Different views of the meaning of "Husband of one wife.” 419 19. words adverse to modesty: through idleness they draw them off from strictness: through wine-bibbing they instil every evil: through busy-prying they convey a rivalry in lust. Not one of this sort of women knoweth how to speak of the good of marrying but once: for their God, as saith the Apostle, is Phil. 3, their belly, and so too is the purtenance of the belly. These things I now commend unto thee, dearest fellow-servant, which it hath been superfluous indeed to treat of after the Apostle; yet which shall be to thee a comfort too, because in them thou wilt, if so it shall happen, oft renew the memory of me. Note N, on page 417. There seems to have been some difference of view between the Churches of Asia and the rest, on the interpretation, or at least the application, of the Apostolic direction, 1 Tim. 3, 1; the Asiatic Churches, apparently understanding the Apostle to forbid those to be ordained, who had had more than one wife at once, whether in consequence of the divorces, which our Lord forbids, and by forbidding implies to have existed, or (among heathens) of actual polygamy, however rare; the rest taking the words "husband of one wife" in their strict sense, one who had not in any way had more than one. Of the Asiatic interpretation there is little direct proof; for S. Chrysostom, who gives it when explaining 1 Tim. (Hom. 10. init.) mentioning also the other, inculcates the other exclusively, on Tit. 1. (Hom. 2.) S. Jerome mentions the interpretation, as held by some, (ad Tit. 1.) perhaps referring to S. Chrysostom himself; Theodoret mentions it only. But it was probably the basis of the Asiatic practice, which Theodoret attests, when (Ep. 110. ad Domn.) he justifies his consecration of Irenæus, by the existing custom. "As to the matter of digamy, we have followed those before us." "We have followed the custom, and men, distinguished and far-famed for their knowledge and life." As instances, he names Alexander of blessed and holy memory, who ruled this Apostolic see, [Antioch,] the most blessed Acacius Bishop of Berea, and the blessed Praylius," [Bishop of Jerusalem.] He mentions also that it was done at the recommendation of the Bishops of Phoenicia, and approved and praised by Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople, the chief bishop of Pontus, and all those of Palestine, and that no doubt had been raised about it. On the other hand, Tertullian, (de Monog. c. 11.) Origen, (Hom. 17. in Luc. fin.) S. Ambrose, (de Off. i. ult. §. 257. and Ep. 63. ad Vercell. §. 63.) S. Jerome, (adv. Jovin. i. 14. 34. 35. “he who has had, not who has one wife," Ep. 123. ad Ageruch. c. 6. ad Tit. i. 6.) S. Augustine, (de bono Conj. c. 18.) S. Epiphanius, (Hær. 59. §. 4.) Innocent I., (Ep. 3. ol. 22. ad Syn. Tolet. Ux. I. 420 Exclusion of twice-married from Priesthood gradual. NOTE fin.) not only give the stricter interpretation, but severally attest it to have ON AD been the practice of the Church not to ordain such as had been married twice. Some extend this to those whose first or even both marriages had been before Baptism, on the ground that the Apostle's rule was peremptory, and such marriage, not being a sin, was not effaced by Baptism; so S. Ambrose, 1. c. followed by Innocent I. 1. c. S. Aug. refers to the exposition of S. Ambrose as acute, but still only as a private opinion, “ they who have thought (censuerunt) that not even he, who as a catechumen or a heathen had a second wife, is to be ordained." The milder side is taken by S. Jerome, Ep. 69. ad Ocean. §. 2, 3. where he reports, “ of such ordinations the whole world is full; I do not say of Presbyters, nor of the inferior grade; I come to Bishops, whom if I would name severally, the number would exceed that of the Synod of Ariminum;" (300, for which, however, he was censured by Chrysogonus, a follower of Ruffinus, Apol. 1. c. Ruf. fin.) Again, on Tit. 1, 6. he treats this extension of the prohibition " rather as superstitious than true." Tertullian, even as a Montanist, admits the same principle, de Monog. c. 11. “a second husband will not be imputed, because after embracing the faith, he is the first." The rule appears to have been gradually enforced in the Western Church, for Tertullian though he mentions that some twice-married Bishops had been deposed, (de Exhort. Cast. c. 7.) taunts the Church with being full of such; "How many twicemarried preside among you, forsooth insulting the Apostle;" (de Monog. c 12.)" and S. Leo, (Ep. 4. ad Episc. per Camp. &c. c. 2.) mentions that some such (quibus fuerint numerosa conjugia) had been admitted indiscriminately to holy Orders." Aquinas, (Quodl. iv. art. 13.) Durand, (in Sent. iv. d. 27. g. 4.) Vazquez, (in 3 P. T. 3. disp. 24. c. 25.) quoted by Bp. Taylor, (Rule of Conscience, iii. 4. rule 20. §. 30.) also declare it " only to be a constitution of the Church," which the Pope may dispense with; and, as has been observed, the permission of such marriages is no greater departure from the letter of Scripture on the one side than the dispensing with a married Clergy on the other. THE SECOND BOOK TO HIS WIFE. I. I HAVE but just now, best-beloved fellow-servant in the Lord, traced out for thee, as well as I was able, what course should be followed by an holy" woman, when her husband is, by whatever hap, taken away. Let us now turn to the next best counsel, out of regard to human infirmity, the examples of certain women warning us, who, when by divorce, or an husband's death, an occasion of continency is offered, have not only thrown away the opportunity of so great a good, but, even in marrying, have not chosen to remember the rule, that first and chiefly they should marry in the Lord. Wherefore my mind hath been troubled, lest I, 1 Cor. 7, who lately exhorted thee to stedfast keeping unto one husband and unto widowhood, may now, by the mention of marriage, make the removal of the caution a downfall unto thee. But if thou art perfect in wisdom, surely thou must therein observe that which is the more profitable. But because this most important purpose of life is difficult and not without its necessities, I have abated somewhat: nor ver. 37. should I have had reasons for referring to thee on this point also, had I not found herein a weightier anxiety. For in * i. e. a Christian, as in c. 2. 3. 6. and i. 6. b See Note O, at the end of this Treatise. ci.e. to a Christian. 1 Cor. 7, 39. is so interpreted by S. Cyprian, Test. iii. 62. S. Jerome, Ep. 123. ad Ageruch. (ol. ad Geront.) §. 5. adv. Jovin. i. 10. (quoted Ep. 40. ad Pamm. §. 5.) Theodoret, Ambrosiaster, Sedulius, ad loc. S. Aug. de Conj. Adulterin. i. 21. S. Chrysostome's paraphrase "with chastity, with honour," (ad loc. Hom. 39 fin.) includes this, and adds to it, not differs from it, 39. II. 422 "Marriage in the Lord" enjoined not counselled. An Ux. proportion as the continency, which ministereth to widowXIII.2. hood, is great, doth the not enduring it seem pardonable. For in things difficult pardon is easy. But as to marry in the Lord is practicable, as being within our power, so much the more culpable is it not to obey what thou canst. To this is added that the Apostle, as touching widows indeed and the unmarried, adviseth that they so remain, when he adjicit. addeth', But I would that all would persevere according to my example; but, as touching marrying in the Lord, when he saith, only in the Lord, he no longer adviseth, but plainly commandeth. Wherefore, in this instance especially, if we obey not, we are in peril. Because one may neglect a thing advised more safely than a thing commanded: for the one cometh of counsel, and is proposed to the will; but the other is derived from power, and is tied to necessity in the derelin- one liberty, in the other contumacy, seemeth to transgress2. cf.1 Cor. 7, 7. quere II. Wherefore when a certain woman in these days removed her marriage out of the Church, and was joined unto an Heathen, and when I called to mind that others in time past had done the same, wondering at either their own wantonness, or the crookedness of their counsellors, since no Scripture holdeth out license for this act, " Do they," said I, "flatter themselves with that passage in the first Epistle to 1 Cor. 7, the Corinthians, where it is written, If any one of the brethren 12, &c. have an unbelieving wife, and she be consenting to the union, let him not put her away. In like manner a believing woman being married to an unbeliever, if she find her husband consenting, let her not put him away. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife by the believing husband: else were your children unclean? Perchance, by understanding in a general sense this admonition touching believers who are married, they may think it lawful also to marry with unbelievers." Whoso thus interpreteth, God forbid that he be knowingly cheating himself! But it is manifest that that Scripture denoteth those believers, who have been found by the grace of God in marriage with di. e. whereas Scripture addresses this direction to believers who are actually married, they, by giving it a more general interpretation, extend it to believers who are not married, as giving them a license to marry unbelievers, as if they too would become sanctified by marriage. [Tr.] 12. 20. Marriage with Heathen to be continued, not contracted. 423 Heathens. According to the very words themselves, "If any believer," saith he, " have an unbelieving wife;" he saith not, "take an unbelieving wife:" he sheweth that one already in the married state with an unbelieving woman, and afterwards converted by the grace of God, ought to continue with his wife; to wit for this reason, lest any, having obtained Faith, should think that he ought to be divorced from a Woman now an alien, and, in some sense, a stranger. Eph. 2, Wherefore he subjoineth also the reason, that we are called 1 Cor.7, in peace to the Lord God; and that the unbeliever may, 15. 16. through use of marriage, be gained by the believer. This very clause too proveth that this must so be understood: ver. 17. As every one, saith he, is called by the Lord, so let him abide. Now Heathens, methinks, not believers, are called. But if he had declared absolutely concerning the marriage of believers only, he had permitted the saints to marry indiscriminately. But if he had permitted this, he would never have subjoined a declaration so different, and so contrary to his own permission, saying, A woman, if her husband be 1 Cor.7, dead, is at liberty: let her marry whom she will only in the Lord. Here surely is no question to be made: for that, concerning which a question might have been made, the Spirit hath declared. Lest we should make an ill use of that which He saith, Let her marry whom she will, He hath added, only in the Lord, that is, in the Name of the Lord, which is, doubtless, to a Christian. That Holy Spirit therefore, who had rather that widows and the unmarried should abide in their integrity, Who exhorteth us to the example of himself', prescribeth no other mode of repeating ver. 7. marriage, save in the Lord. To this condition alone doth He allow the loss of continency. Only, saith He, in the Lord. He hath added a weight to His own law, only; with whatever tone and manner thou shalt pronounce that word, it is weighty: it both commandeth and adviseth, both teacheth and exhorteth, both asketh and threateneth. 'Tis a The word is taken from S. Matt. him; whence T. blends in one the 18, 15. as below, c. 7. [Tr.] Holy Spirit and the inspired writer, though the action itself was that of an inspired Apostle, not as an inspired The Apostle himself. S. Paul being guided to speak of himself in Holy Scripture, his action is directly sanctioned by the Holy Spirit, Who inspired writer. 30. |