in Ioannis Duns Scoti, Doctoris Mariani Theologiae Marianae Elementa (Sibenici, 1933), 55-66. 2 Corpus Iuris Canonici, tom. I: Pars Prior Decretum Magisteri Gratiani , Secunda pars, causa 17, c. 2, (Lipsiae: Bernshard Tauchnitz, 1879) col. 812. 3 Numeri 36:6-8. Question Three 79 The Marriage beTween Mary and JosePh Secondly, I ask: Was there a true marriage between Mary and Joseph? [Arguments Pro and Con] There was not: 1. In the [Decrees of Gratian], 17, question 1, “Sunt quaedam” it says: “For those in vows it is damnable not only to marry but to wish to marry.” 2. Also, in Numbers1 we have the command that women must marry men of their tribe; therefore Mary according to the law, could have married a man only of her own tribe, but Joseph was of the tribe of Juda, as we know from Luke 2:4: “He was of the house and lineage of David.” Mary, however, was of the tribe of Levi, because she was a relative of Elizabeth, according to Luke 1:36. 3. Also, in contracting marriage one consents to something; this is not only living together, because a brother and sister can consent to live this way; therefore one consents to carnal intercourse, for that seems to be the only thing marriage adds to living together; but the Blessed Virgin could not consent to that intercourse, because she had vowed virginity. [For the Affirmative]: The Master in the text says the opposite, and we know it to be so from the Gospel of Matthew: 1:18: “Mary was espoused to Joseph.” etc. 1 Numbers 36:6-8: “This is what the Lord commands with regard to the daughters of Salphahad: They may marry anyone they please, provided they marry into the clan of their ancestral tribe, so that no heritage of the Israelites will pass from one tribe to another, but all the Israelites will retain their own ancestral heritage. Therefore, every daughter who inherits property in any of the Israelite tribes shall marry someone belonging to a clan of her own ancestral tribe, in order that all the Israelites may remain in possession of their own ancestral heritage.” John Duns Scotus: Four Questions on Mary 80 [Corpus Questionis] Hic duo sunt videnda: primo quia ita est, secundo quomodo ita est. [Articlus I: Suntne Maria et Ioseph nupti?] Primum apparet ex auctoritatibus quas ponit Magister4 in littera ; et ratio congrua ad hoc est, quia vel erat praeceptum universale omnibus in lege illa de contrahendo matrimonium, si quidem in lege illa pro benedictione erat foecunditas et pro maledictione sterilitas, patet ex multis locis Scripturae; vel si non fuit praeceptum generale, quod apparet ex hoc quod Ieremias et Ioannes Baptista remanserunt virgines, tunc beatae Virgini fuit datum speciale manmdatum de contrahendo cum Ioseph. Et ad hoc possunt esse rationes congruae, quae accipiuntur ab Ambrosio5 4 Peter Lombard, Sententiae IV, d. 30, c. 2 (ed. cit. II, 932). 5 Ambrose, Expositio evangelium secundum Lucam II, nn. 1-2 (PL 15, 1633): Salutaris possumus intelligere et hoc perpensioris fuisse consilii, quod ea potissimum electa est ut Dominum pareret, quae erat desponsata viro. Cur autem non antequam desponsaretur, impleta est? Fortasse ne diceretur quod conceperat ex adulterio. Et bene utrumque posuit Scriptura, ut et desponsata esset, et virgo: virgo, ut expers virilis...