The condemnation of a second marriage, which the Benedictine Editor and others import into this passage, is not to be found in it. τοὺς δευτέρῳ γάμῳ συμπεριενεχθέντας neither means “qui ad secundas nuptias ultro se dejecere,” nor even “who have involved themselves” (R.W.C.), but simply “who have consented to,”—or, “consented together in—a second marriage,” without any intimation of censure. See V. 9; VI. 13: Ecclus. xxv. 1; γυνὴ καὶ ἁνὴρ ἑαυτοῖς συμπεριφερόμενοι; 2 Macc. ix. 27; Euseb. H. E. ix. 9, 7: ἀνεξικάκως καὶ συμμέτρως συμπεριφέροιντο αὐτοῖς; Zeno, ap. Diog. Laert. vii. 18; τὸ συμπεριφερεσθαι τοῖς φίλοις. Diog. Laert. vii. 13: εὐσυμπερίφορος. Polyb. IV. 35,§ 7, and II. 17, § 12. The gentleness with which Cyril here speaks of second marriages is in striking contrast with the passionate vehemence of Tertullian in the treatise de Monogamia, and elsewhere. Aug. de Hæresibus, cc. 26, 38, reckons the condemnation of second marriage among the heretical doctrines of the Montanists and Cathari. In the treatise de Bono Viduitatis, c. 6, he argues that a second marriage is not to be condemned, but is less honourable than widowhood, and severely rebukes the heretical teaching on this point of Tertullian, the Montanists, and the Novatians. De Bono Conjugali, c. 21: Sacramentum nuptiarum temporis nostri sic ad unum virum et unam uxorem redactum est, ut Ecclesiæ dispensatorem non liceat ordinare nisi unius uxoris virum. On the practice of the Church at various times see Bingham, IV. v. 1–4; Suicer, Thesaur. Διγαμία.