 |
 |
By Preeve which that is Demonstratif (8) Let us consider the opening couplet of the Wife's Prologue: Experience, though noon auctoritee Were in this world, is right ynogh for me . . . Scholars, in their anxiety "To speke of wo that is in mariage" have perhaps missed the force of these two lines. For throughout her Prologue and Tale, the Wife argues on these twin bases of Experience and Auctoritee - that is, reference to authoritative writings, particularly the Bible. For the first part of her Prologue - up to line 162 - she leans heavily on Auctoritee. She proves her points by reference to definitive texts in the Bible. When Aquinas considers the question, "Whether the Matrimonial Act is always a sin?" (Supplementum, Q. 42 art. 3) he maintains that it is not a sin, on the basis of I Corinthians 7:28, "If a girl marries, she does not sin." The Wife comes to the same conclusion, on the basis of the same text: He seith that to be wedded is no synne (51). Aquinas (Supplementum Q. 42 art. 4) maintains that sex is actually meritorious, because it fulfils the Apostle's commandment, "The husband should pay his debt to the wife, and likewise the wife to her husband." (I Cor. 7:3). The Wife of Bath says exactly the same: Why sholde men elles in hir bookes sette That man shal yelde to his wyf hire dette? (129-130). It is curious that Kittredge and others have seen so much heresy in The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale, for so much of her argument is identical with that of the best scholastic theologians. The Wife's turn of phrase may be more robust than that of Aquinas, "But doutelees hir sentence is al one." What the Wife expresses is not so much heresy as orthodoxy pushed to extreme limits. She is an example to be admired rather than imitated. The Supple Doctor. * * * * * %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%