Sixty available days are granted by law to a husband desiring to bring an accusation of adultery, during which he will be allowed to do so either against the adulterer or adulteress. If this term should elapse, the husband can still proceed under the law conceding this right to strangers.
He who brings an accusation of this kind should have no fear of the penalty for malicious prosecution, for My Divine relatives, the Emperors, have permitted the torture of slaves to establish proof of the crime in the same way as in the case of a husband. Published on the second of the Ides of August, during the Consulate of Maximus, Consul for the second time, and Aelianus, The Same Emperor to Heruclanus.
The man who afterwards married her cannot be a lawful accuser, where an adult virgin was violated before her marriage; and therefore he cannot prosecute the crime as her husband, unless he was betrothed to the girl who was violated. If, however, she herself, with the assistance of her curators by whom her affairs were transacted, should prosecute for the injury committed upon her, the Governor of the province will impose a severe sentence in accordance with what is required by law for a crime of this kind, if its commission should be established.
Published on the twelfth of the Kalends of June, during the Consulate of Maximus, Consul for the second time, and Aelianus, The Same Emperor to Domnus. The Lex Julia relating to chastity forbids the two parties guilty of adultery, that is to say, the man and the woman, to be prosecuted at the same time, and in the same case, but they can both be prosecuted in succession. It is proper for the preservation of virtue during My reign that a woman convicted under the Lex Julia concerning chastity should suffer the legal penalty. Moreover, anyone that knowingly marries, or takes back a woman convicted of adultery, who has in some way evaded the penalty prescribed for her crime, shall be punished by the same law as a procurer.
Published on the seventh of the Kalends of February, during the Consulate of Julian, Consul for the second time, and Crispinus, The Same Emperor to Demetrianus. It is not lawful to condone the crime of adultery, and he who is guilty of collusion is in the same position as one who refuses to reveal the truth. Moreover, he who accepts a sum of money to desist from prosecution, in a case where adultery has been discovered, is liable to the penalty imposed by the Lex Julia.
The Same Emperor to Narvanus. No one doubts that a husband cannot accuse his wife of adultery if he continues to retain her in marriage. Published on the Kalends of September, during the Consulate of Alexander, Consul for the second time, and Marcellus, The Same Emperor to Bassus.
Although, as you allege, he who was convicted of the crime of adultery was not restored to his civil rights; still, since your sister, with whom the adultery was said to have been committed, was not accused, she could not have been subjected to any penalty, or rendered infamous, especially as you state that the accuser afterwards died. The Same Emperor to Sylvanus. It is an established rule of law that, if the adulteress, after the accusation has been brought against her, should leave the province, she can still be prosecuted while absent.
- The 10 Most Blasphemous Movies in History!
- Article 1. Whether sacrilege is the violation of a sacred thing?.
- Nun of Watton - Wikipedia!
The Emperor Gordian to Aquila. If your wife should be guilty of adultery during marriage, you ought to prosecute her in the ordinary manner, in the province in which the adultery was committed. If she committed adultery and married again after you repudiated her, you cannot accuse her, unless the notice of the accusation preceded her second marriage. The Same Emperor to the Soldier Hilarinus. If your former wife, before having been accused of adultery, left the province, she cannot be accused while absent; nor can the complaint be legally made or filed in the province in which you were serving as a soldier.
Although you will not be permitted to do this while you are in the military service, you can accuse her afterwards, by observing the usual formalities; for the time during which you were performing your duties as a soldier should not deprive you of the vengeance which you demand for the suffering inflicted upon you as a husband. The Emperors Valerian and Gallienus to Archesilaus. You should appear before the Governor in whose tribunal you have filed your accusation of adultery, if you desire it to be dismissed; but you are mistaken if you think that this can be done without making application to the court, and that, afterwards, you will not be liable to the penalty prescribed by the Decree of the Senate, for the Emperors have frequently decided the contrary.
And you are also notified that, hereafter, you will not have the power to make accusations of this kind; because, by a Decree of the Senate and the Lex Petronia, he who has filed an accusation for adultery and did not prosecute it shall never again be permitted to bring one for this offence. The Same Emperors to Victorinus. You can resume marital relations with your wife without fear of being liable to the penalty prescribed by the Lex Julia, for the suppression of adultery, as you did nothing more than file the written accusation, for the reason that you assert that you afterwards ascertained that you were impelled by groundless indignation to accuse her; for he alone will be liable to the penalty specifically mentioned by the law who is aware that his wife has been publicly convicted of adultery, or that she is an adulteress, as he cannot simulate ignorance of the fact, and retain her as his wife.
Published on the sixth of the Kalends of August, during the Consulate of the Emperor Valerian, Consul for the fourth time, and Gallienus, Consul for the third time, There is no doubt that he who has two wives at once is branded with infamy, for, in a case of this kind, not the operation of the law by which Our citizens are forbidden to contract more than one marriage at a time, but the intention, should be considered; and therefore he who pretended to be unmarried, but had another wife in the province, and asked you to marry him, can lawfully be accused of the crime of fornication, for which you are not liable, for the reason that you thought that you were his wife.
You can obtain from the Governor of the province the return of all your property of which you deplore the loss on account of the fraudulent marriage, and which should be restored to you without delay. But how can you recover what he promised to give you as his betrothed? The Emperors Diocletian and Maximian to Pompeianus. Although it is an undoubted rule of law that, whenever an accusation of adultery is made, the presence of the accuser is required, still, as We have learned from your letters that Materia, the wife of Propositus, who was absent on a journey, was convicted of adultery with Julian after her slaves had been put to torture; and that, when sentence was about to be passed upon her, she demanded that her husband should be present, as the case was almost terminated, and the crime in question had been proved, We do not think that Propositus should be recalled from a distance.
Given on the Nones of December, during the Consulate of the above-mentioned Emperors. The Same Emperors and Caesars to Didymus. The laws punish the detestable wickedness of women who prostitute their chastity to the lusts of others, but does not hold those liable who are compelled to commit fornication through force, and against their will.
And, moreover, it has very properly been decided that their reputations are not lost, and that their marriage with others should not be prohibited on this account. Published on the third of the Nones of October, during the Consulate of Diocletian, Consul for the fourth time, and Maximian, Consul for the third time, The Same Emperors and Caesars to Silanus. Although certain times have been prescribed by law with reference to the commission of adultery, and the accusing of wives, which times must be properly computed, still, if you were unable to file an accusation on account of your having a public employment, and the prescribed term expired before you relinquished your office, you have full power to bring the accusation after you have done so.
You should, however, not delay after you have vacated the office; nor should you, for the purpose of terrifying your adversary, make a pretence of bringing an accusation with unrestrained impetuosity. Published on the fourteenth of the Kalends of November, during the Consulate of Diocletian, Consul for the fourth time, and Maximian, Consul for the third time, The Same Emperors and Caesars to Oblimosus. If a woman whom you have carnally known indiscriminately sold herself for money, and prostituted herself everywhere as a harlot, you did not commit the crime of adultery with her.
Published on the twelfth of the Kalends of November, during the Consulate of Diocletian, Consul for the fourth time, and Maximian, Consul for the third time, The Same Emperors and Caesars to Proculus. Slaves cannot accuse their wives of adultery for violation of conjugal faith. When, however, it is established that the money was paid as a consideration for dishonorable marriage, and for the purpose of obtaining immunity, he will order that the person who received the money in violation of the Decree of the Senate, in such a detestable transaction, shall be punished.
Published on the Kalends of November, during the Consulate of Diocletian, Consul for the fourth time, and Maximian, Consul for the third time, The Same Emperors and Caesars to Dionysius. If you should be accused of adultery by her with whom you have lived in violation of law, you can defend yourself by an innumerable number of expedients. The Same Emperors and Caesars to Sossianus.
Although it is established by the contents of certain documents that you are consumed with the lust of immoderate desire, still, as it has been ascertained that you confined yourself to female slaves, and did not have intercourse with free women, it is clear that by a sentence of this kind your reputation suffers, rather than that you become infamous.
The Same Emperors and Caesars to Crispinus. As Alexander, who was accused of the crime of adultery, pleaded an exception on the ground that the accuser, after the adultery was discovered, kept his wife with him, We think that his status should now be investigated, and the order of the proceeding be reversed, so that, in the first place, inquiry should be made as to the civil condition of Alexander; and if, after having heard the case, you should ascertain that he is free, you can authorize him to plead the exception.
If, however, you should find that he is a slave, all the impediments caused by the exception having been removed, you must immediately punish the accusation of adultery, and if you find him guilty, impose the penalty which the laws have prescribed for the offence.
Given on the fifth of the Kalends of September, during the Consulate of the above-mentioned Emperors. The Same Emperors and Caesars to Phoebus. Adultery committed with a man whom a woman afterwards married is not extinguished by the fact of the marriage. Published on the eighteenth of the Kalends of January, during the Consulate of the Caesars. Our respect for chastity is such that We have determined to remove the ambiguities of former laws, and decide with reference to the trial for adultery; all exceptions having been abolished, except that based on prescription of five years; the one relative to pimping, which can be pleaded against the husband; and that of which the woman can avail herself after the former marriage has been dissolved, and before notice has been served upon her not to contract a second one, namely, that her accomplice in the crime be prosecuted; for it is unworthy that legal technicalities should prevent the punishment of violated chastity.
The Emperor Constantine to Africanus. It should be ascertained whether the woman who committed adultery was the owner of the inn, or only a servant; and if, by employing herself in servile duties which frequently happens , she gave occasion for intemperance, since if she were the mistress of the inn, she will not be exempt from liability under the law. Where, however, she served liquor to the men who were drinking, she would not be liable to accusation as having committed the offence, on account of her inferior rank, and any freemen who have been accused shall be discharged, as the same degree of modesty is required of these women as of those who are legally married, and bear the name of mothers of families.
Those, also, are not subject to judicial severity who are guilty of fornication or adultery, and the vileness of whose lives does not render them worthy of the attention of the laws. Signed and given at Heraclia, on the third of the Nones of February, during the Consulate of Constantine, Consul for the seventh time, and the Caesar Constantius, The Same Emperor to Evagrius. Although the crime of adultery is included among public offences, the accusation of which is granted to all persons without distinction, still, in order that those who inconsiderately wish to cause discord in households may not be allowed to do so, it is hereby decreed that only the nearest relatives of the guilty party shall have the power to bring the accusation; that is to say, the father, the brother, and the paternal and maternal uncles, whom genuine grief may impel to prosecute.
We, however, also give the said persons permission to revoke the accusation, by withdrawing it, if they should so desire. The husband, above all others, should be considered the avenger of the marriage bed, for he is permitted to accuse his wife on suspicion, and he is not forbidden to retain her, if he only suspects her; nor will he be liable if he files a written accusation when he accuses her as her husband, a privilege which was established by former Emperors. Moreover, We decree that strangers shall be prevented from bringing such charges, for although every kind of accusation renders the person who makes it in writing liable in case it should not be proved, still, some persons boldly make them and disturb marriages with false denunciations.
Those who have violated the sanctity of marriage should be punished with death. Published at Nicomedia, on the seventh of the Kalends of May, during the Consujate of Constantine, Consul for the seventh time, and the Caesar Constantius, Consul for the fourth time, The Emperors Constantine and Constans to the People. When a man marries, and his wife becomes pregnant, what can be desired of the woman when her sex is lost sight of; when what it is of no advantage to know becomes a crime; when the sexual act assumes another form; when love is sought, but does not appear?
We order the laws to rise up, and justice to be armed with the avenging sword, that the severest penalty may be visited upon those who are now, or shall hereafter, be guilty of this infamous offence. Given at Milan, on the day before the Nones of December, and published at Rome on the seventeenth of the Kalends of January, during the Consulate of Constantine, Consul for the ninth time, and Constans. In an investigation of adultery, inquiry must be made without excepting any of all the slaves belonging, not only to the husband, but also to the wife, who are alleged to have been in the house at the time when the adultery was committed.
When a charge of adultery has been made, We order that all civil exceptions by means of which a dowry may be claimed, or any other debt demanded, and which are ordinarily pleaded and examined, to be set aside, and that the progress of the case shall not be delayed through their interposition. But when the accusation has been formulated, that is to say, when it has been regularly instituted, whether it was filed under the right of a husband, or under that of a stranger, the crime shall be investigated, the evidence produced, the more important matters in dispute settled, and all civil actions be subordinated to the criminal prosecution.
The woman will afterwards have the right to begin any civil proceedings to which he is entitled, provided they do not interfere with the conduct of the criminal case. Given at Constantinople, on the seventh of the Ides of December, during the Consulate of Arcadius, Consul for the second time, and Rufinus, Where persons accused of adultery repel the accusation under the pretext of relationship, stating that, for this reason, allegations relating to commission of the crime ought not to be believed, or that it was impossible that it should have been committed, and they are afterwards married, the offence of which they were accused shall, merely by this fact, be considered to have been proved clearly and by legal evidence.
Therefore, if any such persons should be met with, We order that they shall be severely punished, just as if they had been convicted of the crime, and had confessed it. Given at Constantinople, on the day before the Nones of December, during the Consulate of Theodosius, Consul for the third time, and Abundantius, If a woman should repudiate her husband without any legal reason having been assigned by her for so doing, We grant the repudiated husband permission to accuse her, if she should stain her widowhood with acts of debauchery.
Former legislators have directed that the freedom of slaves, who belong either to the wife, the husband, or their parents, in case of the repudiation of either of the parties on account of suspicion of the crime of adultery, shall remain in suspense for the term of two months, which must be reckoned from the date of the repudiation, on account of the torture to be inflicted upon them in case it should be deemed necessary. But, as your wife died after your marriage was dissolved in the above-mentioned manner, nothing further is stated by the authorities concerning any additional time during which the slaves shall be required to remain in their present condition for the reason above mentioned.
It, however, seems to Us to be necessary to fix a certain period in a case of this kind, with a view to determining the question of dowry, and whether it should belong to the husband, or be transferred to the heirs of the wife. Hence We order that, after the death of the wife, another two months shall be added, so that the above-mentioned slaves may remain together, and the husband have the power to prove the adultery by them. When the above-mentioned time has elapsed, the heir of the woman will have permission to grant freedom to the slaves, unless he was to blame for the husband being prevented from bringing the accusation of adultery during the term prescribed by law.
Title Where a guardian corrupts his female ward. When a guardian violates the chastity of his female ward, he shall be sentenced to deportation, and all his property shall be confiscated to the Treasury, although he must still suffer the penalty which the laws inflict upon ravishers. Given at Aquileia, on the day before the Nones of April, during the Consulate of Constantine, Consul for the seventh time, and Con-stantius, Concerning women who copulate with their own slaves. The Emperor Constantine to the People. When a woman is convicted of having secretly had sexual intercourse with her slave, she shall be sentenced to death, and the rascally slave shall perish by fire.
Every facility for the proof of this crime shall be afforded all persons, any official can bring the charge, and even the slave-himself shall be permitted to testify concerning it, and if it should be established, he must be granted his freedom. Children born of such an union shall be deprived of all insignia of rank, and shall have nothing but their freedom, nor will they be entitled to receive anything from the estates of their mothers, as bequests under her will, either directly or through the intervention of others.
Moreover, the intestate succession of the woman will pass to her legitimate children, or to her nearest relatives, or to those who are designated by law. All the property which the slave who was convicted may have been entitled to, and anything which could, under any circumstances, have been obtained by the children of this union, as belonging to the woman, can be claimed by the heirs above mentioned.eaglesflightschoollagos.com/scripts/412/13501.php
Question 154. The parts of Lust
Given on the fourth of the Kalends of June, during the Consulate of Constantine, Consul for the seventh time, and the Caesar Constantius, On the Lex Julia relating to public or private violence. The Emperors Severus and Antoninus to Pelitia. Those who seize the property of a wife on account of a debt of her husband, or because of some public civil liability which he has incurred, are considered to have been guilty of violence.
The Emperor Antoninus to Verus. If the third part of the property of your guardian, who was convicted under the Lex Julia relating to private violence, has been confiscated to the Treasury, bring an action of guardianship to recover the portion which your guardian obtained from the Treasury, provided no prescription can be pleaded against you, for each heir of the estate is liable for his proportionate share.
Published on the fifteenth of the Kalends of March, during the Consulate of Antoninus, Consul for the fourth time, and Balbinus, If, as you allege, your son's betrothed has been taken away from him, or your son has been shut up, you will not be prevented from bringing an accusation of violence before the Governor of the province under the provisions of the Lex Julia. Published at Verona, on the eighth of the Kalends of May, during the Consulship of the above-mentioned Emperors. The Same Emperors and Caesars to Liberatius. If you think that a criminal accusation should be brought on account of the property carried away by a slave, you should not bring it against the master of the slave, but against him who you allege committed the offence.
But as you state that you have also been beaten by the said slave Fiscinulus, you can proceed against his master also if you think that he should be prosecuted for private violence under the Lex Julia before the Governor, who will not be ignorant in what way punishment should be inflicted, if the crime should be proved.
The Same Emperors and Caesars to Oplo. Even if a creditor should take possession of land by force, he can be accused of private violence under the terms of the Lex Julia. As many crimes are classed under the term "violence," and as force is often employed against those who resist, and blows are inflicted upon others who indignantly return them, and murder not infrequently results, it has been decided that if anyone, either on the side of the person in possession, or on that of him who rashly attempts to obtain it, should be killed, he must be punished who attempted to employ force, and was responsible for the injuries of either party, and he shall not merely be sentenced to relegation, or deportation to an island, but shall suffer death, and the judgment pronounced against him shall not be suspended by appeal.
When anyone asserts that a tract of land, or any other property, belongs to him, and thinks that he is entitled to restitution of possession of the same, or institutes civil proceedings to obtain it or brings an accusation of violence, after having complied with the legal formalities, he is hereby notified that if he cannot prove the commission of the crime, he shall suffer the same penalty which the defendant would have undergone, if guilty. But if, having failed to serve notice upon the party in possession, he should employ force against him, We order that the case involving violence shall be heard before any others, and whatever has happened to the party in possession should be ascertained, so that the right to possession of the property which he lost may be restored to him; and that, when this has been done, if a criminal accusation should be brought, the penalty for violence shall not be inflicted, but the decision of the entire case shall be postponed, so that the principal matter may be disposed of; and if judgment should be rendered against him, he shall be deported to an island, after the confiscation of all his property.
Published at Rome, on the day before the Nones of October, during the Consulate of Constantine, Consul for the fifth time, and the Caesar Licinius, We decree that slaves who have been guilty of violence, whether this is proved by the evidence of witnesses or by their own confessions, and if they have committed the violence without the knowledge of their masters, shall suffer the extreme penalty for the offence which they have perpetrated. If, however, they committed it through fear, or by order of their masters, it is clear that, according to the Lex Julia, the latter should be declared infamous, and be deprived of any privileges they enjoy, either on account of their country, or their birth; and the slaves who are proved to have obeyed such wicked commands shall, after conviction, be sent to the mines.
Vile and degraded persons, as well as those who have frequently been convicted of having perpetrated acts of violence, are liable to the same penalty under the Imperial constitutions. The judge must remember that he will be branded with infamy if he should delay to pass sentence for the crime of violence, after it has been established before him; or should refuse to hear the accusation, or should grant immunity to the offender; or should impose a milder penalty than We have prescribed. Given at Milan, on the day before the Nones of March, during the Consulate of Valentinian, Consul for the fourth time, and Neoterius, The crime of one who robs, and of one who knowingly retains the stolen property, are not dissimilar.
Given on the third of the Nones of March, during the Consulate of Honorius, Consul for the tenth time, and Theodosius, Consul for the fifth time, We desire that all persons, both in the towns and in the country, shall be deprived of permission to harbor thieves, vagabonds, and armed fugitive slaves. If anyone, in violation of this law which We have promulgated for the public welfare, should attempt to entertain armed slaves, vagabonds, or robbers on his premises, or near his person, We order that he shall be punished severely, after having been sentenced to pay a fine of a hundred pounds of gold.
The illustrious Governors of provinces should see that no one dares to violate this law in any respect, and if they do so knowingly, they shall be stripped of their rank and office, and, after having been condemned to pay a fine of a hundred pounds of gold, shall be put to death, and their principal retainers, as well as the attendants attached to their persons, shall also be condemned to death, in addition to the confiscation of their property. Given on the fifth of the Kalends of September, during the Consulate of Anthemius, Consul for the second time, Concerning the rape of virgins, widows, and nuns.
We decree that ravishers of virgins, who are of honorable rank or freeborn, whether they have been betrothed or not, or of widows of any description, whether they are freedwomen or the slaves of others, shall be punished with death, as being guilty of the worst of crimes; especially when they are widows or virgins consecrated to God, for not only in this case is an injury committed against humanity, but against the reverence due to Almighty God himself; since the virginity or chastity which has been destroyed cannot be restored.
It is with reason that person of this kind are condemned to death as ravishers, as they are frequently also guilty of homicide. Therefore, in order that a crime of such atrocity may not go unpunished, We decree by this general constitution that those who perpetrate it, as well as those who aid them at the time, where they are caught in the act and surprised when committing it, can immediately be killed by the fathers or the blood-relatives, guardians, curators, patrons or masters of the said virgins, widows, or women of any description whatsoever, whether they are freeborn or not.
We order that these provisions shall, above all, be applicable to those who have dared to ravish married women, for the reason that they are liable to punishment for a double crime, that is to say, for adultery as well as rape; and it is necessary for the crime of adultery to be punished with greater severity on account of the other offence being added to it.
We class with these criminals one who has ventured to ravish the girl who was betrothed to him. If, however, after the commission of such a detestable crime, the ravisher should be able to defend himself on account of his powerful influence, or to escape by flight, the illustrious Praetorian Prefects, as well as the distinguished Prefect of the City in this Imperial Capital, as well as the eminent Praetorian Prefects in Illyria and Africa, the Generals of the Army, throughout the different portions of Our Empire, the Eminent Prefect of Egypt, the Count of the East, the Vicegerents, Proconsuls, Dukes, and Governors of Provinces, and Judges of every rank, who may be in those places, shall display the greatest zeal and exert every effort to apprehend the culprit, and shall punish with exemplary severity those who have been arrested for the commission of such a crime, and sentence them to death after evidence which is competent and recognized by law has been given, without permitting any exception to be pleaded.
If the defendants should wish to appeal, We, in accordance with the provisions of the ancient law of Constantine, refuse to grant them permission to do so. If, however, such an atrocious crime should be perpetrated against a woman who is freeborn, all the property movable, immovable, or capable of moving itself, which belongs to the ravishers themselves, or to their accomplices, associates, or followers who have given them assistance, shall be transferred to the ownership of the said ravished freeborn woman by a decree of court, and the efforts of her parents, husband, guardians or curators.
When the woman above mentioned is not married, she can lawfully be united in matrimony with any man whomsoever, except her ravisher, and the property of the latter, or as much of it as she may desire, shall be given as the dowry of the woman aforesaid. If she should not be willing to accept a husband, but prefers to remain single, We order that the said property shall belong to her absolutely, and that no judge, or any other person whosoever, shall dare to violate this provision.
The Code of Justinian : Book 9 ( Scott )
No virgin, widow, or any other woman shall be permitted to accept her ravisher as her husband, but any person whom her parents may agree to her ravishers excepted can legally marry her, as, under no circumstances, and at no time, shall she be given permission by Us to consent to marry one who, in Our Empire, may attempt to contract marriage in a hostile manner; for, where anyone desires to take a wife, whether she be freeborn or a freedwoman, it is necessary to demand her of her parents, or in accordance with Our laws and ancient customs, of others who have charge of her, so that a lawful union may be effected with their consent.
We subject to the punishment of death all those who were aware of and accomplices in a crime of this kind, and have been convicted; as well as those who harbored the culprits, or gave them any assistance, whether they be men or women, no matter of what position, rank, or dignity they may be; and We render them liable to this penalty, whether the offence was perpetrated with or without the consent of the said virgins or women. If, however, the ravishers themselves refrained from the commission of this crime, being deterred either by fear, or by the severity of the punishment, no reproach can be brought against the woman, whether she gave her consent or not, because this law has been enacted to protect women from the treachery of wicked men, who intend to employ violence.
For unless a man solicited her, and deceived her by his detestable arts, he did not induce her to submit to such dishonor; and if her parents, upon whom, above all, devolves the duty of revenge, should tolerate the crime, and stifle their grief, they shall be punished with deportation. All the provisions of the Lex Julia, which have reference to the rape of virgins, widows, or nuns, or which are contained in the ancient books of the law, or in the Imperial Constitutions, are hereby abolished for the future, and this law alone shall take the place of all others, so far as what We have decreed concerning the rape of nuns, virgins, and widows is concerned.
Concerning the correction of slaves. The Emperor Constantine to Bassus.
If a master should punish his slave by striking him with rods or straps, or, in order to keep him in custody, should place him in chains, no objection can be raised with reference to the time he was confined, and the master need have no fear of criminal prosecution, in case the slave should die. For, indeed, he does not use his rights without moderation in a case of this kind, but he will become guilty of homicide if he should intentionally inflict a fatal wound upon the slave by means of rods, stones, or weapons; or order him to be hung; or direct him to be hurled from a precipice; or give him poison; or lacerate his body publicly by the application of iron hooks to his sides; or burn his limbs with fire; or cause his joints to waste away by depriving them of their humors and blood; or deprive him of life by means of torture worthy of the cruelty of the most savage barbarians.
Concerning the correction of relatives. The Emperors Valentinian and Valens to the Senate. We grant the power of punishing minors to their elder relatives, according to the nature of the offence which they have committed, in order that the remedy of such discipline may exert its influence over those whom a praiseworthy example at home has not induced to lead an honorable life.
We, however, are not willing that the right to inflict extremely severe castigation for the faults of minors should be conferred, but that the exercise of paternal authority may correct the errors of youth, and repress them by private chastisement. If, however, the enormity of the deed should exceed the limits of domestic correction, We decree that those guilty of atrocious crime shall be brought before the courts of justice. Given on the day before the Kalends of December, during the Consulate of Valentinian and Valens, On the Lex Cornelia relating to assassins.
Your brother would have done better if he had surrendered himself to the Governor of the province, for if he had proved that the man was not struck by him with the intention of killing him, the Governor would have rendered a decision in accordance with military discipline by remitting the penalty of homicide; for a crime is committed when the purpose to cause damage is present. Those acts, however, which take place rather through unforeseen accident than from design are, for the most part, attributed to misfortune, and not to an intent to commit injury.
Published on the second of the Kalends of February, during the Consulate of Lsetus, Consul for the second time, and Cerealis, The Emperor Gordian to Quintianus. He who, when in danger of his life, kills his aggressor or anyone else, should have no fear of prosecution on this account. The Same Emperor to Quintianus. When anyone kills another who attacks him with a sword, he should not be considered a homicide, for the reason that the defender of his own life is not held to have committed an offence. The Emperor Gallienus to Monatius. If as you state you have killed a robber, there is no doubt that it will be decided that you have lawfully killed him who had the intention of depriving you of life.
Published on the thirteenth of the Kalends of February, during the Consulate of Valerius and Lucillus, If it is true that he who asserts he did not intentionally commit the homicide, but that it took place accidentally, where death appears to have resulted from a kick, no doubt can arise upon this point, and We desire that he shall be freed from any fear and suspicion to which he may have been liable from the facts, as admitted, in conformity with what is set forth by Our annotation.
Given at Sirmium, on the seventh of the Kalends of December, during the Consulate of Diocletian, Consul for the fourth time, and Maximian, Consul for the third time, The Same Emperors and Caesars to Agotius. If anyone should accuse you under the Lex Cornelia relating to assassins, you must prove your innocence of the crime, and not defend yourself by alleging that you were not of age. The Same Emperors and Caesars to Philiscus. He who goes about armed with the intention of killing a man, just as he who does kill one, or through whose evil design such an act is committed, shall be punished with the penalty prescribed by the Lex Cornelia, relating to assassins.
If any person of either sex should kill an infant, he or she is hereby notified that they will be punished with death. Published at Rome, on the seventh of the Ides of February, during the Consulate of Gratian, Consul for the third time, and Equitius, Where a woman is found to have plotted the death of her husband, or to have had the intention of killing him in any other way, or where a husband has entertained a similar design against the life of his wife, all the slaves of both husband and wife who were in the house at the time, without excepting any of them, shall be put to torture.
Concerning those who kill their parents or children. If anyone should hasten the end of either of his parents, his son, his daughter, or any of those relatives whose murder is designated by the term parricide, whether he committed the act secretly or openly, he shall suffer the penalty of parricide, and shall neither be put to death by the sword, nor by fire, nor by any other ordinary method, but shall be sewed up in a sack with a dog, a cock, a viper, and a monkey, and, enclosed with these wild animals and associated with serpents, he shall be either thrown into the sea, or into a river, according to the nature of the locality; so that, while living, he may be deprived of all use of the elements, and during the remainder of his existence, he may be deprived of air, and, at his death, of the earth.
Much less to their liking, though, is the parental trafficking planned by Lord Melancholy's father, away on ambassadorial duties, i.
- How to Draw Pirates (arabic edition) (drawing books (arabic edition) Book 1)!
- Navigation menu.
- SWING als Phänomen musikalischer Phrasierung (German Edition)!
- Main navigation.
- Tommy, Timmy and Tummy!
- Make Believe Its Your First Time.
Angry at learning of his son's marriage but determined to use his offspring for an advantageous alliance, he finds ways to convince the Arch-Prince to manipulate civil and canon law to annul the marriage between Melancholy and Perfection. Melancholy, torn between his father's wishes and his initial marriage vows, eventually gives in to parental pressure. While government intervention in matters of marriage appears, on the whole, to be condoned in The Convent of Pleasure , in this play it is depicted as sinister. The Arch Prince's desire to marry his niece at the expense of an established, happy marriage affects not only Lady Perfection, who finds herself in a social lacuna: as she says she is "neither Maid, Virgin, Widow, nor Wife" So different are his and his new wife's personalities, he explains, "we are happyest when we are fardest asunder" All three young people are distraught.
Yet this is but a minor part of the play's sinister government intervention. As in The Convent of Pleasure , in this play the good of the whole country is at stake. Lady Perfection becomes the target of the Arch-Prince's "raging" desire, which prompts threats of rape when she refuses his marriage proposal After tampering with the law, the Arch Prince now puts himself above the law in threatening rape and simultaneously risks the peace and prosperity of his country by ignoring the Emperor's wish for a union between his daughter and the Arch-Prince.
In this play the convent again offers refuge and social alternatives; here, though it provides a woman without a social identity with one, and it protects a marriage as well as provides escape from an unwanted marriage or possible rape. Perfection maintains, despite an annulment, that she is still married to Melancholy, and thus "cannot vow Virginity, nor a single life. Furthermore, she acquaints "the Fathers of the Church" with her plan All this is done without public knowledge, so that no more laws can be manipulated or broken before she is safely immured in her cloister.
The prince, who has proven capable of arbitrarily changing civil laws, pressuring the church to change canon law, and refusing an alliance with the Emperor's daughter, which will almost certainly precipitate a war, not surprisingly seeks to prevent her from taking vows, but, upon learning he is too late, leaves her alone. As she predicted he will not "not commit Sacrilege" The play is saturated with religious language: Church Fathers, sacrilege, cloister, vow, religious order, and so forth.
The terms repent and repentance also occur frequently. Early on, the play's citizen chorus speculates that the protagonists may repent marrying so young. Mid-way through, in response to Odd-Humour's desire to enter a convent, Nan proclaims that many repent their decision to marry or enter a convent, since most do it merely "for a change in life.
Perfection, however, does not repent her religious vows any more than she did her marriage vows; she takes all her vows seriously: vows of chastity and solitariness are as important as are her still unbroken marriage vows. This play highlights constancy. Martyrdom is another religious element in this play. In the main plot, unable to reunite on earth, Perfection and Melancholy agree to a double suicide so that their souls can unite in the hereafter; thus, they are ready to become martyrs for love and for religion, but above all for keeping one's vows.
Faring better than Romeo and Juliet, though, the couple at the point of piercing their hearts on a double-ended sword, which Melancholy had extended part way through the cloister grate, is stopped by two friars alerted to the suicide plan by Perfection's nurse. The friars point out they have saved the couple not merely from corporeal death but imply more importantly from an immortal death. To them suicide is murder, a mortal sin, and committing it at a convent is sacrilege. Since husband and wife are one, her vow to live alone will remain intact; furthermore by being sexually faithful to her husband she will be practising chastity.
In fact, the friars establish a new order for the couple, the "Order of Chastity in Marriage. Whether Cavendish was aware of the existence of lay orders, which provided a way for a married person to also take religious vows, I cannot say, but it is possible, since she seems to be aware that new religious orders need official church approval, and she also knows that for Catholics chastity does not automatically translate to celibacy.
She further specifies that the "Religious Habit" that Lady Perfection wears is one "Somewhat like the Normetanes" I have not found any reference to a religious order with that name; still, she may have meant the Norbertines, an order whose name sounds somewhat like Normetane and which has associations with Belgium.
Martyrdom is a feature of the subplot as well. Mistriss Odd-Humour is emotionally attached to her childhood chair, a symbol of her wish to arrest her maturation, thereby avoiding marriage. This attachment generates much of the humour in the play. In fact, at one point of the play, she is not only emotionally but literally attached to her chair. Because she has grown to adult size, sitting in it makes for a tight fit. As she, startled, rises to greet a suitor, who has been sent into her unannounced, the chair sticks to her bottom.
He breaks off the proposed match immediately. Momentarily embarrassed, she rallies, reminding herself that the chair has protected her from an unwanted marriage. Her father's response, however, is a command to get rid of the chair. Disobeying him, she continues to use it when he is absent, hiding it when he visits her room, having asked Nan to act as bawd between it and her father, warning ahead of time of her father's visits.
Still, almost religious devotion to remaining a child and to its tangible symbol, the chair, cannot help Odd-Humour. The hiding place for it becomes refigured as a priest hole when Odd-Humour mournfully relates to Nan the chair's "Martyrdome whereat I was so afflicted,.
I lost my sight in tears, which. I let run on the fire, hoping to quench it. In addition to showing the impossibility of remaining a child, the martyrdom of the chair could signify Cavendish's disapproval of hidden or secretive religious affiliation as opposed to her approval of officially sanctioned, and thus open, religious devotion. The chair is not only figured as a priest being caught and martyred; it also is figured as a lover when Odd-Humour suggests that Nan act as a "Bawd.
Still, it seems more likely given the humour of the scene that Cavendish is instead mocking or trivializing those rumours. What is clear is that religion operating more openly--i. It can also facilitate good marriages, keeping Lady Happy single until a proper suitor comes along and Lady Perfection's marriage on hold until time and the creation of yet another religious order allow her to resume it. As for the relationship between government and marriage, Cavendish seems to have a consistent hierarchy: the peace of the kingdom takes precedence over the desires of individuals.
Lady Happy, although initially committed to a celibate life, marries the Prince and prevents war; the Arch-Prince reins in his desire and marries the Emperor's daughter. Mistriss Odd-Humour, while not impoverished, is not an aristocrat and apparently does not have the means to join a convent.
Maybe more than the chair or Lady Perfection or even Lady Happy, who some readers maintain dies to herself in marriage, I believe the real martyr is Mistriss Odd-Humour, who has no say about her marital state. Although it may be argued that any objections Lady Happy may have toward her marriage are silenced by considerations of the good of her country, it can also be argued that her silence acknowledges that she no longer needs to defend life in a convent because she has changed her mind about marriage.
That she already knows the Prince to a degree and was attracted to him increases the odds that hers will be a happy marriage. On the other hand, as Odd-Humour notes, her father may marry her to a miserly man, who "will allow. Her ideal husband would have "more love than jealousy, more merit than title, more honesty than wealth, and more wealth than necessity," , but in reality the economics of the match will dictate who is willing to marry her and whom her father will choose.
Although the authorship of this publication cannot be absolutely ascertained, there was a "Susan Du Verger, who had translated. The information about the family origin and religion and their being at least nominally Catholic is from a conversation with Katie Whitaker at the Fifth International Biennial Cavendish Conference, University College Chester, England, July , See Measure for Measure for similar words from Mariana. The silence of Isabella at the end of Shakespeare's play might be contrasted with Lady Happy's relative silence at the end of The Convent of Pleasure.
In "'I hate such an old-fashioned House': Margaret Cavendish and the search for home," also in this issue, Alison Findlay convincingly suggests that The Religious is "a text in which Cavendish deals poignantly with the loss of her childhood home," the cloister scenes echoing St. For when there is excess of seminal humor in the body, or when the humor is disintegrated either through overheating of the body or some other disturbance, the sleeper dreams things that are connected with the discharge of this excessive or disintegrated humor: the same thing happens when nature is cumbered with other superfluities, so that phantasms relating to the discharge of those superfluities are formed in the imagination.
Accordingly if this excess of humor be due to a sinful cause for instance excessive eating or drinking , nocturnal pollution has the character of sin from its cause : whereas if the excess or disintegration of these superfluities be not due to a sinful cause , nocturnal pollution is not sinful , neither in itself nor in its cause. A second cause of nocturnal pollution is on the part of the soul and the inner man : for instance when it happens to the sleeper on account of some previous thought.
For the thought which preceded while he was awake, is sometimes purely speculative, for instance when one thinks about the sins of the flesh for the purpose of discussion; while sometimes it is accompanied by a certain emotion either of concupiscence or of abhorrence.
Now nocturnal pollution is more apt to arise from thinking about carnal sins with concupiscence for such pleasures, because this leaves its trace and inclination in the soul , so that the sleeper is more easily led in his imagination to consent to acts productive of pollution. In this sense the Philosopher says Ethic. The third cause is spiritual and external; for instance when by the work of a devil the sleeper's phantasms are disturbed so as to induce the aforesaid result. Sometimes this is associated with a previous sin , namely the neglect to guard against the wiles of the devil.
Hence the words of the hymn at even: "Our enemy repress, that so our bodies no uncleanness know " [Translation W. On the other hand, this may occur without any fault on man's part, and through the wickedness of the devil alone. Thus we read in the Collationes Patrum Coll. Hence it is manifest that nocturnal pollution is never a sin , but is sometimes the result of a previous sin. Solomon did not merit to receive wisdom from God while he was asleep. He received it in token of his previous desire.
It is for this reason that his petition is stated to have been pleasing to God 1 Kings , as Augustine observes Gen. The use of reason is more or less hindered in sleep, according as the inner sensitive powers are more or less overcome by sleep, on account of the violence or attenuation of the evaporations. Nevertheless it is always hindered somewhat, so as to be unable to elicit a judgment altogether free, as stated in I ad 2. Therefore what it does then is not imputed to it as a sin. Reason's apprehension is not hindered during sleep to the same extent as its judgment, for this is accomplished by reason turning to sensible objects, which are the first principles of human thought.
Hence nothing hinders man's reason during sleep from apprehending anew something arising out of the traces left by his previous thoughts and phantasms presented to him, or again through Divine revelation , or the interference of a good or bad angel. Article 6. Whether seduction should be reckoned a species of lust? It would seem that seduction should not be reckoned a species of lust. But this may occur between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman , which pertains to fornication. Therefore seduction should not be reckoned a species of lust , distinct from fornication.
Further, Ambrose says De Patriarch. Therefore since adultery is a species of lust , it seems that seduction should not be reckoned a species of lust. Further, to do a person an injury would seem to pertain to injustice rather than to lust. Now the seducer does an injury to another, namely the violated maiden 's father, who "can take the injury as personal to himself" [Gratian, ad can.
Lex illa], and sue the seducer for damages. Therefore seduction should not be reckoned a species of lust. On the contrary, Seduction consists properly in the venereal act whereby a virgin is violated. Therefore, since lust is properly about venereal actions, it would seem that seduction is a species of lust.
Fornication (The Virgin Nun's Sacrilege)
I answer that, When the matter of a vice has a special deformity, we must reckon it to be a determinate species of that vice. Now lust is a sin concerned with venereal matter , as stated above II-II And a special deformity attaches to the violation of a virgin who is under her father's care: both on the part of the maid , who through being violated without any previous compact of marriage is both hindered from contracting a lawful marriage and is put on the road to a wanton life from which she was withheld lest she should lose the seal of virginity : and on the part of the father, who is her guardian, according to Sirach , "Keep a sure watch over a shameless daughter, lest at any time she make thee become a laughing-stock to thy enemies.
Although a virgin is free from the bond of marriage, she is not free from her father's power. Moreover, the seal of virginity is a special obstacle to the intercourse of fornication, in that it should be removed by marriage only. Hence seduction is not simple fornication, since the latter is intercourse with harlots, women , namely, who are no longer virgins , as a gloss observes on 2 Corinthians 12 , "And have not done penance for the uncleanness and fornication," etc.
Ambrose here takes seduction in another sense, as applicable in a general way to any sin of lust. Wherefore seduction, in the words quoted, signifies the intercourse between a married man and any woman other than his wife. This is clear from his adding: "Nor is it lawful for the husband to do what the wife may not. Nothing prevents a sin from having a greater deformity through being united to another sin.
Now the sin of lust obtains a greater deformity from the sin of injustice , because the concupiscence would seem to be more inordinate, seeing that it refrains not from the pleasurable object so that it may avoid an injustice. On fact a twofold injustice attaches to it.
One is on the part of the virgin , who, though not violated by force, is nevertheless seduced , and thus the seducer is bound to compensation. Hence it is written Exodus : "If a man seduce a virgin not yet espoused, and lie with her, he shall endow her and have her to wife. If the maid's father will not give her to him, he shall give money according to the dowry , which virgins are wont to receive. For it is written Deuteronomy : "If a man find a damsel that is a virgin , who is not espoused, and taking her, lie with her, and the matter come to judgment: he that lay with her shall give to the father of the maid fifty sicles of silver, and shall have her to wife, and because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all the days of his life": and this, lest he should prove to have married her in mockery, as Augustine observes.
Whether rape is a species of lust, distinct from seduction? It would seem that rape is not a species of lust , distinct from seduction. For Isidore says Etym. Further, rape, apparently, implies violence. Lex illa] that "rape is committed when a maid is taken away by force from her father's house that after being violated she may be taken to wife. Therefore it seems that rape should not be reckoned a determinate species of lust.
Further, the sin of lust is curbed by marriage: for it is written 1 Corinthians : "For fear of fornication, let every man have his own wife. Further, a man may have knowledge of his newly married wife without committing a sin of lust. Yet he may commit rape if he take her away by force from her parents' house, and have carnal knowledge of her. Therefore rape should not be reckoned a determinate species of lust. On the contrary, Rape is unlawful sexual intercourse, as Isidore states Etym. But this pertains to the sin of lust.
Therefore rape is a species of lust. I answer that, Rape, in the sense in which we speak of it now, is a species of lust : and sometimes it coincides with seduction; sometimes there is rape without seduction, and sometimes seduction without rape. They coincide when a man employs force in order unlawfully to violate a virgin.
This force is employed sometimes both towards the virgin and towards her father; and sometimes towards the father and not to the virgin , for instance if she allows herself to be taken away by force from her father's house. Again, the force employed in rape differs in another way, because sometimes a maid is taken away by force from her parents' house, and is forcibly violated: while sometimes, though taken away by force, she is not forcibly violated, but of her own consent, whether by act of fornication or by the act of marriage: for the conditions of rape remain no matter how force is employed.
There is rape without seduction if a man abduct a widow or one who is not a virgin. Hence Pope Symmachus says [Ep. Raptores xxxvi, qu. Since rape frequently coincides with seduction, the one is sometimes used to signify the other. The employment of force would seem to arise from the greatness of concupiscence , the result being that a man does not fear to endanger himself by offering violence. The rape of a maiden who is promised in marriage is to be judged differently from that of one who is not so promised. For one who is promised in marriage must be restored to her betrothed , who has a right to her in virtue of their betrothal : whereas one that is not promised to another must first of all be restored to her father's care, and then the abductor may lawfully marry her with her parents' consent.
Otherwise the marriage is unlawful, since whosoever steals a thing he is bound to restore it. Nevertheless rape does not dissolve a marriage already contracted, although it is an impediment to its being contracted. As to the decree of the council in question, it was made in abhorrence of this crime, and has been abrogated. Wherefore Jerome [The quotation is from Can. The first is that of a chaste maiden given away lawfully in her maidenhood to a man. The second is when a man finds a maiden in the city, and by force has carnal knowledge of her. If the father be willing, the man shall endow her according to the father's estimate, and shall pay the price of her purity [Cf.
Deuteronomy The third is, when the maiden is taken away from such a man, and is given to another at the father's will. The man who is just married has, in virtue of the betrothal , a certain right in her: wherefore, although he sins by using violence , he is not guilty of the crime of rape. Hence Pope Gelasius says [Can. Lex illa, xxvii, qu. Whether adultery is determinate species of lust, distinct from the other species?
It would seem that adultery is not a determinate species of lust , distinct from the other species. For adultery takes its name from a man having intercourse "with a woman who is not his own [ad alteram]," according to a gloss [ St. Augustine : Serm. Now a woman who is not one's own may be of various conditions , namely either a virgin , or under her father's care, or a harlot, or of any other description.
Therefore it seems that adultery is not a species of lust distinct from the others. Further, Jerome says [Contra Jovin. Hence Sixtus the Pythagorean says in his Maxims: He that is insatiable of his wife is an adulterer," and in like manner one who is over enamored of any woman. Now every kind of lust includes a too ardent love. Therefore adultery is in every kind of lust : and consequently it should not be reckoned a species of lust.
Further, where there is the same kind of deformity, there would seem to be the same species of sin.
More Books by Anita Dobs
Now, apparently, there is the same kind of deformity in seduction and adultery : since in either case a woman is violated who is under another person's authority. Therefore adultery is not a determinate species of lust , distinct from the others. On the contrary, Pope Leo [ St. Augustine , De Bono Conjug. Ille autem. Therefore adultery is a determinate species of lust. I answer that, Adultery, as its name implies, "is access to another's marriage-bed [ad alienum torum]" [Cf. Gratian, ad can.
By so doing a man is guilty of a twofold offense against chastity and the good of human procreation. First, by accession to a woman who is not joined to him in marriage, which is contrary to the good of the upbringing of his own children. Secondly, by accession to a woman who is united to another in marriage, and thus he hinders the good of another's children. The same applies to the married woman who is corrupted by adultery. Wherefore it is written Sirach : "Every woman.
For first she hath been unfaithful to the law of the Most High" since there it is commanded: "Thou shalt not commit adultery " ; "and secondly, she hath offended against her husband," by making it uncertain that the children are his: "thirdly, she hath fornicated in adultery , and hath gotten children of another man ," which is contrary to the good of her offspring. The first of these, however, is common to all mortal sins , while the two others belong especially to the deformity of adultery.
Hence it is manifest that adultery is a determinate species of lust , through having a special deformity in venereal acts. If a married man has intercourse with another woman , his sin may be denominated either with regard to him, and thus it is always adultery , since his action is contrary to the fidelity of marriage, or with regard to the woman with whom he has intercourse; and thus sometimes it is adultery , as when a married man has intercourse with another's wife; and sometimes it has the character of seduction, or of some other sin , according to various conditions affecting the woman with whom he has intercourse: and it has been stated above Article 1 that the species of lust correspond to the various conditions of women.
Matrimony is specially ordained for the good of human offspring, as stated above Article 2. But adultery is specially opposed to matrimony , in the point of breaking the marriage faith which is due between husband and wife. And since the man who is too ardent a lover of his wife acts counter to the good of marriage if he use her indecently, although he be not unfaithful, he may in a sense be called an adulterer; and even more so than he that is too ardent a lover of another woman. The wife is under her husband's authority, as united to him in marriage: whereas the maid is under her father's authority, as one who is to be married by that authority.
Hence the sin of adultery is contrary to the good of marriage in one way, and the sin of seduction in another; wherefore they are reckoned to differ specifically. Of other matters concerning adultery we shall speak in the Third Part [ Supplement ; Supplement, 60,62 ] when we treat of matrimony.
Article 9. Whether incest is a determinate species of lust? It would seem that incest is not a determinate species of lust. But all kinds of lust are opposed to chastity. Therefore it seems that incest is not a species of lust , but is lust itself in general. Lex illa] that " incest is intercourse between a man and a woman related by consanguinity or affinity. Therefore it is not one but several species of lust.
Further, that which does not, of itself, imply a deformity, does not constitute a determinate species of vice. But intercourse between those who are related by consanguinity or affinity does not, of itself, contain any deformity, else it would never have been lawful. Therefore incest is not a determinate species of lust. On the contrary, The species of lust are distinguished according to the various conditions of women with whom a man has unlawful intercourse. Now incest implies a special condition on the part of the woman , because it is unlawful intercourse with a woman related by consanguinity or affinity as stated Objection 2.
Therefore incest is a determinate species of lust. I answer that, As stated above A1 , Article 6 wherever we find something incompatible with the right use of venereal actions, there must needs be a determinate species of lust. Now sexual intercourse with women related by consanguinity or affinity is unbecoming to venereal union on three counts. First, because man naturally owes a certain respect to his parents and therefore to his other blood relations, who are descended in near degree from the same parents: so much so indeed that among the ancients, as Valerius Maximus relates [Dict.
Now from what has been said II-II ; II-II , it is evident that in venereal acts there is a certain shamefulness inconsistent with respect, wherefore men are ashamed of them. Wherefore it is unseemly that such persons should be united in venereal intercourse. This reason seems to be indicated Leviticus where we read: "She is thy mother, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness," and the same is expressed further on with regard to others. The second reason is because blood relations must needs live in close touch with one another.
Wherefore if they were not debarred from venereal union, opportunities of venereal intercourse would be very frequent and thus men's minds would be enervated by lust.
Hence in the Old Law [ Leviticus 18 ] the prohibition was apparently directed specially to those persons who must needs live together.
Related Fornication (The Virgin Nuns Sacrilege)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved