Subjunctive and Eius

[mjdubroy]

Advertendum secundo, quod matrimonium dicitur per ministros Ecclesiae dispensari, non quidem quantum ad aliquid quod sit de essentia sacramenti: sed quantum ad aliquid accidentale, quod est completivum eius et perfectivum, ut est nubentium benedictio.

I understand 99% of this text but have two questions:
1) why is "sit" used? i.e. why is the subjunctive used here?
2) how does "eius" fit? It doesn't make any sense to me? the accidental is completive (the adj. of complete), and perfective; but eius????

[Hylander]

1. Why sit is subjunctive. See Allen & Greenough, New Latin Grammar, sec. 540, Note 3:

Note 3.-- Nōn quod, nōn quia,nōn quō, introducing a reason expressly to deny it, take the Subjunctive; but the Indicative sometimes occurs when the statement is in itself true, though not the true reason. In the negative, nōn quīn (with the Subjunctive) may be used in nearly the same sense as nōn quod nōn . After a comparative, quam quō or quam quod is used:—

“pugilēs ingemēscunt, nōn quod doleant, sed quia profundendā vōce omne corpus intenditur ” (Tusc. 2.56) , boxers groan, not because they are in pain, but because by giving vent to the voice the whole body is put in a state of tension.

“nōn quia rēctior ad Alpīs via esset, sed crēdēns ” (Liv. 21.31.2) , not because the route to the Alps was more direct, but believing, etc.

“nōn quīn parī virtūte et voluntāte aliī fuerint, sed tantam causam nōn habuērunt ” (Phil. 7.6) , not that there were not others of equal courage and good-will, but they had not so strong a reason.

“haec amōre magis impulsus scrībenda ad tē putāvī, quam quō tē arbitrārer monitīs et praeceptīs egēre ” (Fam. 10.3.4) , this I thought I ought to write to you, rather from the impulse of (prompted by) affection than because I thought that you needed advice and suggestion.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0001

2. eius is the complement of completivum; its antecedent is sacramenti. The idea is that dispensation of matrimony by ministers of the Church is not because it's essential to the sacrament, but rather because it's complementary to it, i.e., to the sacrament.

[mjdubroy]

That is very helpful. Thank you.

That made sense with eius - maybe my lack of understanding is with completivum. Is it not an adj? Perhaps it makes more sense if it is a participle but I can't confirm it because the perseus dictionary doesn't bring anything up and the WORDS from Notre Dame dictionary brings up an adjective.

[mwh]

The neuter adjective has become a substantive, that’s all. For identical development cf. e.g. English corrective, negative, … substantive!

[mjdubroy]

Advertendum secundo, quod matrimonium dicitur per ministros Ecclesiae dispensari, non quidem quantum ad aliquid quod sit de essentia sacramenti: sed quantum ad aliquid accidentale, quod est completivum eius et perfectivum, ut est nubentium benedictio.

How would you translate that then?

It should be noticed secondly, that marriage is said to be dispensed through the ministers of the Church, not a certain thing as far as to something which is from the essence of the sacrament: but as far as to something accidental, which is its complete and perfect [Thing?], as is the blessing of those marrying.

I don't quite get then what those adj modify or how they become substantive - i understand what that means but not how it works out in this case. Or if it is substantive do we say "which is its completion and perfection"? The point would be (is this right) that the blessing while accidental to marriage completes and perfects it?

[mwh]

“Secondly it’s to be noted that marriage is said to be administered by means of ministers of the Church, not, to be sure, as far as concerns something that’s of the essence of the sacrament, but as far as concerns something incidental, i.e. its completive and perfective, as is the blessing of the marrying parties.”
Words I’ve never seen in Latin translated by words I’ve never seen in English. Perhaps better, “its completing and finalizing.”
The ceremony is like the benediction, “accidental” rather than “essential.” It’s the marriage itself that’s the essential sacrament. Or that’s what it seems to be saying. But I’m not in the habit of reading such stuff.