“This (even) broader assertion we make: that even if the Paraclete had in this our day definitely prescribed a virginity or continence total and absolute, so as not to permit the heat of the flesh to foam itself down even in single marriage, even thus He would seem to be introducing nothing of "novelty; "seeing that the Lord Himself opens "the kingdoms of the heavens" to "eunuchs," as being Himself, withal, a virgin; to whom looking, the apostle also-himself too for this reason abstinent-gives the preference to continence. ("Yes"), you say, "but saving the law of marriage.”

“Of the benefit of virginity and of continency. In Genesis: "Multiplying I will multiply thy sorrows and thy groanings, and in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children; and thy turning shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." Of this same thing in the Gospel according to Matthew: "All men do not receive the word, but they to whom it is given: for there are some eunuchs who were born so from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who have been constrained by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who can receive it, let him receive it." Also according to Luke: "The children of this world beget, and are begotten. But they who have been considered worthy of that world, and the resurrection from the dead, do not marry, nor are married: for neither shall they begin to die: for they are equal to the angels of God, since they are the children of the resurrection. But, that the dead rise again, Moses intimates when he says in the bush, The Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him." Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "It is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, on account of fornication, let every man have his own wife, and every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render what is due to the wife, and similarly the wife to the husband. The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband. And in like manner, the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife. Defraud not one the other, except by agreement for a time, that ye may have leisure for prayer; and again return to the same point, lest Satan tempt you on account of your incontinency. This I say by way of allowance, not by way of command. But I wish that all men should be even as I am. But every one has his proper gift from God; one in one way, but another in another way." Also in the same place: "An unmarried man thinks of those things which are the Lord's, in what way he may please God; but he who has contracted marriage thinks of those things that are of this world, in what way he may please his wife. Thus also, both the woman and the unmarried virgin thinketh of those things which are the Lord's, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; but she that hath married thinks of those things which are of this world, in what way she may please her husband." Also in Exodus, when the Lord had commanded Moses that he should sanctify the people for the third day, he sanctified them, and added: "Be ye ready, for three days ye shall not approach to women." Also in the first book of Kings: "And the priest answered to David, and said, There are no profane loaves in my hand, except one sacred loaf. If the young men have been kept back from women, they shall eat." Also in the Apocalypse: "These are they who have not defiled themselves with women, for they have continued virgins; these are they who follow the Lamb whithersoever He shall go."”

“Desiring with all his might that believers in Christ should be chaste, endeavours by many arguments to show them the dignity of chastity, as when he says. Come, now, and let us examine more carefully the very words which are before us, and observe that the apostle did not grant these things unconditionally to all, but first laid down the reason on account of which he was led to this. For, having set forth that "it is good for a man not to touch a woman"”

“For they had written to him, "Whether it was right to abstain from one's wife, or not:" and writing back in answer to this and giving rules about marriage, he introduces also the discourse concerning virginity: "It is good for a man not to touch a woman." "For if," says he, "thou enquire what is the excellent and greatly superior course, it is better not to have any connection whatever with a woman: but if you ask what is safe and helpful to thine own infirmity, be connected by marriage." But since it was likely, as also happens now, that the husband might be willing but the wife not, or perhaps the reverse, mark how he discusses each case. Some indeed say that this discourse was addressed by him to priests. But I, judging from what follows, could not affirm that it was so: since he would not have given his advice in general terms. For if he were writing these things only for the priests, he would have said, "It is good for the teacher not to touch a woman." But now he has made it of universal application, saying, "It is good for a man;" not for priest only. And again, "Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife." He said not, "You who are a priest and teacher," but indefinitely. And the whole of his speech goes on entirely in the same tones And in saying, "Because of fornications, let every man have his own wife" by the very cause alleged for the concession he guides men to continence.”

“After rebuking the fornicator and those who upheld him, the Apostle now begins to treat of marriage. In regard to this he does three things: first, he discusses those joined in matrimony; secondly, virgins (v. 25); thirdly, widows (v. 39). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he instructs those not joined in matrimony whether to contract matrimony; secondly, he clarifies what he had said (v. 6). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows what is essentially good in this matter; secondly, what is necessary (v. 2). In regard to the first it should be noted that in their dislike for fornication, against which he had just spoken, some, whose zeal for God was not accompanied by wisdom, arrived at a point where they even condemned marriage. Hence it says in 1 Timothy (4:2-3): "Through the hypocrisy of liars who forbid marriage". Because this seemed harsh to the Corinthian believers, they wrote to the Apostle about it. Therefore, the Apostle answered: I have disapproved of things you do. Now concerning the matters about which you wrote, I answer in regard to matrimony: It is well for a man not to touch a woman. In this matter it should be noted that the woman was given to man as a help in generation, and the generative power differs from the nutritive power in the fact that the latter serves man in preserving him as an individual. Hence, it is good for man to take nourishment, because his life is preserved by it. But the generative power does not serve man as a help in preserving him as an individual, but to preserve the species. Hence, it cannot be said that it is good for a man to preserve himself as an individual by touching a woman; first, in regard to the soul, because as Augustine says in the Soliloquies: "Nothing so casts a man down from the citadel of his power as that contact of bodies without which a wife cannot be had." Consequently, in Exodus (19:5) it says to the people about to receive the Law: "Be ready by the third day; do not go near a woman"; and in 1 Samuel (21:4): "I have no common bread at hand, but there is holy bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women." Secondly, as to the body, the fact that a man subjects himself to a woman by marriage and makes himself a slave out of a freedman. This is the most bitter of all servitudes. Hence it says in Ecclesiastes (7:26): "I found more bitter than death the woman whose heart is snares and nets." Thirdly, as to external things with which a man must occupy himself, when he has a wife and children to be fed; whereas it says in 2 Timothy (2:4): "No soldier on service gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to satisfy the one who enlisted him."”

“Now concerning. The heads of the Church of Corinth had written to St. Paul, desiring to know whether he thought it more expedient to marry or not. This was a question which the sages of antiquity had frequently taken into consideration. To this question St. Paul here delivers his opinion. (Calmet) — Others, with greater probability, suppose the chief question proposed to St. Paul was, whether they were not bound, upon their conversion, to abstain from their infidel wives. (St. Jerome, cont. Jovin. chap. iv.; St. Chrysostom, on this location, hom. xix.) — To this he answers in ver. 12. and 13. — It is good. That is, according to the style of the Scriptures, it is better, if we consider the advantage of every particular, &c. (Witham)”

“Stirred up by the depraved minds of the false apostles, who in their hypocrisy were teaching that marriage ought to be rejected in order that they might appear to be holier than others, the Corinthians wrote to Paul to ask him about these things. Because they were unhappy about this teaching, they ignored everything else and concentrated exclusively on this.”

“You have given up your wife, to whom you are bound. This is a big step you have taken. You are not abusing her, you say, but claiming that you can be chaste and live more purely. But look how your poor wife is being destroyed as a result, because she is unable to endure your purity! You should sleep with your wife, not for your sake but for hers.”

“There would be no adulteries, and debaucheries, and prostitution of women, if it were known to all, that whatever is sought beyond the desire of procreation is condemned by God. Nor would necessity compel a woman to dishonour her modesty, to seek for herself a most disgraceful mode of sustenance; since the males also would restrain their lust, and the pious and religious contributions of the rich would succour the destitute.”

“He speaks about both sides. For it may happen that the husband loves chastity, but the wife does not, or vice versa. With the words "to avoid fornication" he urges restraint. For if marriage is permitted to avoid fornication, then those joined in marriage ought not to have relations with one another without any moderation, but rather chastely.”

“Against the vowing of widowed continence it is objected: 1 Corinthians 7: On account of fornication let each man have his own wife, and each woman her own husband: but that is not a counsel, since it is not a work of perfection nor of supererogation: therefore it is a precept: therefore whoever vows continence acts against this precept.”

“Then when he says, But because of fornication, he shows what is necessary in this matter: first, as to contracting marriage; secondly, as to the use of the matrimony once contracted (v. 3). In regard to the first it should be noted that the act of the generative power is ordained to the conservation of the species by the generation of offspring. And because the woman was given to the man as a helper in generation, the first need for touching a woman is for the procreation of children. Hence it says in Genesis (1:27): "Male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.'" But this need was directed to the formation of the human race, as long as there was need for the people of God to be multiplied by succession according to the flesh. But the Apostle, considering that the human race had now multiplied and that the people of God were now increased not by fleshly propagation but by the generation which is from water the Holy Spirit, as it says in Jn (3:5), he passed over this necessity whereby marriage had been originally instituted as a function of nature, and proposed a second necessity according to which it was instituted as a remedy for sin. For since carnal desire remains alive in believers even after baptism, although it does not rule, it impels men especially toward venereal acts on account of the vehemence of their pleasure. And because it requires greater virtue to conquer this desire entirely than can belong to men, according to Matthew (19:11): "Not all men can receive this saying", it is necessary that this desire be in part yielded to and in part mastered. This, indeed, happens when the act of generation is ordained by reason and man is not totally mastered by the desire, but the desire is rather subjected to reason. Natural reason teaches that man use the act of generation according as it is suitable for generation and education of children. But in brute animals it is found that in certain species the female alone is not sufficient for the training of the offspring, but the male takes care of the offspring with the female. For this it is required that the male recognize its offspring. Therefore, in all such animals, as doves, pigeons and the like, solicitude for the training of offspring is inspired by nature. Wherefore, in such animals coition is not random and indiscriminate, but a definite male is joined to a definite female, not one to another promiscuously, as happens in dogs and such animals, in which the female alone takes care of the offspring. But above all in the human species, the male is required for the education of the offspring, which are attended to not only regarding bodily nourishment, but to a greater degree regarding the nourishment of the soul, as it says in Hebrews (12:9): "We have had earthly fathers to discipline us and we respected them." And consequently, natural reason dictates that in the human species coition is not random and uncertain, but is by a definite man to a definite female, who in fact made the arrangement through the law of matrimony. Thus, therefore, matrimony has three goods. The first is that it is a function of nature in the sense that it is ordered to the production and education of offspring; and this good is the good of offspring. The second good is that it is a remedy for desire, which is restricted to a definite person; and this good is called fidelity, which a man preserves toward his wife, by not going to another woman, and similarly the wife toward the husband. The third good is called the sacrament, inasmuch as it signifies the union of Christ and the Church, as it says in Ephesians (5:32): "This mystery [sacrament] is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church." This therefore is what he says. It has been stated that, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But because all men are not equipped for this good, each man on account of the temptation to fornication should have his own wife, that is, determined by himself, so as to avoid uncertain and promiscuous concubinage, which pertains to fornication: "Rejoice in the wife of your youth" (Prov. 5:18); "Why should you be infatuated, my son with a loose woman" (Prov. 5:20).”

“&c. But because of fornication, let every man have, and live with his own wife, [1] and not leave her, nor dismiss her. Take notice, that St. Paul speaks these words to those that are already married, and speaks not of the unmarried till the 8th verse. He does not then here exhort every one to marry, but admonishes married persons to live together, and not to refuse the marriage duty, which neither the husband nor the wife can do without mutual consent, because of the marriage engagement. Yet he advises them to abstain sometimes from what they may lawfully do, that they may give themselves to prayer, [2] and as it is added in the common Greek copies, to fasting. St. Chrysostom observes, that the words of St. Paul, are not only, that they may pray, (which no day must be omitted) but that they may give themselves to prayer, that is, may be better disposed and prepared for prayer, contemplation, and for receiving the holy Sacrament, as we find the priests even of the ancient law, were to abstain from their wives, when they were employed in the functions of their ministry. But such kind of advice is not relished by all that pretend to be reformers. And return together again….yet I speak this by way of indulgence, of what is allowed to married persons, and not commanded them, unless when one of the married couple is not willing to abstain. (Witham)”

“Here the general rule is given to avoid fornication--More literally, "on account of fornications," to which as being very prevalent at Corinth, and not even counted sins among the heathen, unmarried persons might be tempted. The plural, "fornications," marks irregular lusts, as contrasted with the unity of the marriage relation [BENGEL]. let every man have--a positive command to all who have not the gift of continency, in fact to the great majority of the world (Co1 7:5). The dignity of marriage is set forth by Paul (Eph 5:25-32), in the fact that it signifies the mystical union between Christ and the Church.”

“What (of the fact) that she endured not to have been met alone; but in the presence of Adam, not yet her husband, not yet bound to lend her his ears, she is impatient of keeping silence, and makes him the transmitter of that which she had imbibed from the Evil One? Therefore another human being, too, perishes through the impatience of the one; presently, too, perishes of himself, through his own impatience committed in each respect, both in regard of God's premonition and in regard of the devil's cheatery; not enduring to observe the former nor to refute the latter.”

“Now what is the meaning of "the due honor? The wife hath not power over her own body;" but is both the slave and the mistress of the husband. And if you decline the service which is due, you have offended God. But if thou wish to withdraw thyself, it must be with the husband's permission, though it be but a for short time. For this is why he calls the matter a debt, to shew that no one is master of himself but that they are servants to each other. When therefore thou seest an harlot tempting thee, say, "My body is not mine, but my wife's." The same also let the woman say to those who would undermine her chastity, "My body is not mine, but my husband's." Now if neither husband nor wife hath power even over their own body, much less have they over their property. Hear ye, all that have husbands and all that have wives: that if you must not count your body your own, much less your money. Elsewhere I grant He gives to the husband abundant precedence, both in the New Testament, and the Old saying, "Thy turning shall be towards thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." Paul doth so too by making a distinction thus, and writing, "Husbands, love your wives; and let the wife see that she reverence her husband." But in this place we hear no more of greater and less, but it is one and the same right. Now why is this? Because his speech was about chastity. "In all other things," says he, "let the husband have the prerogative; but not so where the question is about chastity." "The husband hath no power over his own body, neither the wife." There is great equality of honor, and no prerogative.”

“Human laws demand that women be chaste and if they are not they are punished for it, but they do not demand the same from men. Since it was men who made the laws, they did not make themselves equal with woman but allowed themselves extra indulgence. The holy apostle, however, inspired by divine grace, was the first one who made the law of chastity apply to men as well.”

“Then when he says, the husband should give, he deals with the use of the marriage contract: first, about rendering the conjugal debt; secondly, about postponing the debt (v. 5). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he states his proposition, saying: it has been stated that a man should have a wife and a wife her husband. This is reason for the 'having', that the man should give to his wife her conjugal rights, namely, with his own body through carnal union, and likewise the wife to her husband, because in this matter they are judged equal. Hence the woman was not formed from the feet of the man as a servant, nor from the head as lording it over her husband, but from the side as a companion, as it says in Genesis (2:21). Hence, they must pay the debt to one another according to what it says in Romans (13:7): "Pay all of them their dues."”

“That conjugal chastity is to be approved according to the evangelical law is shown by authority, as follows. 1 Corinthians 7: Let the husband render to the wife the debt owed, and the wife to the husband. The husband does not have power over his own body, but the wife does: therefore for the husband to render the debt to the wife is consonant with the law of God: but this is done according to the conjugal act: therefore the conjugal act is consonant with the law of God.”

“Now he proves that love for one another is indeed a necessary obligation. For spouses, he says, do not have authority over their own bodies, but the wife is both a slave and a mistress of her husband: a slave, since she does not have authority over her own body to sell it to whomever she wishes, but her husband has ownership of it; and a mistress, because the body of her husband is her body, and he does not have the authority to give it to harlots. In the same way, the husband is both a slave and a master of his wife.”

“Secondly, he assigns the reason for the debt saying, for the wife does not rule over her own body, namely, in regard to the act of generation as though she could by her own choice be continent or give herself to someone else; but the husband does, that is, has power over her body as to the use of carnal union. Therefore the wife must offer the husband the use of her body. Likewise the husband does not have rule over his own body, but the wife does. Hence he must offer the use of his body to the wife, when any lawful impediment cases. Hence it says in Genesis (2:24): "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."”

“The Lord also showed that certain precepts were enacted for them by Moses, on account of their hardness [of heart], and because of their unwillingness to be obedient, when, on their saying to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to send away a wife?" He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts he permitted these things to you; but from the beginning it was not so;" thus exculpating Moses as a faithful servant, but acknowledging one God, who from the beginning made male and female, and reproving them as hard-hearted and disobedient. And therefore it was that they received from Moses this law of divorcement, adapted to their hard nature. But why say I these things concerning the Old Testament? For in the New also are the apostles found doing this very thing, on the ground which has been mentioned, Paul plainly declaring, "But these things I say, not the Lord." And again: "But this I speak by permission, not by commandment." And again: "Now, as concerning virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." But further, in another place he says: "That Satan tempt you not for your incontinence." If, therefore, even in the New Testament, the apostles are found granting certain precepts in consideration of human infirmity, because of the incontinence of some, lest such persons, having grown obdurate, and despairing altogether of their salvation, should become apostates from God,-it ought not to be wondered at, if also in the Old Testament the same God permitted similar indulgences for the benefit of His people, drawing them on by means of the ordinances already mentioned, so that they might obtain the gift of salvation through them, while they obeyed the Decalogue, and being restrained by Him, should not revert to idolatry, nor apostatize from God, but learn to love Him with the whole heart.”

“Moreover, those who are competent, and who are advanced in years, ought to be judges of themselves in these matters. For that it is proper to abstain from each other by consent, in order that they may be free for a season to give themselves to prayer, and then come together again, they have heard from Paul in his epistle.”

“What then can this mean? "Let not the wife," says he, "exercise continence, if the husband be unwilling; nor yet the husband without the wife's consent." Why so? Because great evils spring from this sort of continence. For adulteries and fornications and the ruin of families have often arisen from hence. For if when men have their own wives they commit fornication, much more if you defraud them of this consolation. And well says he, "Defraud not; fraud" here, and "debt" above, that he might shew the strictness of the right of dominion in question. For that one should practice continence against the will of the other is "defrauding;" but not so, with the other's consent: any more than I count myself defrauded, if after persuading me you take away any thing of mine. Since only he defrauds who takes against another's will and by force. A thing which many women do, working sin rather than righteousness, and thereby becoming accountable for the husband's uncleanness, and rending all asunder. Whereas they should value concord above all things, since this is more important than all beside. We will, if you please, consider it with a view to actual cases. Thus, suppose a wife and husband, and let the wife be continent, without consent of her husband; well then, if hereupon he commit fornication, or though abstaining from fornication fret and grow restless and be heated and quarrel and give all kind of trouble to his wife; where is all the gain of the fasting and the continence, a breach being made in love? There is none. For what strange reproaches, how much trouble, how great a war must of course arise! since when in an house man and wife are at variance, the house will be no better off than a ship in a storm when the master is upon ill terms with the man at the head. Wherefore he saith, "Defraud not one another, unless it be by consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto prayer." It is prayer with unusual earnestness which he here means. For if he is forbidding those who have intercourse with one another to pray, how could "pray without ceasing" have any place? It is possible then to live with a wife and yet give heed unto prayer. But by continence prayer is made more perfect. For he did not say merely, "That ye may pray;" but, "That ye may give yourselves unto it;" as though what he speaks of might cause not uncleanness but much occupation. "And may be together again, that Satan tempt you not." Thus lest it should seem to be a matter of express enactment, he adds the reason. And what is it? "That Satan tempt you not." And that you may understand that it is not the devil only who causeth this crime, I mean adultery, he adds, "because of your incontinency."”

“According to this, if he had wished to practice continence but you had not, he would have been obliged to give in to you, and God would have given him credit for continence for not refusing intercourse out of consideration for your weakness, not his own, in order to prevent you from committing adultery. How much better would it have been for you, for whom subjection was more appropriate, to yield to his will in rendering him the debt, since God would have taken account of your intention to observe continence, which you gave up in order to save your husband from destruction.”

“That is, against the will of the husband the wife must not abstain, and likewise the husband must not abstain against the desire of the wife. For one to abstain against the will of the other means to deprive oneself, just as is also said concerning money; but to abstain by mutual will is an entirely different matter, as for example when both (husband and wife) by agreement set a definite time for mutual abstinence.”

“Then when he says, do not refuse [defraud] one another, he deals with postponing the debt to be rendered. First, he shows how the conjugal act should be postponed. In regard to this he teaches that one thing must be avoided, saying: do not refuse [defraud] one another, so that, for example, the husband wishes to abstain when the wife does not, or even conversely. The Apostle calls this fraud, because one is taking away what belongs to another—and this pertains to fraud no less in marriage than in other affairs, as it says in Proverbs (12:27): "The fraudulent man will not catch his prey," namely, because one who offers God his continence accompanied by that fraud does not gain merit for eternal life. For as Augustine says, God does not want such gain compensated with such harm, so that while one of the spouses is continent against the will of the other, the former falls into dangerous temptations. Three things must be observed in such postponement. The first is that it be done with mutual consent. Hence he says, except perhaps by agreement. Hence it says in Sirach (25:1): "My soul takes pleasure in three things, and they are beautiful in the sight of the Lord and of men; agreement between brothers, friendship between neighbors, and a wife and a husband who live in harmony." The second is that it be for a definite time. Hence he says, except perhaps for a season, as it says in Ecclesiastes (3:5): "a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing." The third is that it be done for a suitable purpose, that is, for the sake of spiritual acts, for which continence renders one more suitable. Hence he adds, that you may devote yourselves to prayer, as it says in Joel (2:14): "A cereal offering and a drink offering for the LORD, your God," and later he adds, "Let the bridegroom leave his room, and the bride her chamber" (Joel 2:16). Then he deals with the resumption of the conjugal act. First he presents the teaching, saying, but then come together again, that is, in order that you may render to each other the debt, now that the time of prayer is finished. Hence it says in 1 Kings (8:66) that after celebrating the dedication of the feast: "They went to their homes joyful and glad of heart." Secondly he assigns a reason for the teaching. For he does not say this as though it were necessary for salvation, but to avoid danger. Hence he adds, lest Satan tempt you, that is, lest he subvert you with his temptation, as it says in 1 Thessalonians (3:5): "For fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain." Satan's temptation should not be feared by the strong, about whom it says in 1 Jn (2:14): "I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one." But he should be feared by the weak. Hence he says, through lack of self-control, that is, on account of a proneness to incontinence, as a result of which the devil overcomes man by tempting and he is inclined to tempt, as it says in 1 Peter (5:8): "the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking some one to devour."”

“Defraud . . . not--namely, of the conjugal duty "due" (Co1 7:3; compare the Septuagint, Exo 21:10). except it be--"unless perchance" [ALFORD]. give yourselves to--literally, "be at leisure for"; be free from interruptions for; namely, on some special "season," as the Greek for "time" means (compare Exo 19:15; Joe 2:16; Zac 7:3). fasting and prayer--The oldest manuscripts omit "fasting and"; an interpolation, evidently, of ascetics. come together--The oldest manuscripts read, "be together," namely, in the regular state of the married. Satan--who often thrusts in his temptations to unholy thoughts amidst the holiest exercises. for your incontinency--because of your inability to "contain" (Co1 7:9) your natural propensities, which Satan would take advantage of.”

“But why say I these things concerning the Old Testament? For in the New also are the apostles found doing this very thing, on the ground which has been mentioned, Paul plainly declaring, "But these things I say, not the Lord." And again: "But this I speak by permission, not by commandment." And again: "Now, as concerning virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." But further, in another place he says: "That Satan tempt you not for your incontinence." If, therefore, even in the New Testament, the apostles are found granting certain precepts in consideration of human infirmity, because of the incontinence of some, lest such persons, having grown obdurate, and despairing altogether of their salvation, should become apostates from God,-it ought not to be wondered at, if also in the Old Testament the same God permitted similar indulgences for the benefit of His people, drawing them on by means of the ordinances already mentioned, so that they might obtain the gift of salvation through them, while they obeyed the Decalogue, and being restrained by Him, should not revert to idolatry, nor apostatize from God, but learn to love Him with the whole heart.”

“"But this I say by way of permission, not of commandment. For I would that all men were even as I myself; in a state of continence." This he doth in many places when he is advising about difficult matters; he brings forward himself, and says, "Be ye imitators of me." "Howbeit each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that." Thus since he had heavily charged them saying, "for your incontinence," he again comforteth them by the words, "each one hath his own gift of God;" not declaring that towards that virtue there is no need of zeal on our part, but, as I was saying before, to comfort them. For if it be a "gift," and man contributes nothing thereunto, how sayest thou, "But I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I: but if they have not continency let them marry?" Do you see the strong sense of Paul how he both signifies that continence is better, and yet puts no force on the person who cannot attain to it; fearing lest some offence arise?”

“Then when he says, I say this, he tells in what sense the above doctrine should be taken. First, he does what has been said; secondly, he assigns a reason (v. 7); thirdly, he explains what he had said (v. 8). First, therefore, he says: I have said that each one should have his own wife and each woman her own husband; furthermore, after practicing continence for a time, they should return once more to each other. I say this by way of concession, that is, to spare your weakness, not of command, namely as though necessary for your salvation. For certain things must be conceded to subjects on account of their weakness, and they should not be compelled by commanding what is good. Hence Ezekiel (34:4-5) says against some prelates: "With force and harshness you have ruled them, so they were scattered." But the Apostle seems to be speaking in an unsuitable manner, for concessions are concerned only with sin. Therefore, by the fact that the Apostle says he is speaking by way of concession, he seems to express that marriage is a sin. But this can be answered in two ways. In one way so that the concession is taken for permission. But there are two kinds of permission: one is concerned with a lesser evil, as in Matthew (19:8): "For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives," that is, to avoid the murder of one's wife, to which they were prone. Such a permission is not found in the New Testament on account of its perfection, according to Hebrews (6:1): "Let us go on to perfection." Another permission is about the lesser good, namely, when a man is not compelled by precept to a greater good. This is the sense in which the Apostle makes a concession here, that is, permits matrimony, which is a lesser good than virginity, which is not commanded and is a greater good. In another way, concession can be taken as regarding guilt, as Isaiah (26:15) says: "But thou hast increased the nation, O LORD, thou hast increased the nation." In this sense, concession refers to the conjugal act, accordingly as it has venial guilt attached to it along with the good of matrimony, without which it would be mortal. Hence it should be noted that the conjugal act is sometimes meritorious and without any mortal or venial sin, as when it is directed to the good of procreation and education of a child for the worship of God; for then it is an act of religion; or when it is performed for the sake of rendering the debt, it is an act of justice. But every virtuous act is meritorious, if it is performed with charity. But sometimes it is accompanied with venial sin, namely, when one is excited to the matrimonial act by concupiscence, which nevertheless stays within the limits of the marriage, namely, that he is content with his wife only. But sometimes it is performed with mortal sin, as when concupiscence is carried beyond the limits of the marriage; for example, when the husband approaches the wife with the idea that he would just as gladly or more gladly approach another woman. In the first way, therefore, the act of marriage requires no concession; in the second way it obtains a concession, inasmuch as someone consenting to concupiscence toward the wife is not guilty of mortal sin; in the third way there is absolutely no concession.”

“" A price! surely none at all was paid, since Christ was a phantom, nor had He any corporeal substance which He could pay for our bodies! But, in truth, Christ had wherewithal to redeem us; and since He has redeemed, at a great price, these bodies of ours, against which fornication must not be committed (because they are now members of Christ, and not our own), surely He will secure, on His own account, the safety of those whom He made His own at so much cost! Now, how shall we glorify, how shall we exalt, God in our body, which is doomed to perish? We must now encounter the subject of marriage, which Marcion, more continent than the apostle, prohibits. For the apostle, although preferring the grace of continence, yet permits the contraction of marriage and the enjoyment of it, and advises the continuance therein rather than the dissolution there of.”

“And to return to the praise of martyrdom, there is a word of the blessed Paul, who says; "Know ye not that they who run in a race strive many, but one receiveth the prize? But do ye so run, that all of you may obtain." Moreover also elsewhere, that be may exhort us to martyrdom, he has called us fellow-heirs with Christ; nay, that he might omit nothing, he says, "If ye are dead with Christ, why, as if living in the world, do ye make distinctions? " Because, dearest brethren, we who bear the rewards of resurrection, who seek for the day of judgment, who, in fine, are trusting that we shall reign with Christ, ought to be dead to the world. For you can neither desire martyrdom till you have first hated the world, nor attain to God's reward unless you have loved Christ. And he who loves Christ does not love the world. For Christ was given up by the world, even as the world also was given up by Christ; as it is written, "The world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." The world has been an object of affection to none whom the Lord has not previously condemned; nor could he enjoy eternal salvation who has gloried in the life of the world. That is the very voice of Christ, who says: "He that loveth his life in this world, shall lose it in the world to come; but he that hateth his life in this world, shall find it in the world to come." Moreover, also, the Apostle Paul says: "Be ye imitators of me, as I also am of Christ." And the same elsewhere says: "I wish that all of you, if it were possible, should be imitators of me."”

“That widowed continence according to the evangelical law ought to be vowed is shown by authority, as follows. 1 Corinthians 7: I wish all men to be as I myself: but he himself was entirely continent and bound to continence: therefore he wished that all be bound to continence. But this is done through the vow of continence: therefore widowed continence is to be vowed.”

“Then when it says, I wish, he assigns the reason for what he has said. First, why he does not speak as commanding; secondly, why he speaks according to a concession (v. 7b). In regard to the first it should be noted that no wise man commands that whose opposite he would rather have done. Therefore, the Apostle does not command that men contract marriage or make use of a marriage already contracted, because he wishes rather that men be continent. And this is what he says: I wish that all men were as I myself am, that is, continent as I am. He says likewise in Acts (26:29): "I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am." But there seems to be something against this, because if all men practiced continence, as the Apostle did, generation would cease and, as a result, the number of the elect would never be fulfilled, and this is against God's arrangement. Some say that it had been revealed to the Apostle that if all men were saved practicing continence, as he practiced it, it would suffice to fill up the number of the elect. But this rests on no authority; consequently, it can be said that the Apostle wished all men to be continent, because he wished this for certain individuals, but he did not wish that all would be continent at the same time. Or it can be said, and this is better, that he wished all men to be continent in his antecedent will, as he says in 1 Timothy (2:4): "God desires all men to be saved," but not by his consequent will, by which God wills to save certain persons, namely the predestined and to damn others, namely, the reprobate, as it says in Malachi (1:2-3): "I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau." Now the antecedent will is concerned with that which considered absolutely is better, as all men to be saved or continent; but the consequent will is concerned with that which is better considering circumstances of persons and events, and according to this, God wills to damn some and the Apostle wishes some to be united in marriage. Then when he says, but each, he tells the reason why he permitted marriage as a concession, namely, because each one has not received from God so much virtue as to enable him to practice total continence, as the Lord himself said: "Not all men can receive this saying... He who is able to receive this, let him receive it" (Matt. 19:11, 12). And this is what he says: I should wish that all were continent, but each has his own gift from God, that is, in a definite measure, one of one kind, for example, to serve God in virginity, and another in another, say to serve God in marriage. Hence it says in Matthew (25:15): "To one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, each according to his ability." And in Wisdom (8:21): "But I perceived that I would not possess wisdom unless God gave her to me—and it was a mark of insight to know whose gift she was."”

“I would, or I could wish you all were even as myself, and as it is said in the next verse, to continue unmarried as I do. From hence it is evident, that St. Paul was not then married, who according to the opinion of the ancient fathers, was never married. But when the apostle says, I would this as to you all, he only signifies what could be wished for, the particular good of every one considered as a particular person, but what cannot be hoped for, considering the state of mankind in general, and the temptations, and frailty of men. — But every one hath his proper gift from God, so that some prudently embrace a single life, and also make a religious vow of always living so, as it has been practised by a great number both of men and women in all ages, ever since Christ’s time. Others have not this more perfect gift: they find themselves not disposed to lead, or vow a single life, they marry lawfully: it is better to marry than to burn, or be burnt by violent temptations of concupiscence, by which they do not contain themselves from disorders of that kind. It is against both the Latin and Greek text to translate, they cannot contain themselves, as in the Protestant and Mr. N….’s translation. Dr. Wells, in his paraphrase, gives the sense of this place in these words: The inconveniences of marriage are to be undergone, rather than such sinful imaginations, or practises, as arise from the flames of an ungovernable lust. They therefore that are unmarried or widows, (to whom St. Paul speaks in these two verses) may have recourse to marriage as a remedy. But let it be observed, that when St. Paul allows of marriage, he speaks not of those who have already made a vow of living always a single life. Vows made to God must be kept. (Psalm lxxv. 12.; Ecclesiastes v. 3.) And St. Paul expressly says of such persons, who have made a vow of perpetual continency, and afterwards marry, that they incur damnation, because they violate their first faith, or vow made to God. See 1 Timothy v. 12. This saying, therefore, it is better to marry than to burn, cannot justify the sacrilegious marriages of priests, or of any others who were under such vows. There are other remedies which they are bound to make use of, and by which they may obtain the gift of continency and chastity. They must ask this gift by fervent prayers to God, who gives a good spirit to them that ask it. (Luke xi. 15.[13.?]) They must join fasting, alms, and the practice of self-denials, so often recommended in the gospel. See the annotations on Matthew xix. The like remedies, and no others, must they use, who being already in wedlock, are under such violent temptations, that they are continually in danger of violating, or do violate the chastity of the marriage-bed. For example, when married persons are divorced from bed and board, when long absent from one another, when sick and disabled, when one has an inveterate aversion to the other: they cannot marry another, but they can, and must use other remedies. (Witham)”

“For, withal, when he has laid down the definitive rule with reference to "the widowed and the unwedded," that they are to "marry if they cannot contain," because "better it is to marry than to burn," he turns round to the other class, and says: "But to the wedded I make official declaration-not indeed I, but the Lord.”

“Do you see the wisdom of Paul, how he both shows the superiority of virginity and at the same time does not compel abstinence from marriage for one who is unable to abstain, lest otherwise he suffer a more grievous fall? If, he says, you experience great force and burning (for the power of desire is strong), then free yourself from those labors and struggles, lest, having undertaken them, you fall into a worse evil.”

“That widowed continence according to the evangelical law ought to be vowed is shown by authority, as follows. 1 Corinthians 7: But I say to the unmarried and to widows: it is good for them, if they so remain: therefore according to the Apostle it is good to remain in widowed continence; but this good is a counsel: therefore someone can licitly vow widowed continence.”

“Then when he says, to the unmarried, he explains what he had said obscurely. First, as to his statement, I wish all were as I myself, namely, because this is absolutely better. Hence he says, to the unmarried, that is, virgins, and the widows I say by way of explanation that it is good for them to remain single as I do, for it says in Wisdom (4:1): "Blessed is the chaste generation with glory."”

“Do you see the strong sense of Paul how he both signifies that continence is better, and yet puts no force on the person who cannot attain to it; fearing lest some offence arise? "For it is better to marry than to burn." He indicates how great is the tyranny of concupiscence. What he means is something like this: "If you have to endure much violence and burning desire, withdraw yourself from your pains and toils, lest haply you be subverted."”

“Secondly, as to his statement, but each one has his own gift; as if to say: not everyone has received from God the gift of continence. Hence he says, if they cannot exercise self-control, that is, if they have not yet received this gift, they should marry, that is, be joined in matrimony: "I would have younger widows marry" (1 Tim. 5:14). Then he gives the reason, saying, it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion, that is, be overcome by concupiscence. For concupiscence is a harmful heat; therefore one assailed by concupiscence is warmed but not burned, unless he is overcome by concupiscence and destroys the water of grace. Hence Job (31:8) says: "A fire which consumes unto Abaddon, and it would burn to the root all my increase." It should be noted that the Apostle uses a helpful comparison here, for it is good to marry, although it is a lesser good. But to be burned is an evil. Therefore it is better, that is, more tolerable, that a man should have the lesser good than incur the evil of incontinence. And this is what he said above (v. 2): to avoid fornication each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband; and later (v. 5): lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control.”

“If they do not contain. This is spoken of such as are free; and not of such as by vow have given their first faith to God; to whom, if they will use proper means to obtain it, God will never refuse the gift of continency. Some translators have corrupted this text, by rendering it, if they cannot contain. (Challoner)”

“And, "Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband, committeth adultery." And, "There are some who have been made eunuchs of men, and some who were born eunuchs, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake; but all cannot receive this saying." So that all who, by human law, are twice married, are in the eye of our Master sinners, and those who look upon a woman to lust after her.”

“And concerning chastity, the holy word teaches us not only not to sin in act, but not even in thought, not even in the heart to think of any evil, nor look on another man's wife with our eyes to lust after her. Solomon, accordingly, who was a king and a prophet, said: "Let thine eyes look right on, and let thine eyelids look straight before thee: make straight paths for your feet." And the voice of the Gospel teaches still more urgently concerning chastity, saying: "Whosoever looketh on a woman who is not his own wife, to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." [Matthew 5:28] "And he that marrieth," says [the Gospel], "her that is divorced from her husband, committeth adultery; and whosoever putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery." [Matthew 5:32] Because Solomon says: "Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned? Or can one walk upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned? So he that goeth in to a married woman shall not be innocent." [Proverbs 6:27-29]”

“Now that the Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union, is expressly contained in the law, "Thou shalt not put away thy wife, except for the cause of fornication;" and it regards as fornication, the marriage of those separated while the other is alive. Not to deck and adorn herself beyond what is becoming, renders a wife free of calumnious suspicion, while she devotes herself assiduously to prayers and supplications; avoiding frequent departures from the house, and shutting herself up as far as possible from the view of all not related to her, and deeming housekeeping of more consequence than impertinent trifling. "He that taketh a woman that has been put away," it is said, "committeth adultery; and if one puts away his wife, he makes her an adulteress," that is, compels her to commit adultery. And not only is he who puts her away guilty of this, but he who takes her, by giving to the woman the opportunity of sinning; for did he not take her, she would return to her husband.”

“Now, when Marcion wholly prohibits all carnal intercourse to the faithful (for we will say nothing about his catechumens), and when he prescribes repudiation of all engagements before marriage, whose teaching does he follow, that of Moses or of Christ? Even Christ, however, when He here commands "the wife not to depart from her husband, or if she depart, to remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband," both permitted divorce, which indeed He never absolutely prohibited, and confirmed (the sanctity) of marriage, by first forbidding its dissolution; and, if separation had taken place, by wishing the nuptial bond to be resumed by reconciliation.”

“That a wife must not depart from her husband; or if she should depart, she must remain unmarried. In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "But to them that are married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not be separated from her husband; but if she should depart, that she remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and that the husband should not put away his wife."”

“Because it is a law expressly appointed by Christ which he is about to read to them about the "not putting away a wife without fornication;" therefore he says, "Not I." True it is what was before spoken though it were not expressly stated, yet it also is His decree. But this, you see, He had delivered in express words. So that the words "I and not I" have this difference of meaning. For that you might not imagine even his own words to be human, therefore he added, "For I think that I also have the Spirit of God." Now what is that which "to the married the Lord commanded? That the wife depart not from her husband: but if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled unto her husband." Here, seeing that both on the score of continence and other pretexts, and because of infirmities of temper, it fell out that separations took place: it were better, he says, that such things should not be at all; but however if they take place, let the wife remain with her husband, if not to cohabit with him, yet so as not to introduce any other to be her husband.”

“Since the Lord in clear words gave the law not to divorce, except for the cause of fornication (Matt. 5:32), the apostle says: "not I, but the Lord." But what was said before was not literally legislated by the Lord. Nevertheless, the words of Paul are also the words of the Lord, and not of man, for below he says of himself: "I think that I also have the Spirit of God" (1 Cor. 7:40).”

“After presenting teachings about the contract of marriage, the Apostle now instructs those who have already contracted marriage, that they must not dissolve the marriage. First, he teaches those already joined in marriage to continue in it; secondly, he gives them a useful teaching as to all the states or conditions of men (v. 20). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he deals with the indissolubility of marriage, as it applies to those who are of one worship; secondly, when there is disparity of cult (v. 12). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he lays down a precept about the indissolubility of marriage; secondly, he teaches what should be done when the marriage is broken by separation (v. 11). First, therefore, he says: I have said to the unmarried, i.e., virgins and widows, that it is better for them to remain as they are; but to the married, the same condition does not prevail. For to them I give the charge, not I, by the authority entrusted to me, but the Lord commands this, saying: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder" (Matt. 19:6). I command, I say, that the wife should not separate from her husband, except on account of fornication, an exception which Christ made and is not mentioned here, because it is well known. The Lord made this the sole exception; all other troubles he commands to be patiently endured for the faith of the marriage: "Whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery" (Matt. 19:9). According to a Gloss of Augustine, what is said here is understood of the union of matrimony when both are faithful.”

“But to them that are married, &c. He tells these persons, that they ought not to part, or if a separation for weighty reasons can be allowed, neither party can marry another. (Witham) — That the wife. Jesus Christ has expressly declared, that in one case only a divorce may be allowable, and that is in the case of adultery. (Estius)”

“not I, but the Lord--(Compare Co1 7:12, Co1 7:25, Co1 7:40). In ordinary cases he writes on inspired apostolic authority (Co1 14:37); but here on the direct authority of the Lord Himself (Mar 10:11-12). In both cases alike the things written are inspired by the Spirit of God "but not all for all time, nor all on the primary truths of the faith" [ALFORD]. Let not the wife depart--literally, "be separated from." Probably the separation on either side, whether owing to the husband or to the wife, is forbidden.”

“A person should either remain as he was born, or be content with one marriage; for a second marriage is only a specious adultery. "For whosoever puts away his wife," says He, "and marries another, commits adultery;" [Matthew 19:9] not permitting a man to send her away whose virginity he has brought to an end, nor to marry again. For he who deprives himself of his first wife, even though she be dead, is a cloaked adulterer, resisting the hand of God, because in the beginning God made one man and one woman, and dissolving the strictest union of flesh with flesh, formed for the intercourse of the race.”

“"Sir, if any one has a wife who trusts in the Lord, and if he detect her in adultery, does the man sin if he continue to live with her?" And he said to me, "As long as he remains ignorant of her sin, the husband commits no transgression in living with her. But if the husband know that his wife has gone astray, and if the woman does not repent, but persists in her fornication, and yet the husband continues to live with her, he also is guilty of her crime, and a sharer in her adultery." And I said to him, "What then, sir, is the husband to do, if his wife continue in her vicious practices?" And he said, "The husband should put her away, and remain by himself. But if he put his wife away and marry another, he also commits adultery." And I said to him, "What if the woman put away should repent, and wish to return to her husband: shall she not be taken back by her husband?" And he said to me, "Assuredly. If the husband do not take her back, he sins, and brings a great sin upon himself; for he ought to take back the sinner who has repented. But not frequently. For there is but one repentance to the servants of God. In case, therefore, that the divorced wife may repent, the husband ought not to marry another, when his wife has been put away. In this matter man and woman are to be treated exactly in the same way. Moreover, adultery is committed not only by those who pollute their flesh, but by those who imitate the heathen in their actions. Wherefore if any one persists in such deeds, and repents not, withdraw from him, and cease to live with him otherwise you are a sharer in his sin. Therefore has the injunction been laid on you, that you should remain by yourselves, both man and woman, for in such persons repentance can take place."”

“But if she does separate, namely, on account of fornication, let her remain unmarried, as long as the husband is alive, because although the marriage is dissolved as to bed and board, not as to bond. Or else be reconciled to her husband, namely, if the husband is not continent. Likewise the husband should not divorce his wife, except on account of fornication. A similar form is kept in regard to the man and to the woman. Hence it is necessary to supply what was said about the wife, namely, that if he dismissed her completely, he should not get another, but be reconciled to his wife. But Ambrose, commenting here, seems to say something contrary to this. He says: he does not say the same things for the man as for the woman, because it is lawful for the husband to marry another woman, for the inferior does not use this law as fully as the superior. But the Master says that this was added by a falsifier and should not be maintained at all. It should be noted here that there are seven cases when a husband cannot dismiss his wife on account of fornication. The first is when he himself prostituted her; the second, when he commits fornication with another woman; the third is when he gave her the occasion of fornication, as when he is unwilling to render the debt; the fourth is when she has probable certitude that her husband is dead and she married another; the fifth is when she has been violently oppressed by him; the sixth is when she was known by another, who seemed to be her husband; the seventh is when she has been manifestly caught in adultery, but is retained by her husband.”

“But and if she depart--or "be separated." If the sin of separation has been committed, that of a new marriage is not to be added (Mat 5:32). be reconciled--by appeasing her husband's displeasure, and recovering his good will. let not . . . husband put away . . . wife--In Mat 5:32 the only exception allowed is, "saving for the cause of fornication."”

“A woman may not marry if she has left her husband because of fornication or apostasy, if he wishes to have sexual relations with her. But if the husband turns away from the faith or desires to have extramarital sexual relations, the wife may neither marry another nor return to him. The husband should not divorce his wife, but one should add the clause "except for fornication."”

“The Lord also showed that certain precepts were enacted for them by Moses, on account of their hardness [of heart], and because of their unwillingness to be obedient, when, on their saying to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to send away a wife?" He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts he permitted these things to you; but from the beginning it was not so;" thus exculpating Moses as a faithful servant, but acknowledging one God, who from the beginning made male and female, and reproving them as hard-hearted and disobedient. And therefore it was that they received from Moses this law of divorcement, adapted to their hard nature. But why say I these things concerning the Old Testament? For in the New also are the apostles found doing this very thing, on the ground which has been mentioned, Paul plainly declaring, "But these things I say, not the Lord." And again: "But this I speak by permission, not by commandment." And again: "Now, as concerning virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." But further, in another place he says: "That Satan tempt you not for your incontinence." If, therefore, even in the New Testament, the apostles are found granting certain precepts in consideration of human infirmity, because of the incontinence of some, lest such persons, having grown obdurate, and despairing altogether of their salvation, should become apostates from God,-it ought not to be wondered at, if also in the Old Testament the same God permitted similar indulgences for the benefit of His people, drawing them on by means of the ordinances already mentioned, so that they might obtain the gift of salvation through them, while they obeyed the Decalogue, and being restrained by Him, should not revert to idolatry, nor apostatize from God, but learn to love Him with the whole heart.”

“Therefore, when in these days a certain woman removed her marriage from the pale of the Church, and united herself to a Gentile, and when I remembered that this had in days gone by been done by others: wondering at either their own waywardness or else the double-dealing of their advisers, in that there is no scripture which holds forth a licence of this deed,-"I wonder," said I, "whether they flatter themselves on the ground of that passage of the first (Epistle) to the Corinthians, where it is written: If any of the brethren has an unbelieving wife, and she consents to the matrimony, let him not dismiss her; similarly, let not a believing woman, married to an unbeliever, if she finds her husband agreeable (to their continued union), dismiss him: for the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife by the believing husband; else were your children unclean." It may be that, by understanding generally this monition regarding married believers, they think that licence is granted (thereby) to marry even unbelievers.”

“For as when discoursing about separating from fornicators, he made the matter easy by the correction which he applied to his words, saying, "Howbeit, not altogether with the fornicators of this world;" so also in this case he provideth for the abundant easiness of the duty, saying, "If any wife have a husband, or husband a wife, that believeth not, let him not leave her." What sayest thou? "If he be an unbeliever, let him remain with the wife, but not if he be a fornicator? And yet fornication is a less sin than unbelief." I grant, fornication is a less sin: but God spares thine infirmities extremely. And this is What He doth about the sacrifice, saying, "Leave the sacrifice, and be reconciled to thy brother." This also in the case of the man who owed ten thousand talents. For him too He did not punish for owing him ten thousand talents, but for demanding back a hundred pence from his fellow-servant He took vengeance on him.”

“What are you saying? If the husband is an unbeliever, then let him remain with his wife; but if he is a fornicator, he should not remain with her? But unbelief is worse than fornication? Indeed it is worse; but God exacts punishment more for sins against one's neighbor than for sins against Himself. For it is said: "Leave your gift there before the altar and go first, be reconciled with your brother" (Matt. 5:24). And ten thousand talents owed to Him, He forgave; but for the one who owed a hundred denarii, He did not leave the offense unavenged (Matt. 18:34). So also in the present case: the sin of unbelief, which offends God Himself, He overlooks, but the sin of adultery He punishes as a sin against the wife. Some, however, explain it thus: a person, they say, remains in unbelief through ignorance, which may perhaps come to an end, as the apostle himself (1 Cor. 7:16) says: "For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband?" — whereas fornication is committed as a result of manifest depravity. Moreover, the fornicator has already separated himself beforehand, for having taken his members away from his wife, he made them members of a harlot; whereas the unbeliever has committed no sin against the bodily union, or rather, through this union he may perhaps be united also in faith. Not to mention that the order of life would also be overturned, and the Gospel would be subjected to reproach, if the believing spouse were to separate from the unbelieving one. Meanwhile, apply the apostle's commandment under consideration only to the case where husband and wife were joined in marriage when both were still in unbelief, but afterward one side or the other converted to the faith. For if previously only the husband was an unbeliever, or only the wife, then the believing spouse was not at all permitted to enter into marriage with the unbelieving one: this is clear from the apostle's words, for he did not say: if anyone wishes to take an unbelieving wife, but: "if any brother has." Again, he does not simply prescribe that the believing spouse live with the unbelieving one, but only in the case where the latter desires it; for this means: "consents," that is, if she desires it.”

“Then when he says, To the rest I say, he treats of the inseparability of marriage between persons of disparate cult, when one is a believer. First, he says that the believer should not dismiss an unbelieving spouse, who is willing to continue living together without abusing the Creator. Secondly, that if the unbeliever does not wish to live together, the believer is not bound to follow, but can marry another (v. 15). Thirdly, that unless the unbeliever leaves first, the believer should patiently remain together (v. 16). In regard to the first, he gives an admonition; secondly, the reason for the admonition (v. 14). In regard to the first he speaks in general to men and women; secondly, in particular to the men (v. 12b); thirdly, in particular to the women (v. 13). He says therefore, To the rest, i.e., where not both are believers, but one is a believer and the other an unbeliever, I say, by way of counsel and not of command, not the Lord. As if to say: I say this from the Lord, although he does not say it with his own lips. This is what I say: If any brother, a believer, is converted to the faith while married. For this is understood of those who married as unbelievers, not of those who are in disparity of cult; for then there was no marriage, and they would have to be separated as Ezra did in Ezra 9-10. If a brother, I say, has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him without insulting the Creator, he should not divorce her. It is a counsel not a precept, so that if one does the contrary, he is not a transgressor, according to a Gloss.”

“For to the rest, &c. This was a case entirely new, which the wisdom of the apostle regulates according to the laws of charity. Tertullian thinks that some of the faithful, who had been converted from paganism, did not esteem it lawful to live any longer with their wives, who were yet buried in the superstitions of idolatry, which scruples St. Paul answers, guided as he was, by the particular lights of the Holy Ghost. (Calmet) — Not the Lord. That is, it is the command of the Lord, for such even as are separated, not to marry to another, but when I advised the unmarried not to marry, this is a counsel, or advice, not a divine precept, which doctrine he repeats again before the end of this chapter, ver. 25, 28, and 39. — If any brother have a wife that believeth not, &c. St. Paul speaks of two that were joined by a contract of marriage, when both of them were infidels, and that one of them is converted to the Christian faith: we do not read of any precept that Christ gave, as to those marriages, but the apostle seems to order by his apostolical authority, that they continue as man and wife, unless the party that remains still an infidel, will needs depart; then, says the apostle, let such an one depart. There is also another case, to wit, when the man or woman remaining an infidel, will not live without continual injuries and blasphemies against God and the Catholic religion, so that there can be no peace on that account betwixt them. In these two cases, according to the canons of the Church, it is looked upon as no marriage, so that the party converted may marry another. And this seems grounded on the reason, which the apostle here gave, that God hath called us in peace. (Witham)”

“to the rest--the other classes (besides "the married," Co1 7:10, where both husband and wife are believers) about whom the Corinthians had inquired, namely, those involved in mixed marriages with unbelievers. not the Lord--by any direct command spoken by Him. she be pleased--Greek, "consents": implying his wish in the first instance, with which hers concurs.”

“Then when he says, If any woman, he speaks in particular to women, where he first of all supposes faith in someone; secondly, unbelief in this other when he says, has a husband who is an unbeliever; thirdly, the unbeliever is willing to live together, when he says, and he consents; fourthly, he advises the believer to remain with him when he says, to live with her, she should not divorce him. He says, therefore, and likewise, if a believing wife has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her without insulting the Creator; for if he were unwilling to live with her without insulting the name of Christ, the believer should divorce him, because 'insulting the Creator dissolves a marriage', as a Gloss says, and she may marry again. If, I say, that is the case, she should not divorce him. It is a counsel, not a precept; for it is lawful for the unbeliever to divorce the believer, but then it was not expedient.”

“the woman--a believer. let her not leave him--"her husband," instead of "him," is the reading of the oldest manuscripts The Greek for "leave" is the same as in Co1 7:12, "put away"; translate, "Let her not put away [that is, part with] her husband." The wife had the power of effecting a divorce by Greek and Roman law.”

“It was not by means of visions alone which were seen, and words which were proclaimed, but also in actual works, that He was beheld by the prophets, in order that through them He might prefigure and show forth future events beforehand. For this reason did Hosea the prophet take "a wife of whoredoms," prophesying by means of the action, "that in committing fornication the earth should fornicate from the Lord," that is, the men who are upon the earth; and from men of this stamp it will be God's good pleasure to take out a Church which shall be sanctified by fellowship with His Son, just as that woman was sanctified by intercourse with the prophet. And for this reason, Paul declares that the "unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband." Then again, the prophet names his children, "Not having obtained mercy," and "Not a people," in order that, as says the apostle, "what was not a people may become a people; and she who did not obtain mercy may obtain mercy. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said, This is not a people, there shall they be called the children of the living God." That which had been done typically through his actions by the prophet, the apostle proves to have been done truly by Christ in the Church.”

“Husband and wife are one in the same way that wine and water are one when they are mixed together. Just as the believing partner sanctifies the unbelieving one, so the unbelieving partner corrupts the believing one. This is why a man who is not yet married should consider very carefully and either not marry at all or marry only in the Lord.”

“But if continency follows Christ, and virginity is destined for the kingdom of God, what have they to do with earthly dress, and with ornaments, wherewith while they are striving to please men they offend God? Not considering that it is declared, "They who please men are put to confusion, because God hath despised them; " and that Paul also has gloriously and sublimely uttered, "If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." But continence and modesty consist not alone in purity of the flesh, but also in seemliness, as well as in modesty of dress and adornment; so that, according to the apostle, she who is unmarried may be holy both in body and in spirit. Paul instructs and teaches us, saying, "He that is unmarried careth for the things of the Lord, how he may please God: but he who has contracted marriage careth for the things which are of this world, how he may please his wife. So both the virgin and the unmarried woman consider those things which are the Lord's, that they may be holy both in body and spirit." A virgin ought not only to be so, but also to be perceived and believed to be so: no one on seeing a virgin should be in any doubt as to whether she is one. Perfectness should show itself equal in all things; nor should the dress of the body discredit the good of the mind. Why should she walk out adorned? Why with dressed hair, as if she either had or sought for a husband? Rather let her dread to please if she is a virgin; and let her not invite her own risk, if she is keeping herself for better and divine things. They who have not a husband whom they profess that they please, should persevere, sound and pure not only in body, but also in spirit. For it is not right that a virgin should have her hair braided for the appearance of her beauty, or boast of her flesh and of its beauty, when she has no struggle greater than that against her flesh, and no contest more obstinate than that of conquering and subduing the body.”

“Then lest the woman might fear, as though she became unclean because of intercourse with her husband, he says, "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the husband." And yet, if "he that is joined to an harlot is one body," it is quite clear that the woman also who is joined to an idolater is one body. Well: it is one body; nevertheless she becomes not unclean, but the cleanness of the wife overcomes the uncleanness of the husband; and again, the cleanness of the believing husband overcomes the uncleanness of the unbelieving wife. How then in this case is the uncleanness overcome, and therefore the intercourse allowed; while in the woman who prostitutes herself, the husband is not condemned in casting her out? Because here there is hope that the lost member may be saved through the marriage; but in the other case the marriage has already been dissolved; and there again both are corrupted; but here the fault is in one only of the two. I mean something like this: she that has been guilty of fornication is utterly abominable: if then "he that is joined to an harlot is one body," he also becomes abominable by having connection with an harlot; wherefore all the purity flits away. But in the case before us it is not so. But how? The idolater is unclean but the woman is not unclean. For if indeed she were a partner with him in that wherein he is unclean, I mean his impiety, she herself would also become unclean. But now the idolater is unclean in one way, and the wife holds communion with him in another wherein he is not unclean. For marriage and mixture of bodies is that wherein the communion consists. Again, there is a hope that this man may be reclaimed by his wife for she is made completely his own: but for the other it is not very easy. For how will she who dishonored him in former times and became another's and destroyed the rights of marriage, have power to reclaim him whom she had wronged; him, moreover, who still remains to her as an alien? Again in that case, after the fornication the husband is not a husband: but here, although the wife be an idolatress, the husband's rights are not destroyed. However, he doth not simply recommend cohabitation with the unbeliever, but with the qualification that he wills it. Wherefore he said, "And he himself be content to dwell with her." For, tell me, what harm is there when the duties of piety remain unimpaired and there are good hopes about the unbeliever, that those already joined should so abide and not bring in occasions of unnecessary warfare? For the question now is not about those who have never yet come together, but about those who are already joined. He did not say, If any one wish to take an unbelieving wife, but, "If any one hath an unbelieving wife." Which means, If any after marrying or being married have received the word of godliness, and then the other party which had continued in unbelief still yearn for them to dwell together, let not the marriage be broken off. "For," saith he, "the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife." So great is the superabundance of thy purity. What then, is the Greek holy? Certainly not: for he said not, He is holy; but, "He is sanctified in his wife." And this he said, not to signify that he is holy, but to deliver the woman as completely as possible from her fear and lead the man to desire the truth. For the uncleanness is not in the bodies wherein there is communion, but in the mind and the thoughts. And here follows the proof; namely, that if thou continuing unclean have offspring, the child, not being of thee alone, is of course unclean or half clean. But now it is not unclean. To which effect he adds, "else were your children unclean; but now are they holy;" that is, not unclean. But the Apostle calls them, "holy," by the intensity of the expression again casting out the dread arising from that sort of suspicion.”

“That is, by the abundance of purity of the believing spouse, the impurity of the unbelieving one is overcome. This is what the apostle's words mean, and not that the pagan becomes holy. For the apostle did not say "is holy," but "is sanctified," that is, is overcome by the holiness of the believing spouse. And he says this so that the believing wife would not fear becoming impure if she has marital relations with such a husband. But the question arises: he who joins himself to a harlot, becoming one body with her, becomes impure (cf. 1 Cor. 6:16); obviously, he who joins himself to a pagan woman also becomes one body with her. If the first is impure, then how does the latter not become impure? As far as fornication is concerned, it is indeed so. When fornicators have relations with one another, their union contains impurity, and therefore they are both impure. But the matter is different in the case of the marital union of a believing spouse with an unbelieving one. The unbelieving husband is impure on account of his unbelief. But the wife has communion with him not in unbelief, but in the marriage bed. In this communion no impurity is found. For it is a lawful marriage. Therefore the believing spouse does not become impure.”

“Then when he says, For the unbelieving husband, he gives the reason for the admonition just given. First, he proposes an example; secondly, the danger (v. 14b); thirdly, the fruit (v. 14c). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he gives the example of an unbelieving husband; secondly, of an unbelieving wife (v. 14). He says, therefore, he is consecrated through his wife; as if to say: the wife who believes should not divorce the unbelieving spouse willing to live with her, because he is sanctified through the wife. This is read in two ways. In the first way thus: the husband who is not a believer is sometimes sanctified by a wife who believes, i.e., it sometimes happens that one is converted to the faith by the other. And this has probably happened already, as Sisinnius was converted to the faith in Rome by Theodora during the reign of Clement. Likewise, the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband, namely, by his admonition and doctrine. In another way it can be read thus: so the believer should not divorce the unbeliever, for the husband is sanctified by the wife, i.e., the believer does not contract uncleanness by cohabiting with or uniting with the unbelieving spouse, but preserves true modesty, according to Augustine. Then when he says, otherwise your children, this is read in two ways: first, of children to be born; secondly, of children already born. In the first way it is read thus: otherwise, if you depart and you both have relations with others, your children, who would be born of this union, would be unclean, i.e., spurious, because not born of a lawful union. In the second way it is read thus: otherwise, namely, if you separate, your children already born would be unclean, i.e., would remain in unbelief, following the majority, which would be unbelievers; but now, if you remain together, they are holy, i.e., become Christians.”

“Is sanctified. The meaning is not that the faith of the husband, or the wife is of itself sufficient to put the unbelieving party, or their children, in the state of grace and salvation: but that it is very often an occasion of their sanctification, by bringing them to the true faith. (Challoner) — Sanctification which has different significations, cannot here signify that an infidel is truly and properly sanctified, or justified, by being married to a faithful believer; therefore we can only understand an improper sanctification, so that such an infidel, though not yet converted, need not be looked upon as unclean, but in the dispositions of being converted, especially living peaceably together, and consenting that their children be baptized, by which they are truly sanctified. — How knowest thou, O wife? &c. These words seem to give the reason, why they may part, when they cannot live peaceably, and when there is little prospect that the party that is an infidel will be converted. (Witham)”

“sanctified--Those inseparably connected with the people of God are hallowed thereby, so that the latter may retain the connection without impairing their own sanctity (compare Ti1 4:5); nay, rather imparting to the former externally some degree of their own hallowed character, and so preparing the way for the unbeliever becoming at last sanctified inwardly by faith. by . . . by--rather, "in . . . in"; that is, in virtue of the marriage tie between them. by the husband--The oldest manuscripts read, "by the brother." It is the fact of the husband being a "brother," that is, a Christian, though the wife is not so, that sanctifies or hallows the union. else . . . children unclean--that is, beyond the hallowed pale of God's people: in contrast to "holy," that is, all that is within the consecrated limits [CONYBEARE and HOWSON]. The phraseology accords with that of the Jews, who regarded the heathen as "unclean," and all of the elect nation as "holy," that is, partakers of the holy covenant. Children were included in the covenant, as God made it not only with Abraham, but with his "seed after" him (Gen 17:7). So the faith of one Christian parent gives to the children a near relationship to the Church, just as if both parents were Christians (compare Rom 11:16). Timothy, the bearer of this Epistle, is an instance in point (Act 16:1). Paul appeals to the Corinthians as recognizing the principle, that the infants of heathen parents would not be admissible to Christian baptism, because there is no faith on the part of the parents; but where one parent is a believer, the children are regarded as not aliens from, but admissible even in infancy as sharers in, the Christian covenant: for the Church presumes that the believing parent will rear the child in the Christian faith. Infant baptism tacitly superseded infant circumcision, just as the Christian Lord's day gradually superseded the Jewish sabbath, without our having any express command for, or record of, transference. The setting aside of circumcision and of sabbaths in the case of the Gentiles was indeed expressly commanded by the apostles and Paul, but the substitution of infant baptism and of the Lord's day were tacitly adopted, not expressly enacted. No explicit mention of it occurs till IRENÆUS in the third century; but no society of Christians that we read of disputed its propriety till fifteen hundred years after Christ. Anabaptists would have us defer baptism till maturity as the child cannot understand the nature of it. But a child may be made heir of an estate: it is his, though incapable at the time of using or comprehending its advantage; he is not hereafter to acquire the title and claim to it: he will hereafter understand his claim, and be capable of employing his wealth: he will then, moreover, become responsible for the use he makes of it [ARCHBISHOP WHATELY].”

“"Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart," for in this case the matter is no longer fornication. But what is the meaning of, "if the unbelieving departeth?" For instance, if he bid thee sacrifice and take part in his ungodliness on account of thy marriage, or else part company; it were better the marriage were annulled, and no breach made in godliness. Wherefore he adds, "A brother is not under bondage, nor yet a sister, in such cases." If day by day he buffet thee and keep up combats on this account, it is better to separate. For this is what he glances at, saying, "But God hath called us in peace." For it is the other party who furnished the ground of separation, even as he did who committed uncleanness.”

“if . . . depart--that is, wishes for separation. Translate, "separateth himself": offended with her Christianity, and refusing to live with her unless she renounce it. brother or a sister is not under bondage--is not bound to renounce the faith for the sake of retaining her unbelieving husband [HAMMOND]. So Deu 13:6; Mat 10:35-37; Luk 14:26. The believer does not lie under the same obligation in the case of a union with an unbeliever, as in the case of one with a believer. In the former case he is not bound not to separate, if the unbeliever separate or "depart," in the latter nothing but "fornication" justifies separation [PHOTIUS in Æcumenius]. but God hath called us to peace--Our Christian calling is one that tends to "peace" (Rom 12:18), not quarrelling; therefore the believer should not ordinarily depart from the unbelieving consort (Co1 7:12-14), on the one hand; and on the other, in the exceptional case of the unbeliever desiring to depart, the believer is not bound to force the other party to stay in a state of continual discord (Mat 5:32). Better still it would be not to enter into such unequal alliances at all (Co1 7:40; Co2 6:14).”

“A marriage contracted without devotion to God is not binding, and for that reason it is not a sin if it is abandoned because of God. But the unbelieving partner sins both against God and against the marriage, because he or she is unwilling to live in a marriage relationship dedicated to God. It is not right to go to court over this because the one who leaves the marriage is doing so out of hatred for God, and for this reason he or she is not to be considered worthy of such attention.”

“If these things may happen to those women also who, having attained the faith while in (the state of) Gentile matrimony, continue in that state, still they are excused, as having been "apprehended by God" in these very circumstances; and they are bidden to persevere in their married state, and are sanctified, and have hope of "making a gain" held out to them.”

“"For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thine husband?" This again refers to that expression, "let her not leave him." That is, "if he makes no disturbance, remain," saith he, "for there is even profit in this; remain and advise and give counsel and persuade." For no teacher will have such power to prevail as a wife. And neither, on one hand, doth he lay any necessity upon her and absolutely demand the point of her, that he may not again do what would be too painful; nor, on the other, doth he tell her to despair: but he leaves the matter in suspense through the uncertainty of the future, saying, "For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O husband whether thou shalt save thy wife?"”

“Returning again to that exhortation that a wife "must not leave" her husband, he presents the current question. For if, he says, he does not quarrel with you, then stay with him and exhort him: perhaps you will accomplish something. He presents the outcome as uncertain, on the one hand, so that they would not think he is imposing on the wife an absolute obligation to fully convince her husband, and on the other hand, so as to sustain in her the hope of her husband's conversion and to prevent despair.”

“What knowest thou but that by staying with thy unbelieving partner thou mayest save him or her? Enforcing the precept to stay with the unbelieving consort (Co1 7:12-14). So Ruth the Moabitess became a convert to her husband's faith: and Joseph and Moses probably gained over their wives. So conversely the unbelieving husband may be won by the believing wife (Pe1 3:1) [CALVIN]. Or else (Co1 7:15), if thy unbelieving consort wishes to depart, let him go, so that thou mayest live "in peace": for thou canst not be sure of converting him, so as to make it obligatory on thee at all costs to stay with him against his will [MENOCHIUS and ALFORD]. save--be the instrument of salvation to (Jam 5:20).”

“"Only as God hath distributed to each man, as the Lord hath called each, so let him walk. Was any one called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Was any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called. Wast thou called, being a slave? Care not for it." These things contribute nothing unto faith, saith he. Be not then contentious neither be troubled; for the faith hath cast out all these things. "Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called. Hast thou been called, having an unbelieving wife? Continue to have her. Cast not out thy wife for the faith's sake. Hast thou been called, being a slave? Care not for it. Continue to be a slave. Hast thou been called, being in uncircumcision? Remain uncircumcised. Being circumcised, didst thou become a believer? Continue circumcised. For this is the meaning of, "As God hath distributed unto each man." For these are no hindrances to piety. Thou art called, being a slave; another, with an unbelieving wife; another, being circumcised.”

“&c. But[3] as the Lord hath distributed,… and called every one, &c. St. Paul proceeds to other points of discipline, that persons converted may remain and continue in the same employments, and lawful state of life as before, that it is nothing to the purpose, whether before his conversion he was a circumcised Jew, or an uncircumcised Gentile, circumcision being no longer of obligation in the new law. If any one that is converted was a bond-man, or a slave, let him not be concerned at this, but use it rather, [4] which many interpret, let him rather endeavour to be made free, though St. Chrysostom and others understand, let him rather remain content with his servile condition. Perhaps it was an admonition to those new converts, who might imagine that their Christian liberty exempted them from being servant of men. However, he gives them this great comfort, that such an one is the Lord’s free-man, that is, whoever is a Christian, and in the grace of God; but he adds, let him not be a slave to men, that is, not follow their sinful ways, nor consent to any thing that is criminal. (Witham) — All consists in doing the will of God, by loving him with our whole heart; without this, all is illusion. To attach ourselves to exterior practices contrary to the order of God, is the superstition of circumcision; to despise what comes from God, is the pride of uncircumcision.”

“But--Greek, "If not." "Only." Caution that believers should not make this direction (Co1 7:16; as ALFORD explains it) a ground for separating "of themselves" (Co1 7:12-14). Or, But if there be no hope of gaining over the unbeliever, still let the general principle be maintained, "As the Lord hath allotted to each, as God hath called each, so let him walk" (so the Greek in the oldest reading); let him walk in the path allotted to him and wherein he was called. The heavenly calling does not set aside our earthly callings. so ordain I in all churches--Ye also therefore should obey.”

“God has assigned to each person the time of his salvation, that is, the time when he might believe, and he will keep that person until then. Paul tells the Corinthians that this is his general rule, so that when they hear that others are expected to follow it, they will be more willing to do so themselves. It is always easier to do something when you see others doing the same.”

“Circumcision . . . nothing, but . . . keeping of . . . commandments of God--namely, is all in all. In Gal 5:6 this "keeping of the commandments of God" is defined to be "faith which worketh by love"; and in Gal 6:15, "a new creature." Circumcision was a commandment of God: but not for ever, as "love."”

“To begin with, that speech, wont to be cast in our teeth, "I have nothing else whereby to live," may be more severely retorted, "You have, then, whereby to live? If by your own laws, what have you to do with God? " Then, as to the argument they have the hardihood to bring even from the Scriptures, "that the apostle has said, `As each has been found, so let him persevere.'" We may all, therefore, persevere in sins, as the result of that interpretation! for there is not any one of us who has not been found asa sinner, since no other cause was the source of Christ's descent than that of setting sinners free.”

“In itself, the state in which we are called is a matter of indifference. An unmarried man, for example, can live a life of purity, but he may also be deeply involved in sin. The same is true for a married man as well. If it were only Christians who practiced celibacy, then it would be possible to say that it was a pure and divine state. But the Marcionites also practice it, though not in the same way as Christians. Christians do it in order to please God, but the Marcionites do it in order not to succumb to the Creator. Celibacy is honorable only when it is clothed with the life and behavior of the church, with pure knowledge and truth.”

“"In the calling in which he was called," that is, in whatever manner of life, and in whatever rank and condition you believed, in that remain; for by calling he means the bringing to faith. Were you a slave when you accepted the faith? Do not worry or be troubled; for slavery does not harm you at all, so that even if you could become free, "make better use of it," sacrifice yourself for the benefit of others.”

“Somebody asked Antony, 'What shall I do in order to please God?' He replied, 'Do what I tell you, which is this: wherever you go, keep God in mind; whatever you do, follow the example of holy Scripture; wherever you are, stay there and do not move away in a hurry. If you keep to these guide-lines, you will be saved.'”

“The virgins of men go about, in opposition to the virgins of God, with front quite bare, excited to a rash audacity; and the semblance of virgins is exhibited by women who have the power of asking somewhat from husbands, not to say such a request as that (forsooth) their rivals-all the more "free" in that they are the "hand-maids" of Christ alone -may be surrendered to them.”

“Astonishing! where has he put slavery? As circumcision profits not: and uncircumcision does no harm; so neither doth slavery, nor yet liberty. And that he might point out this with surpassing clearness, he says, "But even if thou canst become free, use it rather:" that is, rather continue a slave. Now upon what possible ground does he tell the person who might be set free to remain a slave? He means to point out that slavery is no harm but rather an advantage. Now we are not ignorant that some say, the words, "use it rather," are spoken with regard to liberty: interpreting it, "if thou canst become free, become free." But the expression would be very contrary to Paul's manner if he intended this. For he would not, when consoling the slave and signifying that he was in no respect injured, have told him to get free. Since perhaps some one might say, "What then, if I am not able? I am an injured and degraded person." This then is not what he says: but as I said, meaning to point out that a man gets nothing by being made free, he says, "Though thou hast it in thy power to be made free, remain rather in slavery."”

“care not for it--Let it not be a trouble to thee that thou art a servant or slave. use it rather--Continue rather in thy state as a servant (Co1 7:20; Gal 3:28; Ti1 6:2). The Greek, "But if even thou mayest be made free, use it," and the context (Co1 7:20, Co1 7:22) favors this view [CHRYSOSTOM, BENGEL, and ALFORD]. This advice (if this translation be right) is not absolute, as the spirit of the Gospel is against slavery. What is advised here is, contentment under one's existing condition (Co1 7:24), though an undesirable one, since in our union with Christ all outward disparities of condition are compensated (Co1 7:22). Be not unduly impatient to cast off "even" thy condition as a servant by unlawful means (Pe1 2:13-18); as, for example, Onesimus did by fleeing (Plm 1:10-18). The precept (Co1 7:23), "Become not (so the Greek) the servants of men," implies plainly that slavery is abnormal (compare Lev 25:42). "Men stealers," or slave dealers, are classed in Ti1 1:10, with "murderers" and "perjurers." NEANDER, GROTIUS, &c., explain, "If called, being a slave, to Christianity, be content--but yet, if also thou canst be free (as a still additional good, which if thou canst not attain, be satisfied without it; but which, if offered to thee, is not to be despised), make use of the opportunity of becoming free, rather than by neglecting it to remain a slave." I prefer this latter view, as more according to the tenor of the Gospel, and fully justified by the Greek.”

“Next he adds also the cause; "For he that was called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord's free man: likewise he that was called, being free, is Christ's bondservant." "For," saith he, "in the things that relate to Christ, both are equal: and like as thou art the slave of Christ, so also is thy master. How then is the slave a free man? Because He has freed thee not only from sin, but also from outward slavery while continuing a slave. For he suffers not the slave to be a slave, not even though he be a man abiding in slavery: and this is the great wonder. But how is the slave a free man while continuing a slave? When he is freed from passions and the diseases of the mind: when he looks down upon riches and wrath and all other the like passions.”

“A freedman is one who has been liberated from slavery. So he says: you who believed while in a state of slavery are a freedman of the Lord, for Christ has freed you both from sin and from that outward slavery, even though you are a slave. He who does not submit to passions, having a noble soul, is not a slave, even though he appears to be one. On the other hand, another was called to the faith as a free man; such a one is a slave of Christ. Therefore, if the name of slavery disturbs the slave, let him understand that he has become free in Christ, and this freedom is far more important than human freedom. Again, if the name of freedom puffs up the free man, let such a one understand that he is a slave of Christ and be humbled, considering that he is subject to such a Master and must please Him. Do you see the wisdom with which the apostle gives instruction to slaves and free men?”

“the Lord's freeman-- (Plm 1:16) --rather, "freedman." Though a slave externally, spiritually made free by the Lord: from sin, Joh 8:36; from the law, Rom 8:2; from "circumcision," Co1 7:19; Gal 5:1. Christ's servant-- (Co1 9:21). Love makes Christ's service perfect freedom (Mat 11:29-30; Gal 5:13; Pe1 2:16).”

“Whoever has been delivered from sin is truly free. The ancients used to say that anyone who acts unwisely is a slave. They called all wise men free, and all the unwise were slaves as far as they were concerned. In any case, even a free believer is a slave of Christ, for to be free from God is the greatest sin of all.”

“"Ye were bought with a price: become not bondservants of men." This saying is addressed not to slaves only but also to free men. For it is possible for one who is a slave not to be a slave; and for one who is a freeman to be a slave. "And how can one be a slave and not a slave?" When he doeth all for God: when he feigns nothing, and doeth nothing out of eye-service towards men: that is how one that is a slave to men can be free. Or again, how doth one that is free become a slave? When he serves men in any evil service, either for gluttony or desire of wealth or for office' sake. For such an one, though he be free, is more of a slave than any man. But if this be not the meaning, if he bade them forsake their masters and strive contentiously to become free, in what sense did he exhort them, saying, "Let each one remain in the calling in which he is called?" And in another place, "As many servants as are under the yoke, let them count their own masters worthy of all honor; and those that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren who partake of the benefit." And writing to the Ephesians also and to the Colossians, he ordains and exacts the same rules. Whence it is plain that it is not this slavery which he annuls, but that which caused as it is by vice befalls free men also: and this is the worst kind of slavery, though he be a free man who is in bondage to it.”

“He says this not to slaves alone, but also to free people, exhorting all Christians to do nothing for the sake of pleasing men and not to obey them if their commands are unlawful. This is what it means: having been bought by God, to become slaves of men. He is not urging slaves to fall away from their masters—no; this is clear from his subsequent words: "in whatever calling one was called," and so on, that is, if someone was called even in a state of slavery, let him remain in it. He added "before God" so that through obedience to lawless masters one would not fall away from God. He is concerned about both things, that is, on the one hand, that slaves not fall away from their masters under the pretext of obedience to God, and on the other, that by rendering excessive obedience to their masters, they not fall away from God.”

“be not ye--Greek, "become not ye." Paul here changes from "thou" (Co1 7:21) to "ye." YE ALL are "bought" with the blood of Christ, whatever be your earthly state (Co1 6:20). "Become not servants to men," either externally, or spiritually; the former sense applying to the free alone: the latter to Christian freemen and slaves alike, that they should not be servile adherents to their party leaders at Corinth (Co1 3:21-22; Mat 23:8-10; Co2 11:20); nor indeed slaves to men generally, so far as their condition admits. The external and internal conditions, so far as is attainable, should correspond, and the former be subservient to the latter (compare Co1 7:21, Co1 7:32-35).”

“We have been bought at so high a price that only Christ, who owns everything, is able to pay it. Therefore whoever is bought with a price ought to serve all the more, in an effort to pay back the buyer. Having been bought by God, we must not once again become slaves of men. Slaves of men are those who accept human superstitions.”

“abide with God--being chiefly careful of the footing on which he stands towards God rather than that towards men. This clause, "with God," limits the similar precept in Co1 7:20. A man may cease to "abide in the calling wherein he was called," and yet not violate the precept here. If a man's calling be not favorable to his "abiding with God" (retaining holy fellowship with Him), he may use lawful means to change from it (compare Note, see on Co1 7:21).”

“The Lord also showed that certain precepts were enacted for them by Moses, on account of their hardness [of heart], and because of their unwillingness to be obedient, when, on their saying to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to send away a wife?" He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts he permitted these things to you; but from the beginning it was not so;" thus exculpating Moses as a faithful servant, but acknowledging one God, who from the beginning made male and female, and reproving them as hard-hearted and disobedient. And therefore it was that they received from Moses this law of divorcement, adapted to their hard nature. But why say I these things concerning the Old Testament? For in the New also are the apostles found doing this very thing, on the ground which has been mentioned, Paul plainly declaring, "But these things I say, not the Lord." And again: "But this I speak by permission, not by commandment." And again: "Now, as concerning virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." But further, in another place he says: "That Satan tempt you not for your incontinence." If, therefore, even in the New Testament, the apostles are found granting certain precepts in consideration of human infirmity, because of the incontinence of some, lest such persons, having grown obdurate, and despairing altogether of their salvation, should become apostates from God,-it ought not to be wondered at, if also in the Old Testament the same God permitted similar indulgences for the benefit of His people, drawing them on by means of the ordinances already mentioned, so that they might obtain the gift of salvation through them, while they obeyed the Decalogue, and being restrained by Him, should not revert to idolatry, nor apostatize from God, but learn to love Him with the whole heart.”

“Some rules are given as commandments of God, while others are more flexible and left by God to the decision of the individual. The first kind are those commandments which pertain to salvation. The others are better, because even if we do not keep them, we shall still be saved. There is no merit in doing what is obligatory, but there is in doing that which is optional.”

“I have now brought to an end what I have to say respecting continence and marriage and chastity, and intercourse with men, and in which of these there is help towards progress in righteousness; but it still remains to speak concerning virginity-if, indeed, anything be prescribed on this subject. Let us then treat this subject also; for it stands thus:”

“"Now concerning virgins. I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." Advancing on his way in regular order, he proceeds next to speak concerning virginity. For after that he had exercised and trained them, in his words concerning continence, he goes forth towards what is greater, saying, "I have no commandment, but I esteem it to be good." For what reason? For the self-same reason as he had mentioned respecting continence.”

“Above he occupied us with a conversation about chastity, and now he turns to a more important subject, namely virginity, and says that the Lord did not lay down a law and did not give a commandment concerning virginity, but only said: "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" (Matt. 19:12). Therefore I too do not dare to prescribe anything regarding this subject; it is an important matter, but at the same time a dangerous one; however, I give my opinion, that is, my counsel, since I myself, by the mercy of God, have been deemed worthy to be faithful, that is, close to Him and one to whom mysteries can be entrusted.”

“This counselor, namely Christ, has many counselors, to whom he imparts his counsel. And the Apostle himself says: 'In this I give counsel, but I have no precept.' Augustine says that 'Christ became poor to such an extent that he does not have what the foxes have, because foxes have holes, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head; understand: Christ became poor so that we might imitate his poverty.' The Master says that we should imitate him in giving alms, in humility, in poverty, and in obedience.”

“Now concerning virgins, &c. He turns his discourse again to the unmarried, who (if they have made no vow) may lawfully marry, though he is far from commanding every one to marry, as when he says, seek not a wife. And such shall have tribulation of the flesh, cares, troubles, vexations in the state of marriage, but I spare you, I leave you to your liberty of marrying, or not marrying, and will not discourage you be setting forth the crosses of a married life. (Witham)”

“no commandment of the Lord: yet . . . my judgment--I have no express revelation from the Lord commanding it, but I give my judgment (opinion); namely, under the ordinary inspiration which accompanied the apostles in all their canonical writings (compare Co1 7:40; Co1 14:37; Th1 4:15). The Lord inspires me in this case to give you only a recommendation, which you are free to adopt or reject--not a positive command. In the second case (Co1 7:10-11) it was a positive command; for the Lord had already made known His will (Mal 2:14-15; Mat 5:31-32). In the third case (Co1 7:12), the Old Testament commandment of God to put away strange wives (Ezr 10:3), Paul by the Spirit revokes. mercy of the Lord-- (Ti1 1:13). He attributes his apostleship and the gifts accompanying it (including inspiration) to God's grace alone. faithful--in dispensing to you the inspired directions received by me from the Lord.”

“Concerning virginity we have received no commandment; but we leave it to the power of those that are willing, as a vow: exhorting them so far in this matter that they do not promise anything rashly; since Solomon says, "It is better not to vow, than to vow and not pay." [Ecclesiastes 5:5] Let such a virgin, therefore, be holy in body and soul, as the temple of God, [1 Corinthians 7:34] as the house of Christ, as the habitation of the Holy Spirit. For she that vows ought to do such works as are suitable to her vow; and to show that her vow is real, and made on account of leisure for piety, not to cast a reproach on marriage. Let her not be a wanderer abroad, nor one that rambles about unseasonably; not double-minded, but grave, continent, sober, pure, avoiding the conversation of many, and especially of those that are of ill reputation.”

“Now, if in all cases he says it is best for a man thus to be; "Thou art joined to a wife seek not loosing" (that you may give no occasion to adultery); "thou art loosed from a wife, seek not a wife," that you may reserve an opportunity for yourself: "but withal, if thou shalt have married a wife, and if a virgin shall have married, she sinneth not; pressure, however, of the flesh such shall have,"-even here he is granting a permission by way of "sparing them." On the other hand, he lays it down that "the time is wound up," in order that even "they who have wives may be as if they had them not.”

“I suppose--"I consider." this--namely, "for a man so to be," that is, in the same state in which he is (Co1 7:27). for--by reason of. the present distress--the distresses to which believers were then beginning to be subjected, making the married state less desirable than the single; and which would prevail throughout the world before the destruction of Jerusalem, according to Christ's prophecy (Mat 24:8-21; compare Act 11:28).”

“"Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife." These words carry no contradiction to what had been said before but rather the most entire agreement with them. For he says in that place also, "Except it be by consent:" as here he says, "Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not separation." This is no contradiction. For its being against consent makes a dissolution: but if with consent both live continently, it is no dissolution.”

“With the words "are you bound to a wife?" he showed that marriage, as a bond, brings with it troubles. By "divorce" he means not abstinence by mutual agreement, but divorce without sufficient cause; for if the spouses abstain by mutual agreement, then this is not divorce. Having said "do not seek a wife," lest they think he is commanding celibacy, he adds: "but if you do marry, you have not sinned." Notice, meanwhile, how imperceptibly he encourages virginity, calling marriage a bond, and virginity a release and freedom.”

“For even if you do not "sin" in re-marrying, still he says "pressure of the flesh ensues." Wherefore, so far as we can, let us love the opportunity of continence; as soon as it offers itself, let us resolve to accept it, that what we have not had strength (to follow) in matrimony we may follow in widowhood.”

“For this is acceptable to God, he does not wish these things to be said as by authority, and as the mind of the Lord, with reference to the giving of a virgin in marriage; for after he had said. So, immediately after he had said, "if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned "he added, "such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you."”

“Then, lest this should seem to be laying down a law, he subjoins, "but if thou marry, thou hast not sinned." He next alleges the existing state of things, "the present distress, the shortness of the time," and "the affliction." For marriage draws along with it many things, which indeed he hath glanced at, as well here as also in the discourse about continence: there, by saying, "the wife hath not power over herself;" and here, by the expression, "Thou art bound." "But if and thou marry, thou hast not sinned." He is not speaking about her who hath made choice of virginity, for if it comes to that, she hath sinned. Since if the widows are condemned for having to do with second marriages after they have once chosen widowhood, much more the virgins. "But such shall have trouble in the flesh." "And pleasure too," you will say: but observe how he curtails this by the shortness of the time, saying, "the time is shortened;" that is, "we are exhorted to depart now and go forth, but thou art running further in." And yet even although marriage had no troubles, even so we ought to press on towards things to come. But when it hath affliction too, what need to draw on one's self an additional burden. What occasion to take up such a load, when even after taking it you must use it as having it not? For "those even that have wives must be," he saith, "as though they had none."”

“By "virgin" here he means not one who is consecrated to God (for if such a one marries, she undoubtedly sins, since by this, besides her Bridegroom Christ, she introduces an adulterer to herself), but a still-unmarried maiden. So if such a one marries, she does not sin, because marriage contains nothing impure in itself.”

“That conjugal chastity is to be approved according to the evangelical law is shown by authority, as follows. 1 Corinthians 7: If you have taken a wife, you have not sinned: and if a virgin shall have married, she does not sin: therefore if one was previously continent without a wife, it seems that one will also be continent with a wife.”

“trouble in the flesh--Those who marry, he says, shall incur "trouble in the flesh" (that is, in their outward state, by reason of the present distress), not sin, which is the trouble of the spirit. but I spare you--The emphasis in the Greek is on "I." My motive in advising you so is, to "spare you" such trouble in the flesh. So ALFORD after CALVIN, BENGEL, and others. ESTIUS from AUGUSTINE explains it, "I spare you further details of the inconveniences of matrimony, lest even the incontinent may at the peril of lust be deterred from matrimony: thus I have regard for your infirmity." The antithesis in the Greek of "I . . . you" and "such" favors the former.”

“"For the time is short," as says the apostle. This then remains that we do not make a ridiculous figure, as some are seen in the public spectacles outwardly anointed strikingly for imposing effect, but wretched within. Explaining this more clearly, he adds, "It remains that they that have wives be as though they had none, and they that buy as though they possessed not." And if he speaks thus of marriage, in reference to which God says, "Multiply," how do you not think that senseless display is by the Lord's authority to be banished? Wherefore also the Lord says, "Sell what thou hast, and give to the poor; and come, follow me."”

“Now, if any limitation is set to marrying-such as the spiritual rule, which prescribes but one marriage under the Christian obedience, maintained by the authority of the Paraclete, -it will be His prerogative to fix the limit Who had once been diffuse in His permission; His to gather, Who once scattered; His to cut down the tree, Who planted it; His to reap the harvest, Who sowed the seed; His to declare, "It remaineth that they who have wives be as though they had none," Who once said, "Be fruitful, and multiply; "His the end to Whom belonged the beginning.”

“That he who has attained to trust, having put off the former man, ought to regard only celestial and spiritual things, and to give no heed to the world which he has already renounced. In Isaiah: "Seek ye the Lord; and when ye have found Him, call upon Him. But when He hath come near unto you, let the wicked forsake his ways, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him be turned unto the Lord, and he shall obtain mercy, because He will plentifully pardon your sins." Of this same thing in Solomon: "I have seen all the works which are done under the sun; and, lo, all are vanity." Of this same thing in Exodus: "But thus shall ye eat it; your loins girt, and your shoes on your feet, and your staves in your hands: and ye shall eat it in haste, for it is the Lord's passover." Of this same thing in the Gospel according to Matthew: "Take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewith shall we be clothed? for these things the nations seek after. But your Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. Seek first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Likewise in the same place: "Think not for the morrow, for the morrow shall take thought for itself. Sufficient unto the day is its own evil." Likewise in the same place: "No one looking back, and putting his hands to the plough, is fit for the kingdom of God." Also in the same place: "Behold the fowls of the heaven: for they sow not, nor reap, nor gather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not ye of more value than they? " Concerning this same thing, according to Luke: "Let your loins be girded, and your lamps burning; and ye like unto men that wait for their lord, when he cometh from the wedding; that, when he cometh and knocketh, they may open to him. Blessed are those servants, whom their lord, when he cometh, shall find watching." Of this same thing in Matthew: "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the heaven have nests; but the Son of man hath not where He may lay His head." Also in the same place: "Whoso forsaketh not all that he hath, cannot be my disciple." Of this same thing in the first to the Corinthians: "Ye are not your own, for ye are bought with a great price. Glorify and bear God in your body." Also in the same place: "The time is limited. It remaineth, therefore, that both they who have wives be as though they have them not, and they who lament as they that lament not, and they that rejoice as they that rejoice not, and they who buy as they that buy not, and they who possess as they who possess not, and they who use this world as they that use it not; for the fashion of this world passeth away."”

“But yet if it shall please you who find chastity hard to bear, rather to turn to marriage; I consider it to be profitable for you to restrain yourselves in the gratification of the flesh, not making your marriage an occasion for abusing your own vessels to uncleanness. "Then he adds. But those who are goaded on by their lusts, although they do not commit fornication, yet who, even in the things which are permitted with a lawful wife, through the heat of unsubdued concupiscence are excessive in embraces, how shall they celebrate the feast? how shall they rejoice, who have not adorned their tabernacle, that is their flesh, with the boughs of the Agnos, nor have listened to that which has been said; that "they that have wives be as though they had none? "”

“For this reason the Apostle Paul says: "The time is short: it remains that those who have wives be as though not having them, those who weep as though not weeping, and those who rejoice as though not rejoicing, and those who buy as though not possessing, and those who use this world as though not using it; for the form of this world is passing away." For he has a wife, but as though not having one, who knows how to pay the debts of the flesh in such a way that he is not compelled through her to cling to the world with his whole mind. For when the same excellent preacher says again: "He who has a wife thinks about the things of this world, how he may please his wife," that man has a wife as though not having one who strives to please his spouse in such a way that he nevertheless does not displease his Creator. He also weeps, but as though not weeping, who is so afflicted by temporal losses that he nevertheless always consoles his soul with thoughts of eternal gains. But he rejoices, yet as though not rejoicing, who is so gladdened by temporal goods that he nevertheless always considers the everlasting torments; and in that by which he lifts up his mind with joy, he immediately presses it down with the weight of prudent fear. Moreover, he buys, but as though not possessing, who both prepares earthly things for use, and yet with careful thought foresees that he will soon leave these behind. He also uses the world, but as though not using it, who both outwardly applies all necessary things to the service of his life, and yet does not allow these same things to dominate his mind, so that they serve as subjects externally, and never break the intention of a soul striving toward higher things. Whoever therefore are such, for them indeed all earthly things are present not for desire but for use, because they make use of necessary things indeed, but desire to have nothing with sin. From these very possessions they daily acquire rewards, and they rejoice more in good work than in good possession.”

“Lest someone add to his words "will have troubles in the flesh" the thought "but also pleasure at the same time," he cuts off all hope of pleasure by pointing to the shortness of the time. For everything is hastening toward destruction, and the Kingdom of Christ has drawn near, and finally we must appear before Christ. Therefore, even if there is any pleasure in married life, it is unstable and short-lived.”

“Against conjugal chastity it is objected: 1 Corinthians 7: Let those who have wives be as though not having them; but he who does not have a wife does not use her: therefore he who has one should not use her. But this is contrary to the act of conjugal continence: therefore conjugal continence is repugnant to the law of God.”

“this I say--A summing up of the whole, wherein he draws the practical inference from what precedes (Co1 15:50). the time--the season (so the Greek) of this present dispensation up to the coming of the Lord (Rom 13:11). He uses the Greek expression which the Lord used in Luk 21:8; Mar 13:33. short--literally, "contracted." it remaineth--The oldest manuscripts read, "The time (season) is shortened as to what remains, in order that both they," &c.; that is, the effect which the shortening of the time ought to have is, "that for the remaining time (henceforth), both they," &c. The clause, "as to what remains," though in construction belonging to the previous clause, in sense belongs to the following. However, CYPRIAN and Vulgate support English Version. as though they had none--We ought to consider nothing as our own in real or permanent possession.”

“Paul means by this that the end of the world is coming soon. Given this fact, believers should not worry about having children and instead should dedicate themselves to the service of God. For there will be many unprecedented pressures on them, and many will fall into the devil's trap. No one among us who has a proper fear of the pressures which the Savior predicted will want to be caught like that.”

“Let us expect, therefore, hour by hour, the kingdom of God in love and righteousness, since we know not the day of the appearing of God. For the Lord Himself, being asked by one when His kingdom would come, replied, "When two shall be one, and that which is without as that which is within, and the male with the female, neither male nor female." Now, two are one when we speak the truth one to another, and there is unfeignedly one soul in two bodies. And "that which is without as that which is within" meaneth this: He calls the soul "that which is within," and the body "that which is without." As, then, thy body is visible to sight, so also let thy soul be manifest by good works. And "the male with the female, neither male nor female," this meaneth, that a brother seeing a sister should think nothing about her as of a female, nor she think anything about him as of a male. If ye do these things, saith He, the kingdom of my Father shall come. [1 Corinthians 7:29]”

“"Now it has ever been the wont of glory to exalt, not to humble. "Why, shall we not use what is our own? "Who prohibits your using it? Yet (it must be) in accordance with the apostle, who warns us "to use this world as if we abuse it not; for the fashion of this world is passing away." And "they who buy are so to act as if they possessed not." Why so? Because he had laid down the premiss, saying, "The time is wound up." If, then he shows plainly that even wives themselves are so to be had as if they be not had, on account of the straits of the times, what would be his sentiments about these vain appliances of theirs? Why, are there not many, withal, who so do, and seal themselves up to eunuchhood for the sake of the kingdom of God, spontaneously relinquishing a pleasure so honourable, and (as we know) permitted? Are there not some who prohibit to themselves (the use of) the very "creature of God," abstaining from wine and animal food, the enjoyments of which border upon no peril or solicitude; but they sacrifice to God the humility of their soul even in the chastened use of food? Sufficiently, therefore, have you, too, used your riches and your delicacies; sufficiently have you cut down the fruits of your dowries, before (receiving) the knowledge of saving disciplines. We are they "upon whom the ends of the ages have met, having ended their course." We have been predestined by God, before the world was, (to arise) in the extreme end of the times. And so we are trained by God for the purpose of chastising, and (so to say) emasculating, the world. We are the circumcision -spiritual and carnal-of all things; for both in the spirit and in the flesh we circumcise worldly principles.”

“You say that you are wealthy and rich; but it becomes not a virgin to boast of her riches, since Holy Scripture says, "What hath pride profited us? or what benefit hath the vaunting of riches conferred upon us? And all these things have passed away like a shadow." And the apostle again warns us, and says, "And they that buy, as though they bought not; and they that possess, as though they possessed not; and they that use this world, as though they used it not. For the fashion of this world passeth away." Peter also, to whom the Lord commends His sheep to be fed and guarded, on whom He placed and founded the Church, says indeed that he has no silver and gold, but says that he is rich in the grace of Christ-that he is wealthy in his faith and virtue-wherewith he performed many great works with miracle, wherewith he abounded in spiritual blessings to the grace of glory. These riches, this wealth, she cannot possess, who had rather be rich to this world than to Christ.”

“And they who weep. In this passage the apostle teaches us, in the midst of our greatest afflictions not to suffer ourselves to be overwhelmed with grief, but to recollect that the time of this life is short, and that temporary pains will be recompensed with the never-fading joys of eternity. (Estius)”

“they that weep . . . wept not--(Compare Co2 6:10). they that buy . . . possessed not--(Compare Isa 24:1-2). Christ specifies as the condemning sin of the men of Sodom not merely their open profligacy, but that "they bought, they sold," &c., as men whose all was in this world (Luk 17:28). "Possessed" in the Greek implies a holding fast of a possession; this the Christian will not do, for his "enduring substance" is elsewhere (Heb 10:34).”

“As to their malignantly asserting that if heaven is indeed the throne of God, and earth His footstool, and if it is declared that the heaven and earth shall pass away, then when these pass away the God who sitteth above must also pass away, and therefore He cannot be the God who is over all; in the first place, they are ignorant what the expression means, that heaven is [His] throne and earth [His] footstool. For they do not know what God is, but they imagine that He sits after the fashion of a man, and is contained within bounds, but does not contain. And they are also unacquainted with [the meaning of] the passing away of the heaven and earth; but Paul was not ignorant of it when he declared, "For the figure of this world passeth away." In the next place, David explains their question, for he says that when the fashion of this world passes away, not only shall God remain, but His servants also, expressing himself thus in the 101st Psalm: "In the beginning, Thou; O Lord, hast founded the earth, and the heavens are the works of Thy hands. They shall perish, but Thou shalt endure, and all shall wax old as a garment; and as a vesture Thou shalt change them, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail. The children of Thy servants shall continue, and their seed shall be established for ever;" pointing out plainly what things they are that pass away, and who it is that doth endure for ever God, together with His servants. And in like manner Esaias says: "Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath; for the heaven has been set together as smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they who dwell therein shall die in like manner. But my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not pass away."”

“But if our opponents say, How then is it, if the universe be not destroyed, that the Lord says that "heaven and earth shall pass away;" and the prophet, that "the heaven shall perish as smoke, and the earth shall grow old as a garment;" we answer, because it is usual for the Scriptures to call the change of the world from its present condition to a better and more glorious one, destruction; as its earlier form is lost in the change of all things to a state of greater splendour; for there is no contradiction nor absurdity in the Holy Scriptures. For not "the world" but the "fashion of this world" passeth away, it is said; so it is usual for the Scriptures to call the change from an earlier form to a better and more comely state, destruction; just as when one calls by the name of destruction the change from a childish form into a perfect man, as the stature of the child is turned into manly size and beauty. We may expect that the creation will pass away, as if it were to perish in the burning, in order that it may be renewed, not however that it will be destroyed, that we who are renewed may dwell in a renewed world without taste of sorrow.”

“Now the figure of this world is said to pass away, not as regards the total destruction of this sensible world, but because through the action of that fire all flammable elementary things will be consumed, plants and animals; the elements will be purged and renewed, especially air and earth; the just will be purged and the reprobate will be burned; and when these things have been accomplished, the motion of the heavens will also cease, so that, with the number of the elect completed, there may come about a certain renewal and rewarding of worldly bodies. Since God according to His most orderly wisdom made this entire sensible and greater world for the sake of the lesser world, namely man, who is placed in the middle between God and these lower things: hence it is that, so that all things may be congruent with one another, and the dwelling may have harmony with the dweller, when man was well established, this world ought to have been established in a good and peaceful state; when man fell, this world also ought to have deteriorated; when man was disturbed, it ought to have been disturbed; when man was purged, it ought to have been purged; when man was renewed, it ought to have been renewed; and when man was consummated, it ought to have been brought to rest.”

“not abusing it--not abusing it by an overmuch using of it. The meaning of "abusing" here is, not so much perverting, as using it to the full [BENGEL]. We are to use it, "not to take our fill" of its pursuits as our chief aim (compare Luk 10:40-42). As the planets while turning on their own axis, yet revolve round the sun; so while we do our part in our own worldly sphere, God is to be the center of all our desires. fashion--the present fleeting form. Compare Psa 39:6, "vain show"; Psa 73:20, "a dream"; Jam 4:14, "a vapor." passeth away--not merely shall pass away, but is now actually passing away. The image is drawn from a shifting scene in a play represented on the stage (Jo1 2:17). Paul inculcates not so much the outward denial of earthly things, as the inward spirit whereby the married and the rich, as well as the unmarried and the poor, would be ready to sacrifice all for Christ's sake.”

“The fashion of this world passeth away; as if he said: the present order of things shall be changed, the succession of day and night shall cease, the stars shall no longer accomplish their courses and the air shall no longer be in motion, and neither the water nor the earth shall any more produce their harvests, but a new state of things shall be introduced suitable for immortal and incorruptible men and angels.”

“The same holds good also in the case of poverty. For it compels the soul to desist from necessary things, I mean contemplation and from pure sinlessness, forcing him, who has not wholly dedicated himself to God in love, to occupy himself about provisions; as, again, health and abundance of necessaries keep the soul free and unimpeded, and capable of making a good use of what is at hand. "For," says the apostle, "such shall have trouble in the flesh. But I spare you. For I would have you without anxiety, in order to decorum and assiduity for the Lord, without distraction."”

“Of the benefit of virginity and of continency. In Genesis: "Multiplying I will multiply thy sorrows and thy groanings, and in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children; and thy turning shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." Of this same thing in the Gospel according to Matthew: "All men do not receive the word, but they to whom it is given: for there are some eunuchs who were born so from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who have been constrained by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who can receive it, let him receive it." Also according to Luke: "The children of this world beget, and are begotten. But they who have been considered worthy of that world, and the resurrection from the dead, do not marry, nor are married: for neither shall they begin to die: for they are equal to the angels of God, since they are the children of the resurrection. But, that the dead rise again, Moses intimates when he says in the bush, The Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him." Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "It is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, on account of fornication, let every man have his own wife, and every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render what is due to the wife, and similarly the wife to the husband. The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband. And in like manner, the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife. Defraud not one the other, except by agreement for a time, that ye may have leisure for prayer; and again return to the same point, lest Satan tempt you on account of your incontinency. This I say by way of allowance, not by way of command. But I wish that all men should be even as I am. But every one has his proper gift from God; one in one way, but another in another way." Also in the same place: "An unmarried man thinks of those things which are the Lord's, in what way he may please God; but he who has contracted marriage thinks of those things that are of this world, in what way he may please his wife. Thus also, both the woman and the unmarried virgin thinketh of those things which are the Lord's, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; but she that hath married thinks of those things which are of this world, in what way she may please her husband." Also in Exodus, when the Lord had commanded Moses that he should sanctify the people for the third day, he sanctified them, and added: "Be ye ready, for three days ye shall not approach to women." Also in the first book of Kings: "And the priest answered to David, and said, There are no profane loaves in my hand, except one sacred loaf. If the young men have been kept back from women, they shall eat." Also in the Apocalypse: "These are they who have not defiled themselves with women, for they have continued virgins; these are they who follow the Lamb whithersoever He shall go."”

“Then he adds, "But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none." And again, going on and challenging them to the same things, he confirmed his statement, powerfully supporting the state of virginity, and adding expressly the following words to those which he had spoken before, he exclaimed, "I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord: but he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife. There is a difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Now it is clear to all, without any doubt, that to care for the things of the Lord and to please God, is much better than to care for the things of the world and to please one's wife.”

“For even by this very fact, that he has not named "virgins" (as he does in another place where he is teaching touching marrying), he sufficiently predicates that his remark is made touching every woman, and touching the whole sex; and that there is no distinction made between a "virgin" and any other, while he does not name her at all.”

“It is not enough to be holy in body; one must also be holy in spirit, for in this—that is, in purity of soul—true virginity consists. In practice, many who are pure and blameless in body are defiled in soul. Beyond this, note also that she who is concerned with worldly things is no virgin. Therefore, when you see a woman who presents herself as a virgin yet is occupied with worldly matters, know that she differs in no way from a married woman. Paul established definite marks for both by which they may be recognized—not marriage and continence, but on the one hand, great and anxious activity, and on the other, quiet attention to one's own affairs. Consequently, she is no virgin who burdens herself with a multitude of vain occupations. And the married woman continues to care about how to please her husband, and therefore devotes special attention to her appearance, or, so that she may be regarded as a good housewife, shows herself to be thrifty and frugal.”

“The blessed Virgin brought forth that price as strong and holy with the holiness of uncorrupted modesty. Whence in Ecclesiasticus: "Grace upon grace is a holy and modest woman"; and the Angel said: "Hail, full of grace," because she was holy and modest: holy in flesh and modest in mind. The Apostle: "The unmarried woman and the virgin thinks on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit."”

“Concerning virginity we have received no commandment; but we leave it to the power of those that are willing, as a vow: exhorting them so far in this matter that they do not promise anything rashly; since Solomon says, "It is better not to vow, than to vow and not pay." [Ecclesiastes 5:5] Let such a virgin, therefore, be holy in body and soul, as the temple of God, [1 Corinthians 7:34] as the house of Christ, as the habitation of the Holy Spirit. For she that vows ought to do such works as are suitable to her vow; and to show that her vow is real, and made on account of leisure for piety, not to cast a reproach on marriage. Let her not be a wanderer abroad, nor one that rambles about unseasonably; not double-minded, but grave, continent, sober, pure, avoiding the conversation of many, and especially of those that are of ill reputation.”

“But if we listen to the apostle, forgetting what is behind, let us both strain after what is before, and be followers after the better rewards. Thus, albeit he does not "east a snare upon us," he points out what tends to utility when he says, "The unmarried woman thinks on the things of the Lord, that both in body and spirit she may be holy; but the married is solicitous how to please her husband.”

“Now it is clear to all, without any doubt, that to care for the things of the Lord and to please God, is much better than to care for the things of the world and to please one's wife. For who is there so foolish and blind, as not to perceive in this statement the higher praise which Paul accords to chastity? "And this," he says, "I speak for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely."”

“"And this I say for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is seemly, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction." Let the virgins hear that not by that one point is virginity defined; for she that is careful about the things of the world cannot be a virgin, nor seemly. Thus, when he said, "There is difference between a wife and a virgin," he added this as the difference, that wherein they are distinguished from each other. And laying down the definition of a virgin and her that is not a virgin, he names, not marriage nor continence but leisure from engagements and multiplicity of engagements. For the evil is not in the cohabitation, but in the impediment to the strictness of life.”

“Since widowed continence has more in itself of the nature of the honorable on account of purity, more of the nature of the advantageous on account of the removal of impediment, more of the nature of the delightful on account of the removal of burdens which follow upon the law of marriage: hence it is that widowed continence is counseled to all who are unbound; and those who wish to adhere to this counsel according to the dictate of evangelical perfection are not to be restrained but rather encouraged, that is, not only in old age but also in youth. For one is persuaded to abstain from marriage or to be continent, both by the Lord and by the Apostle himself, 1 Corinthians 7: She shall be happier if she so remain, according to my counsel. And the reason for this he himself states beforehand: Moreover, this I say for your profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is honorable, and which may afford the opportunity of beseeching the Lord without hindrance.”

“for your own profit--not to display my apostolic authority. not . . . cast a snare upon you--image from throwing a noose over an animal in hunting. Not that by hard injunctions I may entangle you with the fear of committing sin where there is no sin. comely--befitting under present circumstances. attend upon--literally, "assiduously wait on"; sitting down to the duty. Compare Luk 10:39, Mary; Luk 2:37, "Anna . . . a widow, who departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day" (Ti1 5:5). distraction--the same Greek as "cumbered" (Luk 10:40, Martha).”

“When anger comes upon you, or harshness, know that he is in you; and you will know this to be the case also, when you are attacked by a longing after many transactions, and the richest delicacies, and drunken revels, and divers luxuries, and things improper, and by a hankering after women, and by overreaching, and pride, and blustering, and by whatever is like to these.”

“Wherefore he rejects those of the more incontinent, who, under the influence of vain-glory, would advance to this state, advising them to marry, lest in their time of manly strength, the flesh stirring up the desires and passions, they should be goaded on to defile the soul. For let us consider what he lays down:”

“"But if any man think that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin." Here he seems to be talking about marriage; but all that he says relates to virginity; for he allows even a second marriage, saying, "only in the Lord." Now what means, "in the Lord?" With chastity, with honor: for this is needed everywhere, and must be pursued for else we cannot see God.”

“If anyone, he says, being truly weak in soul, considers it dishonorable to leave his daughter a virgin, especially if she has passed the mature age, then let it be so, he says. How so? "Let him do as he wishes," that is, if he wants to give her in marriage, let him give her, for he will not sin. However, it is better to keep the virgin, as he says further.”

“Let him do what he will, he sinneth not, &c. The meaning is not as libertines would have it, that persons may do what they will, and not sin; provided they afterwards marry: but that the father with regard to the giving his virgin in marriage, may do as he pleaseth: and that it will be no sin to him if she marry. (Challoner)”

“behaveth . . . uncomely--is not treating his daughter well in leaving her unmarried beyond the flower of her age, and thus debarring her from the lawful gratification of her natural feeling as a marriageable woman. need so require--if the exigencies of the case require it; namely, regard to the feelings and welfare of his daughter. Opposed to "having no necessity" (Co1 7:37). let them marry--the daughter and her suitor.”

“Notice how he first marvels at the one who keeps his virgin: he calls him firm and steadfast and one who acts with deliberation; for he says, "standing firm in his heart." So then, the one who gives his virgin in marriage is not firm. By the words "having no necessity" he shows that the father has the authority to give his daughter a husband, and no one can compel him not to give her in marriage. So it is to his honor if he keeps his daughter unmarried; therefore the apostle also praises him, for "he does well," he says. But the one who gives his daughter in marriage also "does well"; for giving in marriage is not a sin, and everything that is not a sin is good. But it is far better not to give in marriage, for this is perfection in what is good.”

“steadfast--not to be turned from his purpose by the obloquy of the world. having no necessity--arising from the natural inclinations of the daughter. power over his . . . will--when, owing to his daughter's will not opposing his will, he has power to carry into effect his will or wish. decreed--determined.”

“Right mystically and sacredly the apostle, teaching us the choice which is truly gracious, not in the way of rejection of other things as bad, but so as to do things better than what is good, has spoken, saying, "So he that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well; and he that giveth her not doeth better; as far as respects seemliness and undistracted attendance on the Lord."”

“For when one thoroughly examines and understands those things which happen to man according to his nature, he will know not to despise the procreation of children, although he applauds chastity, and prefers it in honour. For although honey be sweeter and more pleasant than other things, we are not for that reason to consider other things bitter which are mixed up in the natural sweetness of fruits. And, in support of these statements, I will bring forward a trustworthy witness, namely, Paul, who says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better." Now the word, in setting forth that which is better and sweeter, did not intend to take away the inferior, but arranges so as to assign to each its own proper use and advantage. For there are some to whom it is not given to attain virginity; and there are others whom He no longer wills to be excited by procreations to lust, and to be defiled, but henceforth to meditate and to keep the mind upon the transformation of the body to the likeness of angels, when they "neither marry nor are given in marriage," according to the infallible words of the Lord; since it is not given to all to attain that undefiled state of being a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, but manifestly to those only who are able to preserve the ever-blooming and unfading flower of virginity.”

“The one is bound by the chains of marriage, the other is free from chains; the one is under the Law, the other under Grace. Marriage is good, for thereby the means of continuing the human race has been devised, but virginity is better, for thereby the heritage of the heavenly kingdom is regained, and the mode of attaining to heavenly rewards discovered.”

“That virginal continence is to be preferred to all others is shown by authority, as follows. 1 Corinthians 7: He who gives his virgin in marriage does well, and he who does not give her in marriage does better: therefore virginal continence is to be preferred to the other differences of continence, according to the authority of the Apostle.”

“&c. He that giveth her not, doth better. And more blessed shall she be, if she so remains, according to my counsel. It is very strange if any one, who reads this chapter without prejudices, does not clearly see, that St. Paul advises, and prefers the state of virginity to that of a married life. — I think that I also have the spirit of God. He puts them in mind, by this modest way of speaking, of what they cannot doubt of, as to so great an apostle. (Witham) — It is worthy our notice, that St. Paul on every occasion avoids the least appearance of vanity, and frequently when delivering his own opinion, gives us only a hint, hoping that we shall supply the rest. Of this apostle’s modesty in this particular, we have many instances in his writings, as in ver. 26. “I think, therefore, that this is good;” and likewise in chap. iv. ver. 9. “For I think that God.” (Estius)”

“"Why, then, sir," I said, "do all these trees bear fruit, and some of them fairer than the rest?" "Listen," he said: "all who once suffered for the name of the Lord are honourable before God; and of all these the sins were remitted, because they suffered for the name of the Son of God. And why their fruits are of various kinds, and some of them superior, listen. All," he continued, "who were brought before the authorities and were examined, and did not deny, but suffered cheerfully—these are held in greater honour with God, and of these the fruit is superior; but all who were cowards, and in doubt, and who reasoned in their hearts whether they would deny or confess, and yet suffered, of these the fruit is less, because that suggestion came into their hearts; for that suggestion—that a servant should deny his Lord—is evil."”

“That marriage is not to be contracted with Gentiles. In Tobias: "Take a wife from the seed of thy parents, and take not a strange woman who is not of the tribe of thy parents." Also in Genesis, Abraham sends his servant to take from his seed Rebecca, for his son Isaac. Also in Esdras, it was not sufficient for God when the Jews were laid waste, unless they forsook their foreign wives, with the children also whom they had begotten of them. Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "The woman is bound so long as her husband liveth; but if he die, she is freed to marry whom she will, only in the Lord. But she will be happier if she abide thus." And again: "Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? Far be it from me. Or know ye not that he who is joined together with an harlot is one body? for two shall be in one flesh. But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit." Also in the second to the Corinthians: "Be not joined together with unbelievers. For what participation is there between righteousness and unrighteousness? or what communication hath light with darkness? " Also concerning Solomon in the third book of Kings: "And foreign wives turned away his heart after their gods."”

“Here he teaches about second marriage, and although he permits it, nevertheless he considers more blessed the one who does not enter into a second marriage; for as virginity is higher than the first marriage, so the first marriage is higher than the second. "The wife is bound by the law," that is, she is restrained by the precaution of the law from adultery, from being an adulteress through union with another while the husband is alive, but if the husband dies, she becomes free from the bonds and law of the first marriage and receives permission. "Only in the Lord," that is, only with chastity, with honor may she enter into a second marriage, for bearing and raising children, and not from the impulse of lust. "According to my counsel" he adds, so that you would not regard this as a commandment, but only as counsel, Divine counsel. "I think," he says, "that I also have the Spirit of God." In these words there is more humility; for he did not say: I have, but: "I think" that "I have," that is, I suppose, I surmise.”

“And again I asked him, saying, "Sir, since you have been so patient in listening to me, will you show me this also?" "Speak," said he. And I said, "If a wife or husband die, and the widower or widow marry, does he or she commit sin?" "There is no sin in marrying again," said he; "but if they remain unmarried, they gain greater honour and glory with the Lord; but if they marry, they do not sin. Guard, therefore, your chastity and purity, and you will live to God."”

“This counselor, namely Christ, has many counselors, to whom he imparts his counsel. Paul said: 'She will be more blessed if she so remains according to my counsel; but I think that I also have the Spirit of God.' Whence to the Corinthians: 'You know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, for your sake he became poor.' And the Apostle himself says: 'In this I give counsel, but I have no precept.' Augustine says that 'Christ became poor to such an extent that he does not have what the foxes have, because foxes have holes, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head; understand: Christ became poor so that we might imitate his poverty.' The Master says that we should imitate him in giving alms, in humility, in poverty, and in obedience.”

“happier-- (Co1 7:1, Co1 7:28, Co1 7:34-35). I think also--"I also think"; just as you Corinthians and your teachers think much of your opinions, so I also give my opinion by inspiration; so in Co1 7:25, "my judgment" or opinion. Think does not imply doubt, but often a matter of well-grounded assurance (Joh 5:39). Next: 1 Corinthians Chapter 8”

“And again I asked him, saying, "Sir, since you have been so patient in listening to me, will you show me this also?" "Speak," said he. And I said, "If a wife or husband die, and the widower or widow marry, does he or she commit sin?" "There is no sin in marrying again," said he; "but if they remain unmarried, they gain greater honour and glory with the Lord; but if they marry, they do not sin. Guard, therefore, your chastity and purity, and you will live to God."”