No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Unintended Bigamies: Holy Widowhood, Marriage, and Sponsa Christi in Erasmus's De Vidua Christiana*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 March 2017
Extract
Christ's brides were hell bound by the end of the Middle Ages, when women—in the figure of the witch—were increasingly seen as Satan's spouses. Such is the narrative arc of Dyan Elliott's significant recent study of sponsa Christi (bride of Christ), The Bride of Christ Goes to Hell. Elliott points toward the incarnational logic of Christianity in general and the type of physically immanent bridal mysticism that flourished among late medieval women in particular to locate some of the dynamic forces that helped make possible the theological ideas about witches that flourished from the fifteenth century onward. Elliott has done much to enrich our understanding of the development of an embodied version of the bride of Christ. Medieval and early modern Christianity held out an option, for women at least, to marry Jesus—to become a sponsa Christi—in a literal sense, a form of marriage sustained by such things as legal mechanisms, theological visions, particular emotions, religious rituals, and spiritual practices. But Elliott's argument, stopping as it does right before the tumultuous sixteenth century, lends itself to a reading that the literalized sponsa Christi was bound henceforth to the early modern witch craze. Desiderius Erasmus's 1529 treatise De vidua christiana provides us evidence that the literalized sponsa Christi developed in alternative ways in the early modern period, including the creation of a distinctive vision of the Christian widow who is, at times, bigamous. De vidua, then, can serve as the basis for expanding upon an alternative historical trajectory for the bride of Christ that Elliott mentions in passing in her study.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 2017
Footnotes
*
I owe a debt of gratitude to those who helped to make this essay possible: Constance Furey who commented on several very early versions, Rachel Hile who graciously provided a last minute assist, the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticism, and, finally, the editors of HTR. Any errors are, obviously, singly my responsibility.
References
1 Elliott, Dyan, The Bride of Christ Goes to Hell: Metaphor and Embodiment in the Lives of Pious Women, 200–1500 (The Middle Ages Series; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012) 1–7 Google Scholar. See also McNamer, Sarah, Affective Meditation and the Invention of Medieval Compassion (The Middle Ages Series; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Smith III, William E., “Two Medieval Brides of Christ: Complicating Monogamous Marriage,” in Queer Christianities (ed. Talvacchia, Kathleen T., Pettinger, Michael F., and Larrimore, Mark; New York: New York University Press, 2015) 67–78 Google Scholar.
2 Most other studies that address De vidua do not focus on the roles that sponsa Christi, digamy (remarrying after the death of a spouse), or bigamy play in the text. Christ-von Wedel, Christine, Erasmus of Rotterdam: Advocate of a New Christianity (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013) 246–248 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Linck, Joseph C., “Erasmus’ Use of Scripture in De vidua Christiana ,” Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 11 (1991) 67–87 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Telle, Émile V., Érasme de Rotterdam et le Septième Sacrement: Étude D’Évangélisme Matrimonial au XVIe Siècle et Contribution à la Biographie Intellectuelle D’Érasme (Geneva: Librairie E. Droz, 1954) 423–38Google Scholar. Partially by way of De vidua, Alan W. Reese argues, in passing, that “Christ is the true ‘spouse’ of every true Christian, whether celibate or married” (“Learning Virginity: Erasmus’ Ideal of Christian Marriage,” Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance 57 [1995] 551–567, at 567). Reese takes the language of sponsa Christi in De vidua as metaphorical and thus side steps the issue of bigamy. Informed by the recent insights of the medievalists noted above, I understand Erasmus's use of sponsa Christi in De vidua in more literal terms because of, among other things, the role of emotions and sensuality in building and maintaining a marital relationship. Reese also ignores the issue of digamy and other tensions in the text, which allows him to claim, without qualification, that De vidua, among other works, reveals that “Erasmus wished to encourage marriage as a spiritually safer, though less glorious, mode of life than monasticism, widowhood, or the celibate priesthood” (ibid., 561).
3 Elliott, The Bride of Christ, 261.
4 Erasmus briefly embraced digamy, as Émile V. Telle points out, in the 1522 version of his Suasoria, which included a revised version of the Encomium matrimonii (1518). This position helped raise the ire of theologians in Louvain and Paris (Telle, “La Digamie de Thomas More, Erasme Et Catarino Politi,” Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance 52 [1990] 323–32, at 325–26). For more on the three different forms of bigamy operative in medieval and early modern Christianity, see Smith III, William E., “Christian Monogamy, What's That?” Theology & Sexuality 18 (2012) 3–18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Ep 2011, CWE 14:223–24; Allen 7:418–20. For Erasmus's Latin texts, I use Opera Omnia (ed. Joannes Clericus; 10 vols; Leiden, 1704; repr., Hildesheim: G. Olm, 1961–62), which I reference as LB, and Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterdami (ed. P. S. Allen and H. W. Garrod; London: Oxford University Press, 1906–58), which I refer to as Allen. For English translations, I use the Collected Works of Erasmus (ed. William Barker et al.; 85 vols.; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974–2015), which I cite as CWE. I note where I have either modified the English translation or used my own. Ep refers to epistle, which is followed by a letter's assigned standard number in the CWE and Allen.
6 For an account of Mary's and Henckel's relationship to early Protestant reformers, see Bainton, Roland H., Women of the Reformation: From Spain to Scandinavia (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1977) 205–15Google Scholar.
7 Luther, Martin, The Four Psalms of Comfort, in Luther's Works (ed. and trans. Jaroslav Pelikan; 55 vols; Philadelphia: Concordia, 1958)Google Scholar 14:209–10; Luther's Works is henceforth referred to as LW. For more on Luther's efforts to court Mary, consult Spruyt, B. J., “‘En bruit d'estre bonne luteriene’: Mary of Hungary (1505–58) and Religious Reform,” EHR 109 (1994) 275–307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 282–84.
8 Ep 2118, CWE 15:125; In hoc argumento mihi non admodum placeo, quod nec simplex videatur, nec admodum congruens puellae, quae, ni fallor, alitur coniugio (Allen 8:80). Erasmus expressed similar concerns over the difficulty of the topic and Mary's presumed remarriage in his reply letter to Henckel (Ep 2110, CWE 15:110–11; Allen 8:69).
9 Ep 2339, CWE 16:362; artibus viduitas regenda instituendaque sit, doctissime informauit (Allen 8:469). For a good account of Erasmus's relationship to Mary of Hungry before, around, and after publishing De vidua, read O'Donnell, Anne M., “Sixth Annual Bainton Lecture: Contemporary Women in the Letters of Erasmus,” Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 9 (1989) 34–72 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 John W. O'Malley, “Introduction,” CWE 66, xlviii. We also know that De vidua was for sale at the important Frankfurt Book Fair in 1529 (Ep 2153 CWE 15:216; Allen 8:142) and was probably read by, among others, Johann Schoenraid (Ep 2130 CWE 15:160; Allen 8:103), Dean of St. Mary's at Aachen, and Margaret Roper (Ep 2212 CWE 16:42; Allen 8:274).
11 This was a broad geographical phenomenon in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe. For illustrative studies on England and France, see Diefendorf, Barbara B., “Widowhood and Remarriage in Sixteenth-Century Paris,” Journal of Family History 7 (1982) 379–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 382; Mate, Mavis E., Daughters, Wives, and Widows after the Black Death in Sussex, 1350–1535 (Woodbridge, UK: Boydell, 1998) 125–33Google Scholar; Rosenthal, Joel T., “Fifteenth-Century Widows and Widowhood: Bereavement, Reintegration, and Life Choices,” in Wife and Widow in Medieval England (ed. Walker, Sue Sheridan; Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press, 1993) 33–58 Google Scholar, at 36–37. For studies going into the seventeenth century, consult Todd, Barbara B., “Demographic determinism and female agency: the remarrying widow reconsidered . . . again,” Continuity and Change 9 (1994) 421–50;CrossRefGoogle Scholar eadem, “The remarrying widow: a stereotype reconsidered,” in Women in English Society,1500–1800 (ed. Mary Prior; London: Methuen, 1985) 54–92; Fauve-Chamoux, Antoinette, “Revisiting the decline in remarriage in early-modern Europe: The case of Rheims in France,” History of the Family 15 (2010) 283–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, in LW (trans. A. T. W. Steinhäuser; rev. trans. Frederick C. Ahrens and Abdel Ross Wentz; 1959) 36:73–81.
13 Luther, The Judgment of Martin Luther on Monastic Vows, in LW (trans. James Atkinson; 1966) 44:243–400. For more on Luther's views on marriage and its relationship to religious vows during the 1520s, see Brecht, Martin, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation, 1521–1532 (trans. James L. Schaaf; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1986) 90–104 Google Scholar.
14 Carlstadt, Andreas, Regarding Vows, in The Essential Carlstadt (ed. and trans. Furcha, E. J.; Waterloo: Herald, 1995) 51–99 Google Scholar.
15 Documents Illustrative of the Continental Reformation (ed. B. J. Kidd; Oxford: Clarendon, 1911) 400–1.
16 Tyndale, William, An Answere Vnto Sir Thomas Mores Dialoge (ed. O'Donnell, Anne M. and Wicks, Jared; Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2000) 152–67Google Scholar, 177.
17 See, for instance, Luther, The Judgment, in LW 44:396–400 and his 1528 Lectures on 1 Timothy, in LW (trans. Richard J. Dinda; 1973) 28:334–47.
18 For a general survey on clerical marriage during the first decades of the Protestant Reformation, read Chadwick, Owen, The Early Reformation on the Continent (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 138–150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For some of the stakes of this debate for both sides, see Fudge, Thomas A., “Incest and Lust in Luther's Marriage: Theology and Morality in Reformation Polemics,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 34 (2003) 319–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
19 Telle provides a thorough account of Erasmus's anti-monasticism across the humanist's career in Érasme De Rotterdam. But Telle's history should be read with Albert Hyma's critique in mind. For the latter, consult Hyma, “Erasmus and the Sacrament of Matrimony,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 48 (1957) 145–64.
20 Payne, John B., Erasmus: His Theology of the Sacraments (Research in Theology; Atlanta, GA: M. E. Bratcher, 1970) 104–112 Google Scholar.
21 Selderhuis, H. J., Marriage and Divorce in the Thought of Martin Bucer (trans. John Vriend and Lyle D. Bierma; Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies 48; Kirksville, MO: Thomas Jefferson University Press, 1999) 25 Google Scholar.
22 Ibid., 37.
23 Ep 1887, CWE 13:374; Vereor ne imponant tibi quorundam praestigiae, qui iactant hodie splendidis verbis libertatem Euangelicam. Crede mihi, si rem propius nosses, minus tederet te istius vitae. Video genus hominum exoriri a quo meus animus vehementer abhorret. Neminem video fieri meliorem, deteriores omnes quotquot ego sane nouerim; vt vehementer doleam me quondam in libris meis praedicasse libertatem spiritus. . . . Ciuitates aliquot Germaniae implentur erronibus, desertoribus monasteriorum, sacerdotibus coniugatis, plerisque famelicis ac nudis (Allen 7:199).
24 Erasmus quotes and glosses 1 Tim 5 by writing, “‘For when younger women,’ received into the charity of the church, ‘begin to lust against Christ,’ whom they had chosen as a spouse for themselves, then they end up by ‘wanting to marry,’ with great injury to this spouse” (Quum enim juniores receptae in Ecclesiae alimoniam lascivire caeperint adversus Christum, quem sibi sponsum delegerant, tum demum volunt nubere cum injuria sponsi [CWE 66:243, modified trans.; LB 5:758, italics in original]). In this passage Erasmus continues to work out his position on when a woman should or should not vow herself to Christ in marriage and perpetual chastity. Elsewhere in De vidua, Erasmus gestures toward the de iure humano nature of nuns by stressing that this class of Christians emerged hundreds of years after the apostolic age (CWE 66:193; LB 5:729).
25 Henckel and Erasmus mention this no longer extant letter in Epp 2309 (CWE 16:285; Allen 8:420) and 2350 (CWE 16:378; Allen 8:479).
26 Epp 2121 (CWE 15:133–34; Allen 8:85–86) and 2130 (CWE 15:157–58; Allen 8:102–03).
27 Ep 1869 (CWE 13:297; Allen 7:156).
28 Rummel, Erika, Erasmus and His Catholic Critics II: 1523–1536 (Nieuwkoop, NL: De Graaf, 1989) 29–49 Google Scholar.
29 Ibid., 92–93; see also Aviles, Miguel, Erasmo y la Inquisicion (El libelo de Valladolid y la Apología de Erasmo contra los frailes españoles) (Madrid: Fundacion Universitaria Española, 1980)Google Scholar.
30 Rummel, Erasmus, 25, 56, 72, 88, 93, 98–99; Aviles, Erasmo, 33, 68, 105–06.
31 Ep 2165 CWE 15:265; quae minus habent inuidiae, et plus conducunt ad pietatem (Allen 8:176).
32 De vidua, LB 5:763 (for sponsus) and 756 (for thalamus), for some of the other instances see also 738, 741, 748, and 758.
33 Erasmus utilizes the logic of all Christians being already married to Christ in order to have Eubulus argue against Catherine becoming a nun in the colloquy “Virgo” (1523), since doing so would make her the wife of the same husband twice (CWE 39 [1997] 292; LB 1:700). Additionally we might have expected Erasmus to advance the generic version since Augustine (354–430), one of his Patristic sources, uses this formulation in his account of the Christian widow. Augustine, De bono vidvitatis (ed. Joseph Zycha; CSEL vol. 41; Vienna: F. Tempsky; Lipsae & Freytag, 1900) 319, 334. Erasmus references texts by the Church fathers in De vidua (CWE 66:200–1; LB 5:733–34).
34 Vives, like the Patristic authors, is more likely to link sponsa Christi with virgins. See Mikesell, Margaret, “Marital Love and Divine Love in Juan Luis Vives’ Instruction of a Christian Woman ,” in Love and Death in the Renaissance (ed. Bartlett, Kenneth R., Eisenbichler, Konrad, and Liedl, Janice; Ottawa: Dovehouse Editions, 1991) 113–34Google Scholar. For a broader comparison of De vidua with other advice literature for women spanning the fifteenth to seventeenth centuries, see Llewellyn, Kathleen M., “Words to the Wise: Reappropriating the Widow in Early Modern Didactic Literature,” Parergon 21 (2004) 39–63 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
35 For an example from another genre, read Gericke, Philip O., “The Widow in Hispanic Balladry: Fonte Frida ,” in Upon My Husband's Death: Widows in the Literature & Histories of Medieval Europe (ed. Mirrer, Louise; Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Civilization; Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press, 1992) 289–303 Google Scholar.
36 Clark, Elizabeth A., “The Celibate Bridegroom and His Virginal Brides: Metaphor and the Marriage of Jesus in Early Christian Ascetic Exegesis,” Church History 77 (2008) 1–25 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 2 (italics in original).
37 De vidua, CWE 66:244 modified trans.; Nullus enim votum suscipere cogitur (LB 5:759); for other places Erasmus speaks about a widow's vow, directly and indirectly, in De vidua, see also CWE 66:200–1, 213, 223, 231, 244–45, 251, LB 5:733–34, 741, 746, 751, 758–59, 762.
38 Ibid., 201; id adstringere non est hominis (734).
39 Ibid., 245; 759.
40 Ibid., 243; 758.
41 Erler, Mary C., “Three Fifteenth-Century Vowesses,” in Medieval London Widows, 1300–1500 (ed. Barron, Caroline M. and Sutton, Anne F.; London: Hambledon, 1994) 165–83Google Scholar.
42 Bray, Alan, The Friend (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003) 84–116 Google Scholar, 214.
43 De vidua, CWE 66:209–210; LB 5:739.
44 Vives similarly does not formulate a ritualized or institutional public persona for widows. In contrast, Girolamo Savonarola (1452–1498) envisions holy widows living together in a quasi-religious life in his “On the Life of the Widow” (A Guide to Righteous Living and Other Works [trans. Konrad Eisenbichler; Renaissance and Reformation Texts in Translation 10; Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2003] 191–226, at 198–99).
45 This stance accords well with Erasmus's position on digamy in the Institutio (CWE 69:234; LB 5:624).
46 Ibid., 185; etiam est acerbior, quo caritatis nexus fuerit adstrictior, quo sanctior jucundiorque societas (724).
47 Ibid., 185; Inter omnia porro animorum vincula nullus affectus conferri potest cum eo, qui maritum & uxorem legitimo castoque faedere copulat, vincitque prorsus Herculano, ut prisci solebant loqui, nodo (724, italics in original).
48 Furey, Constance M., “Bound by Likeness: Vives and Erasmus on Marriage and Friendship,” in Discourse and Representations of Friendship in Early Modern Europe, 1500–1700 (ed. Lochman, Daniel T., López, Maritere, and Hutson, Lorna; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011) 29–43 Google Scholar.
49 De vidua, CWE 66:209; interim quae sit alea conjugii, nullus ignorant (LB 5:738).
50 Ibid., 210; cum Maria perpetuo sedere ad pedes Jesu, ut alatur mellitissimis illius colloquiis (739).
51 Ibid., 209; 739.
52 Erasmus, Paraphrases on the Epistles to the Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, CWE 43 (2009) 106; non potest tota vacare Christo, sed in diversas curas dissecta, dimidiata servit Christo, dimidiata matrimonio (LB 7:883); see also 87–109; 878–84.
53 De vidua, CWE 66:209; Uxoris continentiam crebro interpellat maritus incontinens: liberalitatem in pauperes adstringit ad rem attentior: precationes interrumpit aliis addictus studiis (LB 5:739).
54 Ibid., 253–4; Quae maritum mortalem sic amat, ut illius amore, negligat ea quae sunt pietatis, unicum tantum habet sponsum sed mortalem, quem tamen amat ut immortalem (764).
55 For studies on the rise of marital affection over the late medieval period, see Burger, Glenn, Chaucer's Queer Nation (Medieval Cultures 34; Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2003) 78–118 Google Scholar; Lipton, Emma, Affections of the Mind: The Politics of Sacramental Marriage in Late Medieval English Literature (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007) 1–50 Google Scholar, 129–160; and Schnell, Rüdiger, Frauendiskurs, Männerdiskurs, Ehediskurs: Textsorten und Geschlechterkonzepte in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit (Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, 1998)Google Scholar.
56 De vidua, CWE 66:208; Item quae se parat novo marito, nondum totam spem fixit in Domino, sed ad conjugis solatium respicit (LB 5:738).
57 Ibid., 245; 759. Widows’ presumed excessive sexual desire was a cultural staple in medieval and early modern Europe. Panek, Jennifer, Widows and Suitors in Early Modern English Comedy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) 2–3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
58 De vidua, CWE 66:208; LB 5:738.
59 Ibid., 226; si non temperat animus a delitiis (748).
60 Ibid., 226–27; 748; Klapisch-Zuber, Christine, Women, Family, and Ritual in Renaissance Italy (trans. Lydia Cochrane; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985) 117–31Google Scholar.
61 Ibid., 243; 758.
62 Erasmus spells out this assumption explicitly later in De vidua, where he argues that multiple attachments dilute a person's affections (CWE 66:252; LB 5:765).
63 De vidua, CWE 66:217; Ad quamvis offensiunculam exprobrant viro suo defuncti conjugis mores, & quem viventem contemserant, praedicant exstinctum (LB 5:743).
64 Ibid., 243; 758.
65 Ibid.
66 Ibid., 243; lascivire caeperint adversus Christum (758).
67 For the relevant Church fathers, see Augustine, De bono vidvitatis, 320, and Chrysostom, John, Discours a une jeune veuve (trans. Bernard Grillet; SC, vol. 138; Paris: Les Éditions Du Cerf, 1968) 123 Google Scholar.
68 Vives, The Instruction, 169; vidua et coniunx et adultera (De institutione, 218).
69 De vidua, CWE 66:243; LB 5:758.
70 Ibid., 253; Faeminas enim, quibus Deus ademit maritos, videtur speciatim ad suum ambire conjugium (764).
71 Ibid., 254; maritum avulsi, ne sit quod nos a suavissimis complexibus separet (764).
72 Ibid., 209, modified trans.; in quo plus est voluptatis, si toto pectore diligatur, quam in sexcentis maritis quamlibet felicibus (738).
73 Ibid., 208, modified trans.; pro mortali contigerit immortalis (738).
74 Ibid., 206; 737.
75 Ibid., 232; Jesum exosculari quotidie licet; totus amabilis est (751).
76 Ibid., 232; nihil nisi meras esse delitias (751).
77 Ibid., 254, modified trans.; Sponsum suum Vidua complectitur & exosculatur (764).
78 Ibid., 254–55; 764.
79 Ibid., 207; Quae totam spem fixit in Domino, luctum habet in hoc mundo, nec aliunde solatium exspectat quam a Domino (738).
80 Ibid., 208; luctus brevis est (738).
81 Ibid., 186–88, 217; 725–26, 743.
82 For illustrative studies of mourning in this period, see Phillippy, Patricia, Women, Death, and Literature in Post-Reformation England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar and Vaught, Jennifer C., Masculinity and Emotion in Early Modern English Literature (Women and Gender in the Early Modern World; Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2008)Google Scholar.
83 De vidua, CWE 66:208; pellicit homines ad vitam aeternam; Initium conversionis ad Deum, est poenitentia (LB 5:738).
84 Ibid., 208; Plorant desiderio Sponsi coelestis (738).
85 Ibid., 208; jugiter & totae copulari (738).
86 Ibid., 210; Viduae cubiculum nihil aliud quam Oratorium esse debet (739).
87 Ibid., 245–46; 759.
88 Ibid., 248; tam sanctis, tam sublimibus, tam mundis studiis (761).
89 Ibid., 234; Inservire senibus aut aegrotis, bene monere puellas, consolari afflictas, exstimulare fegnes (753).
90 While he does not link the rearing of children from the first marriage to penance, Erasmus does fold it into the widow's religious life by characterizing it as an act of piety (De vidua CWE 66:202; LB 5:734).
91 Steuer, Susan M. B., “Practical Pastoral Care: Vowesses in Northern England in the Later Middle Ages,” A Companion to Pastoral Care in the Late Middle Ages (1200–1500) (ed. Stansbury, Ronald J.; Brill's Companion to the Christian Tradition 22; Leiden: Brill, 2010) 319 Google Scholar.
92 Ibid., 330–31.
93 De vidua, CWE 66:212–13, LB 5:741.
94 Ibid., my trans.; Mundo viduae estis, in Christi thalamo delitiamini (LB 5:756).
95 Ibid., CWE 66:196; LB 5:731.
96 Ibid.,193–97; 729–31.
97 Ibid., 193; puritate corporis & animi, vitam Angelorum aemulari (729). Erasmus draws this connection in his 1522 paraphrase of Matt 22:20 (Paraphrase on Matthew, CWE 45 [2008] 309; LB 7:118).
98 Salih, Sarah, Versions of Virginity in Late Medieval England (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2001) 13 Google Scholar.
99 I am employing Dyan Elliott's definition of “spiritual marriage,” which involves “chaste cohabitation in the context of licit marriage” (Spiritual Marriage: Sexual Abstinence in Medieval Wedlock [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993] 4).
100 De vidua, CWE 66:253; Ita faeminae, quae maritis junctae sunt, nisi Viduae fuerint, non possunt sperare in Domino (LB 5:764).
101 Ibid., 254; Neque vero sponsus ille caelestis admissus in conjugii societatem, adulterio vitiat matrimonium, sed hoc ipsum corporale foedus, sanctius reddit & auspicatius (764).
102 See Smith, “Christian Monogamy,” 6–9.
103 De vidua CWE 66:254, modified trans.; humile . . . & evanidum; aeternarum . . . rerum (LB 5:764).
104 See De vidua, CWE 66:322, n. 38.
105 de Voragine, Jacobus, The Golden Legend: Readings on the Saints (trans. William Granger Ryan; 2 vols.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993)Google Scholar 2:312.
106 De vidua, CWE 66:199; sese partita est marito & Christo, aulae & religioni; malorum contagione (LB 5:733).
107 Ibid. 235, modified trans.; Bonae sordes sunt, quibus expurgantur animarum maculae (753).
108 de Voragine, The Golden Legend, 304.
109 De vidua, CWE 66:255; LB 5:765 (italics in original).
110 Ibid. 255, modified trans.; ex mutuo consensu sibi in totum interdixerunt usum conjugii (LB 5:765).
111 Elliott, Spiritual Marriage, 132–94. Erasmus's Institutio contains a long, detailed section on medieval marital theology and canon law.
112 Erasmus, Paraphrases on the Epistles, CWE 43:87; LB 7:878.
113 Ibid. 89; neque nimium diu (879).
114 Institutio, CWE 69:309; parcus ac verecundus sit usus (LB 5:658).
115 Ibid. 389; 698–99.
116 Ibid. 308–9; 657–58.
117 Ibid. 387; 698.
118 De vidua, CWE 66:203; LB 5:735.
119 Ibid., 204; sic habuisse quasi non haberet, assidue versantem inter Apostolos, atque illis cum caeteris mulieribus ac viduis inservientem (735).
120 Ibid., 218; Satis meminit mariti quae recusat alteri nubere, quae pactam fidem praestat, non jam ut mortuo, sed ut absenti (744).
121 Ibid., 224; 747. This concept of marital love surviving the death of a spouse is also found in the Institutio (CWE 69:234; LB 5:624) and the Encomium (CWE 25:139–140; LB 1:420–21).
122 Vives, The Instruction, 167; De institutione, 214.
123 Chrysostom, Discours, 133.
124 De vidua, CWE 66:217; LB 5:743: sciens meliorem mariti portionem superesse.
125 Ibid. 217, 743: carnalis contubernii.
126 Ibid. 209, 739.
127 Ibid. 218, est . . . digna Viduis Christianis (744).