The Modern Devotion

Confrontation with Reformation and Humanism

R. Attitude to Marriage

It was probably also in the last months of his life that Groote wrote the treatise De Matrimonio. Indeed, few data can be found to establish the time of writing, but dating it as late as possible makes it easier to find the person for whom this work was intended. According to Rudolf Dier¹ this must have been Andreas Kreijnck who was studying in Paris at the time of Groote's visit to that city after his conversion, that is ca. 1375. Judging from details given in the treatise De Matrimonio the person in question was a man of learning who up to this time had led a celibate life but who now, at an advanced age, wished to marry. Student years and advanced age are usually separated by a long period of time and thus the document would have to be dated as late as possible, namely, in 1384. The latest editor of the treatise, M.H. Mulders, CSSR, has found a canon of Cologne, A. Kreijnck, who might be taken into consideration as the Kreijnck to whom Groote addressed his work.² In order to pass judgment on the treatise and its writer it is important to know the following. Groote addressed himself to an acquaintance or friend with the particular aim of dissuading him from marriage at an advanced age. He is speaking thus as an advocate. He wishes to achieve something with his treatise, although he does say that others besides A. Kreijnck may derive some benefit from it. This exposition thus has not a purely scholarly, but a practical aim. This may perhaps to some extent excuse or explain its somewhat drastic proposals. According to Mulders one cannot go very far in this.

As we shall presently see, Groote expressed himself in a radical manner. The new scholarly edition was prepared by Mulders, based on a comparison of various manuscripts and giving the variants.³ It comprises fifty pages of a modern octavo book. I am following here the resumé of the contents, also by Mulders.

The personal incentive to the writing of this treatise was Groote's desire to dissuade from matrimony an unmarried person of advanced years, of high repute and devoting himself to study. Groote's point of

1 G. Dumbar, Analecta I 4.

2 M.A. Mulders, Geert Groote en het huwelijk. Diss. Nijmegen 1941, 94-95.

3 Ibid., 17-58.

[p. 160]

departure accords with his practical aim. Everyone must choose what is most perfect; everyone must strive simpliciter after perfection and not secundum mensuram donationum. Although marriage is good in itself, it is not permissible when it means a transition from a more perfect (i.e. unmarried) state, to a less perfect - in this case marriage. Or when marriage would give rise to scandal, which would occur by marrying at such an age and in such circumstances. Marriage is also not to be recommended when it would be a hindrance to holiness or to perfection.¹ In Groote's view this latter is always true since marriage brings lusts which the married couple really may not enjoy. This is the medieval idea of the contempt for the world which rejects every human pleasure which does not proceed from devotion.

Groote goes so far as to consider marriage a greater sin than fornication or marriage arising from sensuality, since this latter deviates less directly from the final goal. According to Groote there are two lawful motives for marriage: the procreation of children and the avoidance of fornication. In discussing this latter he quotes Paul's text (I Cor. VII, 9 and VII, 5): Melius est nubere quam uri. He recognises this as a lawful motive but thinks that this ‘burning’ is not so easily present. Moreover, he considers marriage an insufficient means of quenching the fires of lust. The struggle remains; but no matter what, marriage for the avoidance of fornication remains a sin, albeit venial sin.

If the first motive, the procreation of children, is to be lawful, then it must in Groote's opinion exist expressly and deliberately. But other motives, such as the desire for an heir or to preserve the family name may conflict with this strict intention and so render the marriage unlawful. Groote indeed considers the plan foolish in itself and therefore sinful. The man to whom his treatise is addressed could adopt children of the poor and bring them up to the honour of God. In the procreation of children for its own sake there is the inherent danger of bringing a number of bad children into the world.

Marriage for the gratification of the senses is mortal sin since in this manner the sacrament is misused. The marriage act is commonly a sinful deed if only because the couple consent in sinful pleasure. The man must certainly abstain from the marriage act if the woman is pregnant or barren. The conjugal act may be performed ad reddendum debitum compari, but even then with inner sadness. As with marriage the

1 Mulders, 98.

[p. 161]

performance of the marriage act in order to avoid fornication is venial sin, and in order to gratify lust, mortal sin.

In conclusion he describes the faults of the woman, the burdens of married life and the dangers to health. The marriage act even shortens life. Besides, it is difficult to find a suitable wife.¹

It does not occur to Groote that married life is an expression of love and that the marriage act strengthens the love between man and wife. For him there is always a sinful side to sexual enjoyment.

Argumentation ad hoc might serve to explain much of these strange, even reprehensible opinions, did not certain expressions in Groote's other works show that Groote was absolutely convinced of the rightness of his ideas. Mulders gives a few examples: a passage from the sermo contra Focaristas: that the sexual lusts, even when giving the debitum, are not yet completely regular: namely, maculatur et hebetatur mente. In the Simonia ad Beguttas he does admit that one may attain to a greater perfection in the married state, under condition, however, that the partners abstain from their conjugal rights.² Some have thought to detect a different note in The Moral Address, but there too Groote exhorts to abstinence, and that you will gladly be together, rather in the spirit than in the flesh.³

Mulder thus concludes: From a comparison of De Matrimonio with remarks made in other works we are justified in concluding that the doctrine of De Matrimonio was not formulated especially for the occasion, but really reflects the opinions generally held by Geert Groote.⁴

Groote attempts to find support for these rigoristic views on marriage, which Mulders has resumed in a few theses, in numerous quotations from the Fathers, theologians, profane authors and above all, the canonists. Various Church Fathers and also the canonists provided him with sufficient evidence for most of these theses, but not for all. Groote not only zealously sought for authors who supported his views, he even exceeded them. He was unique in the tradition of the Netherlands. This may partly be explained by his fight against the lax opinions prevailing, or at least the way of living which he saw around him and which he also perhaps regarded somewhat sombrely. And yet, in the so-called contemptus-mundi-literature, particularly of the twelfth century,

1 Mulders, 49-78.

2 Ibid., 105-106.

3 Ibid., 106 ‘ende dat ghi gherne te gader sijn sult, liever gheestelic dan vleischelic.’

4 Ibid., 107.

[p. 162]

we find utterances against everything the monks termed worldly and which sometimes seems to be synonymous with the lay manner of life. Utterances which are closely related to those of Groote, for example in Peter Damian, who did not recognize such a thing as conjugal love and considered all marriage acts as unfitting and sinful, or at least only to be relegated to second place. Their ideal was to impose the monastic way of life on everyone: to make the world one big monastery.¹ I do not believe that Groote intends to go so far, yet his theories on marriage bear a strong resemblance to the ideas of Peter Damian and other authors of the contemptus mundi, or to those of the monastic preachers.

1 Vgl. R. Bultot, Christianisme et valeurs humaines, La doctrine du mépris du monde, IV, Le XI^e siècle, Louvain, Paris 1963, 63-65. Revue d'Histoire ecclésiastique LXI (1966) 512-528.