Lessons relating to marriage and celibacy. Virginity is preferable to a married state.
That maried folke may aske their debt, and must pay it, though it be better for them to conteine, 8 as also for the vnmarried and vvidovves to continevv single, though they may marrie. 10 That the married may not depart from one an other (nor in any case marrie an other, during the life of the former) 12 vnles it be from one that is vnbaptized, vvhich yet he dissuadeth: 17 counseling also euery one to be content vvith his state vvherein he vvas Christened. 25 Virginitie is not commaunded, but counseled as the better and more meritiorious then Mariage, 39 as also vvidovvhod.
1Now concerning the things whereof you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.Intorno poi alle cose, delle quali mi avete scritto: è buona cosa per l'uomo il non toccar donna.AND concerning the things vvhereof you vvrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a vvoman.De quibus autem scripsistis mihi: Bonum est homini mulierem non tangere: 2But for fear of fornication, let every man have his own wife: and let every woman have her own husband.Ma per cagione della fornicazione ognuno abbia la sua moglie, è ognuna abbia il suo marito.But because of fornication let euery man haue his ovvne vvife, and let euery vvoman haue her ovvne husband.propter fornicationem autem unusquisque suam uxorem habeat, et unaquæque suum virum habeat. 3Let the husband render the debt to his wife: and the wife also in like manner to the husband.Alla moglie renda il marito quello, che le deve: e parimente la donna al marito.Let the husband render his dette to the vvife: and the vvife also in like maner to her husband.Uxori vir debitum reddat: similiter autem et uxor viro. 4The wife hath not power of her own body: but the husband. And in like manner the husband also hath not power of his own body: but the wife.La donna maritata non o più sua, ma del marito. E similmente l'uomo ammogliato non è più suo, ma della moglie.The vvoman hath not povver of her ovvne body: but her husband. And in like maner the man also hath not povver of his ovvne body: but the vvoman.Mulier sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed vir. Similiter autem et vir sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed mulier. 5Defraud not one another, except, perhaps, by consent, for a time, that you may give yourselves to prayer: and return together again, lest Satan tempt you for your incontinency.Non vi defraudate l'un l'altro, se non forse di consenso per un tempo, affine di applicarvi all'orazione: e di nuovo riunitevi insieme, perché non vi tenti satana per la vostra incontinenza.Defraude not one an other, except perhaps by consent for a time, that you may giue your self to praier': and returne againe together, lest Satan tempt you for your incontinencie.Nolite fraudare invicem, nisi forte ex consensu ad tempus, ut vacetis orationi: et iterum revertimini in idipsum, ne tentet vos Satanas propter incontinentiam vestram. 6But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment.E questo io dico per indulgenza, non per comando.But I say this by indulgence, not by commaundement.Hoc autem dico secundum indulgentiam, non secundum imperium.
7For I would that all men were even as myself. But every one hath his proper gift from God: one after this manner, and another after that.Imperocché bramo, che voi tutti siate, qual son io: ma ciascuno ha da Dio il suo dono: uno in un modo, uno in un altro.For I vvould al men to be as my self: but euery one hath a proper gift of God: one so, and an other so.Volo enim omnes vos esse sicut meipsum: sed unusquisque proprium donum habet ex Deo: alius quidem sic, alius vero sic. 8But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I.A que', che non hanno moglie, ed alle vedove, io dico, che è bene per loro, che se ne stiano così, come anch'io.But I say to the vnmaried and to vvidovves: it is good for them if they so abide euen as I also.Dico autem non nuptis, et viduis: bonum est illis si sic permaneant, sicut et ego. 9But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt.Che se non si contengono, contraggano matrimonio. Conciossiaché è meglio contrar matrimonio, che ardere.But if they doe not conteine them selues, let them marie. For it is better to marie then to be burnt.Quod si non se continent, nubant. Melius est enim nubere, quam uri. 10But to them that are married, not I, but the Lord, commandeth that the wife depart not from her husband.Ai coniugati poi ordino, non io, ma il Signore, che la moglie non si separi dal marito:But to them that be ioyned in matrimonie, not I giue commaundement, but our Lord, that the vvife depart not from her husband:Iis autem qui matrimonio juncti sunt, præcipio non ego, sed Dominus, uxorem a viro non discedere: 11And if she depart, that she remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And let not the husband put away his wife.E ove siasi separata, si resti senza rimaritarsi, o si riunisca col suo marito. E l'uomo non ripudii la moglie.and if she depart, to remaine vnmaried, or to be recōciled to her husband. And let not the husband put avvay his vvife.quod si discesserit, manere innuptam, aut viro suo reconciliari. Et vir uxorem non dimittat. 12For to the rest I speak, not the Lord. If any brother hath a wife that believeth not and she consent to dwell with him: let him not put her away.Agli altri poi dico io, non il Signore. Se un fratello ha una moglie infedele, e questa è contenta di abitare con lui, non la ripudii.For to the rest, I say, not our Lord. If any brother haue a vvife an infidel, and she consent to dvvel with him: let him not put her avvay.Nam ceteris ego dico, non Dominus. Si quis frater uxorem habet infidelem, et hæc consentit habitare cum illo, non dimittat illam.
13And if any woman hath a husband that believeth not and he consent to dwell with her: let her not put away her husband.E se la moglie fedele ha un marito infedele, che è contento di abitare con essa, non lo lasci:And if any vvoman haue a husband an infidel, and he consent to dvvel vvith her: let her not put avvay her husband.Et si qua mulier fidelis habet virum infidelem, et hic consentit habitare cum illa, non dimittat virum: 14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife: and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband. Otherwise your children should be unclean: but now they are holy.Imperocché è santificato il marito infedele per la moglie fedele, e la moglie infedele pel marito fedele: altrimenti i vostri figliuoli sarebbero immondi, ed or sono santi.For the man an infidel is sanctified by the faithful vvoman: and the vvoman an infidel is sanctified by the faithful husband: otherwise your children should be vncleane: but novv they are holy.sanctificatus est enim vir infidelis per mulierem fidelem, et sanctificata est mulier infidelis per virum fidelem: alioquin filii vestri immundi essent, nunc autem sancti sunt. 15But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart. For a brother or sister is not under servitude in such cases. But God hath called us in peace.Che se l'infedele si separa, sia separato: imperocché non soggiace a servitù il fratello, o la sorella in tal caso: Iddio però ci ha chiamati alla pace.But if the infidel depart, let him depart. for the brother or sister is not subiect to seruitude in such, but in peace hath God called vs.Quod si infidelis discedit, discedat: non enim servituti subjectus est frater, aut soror in hujusmodi: in pace autem vocavit nos Deus. 16For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?Imperocché che sai tu, o donna, se tu sii per salvare il marito? E che sai tu, o uomo, se tu sii per salvare la moglie?For how knowest thou woman, if thou shalt saue thy husbād? or how knowest thou man, if thou shalt saue the vvoman?Unde enim scis mulier, si virum salvum facies ? aut unde scis vir, si mulierem salvam facies ? 17But as the Lord hath distributed to every one, as God hath called every one: so let him walk. And so in all churches I teach.Solamente ciascheduno secondo quello, che il Signore gli ha dato, e ciascheduno secondo che Dio lo ha chiamato, in quel modo cammini; conforme io pur insegno in tutte le Chiese.But to euery one as our Lord hath deuided, as God hath called euery one, so let him vvalke, and as in al Churches I teach.Nisi unicuique sicut divisit Dominus, unumquemque sicut vocavit Deus, ita ambulet, et sicut in omnibus ecclesiis doceo.
18Is any man called, being circumcised? Let him not procure uncircumcision. Is any man called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised.E stato uno chiamato, essendo circonciso? Non procuri di apparire incirconciso. E stato uno chiamato, essendo incirconciso? Non si circoncida.Is any man called being circumcised? let him not procure prepuce. Is any man called in prepuce? let him not be circumcised.Circumcisus aliquis vocatus est ? non adducat præputium. In præputio aliquis vocatus est ? non circumcidatur. 19Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing: but the observance of the commandments of God.Non importa niente l'essere circonciso, e non importa niente l'essere incirconciso: ma l'osservare i comandamenti di Dio.Circumcision is nothing, and prepuce is nothing: but the obseruation of the commaundements of God.Circumcisio nihil est, et præputium nihil est: sed observatio mandatorum Dei. 20Let every man abide in the same calling in which he was called.Ognuno resti in quella vocazione, in cui fu chiamato.Euery one in the vocation that he vvas called, in it let him abide.Unusquisque in qua vocatione vocatus est, in ea permaneat. 21Wast thou called, being a bondman? Care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.Se' tu stato chiamato, essendo servo? Non prendertene affanno: ma potendo anche diventar libero, piuttosto eleggi di servire.Vvast thou called being a bondman? care not for it: but and if thou canst be made free, vse it rather.Servus vocatus es ? non sit tibi curæ: sed et si potes fieri liber, magis utere. 22For he that is called in the Lord, being a bondman, is the freeman of the Lord. Likewise he that is called, being free, is the bondman of Christ.Imperocché colui, che essendo servo, è stato chiamato al Signore, è liberto del Signore: parimente chi è stato chiamato, essendo libero, è servo di Cristo.For he that in our Lord is called, being a bondman, is the franchised of our Lord. likevvise he that is called, being free, is the bondman of Christ.Qui enim in Domino vocatus est servus, libertus est Domini: similiter qui liber vocatus est, servus est Christi. 23You are bought with a price: be not made the bondslaves of men.Siete stati comperati a prezzo, non diventate servi degli uomini.You vvere bought vvith price, be not made the bōdmen of men.Pretio empti estis: nolite fieri servi hominum. 24Brethren, let every man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God.Ognuno adunque, o fratelli, qual fu chiamato, si resti davanti a Dio.Euery brother' vvherein he vvas called, in that let him abide before God.Unusquisque in quo vocatus est, fratres, in hoc permaneat apud Deum.
25Now, concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy of the Lord, to be faithful.Intorno poi alle vergini io non ho comandamento del Signore; ma do consiglio, come avendo ottenuto dal Signore misericordia, perché io sia fedele.And as concerning virgins, a commaundement of our Lord I haue not: but counsel I giue, as hauing obteined mercie of our Lord to be faithful.De virginibus autem præceptum Domini non habeo: consilium autem do, tamquam misericordiam consecutus a Domino, ut sim fidelis. 26I think therefore that this is good for the present necessity: that it is good for a man so to be.Credo adunque, che ciò sia un bene attesa la urgente necessità, perché buona cosa è per l'uomo starsene così.I thinke therfore that this is good for the present necessitie, because it is good for a man so to be.Existimo ergo hoc bonum esse propter instantem necessitatem, quoniam bonum est homini sic esse. 27Art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.Se' tu legato a una moglie? Non cercar d'essere sciolto. Se' tu sciolto dalla moglie? Non cercar di moglie.Art thou tied to a vvise? seeke not to be loosed. Art thou loose from a vvife? seeke not a vvife.Alligatus es uxori ? noli quærere solutionem. Solutus es ab uxore ? noli quærere uxorem. 28But if thou take a wife, thou hast not sinned. And if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned: nevertheless, such shall have tribulation of the flesh. But I spare you.Che se prenderai moglie: non hai peccato. E se una vergine prende marito, non ha peccato: ma avranno costoro tribolazione della carne. Ma io ho riguardo a voi.But if thou take a vvife, thou hast not sinned. And if a virgin marie, she hath not sinned. neuerthelesse tribulation of the flesh shal such haue. but I spare you.Si autem acceperis uxorem, non peccasti. Et si nupserit virgo, non peccavit: tribulationem tamen carnis habebunt hujusmodi. Ego autem vobis parco. 29This therefore I say, brethren: The time is short. It remaineth, that they also who have wives be as if they had none:Io dico adunque, o fratelli: il tempo è breve: resta, che e que', che hanno moglie siano come que', che non l'hanno:This therfore I say brethren, the time is short, it remaineth, that they also which haue vviues, be as though they had not:Hoc itaque dico, fratres: tempus breve est: reliquum est, ut et qui habent uxores, tamquam non habentes sint: 30And they that weep, as though they wept not: and they that rejoice, as if they rejoiced not: and they that buy as if they possessed not:E quegli, che piangono, come que', che non piangono: e quegli, che sono contenti, come que', che non sono contenti: e quegli, che fan delle compere, come que', che non posseggono:and they that vveepe, as though they vvept not: and they that reioyce, as though they reioyced not: and they that bye, as though they possessed not:et qui flent, tamquam non flentes: et qui gaudent, tamquam non gaudentes: et qui emunt, tamquam non possidentes:
31And they that use this world, as if they used it not. For the fashion of this world passeth away.E quegli, che usano di questo mondo, come que', che non ne usano: imperocché passa la scena di questo mondo.and they that vse this vvorld, as though they vsed it not. for the figure of this vvorld passeth avvay.et qui utuntur hoc mundo, tamquam non utantur: præterit enim figura hujus mundi. 32But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord: how he may please God.Or io bramo, che voi siate senza inquietezza. Colui, che è senza moglie, ha sollecitudine delle cose del Signore, del come piacere a Dio.But I vvould haue you to be vvithout carefulnes. He that is without a vvife, is careful for the things that pertaine to our Lord, how he may please God.Volo autem vos sine sollicitudine esse. Qui sine uxore est, sollicitus est quæ Domini sunt, quomodo placeat Deo. 33But he that is with a wife is solicitous for the things of the world: how he may please his wife. And he is divided.Chi poi è ammogliato, ha sollecitudine delle cose del mondo, del come piacere alla moglie, ed è diviso.But he that is vvith a vvife, is careful for the things that pertaine to the vvorld, hovv he may please his vvife: and he is deuided.Qui autem cum uxore est, sollicitus est quæ sunt mundi, quomodo placeat uxori, et divisus est. 34And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord: that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of the world: how she may please her husband.E la donna non maritata, e la vergine ha pensiero delle cose del Signore; affine di essere santa di corpo, e di spirito. La maritata poi ha pensiero delle cose del mondo, del come piacere al marito.And the vvoman vnmaried & the virgin, thinketh on the things that pertaine to our Lord: that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she that is maried, thinketh on the things that pertaine to the vvorld, hovv she may please her husband.Et mulier innupta, et virgo, cogitat quæ Domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore, et spiritu. Quæ autem nupta est, cogitat quæ sunt mundi, quomodo placeat viro. 35And this I speak for your profit, not to cast a snare upon you, but for that which is decent and which may give you power to attend upon the Lord, without impediment.Or questo io lo dico per vostro vantaggio: non per allacciarvi, ma per quello, che è onesto, e che dia facoltà di servire al Signore senza impedimento.And this I speake to your profit: not to cast a snare vpon you, but to that vvhich is honest, & that may giue you povver vvithout impediment to attend vpon our Lord.Porro hoc ad utilitatem vestram dico: non ut laqueum vobis injiciam, sed ad id, quod honestum est, et quod facultatem præbeat sine impedimento Dominum obsecrandi.
36But if any man think that he seemeth dishonoured with regard to his virgin, for that she is above the age, and it must so be: let him do what he will. He sinneth not if she marry.Se poi uno crede di incorrer biasimo per cagione della sua fanciulla, perché ella oltrepassa il fiore dell'età, ed è necessario di far così: faccia quel lo che vuole: non pecca, ov'ella prenda marito.But if any man thinke that he seemeth dishonoured vpon his virgin, for that she is past age, and if it must so be, let him doe that he vvil. He sinneth not if she marie.Si quis autem turpem se videri existimat super virgine sua, quod sit superadulta, et ita oportet fieri: quod vult faciat: non peccat, si nubat. 37For he that hath determined, being steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but having power of his own will: and hath judged this in his heart, to keep his virgin, doth well.Chi poi ha risoluto fermamente dentro di se (non essendo stretto da necessità, ma potendo disporre a suo talento), e ha determinato in cuor suo di serbar vergine la sua (figliuola) ben fa.For he that hath determined in his hart being settled, not hauing necessitie, but hauing povver of his ovvne vvil, and hath iudged this in his hart, to keepe his virgin, doeth vvel.Nam qui statuit in corde suo firmus, non habens necessitatem, potestatem autem habens suæ voluntatis, et hoc judicavit in corde suo, servare virginem suam, bene facit. 38Therefore both he that giveth his virgin in marriage doth well: and he that giveth her not doth better.Chi adunque la marita, fa bene: e chi non la marita, fa meglio.Therfore both he that ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie, doeth vvel: & he that ioyneth not, doeth better.Igitur et qui matrimonio jungit virginem suam, bene facit: et qui non jungit, melius facit. 39A woman is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth: but if her husband die, she is at liberty. Let her marry to whom she will: only in the Lord.La moglie è legata alla legge tutto il tempo, che vive il marito: che se muore il marito, ella è in libertà: sposi chi vuole: purché secondo il Signore.A vvoman is bound to the lavv so long time as her husband liueth: but if her husband sleepe, she is at libertie: let her marie to vvhom she vvil: only in our Lord.Mulier alligata est legi quanto tempore vir ejus vivit, quod si dormierit vir ejus, liberata est: cui vult nubat, tantum in Domino. 40But more blessed shall she be, if she so remain, according to my counsel. And I think that I also have the spirit of God.Ma sarà più beata, se si resterà così, secondo il mio consiglio: or io mi penso d'avere io pure lo spirito di Dio.But more blessed shal she be, if she so remaine, according to my counsel. and I thinke that I also haue the Spirit of God.Beatior autem erit si sic permanserit secundum meum consilium: puto autem quod et ego Spiritum Dei habeam.
7:1
Calmet
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)
St. Jerome
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. ch. IV.; St. Chrysostom, on this location, hom. xix.)
To this he answers in ver. 12. and 13.
Witham
It is good. That is, according to the style of the Scriptures, it is better, if we consider the advantage of every particular, etc. (Witham)
7:2
Witham
etc. But because of fornication, let every man have, and live with his own wife,[Ver. 2. Suam uxorem, suam virum. eautou gunaika, ton idion andra.] 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,[Ver. 5. Ut vacetis orationi, ina scholazete te proseuche. St. Chrysostom, ouk eipen aplos proseuchesthe.] 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)
7:6
Challoner
By indulgence. That is, by a condescension to your weakness. (Challoner)
7:7
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.
Witham
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 75:12.; Ecclesiastes 5:3.) 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 5:12. 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 11:15.[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)
7:9
Challoner
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)
7:10
Witham
But to them that are married, etc. 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)
Estius
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)
7:12
Calmet
For to the rest, etc. 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.
Witham
If any brother have a wife that believeth not, etc. 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)
7:14
Challoner
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.
Witham
How knowest thou, O wife? etc. 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)
7:17
Witham
etc. But[Ver. 17. Nisi, etc. ei me, it bears the sense here of but.] as the Lord hath distributed,...and called every one, etc. 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,[Ver. 21. Magis utere, mallon chresai. St. Chrysostom says, touteti mallon douleue.] 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.
7:23
Estius
With a price. Viz. with the price of the precious blood of Christ. (Estius)
Him only should we serve, for whatever draws us from this allegiance, is perfect servitude, such as the love of any person or thing out of God.
7:25
Witham
Now concerning virgins, etc. 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)
7:29
Witham
The time is short, etc. Incomparable instructions to the end of this chapter, which are not obscure. (Witham)
7:30
Estius
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)
7:33
It is far easier to give our whole heart and application without any the least reserve to God, than to divide them without injustice.
7:36
Challoner
Let him do what he will, he sinneth not, etc. 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)
7:38
etc. 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.
Witham
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)
Estius
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 1 Corinthians 4:ver. 9. "For I think that God." (Estius)
7:2
Have his own wife.... That is, keep to his wife, which he hath. His meaning is not to exhort the unmarried to marry: on the contrary, he would have them rather continue as they are. (Ver. 7:8.) But he speaks here to them that are already married; who must not depart from one another, but live together as they ought to do in the marriage state.
7:6
By indulgence.... That is, by a condescension to your weakness.
7:9
If they do not contain, etc.... 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.
7:12
I speak, not the Lord.... Viz., by any express commandment, or ordinance.
7:14
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.
7:36
Let him do what he will; he sinneth not, etc.... 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.
7:2
2. His ovvne vvise.] 〈Greek〉 He saith not, as the Protestants here pretend to excuse the vnlavvful coniunction of Votaries, The Apostle biddeth not al to marie, but to keepe their vviues before maried. Let euery one mary: but, let euery one haue, keepe, or vse his ovvne vvise to vvhom he vvas maried before his conuersion. for the Apostle ansvvereth here to the first question of the Corinthians, vvhich vvas not, vvhether it vvere lavvful to mary, but vvhether they vvere not bound vpon their conuersion, to absteine from the company of their vviues married before in their infidelitie, as some did persuade them that they ought to doe. Hiero. li. 1 cont. Iouin. c. 4. Chrys. in hunc locum be. 19.
7:3
3. Let the husband render.] These vvordes open the Apostles intention and talke to be onely of such as are already maried, and to iustruct them of the bond and obligation that is betvvene the maried couple for rendring of the dette of carnal copulation one to an other: declaring that the maried persons haue yelded their bodies so one to an other, that they can not vvithout mutual consent, neither perpetually, nor for a time, defraude one the other.
debitū reddat
7:5
5. Giue your self to praier.] Continence in maried folkes for praier sake. This time, & the Heretikes doctrine, and high estimatiō of matrimonial actes, are far from the puritie of the Apostolike and primitiue Church, vvhen the Chrisians to make their praiers and fastings more acceptable to God, abstained by mutual consent euen from their lavvful vviues. our nevv Maisters not much absteining (as it may be thought) from their vviues for any such matter. And yet S. Augustine saith, the Prelate should passe other in this case, and thinke that not to be lavvful for him, that may be borne in others, because he must daily supply Christes roome, offer, baptize, and pray for the people. So saith he li. 1. q. 〈◊〉 vtroque test. q. 127 in fine. See S. Hiero. li. 1 c. 19 aduers. Iouin. S. Ambr. li. 1 Offic. c. vlt. But alas for the people, vvhose maried Pastors are in this point far vvorse then the vulgar folke, neither teaching continencie, nor giuing good example.
If the lay man can not pray, vnles he abstaine from his vvife: the Priest that alwaies must offer sacrifices, and alvvaies pray, must therfore alvvaies be free from matrimonie. Hiero. li. 1 c. 1• aduer. Iouin.
to fasting & praier:
7:6
6. By indulgence, Perpetual continencie, euen in maried folkes, better then carnal copulation. not commaundement.] Lest some might misconstre his former vvordes, as though he had precisely commaunded maried persons not to abstaine perpetually from carnal copulation, or not to giue their consent one to an other of continencie but for a time onely: he declareth plainely that he gaue no rule or precept absolutely therein, but that he spake al the foresaid, condescending to their infirmities onely, insinuating that continencie from carnal copulation is much better, and that him self kept it continually, Aug. de bon. coniug. c. 10. Enchirid. c. 78.
7:7
7. A proper gift.] To such as may lavvfully mary, or be already maried, God giueth not alvvaies that more high and special gift or grace of continencie, though euery one of them al that duely aske and labour for it, might haue it: but such are not bound to endeuour or seeke for it alvvaies, Who are boūd to liue continently: and that God giueth this gift to al that aske it. and therfore can not be commaunded to abstaine further then they like, but vvhensoeuer a man is bound to abstaine, either by vovv or any other necessarie occasion (as if one of the parties be in prison, vvarre, banishment, siknos, or absent perpetually by lavvful diuorce) the other must needes in paine of damnation abstaine, and can not excuse the vvant of the gift of chastitie. for See S. Augustine li. •. c. 19. 20. de Adult. Coniug to. 4. he is bound to aske it and to seeke for it of God by fasting, praying, and chastising his body: and so labouring duely for it, God vvil giue the grace of chastitie. So had S. Paul it, and so had al the holy men that euer liued chast. Therfore detest the doctrine of the Protestants in this point, that vvhen they list not fast nor pray for it, say they haue not the gift. And it vvere a great maruel vvhy so fevv of the nevv Sectes or rather none novv a daies haue that gift, but that vve see it is obtained by those meanes vvhich our forefathers vsed, & they vse not at all. To liue in mariage continently vvithout the breach of coniugal fidelitio, is a gift of God also, but men must not breake their faith of vvedlocke for vvant of it, but must knovv that God giueth that gift to such as humbly aske it of him. August. de gras. & lib. arbitrio c. 4. De continent. c. 1.
7:8
Before he treated of the continencie of such as vvere married, novv he giueth lessons for the vnmarried also.
7:9
9. If they conteine not.] He meaneth of such as be free: for if they marry after they haue made vow or promes to God of chastitie, The Apostle permitteth mariage to them that be free, not to vovved persons. they are vvorthely damned, such being bound to conteine, and so may conteine if they list. August. de bono viduit. c. 8. 9. & de adult. coniug. li. 1. c. 15. & de fide ad Petrum c. 3. infine. Ambros. ad virg. lapsam c. 5.
9. Better to marry.] It is better to marry for the said persons that be free, then to be ouerthrovven and fall into fornication, for, to burne, or, to be burnt, is not to be tempted onely (as the Protestants thinke that picke quarels easely to marry) but it signifieth to yeld to concupiscence either in minde or external vvorke. Theodore⸢t⸣ in hunc locum. Vvse say also, for such as be free, for concerning others lavvfully made Priests, and such as othervvise haue made vow of chastitie, they cannot marry at al, and therfore there is no comparison in them betvvixt mariage and fornication or burning. for their mariage is but pretensed, and is the vvorst sort of continencie and fornication or burning.
〈Greek〉.
7:10
Concordance Mt. 5, 32 19, 9.
7:11
11. To remaine vnmarried.] Neither partie may dimisse the other and mary an other for any cause. After diuorce not to marie. for though they be separated for fornication, yet neither may marry againe. August. de adult. coniug. li. 1 c. 8. 9. and li. 26. 5. 19. See Annotat. Mat. 19. and S. Augustine in his vvhole bookes. de adulter, coniugijs to. 6.
Concordance Mr. 10, 9. Lu. 16, 18.
7:12
12. I say, not our Lord.] The Apostles precepts. By this vve learne, that there vvere many matters ouer and aboue the things that Christ taught or prescribed, left to the Apostles order and interprecation: vvherein they might, as the case required, either commaund or counsel, and vve bound to obey accordingly.
7:14
14. Sanctified.] Vvhen the infidel partie is said to be cleane or sanctified by the faithful, or the children of their mariage to be cleane, Hovv the infidel, or infidels childe, are sā ctified by the Christian. vve may not thinke that they be in grace or state of saluation thereby, Hiero. li. 1. c. 5 aduers. Iouin. but onely that the mariage is an occasion of sanctification to the infidel partie and to the children. for S. Augustine (li. 3 de pec. mer. & remis. c. 12.) concludeth against the Pelagians, as vve may doe against the Caluinists, holding Christian mens children to be holy from their mothers vvombe and not to neede Baptisme, that vvhat other sanctification soeuer it be that is here meant, it can not be ynough to saluation vvithout saith, Baptisme, &c.
7:19
19. But the obseruation.] Neither to be Ievv nor Gentil, bond or free, maried or single, nor the faith it self vvhich is proper to Christian men, vvil serue to saluation, vvithout good vvorkes and keeping the commaundements. S. Hierom adu. Iouin. li. 1 c. 16.
7:22
libertus
7:23
You must not serue men so that you obey & please them more then God. The Epistle for holy Virgins not Martyrs.
7:24
one, brethren,
7:25
25. Counsel I giue.] The differēce of counsels & precepts. A counsel is one thing, a commaundement is an other. To doe that vvhich is counseled, is not necessarie, because one may be saued notvvithstanding. but he that vvil doe that vvhich he is counseled vnto, shal haue a higher degree of glorie. He that fulfilleth not a cōmaundement, except he doe penance. can not escape punishment. August. li. de virg. c. 13. & 14.
7:28
28. If a virgin marrie.] A professed virgin may not marrie. He speaketh not of that virgin vvhich hath dedicated her self to God, (for if any, such mary, she shal be damned for breaking her first vow) but onely of yong maides vnmaried in the vvorld. Hiero. adu. Iouin. li. 1 c. 7. Chrys. ho 20. Theodorete, Photius, and the other Greeke Doctors vpon this place apud Oecum. Epiph. hares. 61.
28. Tribulation of the flesh.] Virginitie counseled as more meritorious. They are matuelously deceiued (saith S. Augustine li. de virg. c. 1•) that thinke the Apostle counseleth virginitie rather then mariage, onely for that mariage hath many miseries and molestations ioyned vnto it, which by virginitie shal be auoided, & not in respect of the greater reward in heauen. for the Apostles prouident counseling to virginitie, is for the next life, and he alleageth these troubles of mariage in that sense specially as they be a hinderance from the seruice of God here, and therfore an impediment to vs toward the next life and the more ample ioyes thereof.
Virginitie counseled as the better: Mariage not forbidden, because it is no sinne.
7:29
29. As though they had not.] The continencie of married folke. He exhorteth that such as haue vviues, should not vvholy bestovv them selues in the vaine transitorie pleasure and voluptuousnes of their flesh, but liue in such moderation, that their mariage hinder them as litle as may be, from spiritual cogitatiōs. Vvhich is best fulfilled of them that by mutual consent do vvholy conteine, Their perpetual continencie, best. vvhether they haue had children or none, contemning carnal issue for the ioyes of heauen. And these mariages be more blessed then any other, saith S. Augustine de Ser. Do. in monte li. 1 cap. 14.
7:32
32. Careful for the things of our Lord.] The Protestants might here learne if they list, first that virginitie is not onely preferred before mariage, Virginitie preferred, and vvhy. for that it is a more quiet state of life in this world, but for that it is more conuenient for the seruice of God. Secondly that virginitie hath a grateful puritie and sanctitie both of body & soule, vvhich mariage hath not. Thirdly, they may learne the cause why the Church of God requireth chastitie in the clergie, Vvhy continencie is required in the clergie. and forbiddeth not onely fornication, but al carnal copulation euen in lavvful vvedlocke: Vvhich is not onely to the end that Gods Priests be not diuided from him by the clogges of mariage, but also that they be cleane and pure from the fleshly actes of copulation.
7:39
Concordance Ro. 7, 2.
7:40
The state of vvidovvhod more blessed, then the state of matrimonie.
7:1
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 3
… to whom looking, the apostle also—himself too for this reason abstinent—gives the preference to continence.
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 11
… inexperience so great, that that infancy of faith prevented them from yet knowing what they were to do in regard of carnal and sexual necessity. The very phases themselves of this (inexperience) are intelligible from (the apostle’s) rescripts, when he says:
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… behold him desiring souls to keep a fast from the legitimate fruit of nature—the apple, I mean, of marriage: “But with regard to what ye wrote, good it is for a man to have no contact with a woman; but, on account of fornication, let each one have his own wife: let husband to wife, and wife to husband, render what is due.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.33
… 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.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.11
For consider, O virgins, how he, 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,
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.12
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,”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 14
82. But neither has the widow received any command, but a counsel; a counsel, however, not given once only but often repeated. For, first, it is said: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans the-argument
… Now to the rest he was moved to write by some particular cause and subject, and this he shows, as when he says to the Corinthians, “Touching those things whereof ye wrote unto me” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.4
… “The entire question relates to those who are living in wedlock, whether it is lawful for them to put away their wives, a thing which the Lord also has forbidden in the Gospel. Hence, also, the apostle says: ‘It is good for a man not to touch’ a wife or ‘a woman,’
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.14
… The above is my comment upon the apostle’s words: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 107.13
… such is your innate thirst for chastity that I cannot doubt but that you would go to them even before your daughter, and would emancipate yourself from God’s first decree of the Law to put yourself under His second dispensation of the Gospel.
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.7
… And again, supposing that one of two Gentiles believed on Christ, whether the one that believed should leave the one that believed not? And in case it were allowable to take wives, would the Apostle direct that only Christian wives, or Gentiles also, should be taken? Let us then consider Paul’s replies to these inquiries.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 2.2
… For Thy omnipotency is not far from us even when we are far from Thee, else in truth ought I more vigilantly to have given heed to the voice from the clouds: “Nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh, but I spare you;” and, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 3.18
… For in the former case the man aims at a useful object suited to the circumstances of the times; in the latter case he gratifies a lust which is engrossed in temporal enjoyments. And those men to whom the apostle permitted as a matter of indulgence to have one wife because of their incontinence,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 121
… For it is from these that we hear this voice: The end of the commandment is charity, and God is love. Wherefore, all God’s commandments, one of which is, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and all those precepts which are not commandments but special counsels, one of which is, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 35
… and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. For I would that all men were even as I myself: but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.18
… “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” He, however, who cannot receive it, “even if he marry, sinneth not;” and if a woman have not the gift of continence, let her also marry. “It is good, indeed, for a man not to touch a woman.”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… For hence it is that the Apostle, skilled in heavenly medicine, did not so much lay down a course of life for the whole as point out remedies to the weak when he said, It is good for a man not to touch a woman: but on account of fornication let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband (
7:2
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.23
… so.” But in the new covenant also there are some legal injunctions of the same order as, “Moses for your hardness of heart suffered you to put away your wives;” for example, because of our hardness of heart, it has been written on account of our weakness, “But because of fornications, let each man have his own wife and let each woman have her own husband;”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.12
… For, having set forth that “it is good for a man not to touch a woman,” he added immediately, “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 1
… and to those who love the way of abstinence, the things of abstinence; and to those who are married
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 23
… Therefore this passion indeed He did not cut off altogether, but added the words, “without a cause.” ( Matt. v. 22 .) Nor again did He abolish all desire, but only that which is unlawful, for he saith, “Nevertheless, because of desires , let every man have his own wife.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.18
… “It is good, indeed, for a man not to touch a woman.” But since “all men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given,” it remains that “to avoid fornication, every man ought to have his own wife, and every woman her own husband.”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 2.5
… Let the husband render unto the wife her due, and likewise the wife unto the husband (
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.24
Good indeed is the procreation of children enjoined by the law, and good is marriage on account of fornications, for it does away with these
7:3
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 2.54
… The manifold character of his ministry? His loving kindness? And on the other hand his strictness? And the combination and blending of the two; in such wise that his gentleness should not enervate, nor his severity exasperate? He gives laws for slaves and masters, rulers and ruled, husbands and wives, parents and children, marriage and celibacy,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 7
… Yea, touching thy wife’s modesty thou art so strict as even to go beyond necessity or measure, and not to allow her so much as indispensable absences; but to thyself thou deemest all things lawful. Yet Paul allows thee not, who gives the wife likewise the same authority, for thus he speaks: “Let the husband render unto the wife due honor.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
[2.] Ver. 3 . “Let the husband pay the wife the honor due to her: in like manner the wife the husband.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.22
… It would be tedious to go over the same ground now; and any one who pleases may draw from that fountain. But lest I should seem wholly to have passed over the matter, I will just say now that the apostle bids us pray without ceasing, and that he who in the married state renders his wife her due
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.4
… Accordingly, when the Egyptian woman desired to touch Joseph he flung away his cloak and fled from her hands. But as he who has once married a wife cannot, except by consent, abstain from intercourse with her or repudiate her, so long as she does not sin, he must render unto his wife her due,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.49
… For the apostle uses this figure when he says, "Let the husband render unto the wife what is due."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.16
… and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other; except it be with consent for a time, that ye may have leisure for prayer; and then come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… vii. 1, 2 ). For in that he premised the fear of fornication, he surely did not give a precept to such as were standing, but pointed out the bed to such as were falling, lest haply they should tumble to the ground. Whence to such as were still weak he added, Let the husband render unto the wife her due; and likewise also the wife unto the husband (
7:4
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 11
… but if her husband be dead she is loosed from the law of her husband.” It is then proved that marriage is a bond by which the woman is bound and from which she is loosed. Beautiful is the grace of mutual love, but the bondage is more constant. “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 An Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall 2.3
… For, as I said at the beginning, if you were a private person no one would indict you for shunning to serve as a soldier; but now thou art no longer thy own master, being engaged in the service of so great a king. For if the wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 7
… nevertheless, I do not enforce this. Abide, having house and children and wife; only do not insult thy wife, nor put thy children to shame, neither bring into thine house the infection from the theatre.” Hearest thou not Paul saying, “The husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 33
… ( Acts xxviii. 20 .) And again, “These things I endure for the elect’s sakes that they may obtain eternal life. ( 2 Tim. ii. 10 .) And this one may see in worldly things. “For the wife,” saith he, “hath not power over her own body, nor yet the husband; but the wife over the husband’s, and the husband over the wife’s.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 20
… Thus wilt thou be able to abate her wrath, and put an end to her disappointment. For it is flattery when a man does an unworthy act with an evil object: whereas this is the highest philosophy. Say then, “Even I am thine, my child; this advice Paul gives me where he says, ‘The husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife.’ (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.4
4. As the brief compass of a letter does not suffer us to delay too long on a single point, let us now pass to those which remain. In explaining the testimony of the apostle, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and likewise, also, the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife,”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 107.13
… You would count as nothing your desire for other offspring and would offer up yourself to the service of God. But because “there is a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing,” and because “the wife hath not power of her own body,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.25
… and not to insult, but rather to obey his wife, who supposed it would be solace of her barrenness if she could make use of the fruitful womb of her handmaid to supply the defect of her own nature, and by that law of which the apostle says, “Likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 4
… Unto which faith the Apostle allows so great right, as to call it “power,” saying, “The woman hath not power of her own body, but the man; again in like manner also the man hath not power of his own body, but the woman.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 6
… so that, although perpetual continence be pleasing to one of them, he may not, save with consent of the other. For thus far also, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the man: in like manner also the man hath not power of his own body, but the woman.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 32
… straightway he added, “to have children, to be mothers of families.” But unto the faith of chastity pertains that saying, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.31
… not consenting with sinful desires in her husband, but requesting of him what it was proper in him to grant. Nor was it the request of proud assumption; for every one knows that the duty of a wife is to obey her husband. But in reference to the body, we are told by the apostle that the wife has power over her husband’s body, as he has over hers;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.49
… and in obedience to her he had children by her hand-maid, and afterwards, without any hiring, by herself. On this occasion it was Rachel’s turn, so that she had the power so expressly mentioned in the New Testament by the apostle, "The husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.39
… In respect of its ordination for generation the Scripture says, “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house;” as regards its guaranteeing chastity, it is said of it, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.28
… as Sarah, Rachel, and Leah. And in doing this the husbands did not commit adultery, in that they obeyed their wives in that matter which had regard to conjugal duty, according to what the Apostle saith: “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 11.45
… But, if the wife does not follow after the continence which the husband aspires to, or the husband refuses that which the wife aspires to, it is not lawful for wedlock to be cut asunder, seeing that it is written, The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife (
7:5
Tatian † AD 180 Fragments 1
… At any rate, by the permission he certainly, though delicately, forbids; for while he permits them to return to the same on account of Satan and incontinence, he exhibits a man who will attempt to serve two masters—God by the ‘consent’ (
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.15
… “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.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Veiling of Virgins 10
… and therefore the worthier is it of all ostentation, if ostentation of virginity is dignity. For is not continence withal superior to virginity , whether it be the continence of the widowed , or of those who, by consent, have already renounced the common disgrace (which matrimony involves)?
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 1
… The first species is, virginity from one’s birth: the second, virginity from one’s second birth, that is, from the font; which (second virginity) either in the marriage state keeps (its subject) pure by mutual compact,
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 10
… If he is making prayer to the Lord, he is near heaven. If he is bending over the Scriptures, he is “wholly in them.” If he is singing a psalm, he satisfies himself. If he is adjuring a demon, he is confident in himself. Accordingly, the apostle added (the recommendation of) a temporary abstinence for the sake of adding an efficacy to prayers,
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.1
… So also I understand the apostolic saying “Defraud ye not one the other except it be by agreement for a season that ye may give yourselves unto prayer.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.2
… for by the two, he says, whom the Word desires to agree on earth, we must understand the husband and wife, who by agreement defraud each other of bodily intercourse that they may give themselves unto prayer;
St Dionysius of Alexandria † AD 265 Containing Various Sections of the Works 5.3
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.
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.11
… But afterwards, being aware of the weakness of the less continent, and their passion for intercourse, he permitted those who are unable to govern the flesh to use their own wives, rather than, shamefully transgressing, to give themselves up to fornication. Then, after having given this permission, he immediately added these words,
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Restoration of the Catholics on the Council of Sardica 1
… How many young men, seeing the examples of others, embraced the monastic life! How many fathers persuaded their children, and how many were urged by their children, not to be hindered from Christian asceticism! How many wives persuaded their husbands, and how many were persuaded by their husbands, to give themselves to prayer
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 4.25
… Because thou hast a possession of gold, do not on that account reprobate the silver. But let those also be of good cheer, who being married use marriage lawfully; who make a marriage according to God’s ordinance, and not of wantonness for the sake of unbounded license; who recognise seasons of abstinence, that they may give themselves unto prayer
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 82
And he hath a third grievous snare; as when he invests the sin with a show of devotion. And where hath the devil so far prevailed as to deceive to this degree? Hear, and beware of his devices. Christ by Paul commanded “that a woman depart not from her husband, and not to defraud one another, except by consent;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
[3.] Ver. 5 . “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 23
… And this is evident also from the advice which Paul gave. For from that lust he leads men quite away, saying, “But they that desire to be rich fall into temptation;” ( 1 Tim. vi. 9 .) but in the case of the other not so; but having separated them “for a season” only, and that by “consent,” he advises to ‘come together again’ (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 2
… We have a similar instance, in Paul’s Epistle to the Corinthians, in his command to husbands and wives to come together again. To which, that he might not be thought to be legislating for them, he subjoins, “But this I say by way of permission, not of commandment.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 20
… Then entrust her with the discourses of wisdom, for her soul will receive them. And establish her in that loveliest habit, I mean modesty. If you wish me, I will also tell you by way of specimen, what sort of language should be addressed to her. For if Paul shrank not from saying, “Defraud ye not one the other” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Thessalonians 5
… But at the season of marriage, let no one defer it. Behold, I speak the words of a match-maker, that you should let your sons marry. But I am not ashamed to speak thus, since not even Paul was ashamed to say, “Defraud ye not one the other” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Titus 5
… This then the blessed Paul places almost in the rank of a command. “Having food and raiment, let us be therewith content.” ( 1 Tim. vi. 8 .) But concerning women he says, “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent”—and “come together again.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.15
… “But if we are always to pray we must never yield to the claims of wedlock for, as often as I render her due to my wife, I incapacitate myself for prayer.” When I spoke thus it is clear that I relied on the words of the apostle: “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to…prayer.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.16
… “But lest any should suppose from the context of the words before quoted (namely, ‘that ye may give yourselves…to prayer and come together again’) that the apostle desires this consummation, and does not merely concede it to obviate a worse downfall, he immediately adds, ‘that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.’
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 122.4
… for my aim is that, flying on the wings of a dove, you may find rest and make your peace with the Father of mercy. Your former wife, who is now your sister and fellow-servant, has told me that, acting on the apostolic precept,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.12
… The great Creator and Fashioner, knowing the weakness of the vessel which he made, left virginity open to those whom He addressed; and shall I, the teacher of the Gentiles, who have become all things to all men that I might gain all, shall I lay upon the necks of weak believers from the very first the burden of perpetual chastity? Let them
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 2.3
… “Ye were running well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?” And elsewhere: “We would fain have come unto you, I Paul once and again; and Satan hindered us.” And to the married he says:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 78
… take, for example, what the Apostle Paul says to those who are married: “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer: and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 5.9
… With these are joined, in the abundant riches of God’s mercy, the inferior class of those to whom it is said, "Defraud not one another, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 30.5
… You, as a concession, allow your followers, as distinct from the priests, to eat animal food; as the apostle allows, in certain cases, not marriage in the general sense, but the indulgence of passion in marriage.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.43
… As for the permission which the apostle gives to husbands and wives, “not to defraud one another, except with consent for a time, that they may have leisure for prayer,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.16
… and the married pair are enjoined not to defraud one the other, lest Satan should tempt them by reason of their incontinence.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.22
… It is doubtless a sin, though a venial one. The Apostle saith, “But I speak this of allowance,” when he was treating the matter thus. “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 141.8
… who seeketh him not aid from the devil; who holdeth the Catholic Church; whom no one complaineth of as cheating; under whose oppression no weak neighbour groaneth; who assaileth not another’s wife; who is content with his own, or even without his own, in such wise as is lawful, and as Apostolical discipline permitteth, with consent of both,
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 17.20
… “Since then we are the offspring of God we ought not to think that the Godhead is like to gold or silver or stone sculptured by the art and device of man.” But to the weak he became weak, when, by way of permission, not of command, he allowed those who could not contain themselves to return together again,
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… 21 ). For in truth, when supplication is poured out to God , such married life is by no means condemned. Concerning which supplication Paul also admonishes, saying, Defraud ye not one the other except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to prayer (
7:6
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.15
… 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.”
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.1
… But in as far as marrying “in the Lord” is permissible, as being within our power, so far more culpable is it not to observe that which you can observe. Add to this the fact that the apostle, with regard to widows and the unmarried, advises them to remain permanently in that state, when he says, “But I desire all to persevere in (imitation of) my example:”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… and will be bound forthwith to put the curb upon the nuptials of continence, if the fornication for the sake of which those nuptials are permitted shall cease to be feared. For (a fornication) which has indulgence granted it will not be feared. And yet he professes that he has granted the use of marriage “by way of indulgence, not of command.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 10.5
… Where, for example, he says something by way of permission
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.23
… it has been written on account of our weakness, “But because of fornications, let each man have his own wife and let each woman have her own husband;” and this, “Let the husband render unto the wife her due, and likewise also the wife unto the husband.” To these sayings it is accordingly subjoined, “But this I say by way of permission, not of commandment.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.16
… One which he blushes to speak of in plainer words, which he prefers only to Satan’s temptation, and which has its root in incontinence. Do we labor to expound this as a dark saying when the writer has himself explained his meaning? “I speak this,” he says, ‘by way of permission, and not as a command.’
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 78
… It is possible, I say, that this might not have been considered a sin, had the apostle not added: “But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Continence 27
… Forsooth marriage continence is wont to ease this lust of the flesh, and to check its curb but thus far, that neither in marriage itself it run riot by immoderate license, but that a measure be observed, either such as is due to the weakness of the spouse, unto whom the Apostle enjoins not this, as of command, but yields it as of permission;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 15
… let him receive;” no one doubts that they would have been ready to receive it even with joy, who reads with careful attention what use they made of their wives, at a time when also it was allowed one man to have several, whom he had with more chastity, than any now has his one wife, of these, unto whom we see what the Apostle allows by way of leave.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 5
… lest, by this means, the one of them, (the due of marriage being denied to him,) being through his own incontinence tempted of Satan, should fall away into fornication, he saith, “But this I say of leave, not of command; but I would that all men were as I myself; but each one hath his own proper gift from God; but one in this way, and another in that.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.16
… that is, into fornications and adulteries. To escape this evil, even such embraces of husband and wife as have not procreation for their object, but serve an overbearing concupiscence, are permitted, so far as to be within range of forgiveness, though not prescribed by way of commandment:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.22
… Is it not a sin in married persons to exact from one another more than this design of the “procreation of children” renders necessary? It is doubtless a sin, though a venial one. The Apostle saith, “But I speak this of allowance,”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… Whence to such as were still weak he added, Let the husband render unto the wife her due; and likewise also the wife unto the husband ( v. 3 ). And, while in the most honourable estate of matrimony allowing to them something of pleasure, he added, But this I say by way of indulgence, not by way of command (
7:7
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.7
… 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,
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.2
… For fear we should make an ill use of what he says, “Let her marry whom she wishes,” he has added, “only in the Lord,” that is, in the name of the Lord, which is, undoubtedly, “to a Christian.” That “Holy Spirit,” therefore, who prefers that widows and unmarried women should persevere in their integrity, who exhorts us to a copy
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 3
… For what is absolutely good is not permitted , but needs no asking to make it lawful. Permission has its cause sometimes even in necessity . Finally, in this case, there is no volition on the part of him who permits marriage. For his volition points another way. “I will ,” he says, “that you all so be as I too (am).”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.16
… and Paul knowing this, that marriage according to the Word of God was a “gift,” like as holy celibacy was a gift, says, “But I would that all men were like myself; howbeit, each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
Pierius of Alexandria † AD 309 Pierus of Alexandria 1
Origen, Dionysius, Pierius, Eusebius of Cæsareia, Didymus, and Apollinaris, have interpreted this epistle most copiously; of whom Pierius, when he was expounding and unfolding the meaning of the apostle, and purposed to explain the words, For I would that all men were even as I myself ,
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 11
… ‘For what a man seeth, why doth he also hope for? But if we hope for those things we see [not], we then by patience wait for them .’ Since then that blessed man was of such a character, and apostolic grace was committed to him, he wrote, wishing ‘that all men should be as he was
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 14
82. But neither has the widow received any command, but a counsel; a counsel, however, not given once only but often repeated. For, first, it is said: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” And again: “I would that all men were even as I myself;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Commentary on Galatians 2
… vii. 5 .) For this was not a judgment authoritatively given but an indulgence to their incontinence; as he says, “for your incontinency.” Would you know Paul’s sentence in this matter? hear his words, “I would that all men were even as I myself,” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 1
… As for example, the first will is that sinners should not perish; the second will is, that, if men become wicked, they shall perish. For surely it is not by necessity that He punishes them, but because He wills it. You may see something of the sort even in the words of Paul, where he says, “I would that all men were even as I myself.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 10
This is rightly said, as he was certain to be reproached by them, and for the same reason perhaps he said, “the husband of one wife,” though elsewhere he says, “I would that all men were even as I myself!” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 16
[10.] How is it then (some one says) that many are not able? How is it then that many are not willing? For, if they be willing, all will be able. Therefore also Paul says, “I would that all men were even as I myself” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 18
How then did He Himself enjoin it? In condescension. For as Paul says, “I would that all men were even as I myself” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.20
… For they are not to be heard who feign him to have had a wife; for, when he is discussing continence and commending perpetual chastity, he uses the words, “I would that all men were even as I myself.” And farther on, “I say, therefore, to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.4
… Again, in the verses which follow, the apostle says: “But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 49.3
… Origen, Dionysius, Pierius, Eusebius of Cæsarea, Didymus, Apollinaris, have used great latitude in the interpretation of this epistle. When Pierius, sifting and expounding the apostle’s meaning, comes to the words, “I would that all men were even as I myself,”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.8
… but we may at least imitate His life. The former was the blessed prerogative of divinity, the latter belongs to our human condition and is part of human effort. I would that all men were like me, that while they are like me, they may also become like Christ, to whom I am like. For “he that believeth in Christ ought himself also to walk even as He walked.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.34
… or they listen to the dictates of wealth. And, worse than all, they give promotion to the clergy who besmear them with flattery. To take the other view, if the Apostle’s meaning be that marriage is necessary in a bishop, the Apostle himself ought not to have been a bishop, for he said,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.36
… But what does the Apostle mean by exhorting to continence, if continence be contrary to nature? What does our Lord mean when He instructs us in the various kinds of eunuchs. Surely
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 8.1
… For, compared with Thy sweetness, and the beauty of Thy house, which I loved, those things delighted me no longer. But still very tenaciously was I held by the love of women; nor did the apostle forbid me to marry, although he exhorted me to something better, especially wishing that all men were as he himself was.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 189.5
5. They occupy indeed a higher place before God who, abandoning all these secular employments, serve Him with the strictest chastity; but “every one,” as the apostle says, “hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Continence 1
… but each hath his own gift from God; one in this manner, another in that manner.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 10
… Would that all would this, only in “charity out of a pure heart, and good conscience, and faith unfeigned;” much more speedily would the City of God be filled, and the end of the world hastened. For what else doth the Apostle, as is manifest, exhort to, when he saith, speaking on this head, “I would that all were as myself;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 41
… but each one hath his own proper gift from God; one in this way, and another in that way.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 29
… so that to observe the one is of course more than to keep the other; whereas, at the same time, neither can be maintained without the grace of God, inasmuch as the apostle, in speaking of this very subject, says: “But I would that all men were even as I myself. Every man, however, hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.3
That chastity in the married state is God’s gift, is shown by the most blessed Paul, when, speaking on this very subject, he says: “But I would that all men were even as I myself: but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 8
… Writing to the Corinthians, he admonished married persons not to defraud each other; and then, after his admonition to these, he added: “But I could wish that all men were even as I am myself,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 21
… one after this manner, and another after that.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints 2.37
… but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, another after that;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 8.8
… Except thou wish him thine equal, thou wishest to have him always a learner. But if thou wish to have him always a learner, thou wilt be an envious teacher. If an envious teacher, how wilt thou be a teacher? I pray thee, do not teach him thine enviousness. Hear the apostle speaking of the bowels of charity: “I would that all were even as I.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 106.32
32. So “He gave them unto compassions, in the sight of all that had taken them captive” ( ver. 46 ). That they might not be vessels of wrath, but vessels of mercy. The compassions unto which He gave them are named in the plural for this reason, I imagine, because each one hath a gift of his own from God, one in one way, another in another.
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 11.64
… For holy preaching concedes them this, and yet in the very concession shakes the mind with fear. For, when the Apostle Paul said, Who cannot contain let him have his own wife, he straightway took care to add, But I speak this by way of indulgence, not by way of command (
Pseudo-Cyprian On the Glory of Martyrdom 28
… “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.”
7:8
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 3
… (namely), that he has introduced all indulgence in regard to marriage from his own (judgment)—that is, from human sense, not from divine prescript. 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,”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… But when things lawful are (only) granted by way of indulgence, who hope for things unlawful? “To the unmarried” also, “and widows,” he says, “It is good, by his example, to persevere” (in their present state); “but if they were too weak, to marry; because it is preferable to marry than to bum.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.12
… all were healthy and continent, as he also was, but afterwards allowing a second marriage to those who are burdened with the disease of the passions, lest they should be wholly defiled by fornication, goaded on by the itchings of the organs of generation to promiscuous intercourse, considering such a second marriage far preferable to burning and indecency.
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 4.26
… for though continence is a noble and admirable thing, yet it is also permissible to enter upon a second marriage, that the weak may not fall into fornication. For it is good for them , saith the Apostle, if they abide even as I. But if they have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 14
82. But neither has the widow received any command, but a counsel; a counsel, however, not given once only but often repeated. For, first, it is said: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” And again: “I would that all men were even as I myself;” and once more: “It is good for them if they remain even as I;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… For if it be a “gift,” and man contributes nothing thereunto, how sayest thou, “But (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.5
… Can any one who has any part in Christ’s tunic be regarded as an alien? Have we not spoken of the very queen herself—that is, the Church of the Saviour—as wearing a vesture of gold wrought about with divers colors? Moreover, when I came to discuss marriage in connection with the following verses,
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.17
17. The shortness of a letter compels me to hasten on. I pass, accordingly, to the points which remain. “I say,” remarks the apostle, “to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 123.4
… To the Corinthians he uses somewhat similar language: “I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 123.7
… The apostle is of two minds: first, he proclaims a command, “I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.” Next. he makes a concession, “But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.9
… ” but you say, “It is better to marry than to burn.” If marriage in itself be good, do not compare it with fire, but simply say “It is good to marry.” I suspect the goodness of that thing which is forced into the position of being only the lesser of two evils. What I want is not a smaller evil, but a thing absolutely good.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 3
3. Therefore (thus) saith the Apostle, the teacher of the Gentiles, the vessel of election, “But I say unto the unmarried and the widows, that it is good for them, if they shall have so continued, even as I also.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 7
… otherwise we shall condemn first marriages also, which neither Cataphryges, nor Novatians, nor their most learned upholder Tertullian dared to call base. But as, when he says, “But I say unto the unmarried and widows, that it is good for them if they shall have so continued;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 11
… For you would have done what the Apostle says, after he had said, “It is good for them, if they shall have so continued, even as I;”
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 5.11
… and which is termed by Scripture uncleanness: of which the Apostle says: “But I say to the unmarried and to widows, that it is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they do not contain let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn;”
7:9
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.7
… 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,
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 1
… But now this glory is being extinguished, and that by means of those who ought with all the more constancy to refuse concession of any pardon to defilements of this kind, that they make the fear of succumbing to adultery and fornication their reason for marrying as often as they please—since “better it is to marry than to burn.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 160.4
… “it remaineth that both they that have wives be as though they had none.” If he improperly quotes the charge “Increase and multiply,” I laugh at him, for not discerning the signs of the times. Second marriage is a remedy against fornication, not a means of lasciviousness. “If they cannot contain,” it is said “let them marry;”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 15.23
… Only be of good cheer, only work, only strive earnestly; for nothing shall be lost. Every prayer of thine, every Psalm thou singest is recorded; every alms-deed, every fast is recorded; every marriage duly observed is recorded; continence
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Repentance 1.14
68. The serpent eats this dust, if the Lord Jesus is favourable to us, that our spirit may not sympathize with the weakness of the flesh, nor be set on fire by the vapours of the flesh and the heat of our members. “It is better to marry than to burn,”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 2
… Yet, since the Apostle knew that Anna, the widow of fourscore years, from her youth was a herald of the works of the Lord, I do not think that he thought that the younger should be excluded from the devotion of widowhood, especially as he said: “It is better to marry than to burn.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… For if it be a “gift,” and man contributes nothing thereunto, how sayest thou, “But ( v. 8 .) I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I: (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 23
Therefore also Paul said, “It is better to marry than to burn:” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.29
… If you find one of them weak in the faith, be attentive to her, comfort her, caress her, and make her chastity your treasure. But if a girl pretends to have a vocation simply because she desires to escape from service, read aloud to her the words of the apostle: “It is better to marry than to burn.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.8
… Can any one, moreover, be so unfair in his criticism of my poor treatise as to allege that I condemn first marriages, when he reads my opinion on second ones as follows: “The apostle, it is true, allows second marriages, but only to such women as are bent upon them, to such as cannot contain,
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 77.3
… If however it is made a charge against her that after repudiating her husband she did not continue unmarried, I readily admit this to have been a fault, but at the same time declare that it may have been a case of necessity. “It is better,” the apostle tells us, “to marry than to burn.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 79.10
… A widow should be ignorant that second marriage is permitted; she should know nothing of the apostle’s words:—“It is better to marry than to burn.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 10
… but she that is married, is anxious about the things of the world, how to please her husband.” Whence it seems to me, that at this time, those only, who contain not, ought to marry, according to that sentence of the same Apostle, “But if they contain not, let them be married: for it is better to be married than to burn.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 19
19. Therefore as many women as there are now, unto whom it is said, “if they contain not, let them be married,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 25
… For it is the habit itself, whereby any thing is done, when there is need; but when it is not done, it can be done, only there is no need. This habit, in the matter of that continence which is from sexual intercourse, they have not, unto whom it is said, “If they contain not, let them be married.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 9
… but now, when from out every race of men, and from out all nations, members of Christ may be gathered unto the People of God, and City of the kingdom of heaven, whoso can receive sacred virginity, let him receive it; and let her only, who contains not, be married.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.18
… “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” He, however, who cannot receive it, “even if he marry, sinneth not;” and if a woman have not the gift of continence, let her also marry.
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… vi. 9, 10 ). And again, But fornicators and adulterers God will judge ( Heb. xiii. 4 ). They are therefore to be admonished that, if they suffer from the storms of temptation with risk to their safety, they should seek the port of wedlock. For it is written, It is better to marry than to burn (
7:10
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.7
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,
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.91
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.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 82
And he hath a third grievous snare; as when he invests the sin with a show of devotion. And where hath the devil so far prevailed as to deceive to this degree? Hear, and beware of his devices. Christ by Paul commanded “that a woman depart not from her husband,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
[4.] Ver. 10 . “But to the married I give charge, yet not I, but the Lord.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.10
10. So far the first section has been explained. Let us now come to those which follow.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 28.4
… —if we say thus, what then shall be our answer when perverse men such as he himself prophetically described arise, forbidding marriage, if they defend themselves by saying that, in all which the same apostle wrote in confirmation of the lawfulness of marriage,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 7
… For holy Scripture causes a hard knot in this matter, in that the Apostle says, that, by commandment of the Lord, the wife ought not to depart from her husband, but, in case she shall have departed, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 32
… likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.” But unto the sanctity of the Sacrament that saying, “The wife not to depart from her husband, but, in case she shall have departed, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 15
… But that, which he added, “Thou art loosed from a wife, seek not a wife,” is a sentence of counsel, not of command; therefore it is lawful to do, but it is better not to do. Lastly, he added straightway, “Both if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.14
… “And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.”
Socrates Scholasticus † AD 440 The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 4.23
… On leading the bride with the customary ceremonies from the banquet-room to the nuptial couch, after their mutual friends had withdrawn, he took a book containing the epistles of the apostles and read to his wife Paul’s Epistle to the Corinthians, explaining to her the apostle’s admonitions to married persons.
7:11
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
Now what is that which “to the married the Lord commanded? That the wife depart not from her husband: (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 6
… Hence it was that both grace wrought effectually in those days, hence also that they lived in good works. Hear, moreover, what he writes to the Corinthians, against whom he brings charges out of number; yet does he not bear even them record, where he says, “Yea, what zeal it wrought in you, yea, what longing!” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.16
… But in this section of the Gospel nothing is to be more steadily kept in view, than that so great is the evil of fornication, that, while married people are bound to one another by so strong a bond, this one cause of divorce is excepted; but as to what fornication is, that we have already discussed.
7:12
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.15
… 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.”
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.2
… 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.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 1.5
… Paul. When he declares that “Every Scripture is inspired of God and profitable,” does he include his own writings? Or does he not include his dictum,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
Ver. 12 . “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. If any brother have a wife that believeth not, and she is content to dwell with him, let him not leave her. And if any woman hath an husband that believeth not, and he is content to dwell with her, let her not leave him.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 30
… The measure of that which He enjoyeth by us is but the greatness of our benefit, and the delight He taketh in our salvation. For this reason He also oftentimes relinquisheth His own, and seeketh thine. “For if any,” he saith,” have a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away;” (
7:13
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 63
… but if she separate herself from a fornicator, not so. Seest thou how great an evil this is? “If,” It saith, “any faithful woman have a husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 107.1
… “The woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband; else were your children unclean but now are they holy.”
7:14
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.20.12
… 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.”
Tertullian † AD 220 A Treatise on the Soul 39
… Thus, too, is it that to all persons their genii are assigned, which is only another name for demons . Hence in no case (I mean of the heathen, of course) is there any nativity which is pure of idolatrous superstition. It was from this circumstance that the apostle said, that when either of the parents was sanctified, the children were holy;
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.2
… but continence He commends. Let the one, therefore, have the necessity of continuing; the other, further, even the power of not marrying. Secondly, if, according to the Scripture, they who shall be “apprehended” by the faith in (the state of) Gentile marriage are not defiled (thereby) for this reason, that, together with themselves, others
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 11
… It is not I who say this, but the Apostle; or, rather, it is not he, but Christ, Who spoke in him. And he spoke of this servitude in the case of good married people. For above you read: “The unbelieving husband is sanctified by his believing wife; and the unbelieving wife by her believing husband.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 10
[7.] Hearing these things, let us, I beseech you, “minister to the saints.” For every believer is a saint in that he is a believer. Though he be a person living in the world, he is a saint. “For” (he says) “the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife by the husband.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 85.0
Paulinus had asked Jerome two questions, (1) how can certain passages of scripture ( Exod. vii. 13; Rom. ix. 16 ) be reconciled with Free Will? and (2) Why are the children of believers said to be holy (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 85.2
2. Your letter propounds two questions, the first, why God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and why the apostle said: “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy;” and other things which appear to do away with free will: the second, how those are holy who are born of believing, that is, of baptized parents,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 13
… of either of them, even an unbelieving partner does not stand in the way of, but rather that the sanctity of the wife profits the unbelieving husband, and the sanctity of the husband profits the unbelieving wife, the same Apostle is witness, saying, “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in a brother.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 35
… "The unbelieving husband," he says, "is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving woman by the believing husband: otherwise your children would be unclean; but now are they holy."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 2.41
The apostle indeed says, “ Else were your children unclean , but now are they holy ;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 2.42
… The apostle, in this very passage which has occupied our attention, says that the unbeliever of a married couple is sanctified by a believing partner: “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband. Else were your children unclean, but now are they holy.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.21
… Therefore the saying of the apostle, when advising believers not to separate themselves from unbelieving partners: “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.16
… but in permitting, He did not command it: He gave opportunity to the apostle for advising that whoever wished should not put away an unbelieving wife, in order that, perchance, in this way she might become a believer. “For,” says he, “the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.22
… but has thought it plain, as he wished a Christian who had an unbelieving wife to be understood by the expression brother . And therefore he says a little after, “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart: a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 12
… That “brethren” mean Christians, may be proved by many texts of Holy Writ; the plainest, however, is that of the apostle which he puts thus: “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother.”
7:15
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.2
… for this reason, to be sure, in order that no one, after attaining to faith, should think that he must turn away from a woman who is now in some sense an “alien” and “stranger.” Accordingly he subjoins withal a reason, that “we are called in peace unto the Lord God;” and that “the unbeliever may, through the use of matrimony, be gained by the believer.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 11
… And he spoke of this servitude in the case of good married people. For above you read: “The unbelieving husband is sanctified by his believing wife; and the unbelieving wife by her believing husband.” And further on: “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not bound in such cases.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 61
But He seems to me here to intimate also the persecutions. For since there were many instances both of fathers urging their sons to ungodliness, and wives their husbands; when they command these things, saith He, let them be neither wives nor parents, even as Paul likewise said, “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 22
… And why be surprised if this be not universally possible in the case of other persons, when even in the case of man and wife he broke through the rule? “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… 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.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 20
Seest thou not how great a share of honor God would have her enjoy, in that he hath taken thee away from thy father, and hath linked thee to her? What then, a man may say, if our duty is done, and yet she does not follow the example? “Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.6
… My words are these: “‘If any man is called in uncircumcision, let him not be circumcised.’ You had a wife, the apostle says, when you believed. Do not fancy your faith in Christ to be a reason for parting from her. For ‘God hath called us in peace.’
7:16
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.7
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”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 188
… If her reason is his living in fornication we do not find this in the custom of the church; but from an unbelieving husband a wife is commanded not to depart, but to remain, on account of the uncertainty of the issue. “For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 31
… ii. 12 .) He means to hinder her from publicly coming forward ( 1 Cor. xiv. 35 ), and from the seat on the bema, not from the word of teaching. Since if this were the case, how would he have said to the woman that had an unbelieving husband, “How knowest thou, O woman, if thou shalt save thy husband?” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… 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?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 61
… A women destroyed Absalom, a woman destroyed Amnon, a woman was like to have destroyed Job, a woman rescued Nabal from the slaughter. Women have preserved whole nations; for Deborah and Judith exhibited successes worthy of men; so also do ten thousand other women. Wherefore Paul saith, “For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband?” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 69
… Even if thou accomplish nothing, thou hast fulfilled all thy part; but I should rather say, that it is impossible that the wife should not gain the husband, when she speaks by the very actions. “For what knowest thou, O woman, whether thou shalt save thy husband?” (
7:17
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.2
… “As each,” it says, “is called by the Lord, so let him persevere.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 1.5
… Paul. When he declares that “Every Scripture is inspired of God and profitable,” does he include his own writings? Or does he not include his dictum, “I say, and not the Lord,” and
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Defence Against the Arians (Apologia Contra Arianos) 2
… If then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 30
… And he does this also in regard to the preaching, as when he says, “What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?” ( ib. xiv. 36 .) For there is nothing so powerful as emulation. And so he often employs it. For elsewhere too he says,” “And so ordain I in all the Churches;” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… 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.
7:18
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1.18
… Or who shall be considered free of a crime of the greatest enormity, that lays hands upon himself? But perhaps the Epistles of the Apostle Paul will appear to be beyond this. For what is his meaning, when he says, “Is any man called, being circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1-2.18
… And who is there that, condemning himself for having looked upon a woman to lust after her, would rationally transfer the blame to the right eye alone, and throw it away? The apostle, moreover, lays down the law, saying, “Is any man called, being circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised.”
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 42
… For it is written: “Is any man circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Or is any in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. For neither of these is anything, but only the keeping of the commandments of God.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.6
… Moreover, in the passage where I interpret the words of the apostle, “Is any man called being circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 128.3
3. What then, I reply? Is youth to run riot that self-indulgence may afterwards be more resolutely rejected? Far from it, they rejoin: “let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide. Is any called being circumcised,”— that is, as a virgin?—“let him not become uncircumcised”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.11
… and then he suddenly introduces the metaphors of circumcision and uncircumcision, of bond and free, and under those metaphors treats of the married and unmarried.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Lying 8
… Whence are those words of his: “Is any man called being circumcised let him not become uncircumcised. Is 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 every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of the Work of Monks 12
… as in another place he saith, “Thy circumcision is become uncircumcision.” It was in accordance then with this his sentence, in which he saith, “Is any called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised;”
7:19
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 32
… i. 24 .) For to show that this is the meaning, observe what he adds, “Put no difference between us and them.” When he has mentioned the testimony borne to them, then he utters that great word, the same which Paul speaks, “Neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 2
… and why says he here, “to the Jew first, and also to the Greek?” What meaneth this difference? and yet he has often said, “Neither circumcision is anything, nor uncircumcision” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.6
… My words are these: “‘If any man is called in uncircumcision, let him not be circumcised.’ You had a wife, the apostle says, when you believed. Do not fancy your faith in Christ to be a reason for parting from her. For ‘God hath called us in peace.’ ‘Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping of the commandments of God.’
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 63
… And between Jew and Gentile there is no distinction, since, as the Apostle says, “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of God’s commands
7:20
Tertullian † AD 220 On Idolatry 5
… 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.’”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 107.13
… You would count as nothing your desire for other offspring and would offer up yourself to the service of God. But because “there is a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing,” and because “the wife hath not power of her own body,” and because the apostle says “Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called”
7:21
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Veiling of Virgins 3
… 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
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 23
… xix. 4, 5 ; Gen. ii. 24 .) And this is what that wise man meant to explain. For since equality of honor does many times lead to fightings, He hath made many governments and forms of subjection; as that, for instance, of man and wife, that of son and father, that of old men and young, that of bond and free,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 19
… another in the most painful diseases: are these works of Providence? One man is deaf, another dumb, another poor, whilst another, impious, yea, utterly impious, and full of ten thousand vices, enjoys wealth, and keeps concubines, and parasites, and is owner of a splendid mansion, and lives an idle life.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.6
… And a little further on he says: ‘Art thou called being a servant, care not for it; but, if thou mayest be made free, use it rather;’
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.7
… Once more, in another place, we have brought forward the testimony of the apostle to this effect: “Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 128.3
… The same Paul also in the same chapter, when discussing the subjects of virginity and marriage, calls those who are married slaves of the flesh, but those not under the yoke of wedlock freemen who serve the Lord in all freedom.
7:22
St Ignatius of Antioch † AD 108 Epistle to the Philadelphians: Shorter and Longer Versions 4
… Children, obey your parents, and have an affection for them, as workers together with God for your birth [into the world]. Servants, be subject to your masters in God, that ye may be the freed-men of Christ.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 1.5
… And because in the time of the Lord’s passion wrong alone had no part, which had made captive all of whom it had gained possession, captivity itself turning back upon itself was made captive, not now attached to Belial but to Christ, to serve Whom is liberty. “For he who is called in the Lord as a servant is the Lord’s freedman.”
7:23
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 11
… then, is the constraint in marriage, which subjects even the stronger to the other; for by mutual constraint each is bound to serve. Nor if one wishes to refrain can he withdraw his neck from the yoke, for he is subject to the incontinence of the other. It is said: “Ye are bought with a price, be not ye servants of men.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 52
… And ye know assuredly what are the things that give freedom. Wherefore also Paul leading us there, I mean unto the freedom that beseems us, did on this wise lead us unto it, having reminded us of the cross and blood of our Lord. “For ye are bought,” saith he, “with a price; be not ye the servants of men.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 12
… Now that they may not say this, he shows that from benefits already conferred, it is binding on us to choose it: and this he lays down more clearly in other passages, where he says, “Ye are not your own;” and, “Ye are bought with a price;” and, “Be not ye the servants of men” ( 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20 ;
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 14
… And this is a point he is everywhere giving proof of, that what God hath done for us is not matter of debt, but of mere grace. But after this, what we do is no longer matter of free-will offering, but of debt. For when he saith, “Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of men” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… 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.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 25
But we “are become” (I know not why) “servants of men” (
7:24
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 128.3
3. What then, I reply? Is youth to run riot that self-indulgence may afterwards be more resolutely rejected? Far from it, they rejoin: “let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide.
7:25
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.15
… “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.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 4
… But there is a wide difference between a precept of God and a suggestion of man. “Precept of the Lord,” says he, “I have not; but I give advice, as having obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.13
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:
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Duties of the Clergy 2.17
87. Such was Paul, who gave counsel to virgins,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Virgins 1.5
23. But let us now come down from the mother to the daughters. “Concerning virgins,” says the Apostle, “I have no commandment of the Lord.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 12
… And so it is not laid upon any, but set before him. And, therefore, the Apostle said well: “Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my counsel.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 13
80. For the Lord Himself did not impose this commandment, but invited the will, and the Apostle did not lay down a rule, but gave a counsel.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 63.24
35. Again, with what reverence for virginity has the holy Apostle spoken: “Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, but I give my counsel, as having obtained mercy of the Lord.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Instructions to Catechumens 2.5
… For his service is not forced upon thee. And see the lovingkindness of God. For we, before we put down the price, ask those who are being sold, and when we have learned that they are willing, then we put down the price. But Christ not so, but He even put down the price for us all; his precious blood. For, He says, ye were bought with a price.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 75
… For He did not command this, but left it to the choice of his hearers. Wherefore Paul also said “Now, concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
[7.] Ver. 25 . “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.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 23
… Therefore surely, it is, that Paul, permitting even a second marriage, demands in the case of money great strictness, saying, “Why not rather take wrong? why not rather be defrauded?” ( 1 Cor. vi. 7 .) And when treating of virginity, he says, “I have no commandment,” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.20
… Your watchful affection has kept her a virgin. Are you angry with her because she chooses to be a king’s wife and not a soldier’s? She has conferred on you a high privilege; you are now the mother-in-law of God. “Concerning virgins,” says the apostle, “I have no commandment of the Lord.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.7
7. In another passage we have discussed the reasons which led Paul to say: “Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 130.10
… The dew of heaven and severe fasting quench in a girl the flame of passion and enable her soul even in its earthly tenement to live the angelic life. Therefore the chosen vessel declares that concerning virgins he has no commandment of the Lord.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary 23
… It is this angelic purity which secures to virginity its highest reward, and the Apostle might have seemed to despise a course of life which involves no guilt. Nevertheless in the immediate context he adds,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.12
12. Having discussed marriage and continency he at length comes to virginity and says
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.34
34. All that goes for nothing, says Jovinianus, because even bishops, priests, and deacons, husbands of one wife, and having children, were appointed by the Apostle. Just as the Apostle
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.36
… “Many are called, few chosen.” Many begin, few persevere. And so the reward is great for those who have persevered. If all were able to be virgins, our Lord would never have said: “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it:” and the Apostle would not have hesitated to give his advice,—
Sulpicius Severus † AD 420 The Doubtful Letters of Sulpitius Severus 2.4
… No one acquainted with the law does not know that virginity is above the commandment or precept, as the Apostle says, “Now, as to virgins, I have no precept of the Lord, but I give my advice.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 21.27
… For among this number is the apostle, who says, “I obtained mercy to be faithful.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 31
And lest men should arrogate to themselves the merit of their own faith at least, not understanding that this too is the gift of God, this same apostle, who says in another place that he had “obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 13
… Therefore I think that this is good on account of the present necessity, because it is good for a man so to be.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 14
… but that, which, within the kingdom of God itself, might be more largely possessed, if there were larger thoughts how they were to please God, will assuredly be less, when as this very thing is less thought of by necessity of marriage. Therefore he says, “Concerning virgins I have not command of the Lord.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 29
… “That we do more than is commanded us in the law and the gospel.” To this Pelagius replied: “This they have set down as my statement. What we said, however, was in keeping with the apostle’s assertion concerning virginity, of which Paul writes: ‘I have no commandment of the Lord.’”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 63
… “That we do more than is commanded us in the law and the gospel,” Pelagius urged in his own vindication, that “he spoke concerning virginity,” of which Paul says: “I have no commandment of the Lord.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 17
His last clause runs thus: “I have kept the faith.” But he who says this is the same who declares in another passage, “I have obtained mercy that I might be faithful.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 28
I have already discussed the point concerning faith, that is, concerning the will of him who believes, even so far as to show that it appertains to grace,—so that the apostle did not tell us, “I have obtained mercy because I was faithful;” but he said, “I have obtained mercy in order to be faithful.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints 1.4
… And he does not say, “to believe on Him more fully and perfectly,” but, “to believe on Him.” Neither does he say that he himself had obtained mercy to be more faithful, but “to be faithful,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints 1.7
… but it should further have been asked, whether even the merit of faith does not come from God’s mercy,—that is, whether that mercy is manifested in man only because he is a believer, or whether it is also manifested that he may be a believer? For we read in the apostle’s words: ‘I obtained mercy to be a believer.’
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 3.14
Observe further that the word judgment ( γνώμη ) is used in many ways and in many senses. Sometimes it signifies exhortation: as when the divine apostle says, Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; yet I give my judgment
7:26
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… “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.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 13
… But this not a man’s counsel as to things within the compass of man’s strength, for he acknowledges that the gift of divine mercy was bestowed upon him, that he might know how faithfully to set first the former, and to arrange the latter. And, therefore, he says: “I think,” not, I order, but, “I think that this is good because of the present distress.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 14
… a counsel, however, not given once only but often repeated. For, first, it is said: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” And again: “I would that all men were even as I myself;” and once more: “It is good for them if they remain even as I;” and a fourth time: “It is good for the present distress.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 63.24
38. Answer me now, O Paul, in what way thou givest counsel for the present distress.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 15
And Paul too sets forth sensible rewards at great length, and uses things present in his exhortations; as when he is discoursing about virginity. For having said nothing about the heavens there, for the time he urges it by things present, saying, “Because of the present distress,” and, “But I spare you,” and, “I would have you without carefulness.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 21
… I shall therefore quote you examples from the saints of the ancient times. How many, who had wives to keep and children to bring up, were inferior in no respect, no, in no respect to those who have been mentioned? Now, however, it is no longer so, “by reason of the present distress” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.21
… “Thou shalt not take thee a wife.” He had been sanctified in his mother’s womb, and now he was forbidden to take a wife because the captivity was near. The apostle gives the same counsel in different words. “I think, therefore, that this is good by reason of the present distress, namely that it is good for a man to be as he is.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.12
… After them there is a long series of apostolic men, martyrs, and men illustrious no less for holiness than for eloquence, with whom we may very easily become acquainted through their own writings.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 14
… he saith, “I give counsel, as having obtained mercy from God that I should be faithful.” For neither ought I to grudge faithful counsel, who not by my own merits, but by the mercy of God, am faithful. “I think therefore that this is good, by reason of the present necessity.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 19
19. But lest any should think that of two works, the good and the better, the rewards will be equal, on this account it was necessary to treat against those, who have so interpreted that saying of the Apostle, “But I think that this is good by reason of the present necessity,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 21
… Wherefore we have already spoken enough for the business which we have taken in hand, and, so far as we could, have shown, that neither that saying of the Apostle, “But I think that this is good by reason of the present necessity,”
7:27
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.7
… 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 thereof.
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife i.7
… Therefore when, through the will of God, the husband is deceased, the marriage likewise, by the will of God, deceases. Why should you restore what God has put an end to? Why do you, by repeating the servitude of matrimony, spurn the liberty which is offered you? “You have been bound to a wife,”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 4
However, touching second marriage, we know plainly that the apostle has pronounced: “Thou hast been loosed from a wife; seek not a wife. But if thou shalt marry, thou wilt not sin.”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Defence Against the Arians (Apologia Contra Arianos) 1.6
… he lost his love for the first in his lust for another, without even keeping to that which he obtained at the prompting of his lust. For, behold, withdrawing himself from the second, again he takes possession of another’s , casting an evil eye all around him upon the cities of other men, and thinking that godliness
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Virgins 1.6
24. I am not indeed discouraging marriage, but am enlarging upon the benefits of virginity. “He who is weak,” says the Apostle, “eateth herbs.” I consider one thing necessary, I admire another. “Art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou free from a wife? Seek not a wife.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
Ver. 27 . “Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 10
… one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity.” If then “he who is married cares for the things of the world” ( 1 Cor. vii. 33 .), and a Bishop ought not to care for the things of the world, why does he say the husband of one wife? Some indeed think that he says this with reference to one who remains free
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 145
For the present I will content myself by suggesting to your discretion that you should bear in mind the apostle’s words: “Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife;”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.12
… “For it is good for a man so to be.” If it is good for a man so to be, it is bad for a man not so to be.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 15
15. After that the same Apostle adds, and says, “Thou art bound to a wife, seek not loosening: thou art loosed from a wife, seek not a wife.”
7:28
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife i.7
… Why do you, by repeating the servitude of matrimony, spurn the liberty which is offered you? “You have been bound to a wife,” says the apostle; “seek not loosing. You have been loosed from a wife; seek not binding.” For even if you do not “ sin ” in re-marrying, still he says “pressure of the flesh ensues.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.13
… 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,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 12
72. Marriage , then, is honourable, but chastity is more honourable, for “he that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well, but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 An Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall 2.5
… The things of this life are a shadow, and more naught even than a shadow, being full of many fears, and many dangers, and extreme bondage. Do not then deprive thyself both of that world, and of this, when you may gain both, if you please. Now that they who live in Christ will gain the things of this world Paul teaches us when he says: “But I spare you;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
Then, lest this should seem to be laying down a law, he subjoins, (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 36
… whereas now, having stated it after much other matter and timing its introduction exactly, he strongly touched the hearers. This also he did in respect of virginity. For before this having said much, and after this again, at last he saith, “I spare you,” and, “I would have you to be free from cares.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 2 Timothy 7
… Not that I forbid a second marriage, or pronounce it a proof of wantonness, for Paul does not allow me, stopping my mouth by saying to women, “If she marry she hath not sinned.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 80
… the next is, to want little; and this the Angels and their imitators especially possess. But for men to succeed in this while tarrying in a mortal body, think how great praise this hath. This also Paul said, when writing to the Corinthians, “But I spare you,” and, “lest such should have trouble in the flesh.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.22
… Either we pray always and are virgins, or we cease to pray that we may fulfil the claims of marriage. Still he says: “If a virgin marry she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 2.2
… For Thy omnipotency is not far from us even when we are far from Thee, else in truth ought I more vigilantly to have given heed to the voice from the clouds: “Nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh, but I spare you;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 11
… But now what shall we say against the most plain speech of the Apostle, saying, “Let her do what she will; she sinneth not, if she be married;” and, “If thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned: and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 12
… this is the work of marriage, this the Apostle defends from every charge, in saying, “Both if thou shall have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned: and if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not:” and, “Let her do what she will: she sinneth not if she be married.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 21
… For it is a matter of sacrament, not of sin. For in baptism all sins are put away. But he who said, “If thou shall have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 16
16. Yet he added, “But such shall have tribulation of the flesh, but I spare you:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 19
… as though in that eternal life, they, who had chosen this better part, would have nothing more than the rest of men. And in this discussion when we came to that saying of the same Apostle, “But such shall have tribulation of the flesh, but I spare you;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 20
… It was, forsooth, your condemnation, say they, that he was silent on, when he said, “But I spare you.” Who (saith) this? Surely he, who had said above; “And, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 21
… nor that other, where he saith of such as wed, “But such shall have tribulation of the flesh, but I spare you;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.18
… “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” He, however, who cannot receive it, “even if he marry, sinneth not;”
7:29
Pope St Clement I † AD 99 The Second Epistle of Clement 12
… And “the male, with the female, neither male nor female,” this He saith, that brother seeing sister may have no thought concerning her as female, and that she may have no thought concerning him as male. “If ye do these things,” saith He, “the kingdom of my Father shall come.”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 1.29
… 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,”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.7
… and, if separation had taken place, by wishing the nuptial bond to be resumed by reconciliation. But what reasons does (the apostle) allege for continence? Because “the time is short.”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.8
… and since Christ has in these last days appeared as the dispenser of spiritual gifts (as the apostle says, “When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son;” and again, “This I say, brethren, that the time is short”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women ii.9
… “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.”
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife i.5
… And yet that “blindness” then was felt long before “the ends of the world.” What, then, will the case be if God now keep us from the vices which of old were detestable before Him? “The time,” says (the apostle), “is compressed.
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 3
… nevertheless already destroying it, in so far as he gives the preference to continence. “Good,” he says, “(it is) for a man not to have contact with a woman.” It follows that it is evil to have contact with her; for nothing is contrary to good except evil. And accordingly (he says), “It remains, that both they who have wives so be as if they have not,”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.12
… for the fashion of this world passeth away.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.13
… 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,
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 9.4
… 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?”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 160.4
… But, for my part, to every one who is thinking about marriage I testify that, “the fashion of this world passeth away,” and the time is short: “it remaineth that both they that have wives be as though they had none.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.7
52. Christ, then, is the beginning of our virtue. He is the beginning of purity, Who taught maidens not to look for the embraces of men,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 24
Since he had given them what commands were fitting, he again thrusts them on to the performance of good works, in consideration of what was pressing upon them. For the time of judgment, he means, is at the doors. So too he wrote to the Corinthians also, “The remaining time is short.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 10
… vii. 33 .), and a Bishop ought not to care for the things of the world, why does he say the husband of one wife? Some indeed think that he says this with reference to one who remains free from a wife. But if otherwise, he that hath a wife may be as though he had none. (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 2
… Therefore, lest this befall us, let us not seek after wealth, nor let us be impatient of poverty, nor make haste to be rich: and let those of us who have [riches] so use them as Paul commanded. (“They that have,” saith he, “as though they had not, and they that use this world as not abusing it”—
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 7
And, how can marriage be honorable, which so hinders us? What then? It is possible, yea very possible, even if we have wives, to pursue after virtue, if we will. How? If having “wives,” we “be as though we had none,” if we rejoice not over our “possessions,” if we “use the world as not abusing it.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 19
What is, “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together”? (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.21
… “I think, therefore, that this is good by reason of the present distress, namely that it is good for a man to be as he is.” What is this distress which does away with the joys of wedlock? The apostle tells us, in a later verse: “The time is short: it remaineth that those who have wives be as though they had none.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 52.16
… while, if you refuse it, it is wonderful how much more he will come to respect you. The preacher of continence must not be a maker of marriages. Why does he who reads the apostle’s words “it remaineth that they that have wives be as though they had none”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 123.6
… He does not by this arrangement urge unmarried girls or youthful widows to marry, seeing that even of the married he says: “the time is short: it remaineth that they that have wives be as though they had none.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 123.13
… and let us only end our marrying with the close of our lives. And if both before and after the deluge the maxim held good: “be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth:” what has that to do with us upon whom the ends of the ages are come, unto whom it is said, “the time is short,”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary 22
… So long as that law remained, “Be fruitful, and multiply and replenish the earth”; and “Cursed is the barren woman that beareth not seed in Israel,” they all married and were given in marriage, left father and mother, and became one flesh. But once in tones of thunder the words were heard,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.5
… only in the Lord.’ And ‘Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression: but she shall be saved through the child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety.’ Surely we shall hear no more of the famous Apostolic utterance,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.24
… And what is more they were figures of those that were to come. But we to whom it is said,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.30
… “Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away, for lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone.” This relates to the Old Testament. Once more he speaks of the Gospel and of virginity: “The flowers appear on the earth, the time of the pruning of vines has come.” Does he not seem to you to say the very same thing that the Apostle says:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 10
… but whoso is joined in marriage, thinks of the things of the world, how to please his wife: and a woman that is unmarried and a virgin is different: she that is unmarried is anxious about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit: but she that is married, is anxious about the things of the world, how to please her husband.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 11
11. But thou who both hast sons, and livest in that end of the world, wherein now is the time not of casting stones, but of gathering; not of embracing, but of abstaining from embracing; when the Apostle cries out, “But this I say, brethren, the time is short; it remains, that both they who have wives be as not having;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.15
… and they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, 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. But I would have you without solicitude.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.14
… both because nothing is done contrary to that precept whereby the Lord forbids a spouse to be put away (for he does not put her away who lives with her not carnally, but spiritually), and because that principle is observed to which the apostle gives expression, “It remaineth, that they that have wives be as though they had none.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.21
21. Joseph then was not the less His father, because he knew not the mother of our Lord, as though concupiscence and not conjugal affection constitutes the marriage bond. Attend, holy brethren; Christ’s Apostle was some time after this to say in the Church, “It remaineth that they that have wives be as though they had none.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 75.7
… it remaineth that both they that have wives, be as though they had not; and they who buy, as though they possessed not; and they who rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they who weep, as though they wept not; and they who use this world, as though they used it not; for the fashion of this world passeth away. I would have you be without carefulness.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 96.14
… he buyeth it; he hath brought forth, he now giveth suck to what he hath bought. “Woe to them that are with child, and that give suck in those days!” Woe to those who put their hope in the world; woe to them that cling to those things which they brought forth through hope in the world. What then should the Christian do? He should use, not serve, the world.
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 14
For although they who are not within the ranks of the clergy are free to take pleasure in the companionship of wedlock and the procreation of children, yet for the exhibiting of the purity of complete continence, even sub-deacons are not allowed carnal marriage: that “both those that have, may be as though they had not
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 167
… But when they reached to the said ranks, what was before lawful ceased to be so. And hence, in order that their wedlock may become spiritual instead of carnal, it behoves them not to put away their wives but to “have them as though they had them not
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 49
… and those that weep as though they wept not; and those that rejoice as though they rejoiced not; and those that buy as though they possessed not; and those that use this world as though they used it not; for the fashion of this world passeth away
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 90
… it remains that those who have wives be as though they had none; and those who weep, as though they wept not; and those who rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and those who buy, as though they possessed not; and those that use this world, as though they used it not. For the fashion of this world passes away
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… nor let it devote itself entirely to what it is engaged in now, lest it fall utterly from what it ought stedfastly to hope for. Which thing Paul well expresses briefly, saying, They that have wives as though they had none, and they that weep as though they wept not, and they that rejoice as though they rejoiced not (
7:30
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women ii.9
… “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.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 On the Dress of Virgins 10
… 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.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 71
… “That they that rejoice in wealth, be as though they rejoiced not; and they that have, as though they possessed not; and they that use this world, as not abusing it.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.13
… The time is short, the Lord is at hand. Even though we lived nine hundred years, as did men of old, yet we ought to think that short which must one day have an end, and cease to be. But, as things are, and it is not so much the joy as the tribulation of marriage that is short, why do we take wives whom we shall soon be compelled to lose?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 81.20
… Brethren, there are men altogether despisers of this world, to whom nothing is pleasant that flows in the course of time, they cling not by love to any earthly works, holy, chaste, continent, just, perchance even selling all their goods and distributing to the poor, or “possessing as though they possessed not, and using this world as though not using it.”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.26
… Hence Solomon says, The turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them ( Prov. i. 32 ). Hence Paul admonishes, saying, They that buy, as though they possessed not; and they that use this world, as though they used it not (
7:31
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.3
… 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.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 5.35
… “For there shall be a new heaven and a new earth; and there shall be no remembrance of the former, neither shall the heart think about them, but they shall find in it joy and exultation.” Now this is what has been said by the apostle: “For the fashion of this world passeth away.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 5.36.1
… For neither is the substance nor the essence of the creation annihilated (for faithful and true is He who has established it), but “the fashion of the world passeth away;”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Idolatry 9
… If you did know it, you ought to have known this also, that you should have nothing more to do with that profession of yours which, of itself, fore-chants the climacterics of others, and might instruct you of its own danger. There is no part nor lot for you in that system of yours. He cannot hope for the kingdom of the heavens, whose finger or wand abuses
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 5
… How mighty He is, you know full well who believe that He is the only God. Let, then, the flesh begin to give you pleasure, since the Creator thereof is so great. But, you say, even the world is the work of God, and yet “the fashion of this world passeth away,”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women ii.9
… “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
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 1.6.4
… or because, while the form of those things which are seen passes away, their essential nature is subject to no corruption. And Paul seems to confirm the latter view, when he says, “For the fashion of this world passeth away.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 2.3.6
… and those are worlds which are on the other side of it, which are governed by these same arrangements of the ruling God.” That universe which is bounded by heaven and earth is also called a world, as Paul declares: “For the fashion of this world will pass away.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 3.5.1
… as he does also when he again says, “The fashion of this world passeth away.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 13.1
… for it is also in opposition to the saying that “things seen are temporal,” and that “this age shall have a consummation,” and also to the fulfilment of the saying, “Heaven and earth shall pass away,” and “the fashion of this world passeth away,”
St Methodius † AD 311 From the Discourse on the Resurrection, Part I 1
… 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,
St Hilary of Poitiers † AD 367 De Trinitate or On the Trinity 10.42
… for example, Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My word shall not perish : also the Apostle says, Behold the old things are passed away; they are become new . And again, The fashion of this world shall pass away
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Hexæmeron 1.3
… Thus seeing that figures which move in a circle always return upon themselves, without for a single instant interrupting the regularity of their course, do not vainly imagine to yourselves that the world has neither beginning nor end. “For the fashion of this world passeth away”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 160.4
… And, on the other hand, it will not be lawful for the wife to be joined with the husband’s kin, for the rights of relationship hold good on both sides. But, for my part, to every one who is thinking about marriage I testify that, “the fashion of this world passeth away,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 7
… For in fact all our laws are common to the monks also, except marriage; yea rather, even with respect to this, Paul commands us to put ourselves altogether on a level with them; saying, “For the fashion of this world passeth away:” that “they that have wives be as though they had none.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
If then they marry not, the question is vain. But not because they do not marry, therefore are they angels, but because they are as angels, therefore they do not marry. By this He removed many other difficulties also, all which things Paul intimated by one word, saying, “For the fashion of this world passeth away.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 71
But art thou impatient? Hear him saying, “Yet a little while, and He that cometh will come, and will not tarry. The Lord is at hand, be careful for nothing;” and again, “The fashion of this world passeth away.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 14
… xv. 54 .) But to show, that with the corruption of the body the constitution of the things of this life will also come to an end, he wrote again elsewhere, “For the fashion of this world passeth away.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 20
… If then thou wouldest walk upright (or aright ὀρθὰ ), figure not thyself after the fashion of this life present. For in it there is nought abiding or stable. And this is why he calls it a fashion ( σχἥμα ); and so in another passage, “the fashion of this world passeth away.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 20.14
… For when the judgment is finished, this heaven and earth shall cease to be, and there will be a new heaven and a new earth. For this world shall pass away by transmutation, not by absolute destruction. And therefore the apostle says, “For the figure of this world passeth away. I would have you be without anxiety.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 20.24
… And, indeed, in the sacred writings which are peculiar to ourselves, and not common to the Hebrews and us,—I mean the evangelic and apostolic books,—the following expressions are used: “The figure of this world passeth away;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 35
… There is a proper entrance, though known to but a few; and by it men come in, though you disbelieve it, or do not wish to find it. In the Catholic Church there are believers without number who do not use the world, and there are those who "use it," in the words of the apostle, "as not using it,"
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 123
… Hold fast then, my dear friend, to the apostolic doctrines, for “He that shall come will come, and will not tarry,” and “He shall render to every man according to his deeds,” for “the fashion of this world passeth away,”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.27
… And again, to rejoice as though we rejoiced not is so to take heart from things below as still never to cease from fear concerning the things above. In the same place also a little afterwards he aptly adds, For the fashion of this world passeth away (
7:32
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women ii.4
As if I were speaking to Gentiles, addressing you with a Gentile precept, and (one which is) common to all, (I would say,) “You are bound to please your husbands only.” But you will please them in proportion as you take no care to please others . Be ye without carefulness,
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 9
If we look deeply into his meanings, and interpret them, second marriage will have to be termed no other than a species of fornication. For, since he says that married persons make this their solicitude, “how to please one another”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 3
… And accordingly (he says), “It remains, that both they who have wives so be as if they have not,” that it may be the more binding on them who have not to abstain from having them. He renders reasons, likewise, for so advising: that the unmarried think about God, but the married about how, in (their) marriage, each may please his (partner).
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… the married, however, muse about the world, how they may please their spouse.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 On the Dress of Virgins 5
… 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.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.33
… 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.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.13
… 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,
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On Virginity 9
… “He that is unmarried careth for the things of the Lord; but he that is married careth for the things that are of the world
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On Virginity 20
… us to choose between, and we cannot be subject to both, for “no man can serve two masters ,” he who is wise will choose the one most useful to himself, so, when two marriages are before us to choose between, and we cannot contract both, for “he that is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord, but he that is married careth for the things of the world
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Virgins 1.5
… For he who is without a wife is careful for the things which are the Lord’s, how he may please God.…And the virgin taketh thought for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit. For she that is married taketh thought for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 63.24
38. Answer me now, O Paul, in what way thou givest counsel for the present distress. “Because he that is without a wife is careful,” he says, “for the things of the Lord, how he may please God.” And he adds, “The unmarried woman and the virgin think of the things of the Lord, that they may be holy in body and spirit.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 22
This then is His meaning here also, when He saith, “sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” For nothing so pains the soul, as carefulness and anxiety. Thus did Paul also, when urging to celibacy, give counsel, saying, “I would have you without carefulness.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Thessalonians 6
“But she,” he says, “that is a widow indeed, and desolate, hath her hope set on God.” ( 1 Tim. v. 5 .) To whom is this said? To those who have no
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.21
… but he that is married careth for the things that are of the world how he may please his wife. There is 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.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary 22
… But once in tones of thunder the words were heard, “The time is shortened, that henceforth those that have wives may be as though they had none”: cleaving to the Lord, we are made one spirit with Him. And why?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 2.2
… “Nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh, but I spare you;” and, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman;” and, “He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 245
… But those who belong to the world have also to consider how they may in these things please their wives if they be husbands, their husbands if they be wives;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 21.26
… Would you hear, in the apostle’s own words, who he is who builds on the foundation gold, silver, precious stones? “He that is unmarried,” he says, “careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 68
… “The furnace proveth the potter’s vessels: and the furnace of adversity just men.” And this fire does in the course of this life act exactly in the way the apostle says. If it come into contact with two believers, one “caring for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 32
… provided, that is, men so use that freedom, as it is written, so as to have their thoughts of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord; that is, that Continence
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 22
… but whoso is joined in marriage has thought of the things of the world, how to please his wife. And a woman unmarried and a virgin is divided; she that is unmarried is careful about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit: but she that is married is careful about the things of the world, how to please her husband.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 39
… For what more grievous offense, than that by pride thou displease Him, Who for thy sake hath been displeasing to the proud? And where ought there to be more that “chaste fear abiding for ever and ever,” than in thee, who hast no thought of the things of this world, how to please a wedded partner; but of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 45
… otherwise she will not be humble, and “God resisteth the proud!” What, therefore, shall she have in her thoughts? Forsooth the hidden gifts of God, which nought save the questioning of trial makes known to each, even in himself. For, to pass over the rest, whence doth a virgin know, although careful of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord
Pseudo-Clement The First Epistle of the Blessed Clement, the Disciple of Peter the Apostle 7
… For every virgin who is in God is holy in her body and in her spirit, and is constant in the service of her Lord, not turning away from it any whither, but waiting upon Him always in purity and holiness in the Spirit of God, being “solicitous how she may please her Lord,”
7:33
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 10
… Because there are some who unseasonably smite the consciences of their brethren, it seems to be said with reference to them. “Not greedy of filthy lucre, but patient: not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity.” If then “he who is married cares for the things of the world” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 21.26
… “He that is unmarried,” he says, “careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord.” Would you hear who he is that buildeth wood, hay, stubble? “But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 68
… If it come into contact with two believers, one “caring for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord,” that is, building upon Christ the foundation, gold, silver, precious stones; the other “caring for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife,”
7:34
Tertullian † AD 220 On Prayer 22
… For even by this very fact, that he has not named “virgins” (as he does in another place
Tertullian † AD 220 On Patience 13
… Further, if we set down in order the higher and happier grades of bodily patience, (we find that) it is she who is entrusted by holiness with the care of continence of the flesh: she keeps the widow, and sets on the virgin the seal
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women ii.4
As if I were speaking to Gentiles, addressing you with a Gentile precept, and (one which is) common to all, (I would say,) “You are bound to please your husbands only.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Veiling of Virgins 4
… in these (passages), in which he does not name a virgin , points out (by not making the distinction) community of condition. Otherwise he could here also have marked the difference between virgin and woman , just as elsewhere he says, “Divided is the woman and the virgin .”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 1.1
… for “the unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord,” how she may please the Lord, “that she may be holy both in body and in spirit,”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 5.4
… For then am I plainly consecrated altogether to the Lord, when I not only strive to keep the flesh untouched by intercourse, but also unspotted by other kinds of unseemliness. For “the unmarried woman,” it is said,
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 46.3
… So I continually set forth the life of the unmarried maid, and described how “the unmarried” alone “careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 1.1
… for I ought not to leave them without honour, nor to separate them from the commendation belonging to virgins, since the voice of the Apostle has joined them to virgins, according to what is written: “The unmarried woman and the virgin careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 2
8. “For this,” says he, “is acceptable with God.” So that if thou, O widow, carest for the things of God, thou oughtest to follow after that which thou hast learnt to be well pleasing to God. And, indeed, the Apostle somewhat farther back,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 75
And wherefore can it be that this parable brings forward a king, but that a bridegroom? That thou mightest learn how close Christ is joined unto the virgins that strip themselves of their possessions; for this indeed is virginity. Wherefore Paul also makes this as a definition of the thing. “The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 15
… For they had enrolled themselves on higher views, and the work with them proceeded from a greater elevation of mind. Therefore the receiving of strangers, and the washing of the Saints’ feet, he has represented by “attending upon the Lord without distraction” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 14
… To prove that these words are not mere boasting hear what He saith to them, “Ye shall not use divination, nor make purification of your children, for ye are a holy people.” So that holiness with them consisted in being free from the customs of idolatry; but it is not so with us. “That she may be holy,” saith Paul, “in body and spirit.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.38
… Has she then ceased to be a virgin?” In the first place, it is doubtful if she is a virgin. For “the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh upon the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.” Again, she may be a virgin in body and not in spirit. According to the apostle, a true virgin is “holy both in body and in spirit.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 79.7
… “every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving.” But the same apostle says: “it is good neither to eat flesh nor to drink wine,” and in another place: “be not drunk with wine wherein is excess.” “Every creature of God is good”—the precept is intended for those who are careful how they may please their husbands.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary 22
… Why do you resist? The vessel of election says this; he tells us that there is a difference between the wife and the virgin. Observe what the happiness of that state must be in which even the distinction of sex is lost. The virgin is no longer called a woman.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary 23
23. I do not deny that holy women are found both among widows and those who have husbands; but they are such as have ceased to be wives, or such as, even in the close bond of marriage, imitate virgin chastity. The Apostle, Christ speaking in him, briefly bore witness to this when he said,
Sulpicius Severus † AD 420 The Doubtful Letters of Sulpitius Severus 2.8
… For the Apostle says, “She that is unmarried careth for the things of the Lord, how she may please God, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but she who is married careth for the things of this world, how she may please
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 3.2
… Receive us; we have wronged no man.” It is doubtful whether we should read, “ mundemus nos ab omni coinquinatione carnis et spiritus ” [let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit], in accordance with the passage, “that she may be holy both in body and in spirit,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 14
14. And not without just cause a doubt is raised, whether he said this of all married women, or of such as so many are, as that nearly all may be thought so to be. For neither doth that, which he saith of unmarried women, “She, that is unmarried, thinkest of the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 27
… But it may happen that the virtue of continence is less in his mind, who uses not marriage, which Abraham used: but yet it is greater than in his mind, who on this account held chastity of marriage, in that he could not a greater. Thus also let the unmarried woman, whose thoughts are of the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 11
… Therefore that virgin is with good reason set before a married woman, who neither sets herself forth for the multitude to love, whereas she seeks from out the multitude the love of one; nor, having now found him, orders herself for one, taking thought of the things of the world, “how to please her husband;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 3
… Whence also, in what follows, under the one term “unmarried” he embraces both professions, saying, “She who is unmarried is careful of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord: but she who is married is careful of the things of the world, how to please her husband.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 8
8. Whence, also, what the Apostle Paul said of the unmarried woman, “that she may be holy both in body and spirit;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 23
… Therefore let us give ear unto the Apostle, “She who is unmarried,” saith he, “is careful about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit; but she who is married is careful about the things of the world, how to please her husband.”
Pseudo-Clement The First Epistle of the Blessed Clement, the Disciple of Peter the Apostle 5
Thou desirest, then, to be a virgin? Knowest thou what hardship and irksomeness there is in true virginity—that which stands constantly at all seasons before God, and does not withdraw from His service , and “is anxious how it may please its Lord with a holy body, and with its spirit?”
7:35
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife i.3
… For the first place is what every struggle aims at; the second has consolation attaching to it, but not victory. 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 “cast a snare
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife i.4
… but “sufficiency,” which is suitable to moderation and modesty. Presume, I pray you, that you have need of nothing if you “attend upon the Lord;”
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 5
… But you will have full knowledge of the whole subject when I am present with you, if indeed you still continue to care for your own salvation. For I do not “cast a snare upon any one,”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.13
… 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,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Duties of the Clergy 2.6
25. We have then to speak of that usefulness which is full of what is virtuous, as the Apostle himself has laid it down in so many words, saying: “And this I speak for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 An Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall 2.5
… Do not then deprive thyself both of that world, and of this, when you may gain both, if you please. Now that they who live in Christ will gain the things of this world Paul teaches us when he says: “But I spare you;” and again “But this I say for your profit.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
… 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.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 23
… why not rather be defrauded?” ( 1 Cor. vi. 7 .) And when treating of virginity, he says, “I have no commandment,” ( ib. vii. 25 .) and “I speak this for your profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you;” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 14
… Such was Anna. Such strictness does he require of widows. Greater even than of virgins, from whom he yet requires much strictness, and eminent virtue. For when he speaks of “that which is comely,” and “that she may attend upon the Lord without distraction” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.7
… If I am loosed from a wife, let me not seek a wife. Just as I do not loose marriage-ties when they are once made, so do you refrain from binding together what at present is loosed from such ties.” Yet another passage bears unmistakable testimony to the view which we have taken of virginity and of wedlock: “The apostle casts no snare upon us,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.13
… of this world, which lieth in wickedness, the fashion of which passeth away, and concerning which the Lord said to the Apostles, “If ye were of the world, the world would love its own.” And lest perchance someone might suppose that he was laying the heavy burden of chastity on unwilling shoulders, he at once adds his reasons for persuading to it, and says:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 7
7. But whereas the Apostle, when commending the fruit of unmarried men and women, in that they have thought of the things of the Lord, how to please God, added and saith, “But this I say for your profit, not to cast a snare on you,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 36.14
14. What great demand is this, my Brethren? I give you counsel only; do I use violence? As saith the Apostle, “This I speak for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you.”
7:36
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.14
… 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:
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 19
Ver. 36 . “But if any man think that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Marriage 11
11. And yet not to these themselves is marriage a sin; which, if it were chosen in comparison of fornication, would be a less sin than fornication, and yet would be a sin. But now what shall we say against the most plain speech of the Apostle, saying, “Let her do what she will; she sinneth not, if she be married;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 32.17
… The same meaning they forced from the words of Paul: "We know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away;" making out that the apostle knew and prophesied in part, when he said, "Let him do what he will; if he marries, he sinneth not,"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 40
“This passage, too,” says he, “is quoted by them: ‘It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.’” And he observes that the answer to be given to them is derived from the same apostle’s words in another passage: “Let him do what he will.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 41
But I beg of you to see what kind of objection, after all, he makes, that to him who “willeth and runneth” there is no necessity for God’s mercy, which actually anticipates him in order that he may run,—because, forsooth, the apostle says concerning a certain person, “Let him do what he will,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 4
… “Let him do what he willeth; he sinneth not if he marry. Nevertheless, he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 8
It is concerning conjugal chastity itself that the apostle treats, when he says, “Let him do what he will, he sinneth not if he marry;”
7:37
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 3.14
… But for him who of his own free will and purpose decides to preserve his flesh in virgin purity, “having no necessity,”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 63.24
… and he that giveth her not in marriage, doeth better. A woman is bound by the law, for so long a time as her husband liveth. But if her husband have fallen asleep, she is freed, let her marry whom she will, only in the Lord. But she will be more happy if she abide as she is, after my counsel, for I think that I also have the Spirit of the Lord.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.13
… But if anyone considers that his virgin, that is, his flesh, is wanton and boiling with lust, and cannot be bridled, and he must do one of two things, either take a wife or fall, let him do what he will, he does not sin if he marry. Let him do, he says, what he will, not what he ought. He does not sin if he marry a wife; yet, he does not well if he marry:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 30
30. Ye also who have not yet made this vow, who are able to receive it, receive it. Run with perseverance, that ye may obtain. Take ye each his sacrifices, and enter ye into the courts of the Lord, not of necessity, having power over your own will.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 7
… “Keep thyself continent”? He also explained the power of the will in this matter when He said, “Having no necessity, but possessing power over his own will, to keep his virgin.”
7:38
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… the married, however, muse about the world, how they may please their spouse.” Thus he pronounces that the “preserver of a virgin” doeth “better” than her “giver in marriage.”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 2.7
… 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.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Virgins 1.6
… “Art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou free from a wife? Seek not a wife.” This is the command to those who are. But what does he say concerning virgins? “He who giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well, and he who giveth her not doeth better.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 18
… and that they understand that it was in no way of deceit, but of plain truth that it was said by the Apostle, “Whoso gives in marriage does well; and whoso gives not in marriage, does better; and, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 21
… For they discourage rather than exhort holy virgins, who compel them to continue so by passing sentence on marriage. For whence can they feel sure that that is true, which is written, “And he, who gives her not in marriage, does better:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 7
… Because what is honester, save what is more honest? But what is more honest is certainly honest. Forsooth he plainly showed that this is better than that other that is good, where he says, “Whoso giveth to marry, doeth well; but whoso giveth not to marry, doeth better.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 30.6
6. So, again, if your exhortations to virginity resembled the teaching of the apostle, "He who giveth in marriage doeth well, and he who giveth not in marriage doeth better;"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.57
… [4.] He makes a good use of an evil thing, when he restrains his concupiscence by matrimony. Now, as it is better to make good use of a good thing than to make good rise of an evil thing,—since both are good,—so “he that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.”
Ecumenical Councils The Canons of the Holy Fathers Assembled at Gangra, Which Were Set Forth After the Council of Nice 1
… The saying of our Blessed Lord with reference to those who had become “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,” and those words of St. Paul “He that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well, but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better,”
7:39
Tertullian † AD 220 The Chaplet, or De Corona 13
… Marriage, too, decks the bridegroom with its crown; and therefore we will not have heathen brides, lest they seduce us even to the idolatry with which among them marriage is initiated. You have the law from the patriarchs indeed; you have the apostle enjoining people to marry in the Lord.
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.7
… And yet He from whom emanates this shortness of the time, will also send what suits the said brevity. No one makes provision for the time which is another’s. You degrade your god, O Marcion, when you make him circumscribed at all by the Creator’s time. Assuredly also, when (the apostle) rules that marriage should be “only in the Lord,”
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.1
… admonished hereto by the examples of certain, who, when an opportunity for the practice of continence has been offered them, by divorce, or by the decease of the husband, have not only thrown away the opportunity of attaining so great a good, but not even in their remarriage have chosen to be mindful of the rule that “above all
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife 2.2
… If, however, he had given such a permission, he would never have subjoined a declaration so diverse from and contrary to his own permission, saying: “The woman, when her husband is dead, is free: let her marry whom she wishes, only in the Lord .”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 7
… Therefore a wife, when her husband is dead, will not marry; for if she marry, she will of course be marrying (his) brother: for “all we are brethren.” Again, the woman, if intending to marry, has to marry “in the Lord;”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 11
… Such (conduct) the Psychics will have it the apostle approved, or else totally failed to think about, when he wrote: “The woman is bound for such length of time as her husband liveth; but if he shall have died, she is free; whom she will let her marry, only in the Lord.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… married, however, muse about the world, how they may please their spouse.” Thus he pronounces that the “preserver of a virgin” doeth “better” than her “giver in marriage.” Thus, too, he discriminatingly judges her to be more blessed, who, after losing her husband subsequently to her entrance into the faith, lovingly embraces the opportunity of widowhood.
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.18
… but she is happier if she abide as she is, after my judgment, and I think that I also have the Spirit of God”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.23
… the husband render unto the wife her due, and likewise also the wife unto the husband.” To these sayings it is accordingly subjoined, “But this I say by way of permission, not of commandment.” But this also, “A wife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth, but if her husband be dead, she is free to be married to whom she will, only in the Lord,”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.63
… 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.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 199
XLI. The woman in widowhood, who is independent, may dwell with a husband without blame, if there is no one to prevent their cohabitation; for the Apostle says; “but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 1.2
2. But in this particular virtue is contained also the prizes of liberty. For: “The wife is bound as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband fall asleep she is freed: let her marry whom she will, only in the Lord. But she will be happier if she so abide, after my judgment, for I think I also have the Spirit of God.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.5
… In another verse he speaks to the same effect: ‘The wife is bound…as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband; she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord,’
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 55.3
… but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then, if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress.” And in another place: “the wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 123.5
… Immediately afterwards he adds: “The wife is bound by the law to her husband as long as her husband liveth, but if her husband be fallen asleep, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord. But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the spirit of God.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.5
… His inference is thus expressed: “If they idly urge in defence of themselves the plea that the world in its early stage needed to be replenished, let them listen to the words of Paul, ‘I desire therefore that the younger widows marry, bear children.’ And ‘Marriage is honourable and the bed undefiled.’ And
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.10
… not of light, but of darkness: that they do not belong to Christ, but to Belial: that they are not temples of the living God, but shrines and idols of the dead. And, if you wish to see more clearly how utterly unlawful it is for a Christian woman to marry a Gentile, consider what the same Apostle says,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.14
… He has followed the royal road and fulfilled the command not to be righteous over much. Now again he compares monogamy with digamy, and as he had subordinated marriage to virginity, so he makes second marriages inferior to first, and says,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 18
… but let them surmount it as a hill of the lesser good, in order that they may rest in the mountain of the greater, continence. It is on this condition, forsooth, that this hill is dwelt on; that one leave it not when he will. For, “a woman is bound, so long as her husband liveth.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 5
… but, in case her husband shall have died, she is set free: let her be married to whom she will, only in the Lord: but she shall be more blessed, if she shall have so continued, according to my counsel;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 15
… For I, as in the beginning of this discourse I gave warning, dare not to be more wise than it behoveth to be wise. For who am I, that I should think that that must be defined which I see that the Apostle hath not defined? For he saith, “A woman is bound, so long as her husband liveth.”
7:40
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 16
… Thus he commends as Divine all these counsels of continence: “I think,” he says, “I too have the Spirit of God.”
Novatian † AD 258 A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity 29
… Of this says the same apostle: “We have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God.” Concerning Him he exultingly says: “And I think also that I have the Spirit of God.”
St Gregory Thaumaturgus † AD 270 A Sectional Confession of Faith 21
… If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” And again: “But ye are washed, but ye are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” And again: “What! know ye not that your bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God?” “And I think also that I have the Spirit of God.”
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Letters on the Apollinarian Controversy 101
… But if their long books, and their new Psalters, contrary to that of David, and the grace of their metres, are taken for a third Testament, we too will compose Psalms, and will write much in metre. For we also think we have the spirit of God,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 3.9
55. Then, in the same way as we here understand that where the Spirit is there also is Christ; so also, elsewhere, he shows that where Christ is, there also is the Holy Spirit. For having said: “Do ye seek a proof of Christ Who speaketh in me?” he says elsewhere: “For I think that I also have the Spirit of God.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Letter to a Young Widow 2
… but she who is a widow indeed and desolate hath set her hope in God, and continueth in prayers and supplications day and night.” And writing to the Corinthians he says “But she is more blessed if she abide thus.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Thessalonians 8
… xiii. 3 .) And again, “Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ.” For the “Apostle” speaks the things of Him who sent him; showing that nothing is of himself. And again, “I think that I also have the Spirit of God.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 48.8
… To this he immediately adds his apostolical authority, ‘after my judgment.’ Moreover, lest any should consider that authority, being human, to be of small weight, he goes on to say, ‘and I think also that I have the spirit of God.’
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.14
… and I think that I also have the Spirit of God.” He allows second marriages, but to such persons as wish for them and are not able to contain; lest, having “waxed wanton against Christ,” they desire to marry, “having condemnation, because they have rejected their first faith;” and he makes the concession because many had already turned aside after Satan.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 7
… But what is more honest is certainly honest. Forsooth he plainly showed that this is better than that other that is good, where he says, “Whoso giveth to marry, doeth well; but whoso giveth not to marry, doeth better.” And this more blessed than that other that is blessed, where he saith, “But she shall be more blessed, if she shall have so continued.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 37.3
… that is, use a word of doubting, while in their heart they doubt not: just as thou wouldst say to thy slave, if thou wert angry with him, “Thou despisest me; but consider, perhaps I am thy master.” Hence also the apostle, speaking to some who despised him, says: “And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 76.11
… Hath she willed any evil thing? Evil certainly. Why? Because already she had vowed to the Lord her God. For what hath the apostle Paul said concerning such? Though he saith that young widows may marry if they will: nevertheless he saith in a certain passage, “but more blessed she will be, if so she shall have remained, after my judgment.”
7:1
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. It is beautiful, exemplary, and excellent. The Greek here is καλὸν. So Theophylact. Good is not here the same as useful or expedient, as Erasmus turns it, but denotes that moral and spiritual good which of itself conduces to victory over passion, to piety, and salvation (cf. vers. 32, 34, 35). To touch a woman or to know is with the Hebrews a modest form of speech, denoting the act of conjugal copulation. S. Jerome (lib. i. contra Jovin.) adds that the Apostle says touch, "because the very touching of a woman is dangerous, and to be avoided by every man." These are his words: " The Apostle does not say it is good not to have a wife, but 'it is good not to touch a woman,' as though there were danger in the touch, not to be escaped from by any one who should so touch her: being one who steals away the precious souls of men, and makes the hearts of youths to fly out of their control. Shall any one nurse a fire in his bosom and not be burnt? or walk upon hot coals and not suffer harm? In the same way, therefore, that he who touches fire is burnt, so when man and woman touch they feel its effect and perceive the difference between the sexes. The fables of the heathen relate that Mithras and Ericthonius, either on stone or in the earth, were generated by the mere heat of lust. Hence too Joseph fled from the Egyptian woman, because she wished to touch him; and as though he and been bitten by a mad dog and feared lest the poison should eat its way, he cast off the cloak that she had touched, " Let men and youths take note of these words. Cardinal Vitriaco, a wise and learned man, relates of S. Mary d'Oignies that she had so weakened and dried up her body by fastings that for several years she felt not even the first motions of lust, and that when a certain holy man clasped her hand in pure spiritual affection, and thus caused the motions of the flesh to arise, she, being ignorant of this, heard a voice from heaven which said, "Do not touch me," She did not understand it, but told it to another who did, and thenceforward she abstained from all such contact. S. Gregory (Dial. lib. iv. c. 11) relates how S. Ursinus, a presbyter, had lived in chastity separated from his wife, and when he was on his death-bed, drawing has last breath, his wife came near and put her ear to his mouth, to hear if he still breathed. He, still having a few minutes to live, on perceiving this, said with as much strength as he could summon, "Depart from me, woman a spark still lingers in the embers; do not fan it into a flame." Well sung the poet: "Regulus by a glance, the Siren of Achelous with a song, The Thessalian sage with gentle rubbing slays: So with eyes, with hands, with song does woman burn, And wield the three-forked light of angry Jove," S. Jerome rightly infers from this (lib. i. contra Jovin.) that it is an evil for a man to touch a woman. He does not say it is sinful, as Jovinian and others falsely alleged against him, but evil. For this touching is an act of concupiscence, and of the depraved pleasure of the flesh; but it is nevertheless excused by the good of wedlock, but is wholly removed by the good of the single life. It may be urged from Gen, ii. 18, where it is said that it is not good for a man to be alone, that it is therefore good to touch a woman. I answer that in Genesis, God is speaking of the good of the species, Paul of the individual; God in the time when the world was uninhabited, Paul when it is full; God of temporal good, Paul of the good of the eternal life of the Spirit. In this it is good for a man not to touch a woman. Ver. 2. Nevertheless to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife. Lest being unmarried, and unwilling to live a chaste life, he fall into fornication. Every man, say Melancthon and Bucer, must include the priest and the monk. I reply that every man means every man that is free, not bound by vow, disease, or old age: for such are incapable if matrimony. Laws and documents must be interpreted according to their subject-matter: they only apply to those capable of receiving them, not to those who are not. To him then who is free, and unbound, and can fulfil the requirements of matrimony, the apostle gives to precept, but advice and permission, that if he fears to fall into fornication he should marry a wife, or keep to her that he has already married, rather than fall into any danger of committing such a sin. So the Fathers whom I will quote at ver. 9 all agree in saying. This must be the Apostle's meaning, for otherwise he would contradict himself, for throughout the whole chapter he urges the life of chastity. Moreover, the apostle is speaking primarily to the married alone, and not to the unmarried. To these latter he begins to speak in ver. 8, Now I say to the unmarried and widows, where the adversative now marks the change. He says too here let every man have, not let every man marry, because he is speaking to those who already had wives. So S. Jerome (lib. i. contra Jovin.) says, "Let every man that is married have his own wife," i.e., continue to have her, not dismiss or repudiate her, but rather use her lawfully and chastely. The word have signifies not an inchoate but a continuous action. So 2Ti 1:13: "Hold fast the form of sound words," where the same word is used. So in S. Luk 19:26: Unto every one that hath (that uses his talent) shall be given; and from him that hath not (does not use), even that he hath shall be taken away from him; otherwise there cannot well be taken from a man what he has not. That this is the true meaning is evident from that follows in ver. 3. Ver. 3. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence. A modest paraphrase for the conjugal debt. Ver. 4. The wife hath not power of her own body but the husband, She has not power, that is, over those members which distinguish woman from man, in so far as they serve for the conjugal act. Power she has not over them so as to contain at her own will or to have intercourse with another. That power belongs to the husband alone, and that for himself only, not for another. Cf. S. Augustine (contra Julian, lib. v.). The Greek is literally, has no right over her body, whether to contain or to hand it over to another.
7:4
Likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Hence it is clear that, though in the government of the family the wife should be subject and obedient to her husband, yet in the right of exacting and returning the marriage debt she is equal with her husband, has the same right over his body that he has over hers, and this from the marriage contract, in which each has given to the other the same power over the body, and received the same power over the other's body. The husband, therefore, is as much bound to render his wife, as the wife her husband, faithfulness and the marriage debt. This is taught at length in their expositions of this passage by Chrysostom. Theophylact, Œcumenius, Primasius, Anselm, and by S. Jerome (Cit. 32, qu. 2, cap. Apostolus), who says that husband and wife are declared to be equal in rights and duties. " When, therefore," says S. Chrysostom (Hom. 19), " a harlot comes and tempts you, say that your body is not your own but your wife's. Similarly, let the wife say to any one who proposes to rob her of her chastity, 'My body is not mine but my husband's. '" Ver. 5. Defraud ye not one the other. By denying the marriage debt. The words and to fasting, though in the Greek, are wanting in the Latin. Hence Nicholas I., in his answers to the questions if the Bulgarians (c. 50), writes to them that, throughout the forty days of Lent, they should not come at their wives. But this is a matter of counsel.
7:5
And come together again. From this Peter Martyr and the Magdeburgians conclude that it is not lawful for married persons to vow perpetual continence by mutual consent. But the answer to this is that the Apostle is not prescribing but permitting the marriage act. Ver. 6. But I speak this by permission and not of commandment. 1. I permit the act of copulation by way of indulgence: I do not prescribe it. Nay, S. Augustine (Enchirid. c. 78) takes it: "I say this by way of pardon." The Greek word denotes forgiveness, and hence S. Augustine gathers that it is a venial sin to have sexual connection, not for the sake of children but for carnal pleasure, and to avoid the temptations of Satan; for pardon is given to what is sinful. So too indulgence is given in what concerns sin, or at all events a lesser good, as S. Thomas has rightly observed. 2. That there is no precept given here is also evident, because the Apostle permits married people to contain for a time, that they may give themselves to fasting and to prayer; therefore, if they agree to devote their whole life to fasting and to prayer, he permits them to contain themselves for life. 3. He says come together, and gives the reason, "that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency;" i.e., that there may be no danger of your falling into adultery, or other acts of impurity, because of your incontinency. Therefore, when the cause does not exist, viz., the danger of incontinency, as it does not exist in those who have sufficient high-mindedness to curb it and tame it, he permits them to be continent for life. 4. He says in ver. 7, "I would that all men were even as I myself," i.e., not chaste in some way or other, but altogether continent, unmarried, nay, virgin souls, even as I, who am unmarried. So Ambrose, Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, Chrysostom, Œcumenius and Epiphanius (Hæres. 78), S. Jerome (Ep. 22 ad Eustoch.)
5. In the early days of the Church many married persons, in obedience to this admonition of S. Paul, observed by mutual consent perpetual chastity, as Tertullian tells us (ad Uxor. lib. i. c. vi., and de Resurr. Carn. c. 8, and de Orland. Virg. c. 13). The same is said by the author of commentaries de Sing. Cleric., given by S. Cyprian. Here are some examples of married persons, not merely of low estate, but people illustrious both for their birth and holiness and renown, who preserved their continency and chastity unimpaired in wedlock. (1.) There are the Blessed Virgin and Joseph, who have raised the banner of chastity not only before virgins, but also before they married. (2.) We have the illustrious martyrs Cecilia and Valerian, who were of such merit that the body of S. Cecilia has been found by Clement VIII. in this age, after the lapse of so many centuries, undecayed and uninjured. (3.) There are SS. Julian and Basilissa, whose illustrious life is narrated by Surius. (4.) S. Pulcheria Augusta, sister of the Emperor Theodosius, made a vow to God of perpetual chastity, and on the death of Theodosius, married Marcian, stipulating that she should keep her vow, and raised him to the Imperial throne; and this vow was faithfully kept unbroken by both, as Cedrenus and others testify. (5.) We have the Emperor Henry II. and Cunegund, the latter of whom walked over hot iron to prove her chastity. (6.) There is the example of Boleslaus V., King of the Poles, who was called the Maid, and Cunegund, daughter of Belas, King if the Hungarians. (7.) King Conrad, son of the Emperor Henry IV., with Matilda his wife. (8.) Alphonse II. King of the Asturians, who by keeping himself from his wife gained the name of "the Chaste." (9.) Queen Richardis, who, though married to King Charles the Fat, retained her virginity. (10.) Pharaildis, niece of S. Amelberga and Pepin, was ever-virgin though married. (11.) Edward III. and Egitha were virgin spouses. (12.) Ethelreda, Queen of the East Angles, though twice married, remained a virgin. (13.) We have two married people of Arvernum, spoken of by Gregory of Tours (de Gloria Conf. c. xxxii.): "When the wife was dead, the husband raised his hands towards heaven, saying: 'I thank Thee, Maker of all things, that as Thou didst vouchsafe to intrust her to me, so I restore her to Thee undefiled by any conjugal delight.' But she smilingly said: 'Peace, peace, O man of God; it is snot necessary to publish our secret.' Shortly afterwards the husband died and was buried in another place; and, lo! in the morning the two tombs were found together, as is today: and therefore natives there are wont to speak of them as the Two Lovers, and to pay them the highest honour." Nowadays two examples of the same thing nay be found. Ver. 7. For I would that all men were even as I myself. That is so far as the single life and continency is concerned. The Apostle means that he wishes it if it could well be. I would, therefore, denotes as inchoate and imperfect act of the will. This is evident too from his subjoining,
7:7
But every man hath his proper gift of God. The word all again means each one, or all taken one by one, not collectively. For if all men in a body were to abstain, there would be no matrimony, and the human race and the world would come to an end together. In the same way we are said to be able to avoid all venial sins: that is, all taken singly, not collectively, or in other words, each one. Others take all collectively, inasmuch as if God were to inspire all men with this resolution of continency, it would be a sign that the number of the elect was completed, and that God wished to put an end to the world. But Paul was well aware that God at that time was willing the contrary, in order that the Church might increase and be multiplied through matrimony. The first explanation therefore is the sounder.
But everyman hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner and another after that, That is, he has his own gift of his own will, says the treatise de Castitate, falsely assigned to Pope Sixtus III., which is preserved in the Biblioth. SS. Patrum, vol. v. It is, however, the work of some Pelagian; for the tenor of the whole treatise is to show that chastity is the work of free-will, and of a man's own volition, and not of the grace of God. (Cf. Bellarmine, de Monach. lib. ii. c. 31, and de Clericis, lib.i. c. 21, ad. 4.) But this is the error of Pelagius; for if you take away the grace of God from a man's will it can no longer be called "his proper gift of God." For the will if a man is nothing else but the free choice of his own will. For God has given to all an equal and similar gift of free-will; wherefore that one chooses chastity, another matrimony, cannot be said to e the gift of God if you take away His grace; but it would have to be attributed to the free choice of each man, and that choice therefore in diverse things is unlike and unequal.
Proper gift then denotes the gift of conjugal, virginal, or widowed chastity. But heretics say that priests therefore, and monks, if they have not the gift of chastity, may lawfully enter on matrimony. But by parity of reason, it might be said ghat therefore married people, if they have not the gift of conjugal chastity, as many adulterers have not, may lawfully commit adultery, or enter upon a second marriage with one that is an adulterer. Or again that if a wife is absent, is unwilling, or is ill, the husband may go to another woman, if he alleges that he has not the gift of widowed chastity. And although the passion of Luther may admit this excuse as valid, yet all shrink from it; and the Romans and other heathen, by the instinct of nature, regarded all such tenets as monstrous. I reply, then, with Chrysostom and the Fathers cited, that the Apostle is here giving consolation and indulgence to the weak, and to those that are married, for having embraced the gift and state of conjugal chastity, then before they might have remained virgins. For of others that are not married he adds, It is good for them if they abide even as I; that is, it is good for them, if they will, to remain virgins; but this I do not command, nay, I am consoling the married, and I permit them the due use of wedlock, in order that they may avoid all scruple, by the reflection that each one has his own gift from God, and that they have the gift of wedlock, i.e., conjugal chastity; for matrimony itself is a gift of God, and was instituted by Him. God wills, in order to replenish the earth, in a general and indeterminate way, that some should be married; and yet this gift of wedlock is less than the gift of virginity. It may be said that not only is matrimony a gift from God, but that one is a virgin and another married is also a gift from God. I answer that this is true enough, as when God inspires one with a purpose to lead a single life, and another a married life; as, e.g., in the case of a queen who may bear an honest offspring to the good of the realm and the Church; but still God does not always do this, but leaves it wholly to the decision of many whether they will choose the married or unmarried life. It will be retorted, "How, then, is it that the Apostle says that each one has his proper gift of God?" I answer that this word gift is of two-fold meaning: (1.) It denotes the state itself of matrimony, or celibacy, or religion; (2.) The grace that is necessary and peculiar to this or that state. If you take the first, then each man's own gift is from God, but only materially, inasmuch as that gift which each one has chosen for himself and made his own is also from God. For God instituted, either directly or by His Church, matrimony and celibacy and other states, and gave this or that state to each one according as he wished for it; and in this sense each one has his own gift, partly from God and partly from himself and his own will. But properly and formally, that this gift or that is proper to this or that man, is often a matter of free-will. Yet it may be said to be so far from God as the whole direction of secondary causes, and all good providence generally is from God. For God in His providence directs each one through his parents, companions, confessors, teachers, and through other secondary causes, by which it comes to pass that one devoted himself, though freely, to matrimony, another to the priesthood. For all this direction does not place him under compulsion, but leaves him free. 2. Gift may be the grace befitting each state. The married require one kind of grace to maintain conjugal fidelity, virgins another to live in virginity; and this grace peculiar to each is formally from God, because, it being given that you have chosen a certain state, whether of matrimony, or celibacy, or any other, God will give you the grace that is proper to that state to enable you, if you will, to live rightly in it. For this belongs to the rightly ordered providence of God, that since He has not seen fit to prescribe to each of us his state, but has left the choice of it, as well as mist other things, to our own free-will, He will not forsake a man when he has made his choice, but will give him the grace necessary for living honestly in that state. Consequently He will supply to all the means necessary to salvation, by which, if thy are willing, they will be enabled to live holily and be saved. For else it would be impossible for many to be saved, as, e.g., for religious and others who have taken a vow of chastity, for one married who has bound himself to a person that is hard to please, infirm, or detestable. To meet and overcome such difficulties they need to receive from God proper and sufficient grace. For neither the married can be loosed from matrimony, nor the religious from their vow, to adopt some other state more fitting for them. In this the sense of this passage is: Choose whatever state you like, and God will give you grace to live in it holily. So Ambrose. And that this is the strict meaning if the Apostle is evident from the words, " For I would," which import: I have said that I allow, but do not command, the state of wedlock; for I would that all would abstain from it, and cultivate chastity, and live a single life; but still each one has his own gift let him be content with that, kat him exercise that. Let the single man who has received virginal or widowed chastity, i.e., the grace by which he can contain himself, look upon it as the gift of God; let the married, who has received conjugal chastity, i.e., the grace of using wedlock chastely, look upon it as the gift of God, be content with it, and use it as such. Hence it follows (1.) that God gives to minks, even though they be apostates, the gift of sufficient grace to enable them, if they will, to live chastely; that is to say, if they pray to God, give themselves to fasting, to holy reading, to manual labour, to constant occupation. Otherwise they would be bound to an impossibility, and God would be wanting to them in things necessary, and they would not have the gift proper to their state, although the Apostle here asserts that each one, whether unmarried, or virgin, or married, has the gift of chastity proper to his state. It follows (2.) that if any one changed his state for the better, God also changes and gives him a greater gift, and a greater measure of grace befitting that state, for this is necessary to a more perfect state. So the Council of Trent (Sess. xxiv. can. 9) lays down: " If any one says that clerks who have been placed in Holy Orders, or regulars who have solemnly professed chastity, and who do not think that they have the gift of chastity, can lawfully enter into matrimony, let him be anathema, since God does not deny it to them that seek for it, nor suffer us to be tempted above that we are able. "
Hath his gift of God. The gifts of God are twofold. 1. Some are wholly from God. So the gifts of Nature, which is but another name for god, inasmuch as He is the Author and Maker of Nature, are talent, judgment, memory, and a good disposition. The gifts of grace again are faith, hope, charity, and all the virtues infused by God, as the Author of grace. 2. Other gifts are from God indeed, but require for their due effect out co-operation. For example, all prevenient grace and good inspirations are gifts of God; so all good works, and the acts of all virtues, are gifts of God, says S. Augustine, because he gives (a) prevenient grace to excite us to these works and these actions, and (b) co-operating grace, by which He works with men to produce such things. Yet this grace so acts that man is left free, and has it in his power to act or not, to use this grace or not. In this sense all good works are gifts of God: yet they are free to man, and subject to his will and power. Of this second class the Apostle is here speaking in connection with the gift of chastity. The gift of chastity is, strictly speaking, an infused habit, or an acquired habit in those who already have it infused. But for those who have not yet the habit, there is sufficient help of grace, both internal and external, prepared for each one by God, so that by freely co-operating with it, each one may live in chastity, if he is willing to use that help. And this is evident from what is said in vers. 25, 35, 38, about the single life being counselled by God and Christ, who puts it before all men, and advises them to adopt it. But God does not advise a man to anything which is not in his power; but the single life is not in the power of each man, unless his will is helped by the grace of God. Therefore Christ has prepared, and is prepared to give to each one, this grace that is necessary to a single life and to virginity. If he is ready to give to each one virginal chastity, much more conjugal. Whoever, therefore, has his proper gift, that if his proper grace, in its beginning, will have it also in its perfect ending, if he will only pray to God earnestly and constantly to give him the grace prepared for him, and then co-operate vigorously with the grace that he has received.
7:8
Ver. 8. I say, therefore, to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. I am unmarried: let them remain the same. Hence it is most evident that S. Paul has no wife, but was single. Ver. 9. But if they cannot contain, let then marry, for it is better to marry than to burn. This may be a reference to Rth 1:13. It is better to marry than to burn, unless, that is, you are already wedded to Christ by a vow. Cf. S. Ambrose (ad Virg. Laps. c. v.). for to those who are bound by a vow of chastity, and are professed, as well as for husbands, it is better to burn and commit fornication than to marry a second time. For such marriage would be a permanent sacrilege or adultery, which is worse than fornication, or some momentary sacrilege; just as it is better to sin than to be in a constant state of sin, and to sin from obstinacy and contempt. But it is best of all neither to marry, nor to burn, but to contain, as Ambrose says; and this can be done by all tho have professed chastity, as was said in the last note, no matter how grievously they may be tempted. The Apostle going it so in his sore temptation, as many other saints have done, and especially he to whom the devils exclaimed, when they were overcome by him and put to confusion through the resistance he made to their temptation: "Thou hast conquered, hast conquered, for thou hast been in the fire and not been burnt." Burn here does not denote to be on fire, or to be tempted by the heat of lust, but to be injured and overcome by it, to yield and consent to it. For it is not he that feels the heat of the fire that is sain to be burnt by it, but he that is injured and scorched by it. So Virgil sings of Dido, who had been overcome by love for Æneas (Æn. 4. 68): "The ill-starred Dido burns and wanders frantically about the city." Cf. also Ecclus. 23:22. The Apostle is giving the reason why he wishes the incontinent and weak to marry, viz., lest they should burn, i.e., commit fornication; others, who are combatants of great soul, he wishes to contain. In other words, let those who do not contain marry, for it is better to marry than to burn. So Theodoret, Ambrose, Anselm, S. Thomas, Augustine (de Sancta Virgen, c. 74), Jerome (Apolog. pro Lib. contra Jovin.). "It is better," says S. Jerome, "to marry a husband than to commit fornication." And S. Ambrose says: " To burn is to be at the mercy of the desires; for when the will consents to the heat of the flesh it burns. To suffer the desires and not be overcome by them is the part of an illustrious and perfect man." It may be objected that S. Cyprian (Ep. 11 ad. Pompon. lib. i.) says of virgins who have consecrated themselves to Christ, that "if they cannot or will not persevere, it is better for them to marry than to burn." But Pamelius, following Turrianus and Hosius, well replies that S. Cyprian is not speaking of virgins already consecrated but of those about to be. These he advises not to dedicate and vow themselves to Christ if they do not intend to persevere; and in the same epistle he points out that that would be adulterous towards Christ if, after a vow of chastity, they should be wedded to men. Like the apostle here, he is speaking, therefore, not of those who are already bound, but of those who are free. Erasmus therefore is wrong and impudent, as usual, in making a note in the margin of this passage of S. Cyprian's, "Cyprian allows sacred virgins to marry." It may be objected secondly that S. Augustine says (de Sancta Virgin. c. 34) that those vowed virgins who commit fornication would do better to marry than to burn, i.e., than to be consumed by the flame of lust. I answer (1.) that this is a mere passing remark of S. Augustine's, meaning that for such it would be better, i.e., a less evil to marry than to commit fornication. He does not deny that they sin by marrying, but he only asserts that they sin less by marrying than by committing fornication. In the same way we might say to a robber, "It is better to rob a man than to kill him," i.e., it is a less evil. (2.) For such it is even absolutely better to marry than to burn, if only they enter into wedlock lawfully, that is to say, with the consent of the Church and a dispensation of their vow of continency from the Pope. (3.) Possibly, and not improbably. S. Augustine's meaning was that even for those who have no such dispensation it is better to marry than to commit fornication persistently, i.e., to live in a state of fornication and concubinage. And the reason is that such a one, if she marries, sins indeed grievously against her vow by marrying; yet still, after her marriage she may keep her vow of chastity and be free from sin, viz., by not exacting, but only paying the marriage debt, as the women commonly do of whom S. Augustine is here speaking. If, however, such a one is constantly breaking her vow, and she consequently sins more grievously than she would by marrying. For those acts of fornication constantly repeated seem to be a far worse evil and more grievously sinful than the single act of entering into a contract of marriage against a vow of continency. For though this one act virtually includes many, viz., the seeing and paying of the marriage debt as oft as it shall please either, yet this is only remotely and implicitly. But one who commits fornication constantly sins directly and explicitly, and daily repeats such actions; therefore he sins more grievously. For it is worse to sin explicitly and in many acts than by one tacit and implicit action. Observe also that at the time of S. Augustine these maidens who had vowed and professes chastity, though they might sin by marrying, yet might contract a lawful marriage. For the Church, as S. Augustine gives us plainly enough to understand, had not at that rime made the solemn vow an absolute barrier to matrimony. Moreover, it is evident from his next words that S. Augustine is of opinion that such ought simply and absolutely to keep their vow of chastity; for he adds: " Those virgins who repent them of their profession and are wearied of confession, unless they direct their heart aright, and again overcome their lust by the fear of God, must be reckoned among the dead." Lastly, that the Apostle is here speaking to those who are free, and not to those who are bound by a vow, is proved at length by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Œcumenius, by Epiphanius (Hæres. 61), Ambrose (ad Virgin. Lapsam c. 5), Augustine (de adulter. Conjug. lib. i. c. 15), Jerome (contra Jovin, lib. i.). S. Ephrem, 1300 years ago, being asked to whom this verse applies, wrote a most exhaustive treatise about it, in which he abundantly proves that it has to do, not with religious or the clergy, and those who have taken a vow of chastity, but with seculars who are free. Vers. 10, 11. And unto the married I command, &c. The Apostle now passes from the question of marriage to that of divorce; for, as this verse indicated, the Corinthians had put to Paul a second question, one relating to divorce. Granted that in matrimony its use was lawful, nay obligatory, as S. Paul has said, at all events may not one that is faithful to his marriage vow dissolve it and have a divorce? And again, when a divorce has taken place, may not the wife or the husband marry again? This verse and ver. 11 give the answer to the question. He says let her remain unmarried. Hence it follows that divorce, even supposing it to be just and lawful, does not loose the marriage knot, but only dispenses with the marriage debt; so that if the wife os an adulteress it is not lawful for the innocent husband to enter into another marriage. And the same holds good for the wife if the husband is an adulterer. We should take notice of this against the heretics Erasmus, Cajetan, and Catherinus, who say that this cannot be proved from Scripture, but only from the Canons. But they mistake, as is evident from this passage of S. Paul's. For the Apostle is here speaking evidently of a just separation made by the wife when she is innocent, and injured by her husband committing adultery, for he permits her to remain separated, or to be reconciled to her husband. For if he were speaking if an unjust separation, such as when a wife flies from her husband without any fault on his side, he would have had not to permit of separation but altogether to order a reconciliation. It may be said that the word reconciled points to some offence and injury done by the wife who caused the separation, and that therefore S. Paul is speaking if an unjust separation. I reply by denying the premiss. For reconcile merely signifies a return to mutual good-will; and the offending party in spoken of as being reconciled to the offended just as much as the offended to the offending. For instance, in 2 Macc. i. 5, it is said "that God may hear your prayers and be reconciled to you." The Councils and Fathers explain this passage in this way, and lay down from it that fornication dissolves the marriage bond so far as bed and board are concerned, but not so that it is lawful to marry another. Cf. Concil. Milevit. c. 17; Concil. Elibert. c. 9; Concil. Florent. (Instruct. Armen. de Matrim.); Concil. Trident Sess. xx. can. 7); Pope Evaristus (Eph 2); S. Augustine de Adulter. Conjug. (lib. ii. c. 4); S. Jerome (Ep. ad Amand.); Theodoret, Œcumenius, Haymo, Anselm and others. It may be said that Ambrose, commenting on this verse, says that the Apostle speaks of the wife only, because it is never lawful for her to marry another after she is divorced; but that it is lawful for the husband, after putting away an adulterous wife, to marry another, because he is the head of the woman. I answer that from this and similar passages it is evident that this commentary on S. Paul's Epistles is not the work of S. Ambrose, or at all events that these passages are interpolations. For in matrimony and divorce the same law governs the wife which governs the husband, as the true Ambrose lays down (in Lucam viii. and de Abraham, lib. i. c. 4). What then the Apostle says of the wife applies equally to the husband; for he is speaking to all that are married, as he says himself; and moreover, in ver. 5, he declared that the marriage rights of husband and wife are equal, and that each has equal power over the other's body.
7:11
Let not the husband put away his wife. I.e., without grave and just cause; for it is allowed to put her away because of fornication and other just causes. Ver. 12. But to the rest speak I... let him not put her away.
7:12
The rest are those that are married and belong to different religions; and to them I say, that if a brother, i.e., one of the faithful, have a wife that is an unbeliever, &c. In other words, I have thus far spoken to married people when both are of the number of the faithful, as I implied in ver. 5, when I said "that ye may give yourselves to prayer." Now, however, I am addressing those of whim one is a believer, the other an unbeliever. This is the explanation given by many together with S. Augustine, who will be quoted directly. But if this is so it is certainly strange that the Apostle did not express himself more clearly, for by the addition of a single word he might have said more simply: "To the faithful who are married it is not I that speak but the Lord; but to the rest, viz., to those married couples of whom one is an unbeliever, I speak, not the Lord." But by saying not to the faithful, but unto the married, he seems to speak in general terms of all that are married, whether believers or unbelievers. Nor is it to be objected to this that in ver.5 he speaks casually to the faithful, for there he is excepting from the general law which governs the marriage debt those of the faithful who are married, when by mutual consent they give themselves to prayer. But this exception is not to be made to cover all the marriage laws, which the Apostle in this chapter us laying down for all who are married. Moreover, the Apostle so far has not said a single word about the unbeliever, or about a difference of religion. Hence we may say secondly and better, that the rest are those who are not joined in matrimony. For by the words but and the rest this verse is opposed to ver. 10, as will appear more clearly directly.
Speak I, not the Lord. "I command," says Theodoret. But S. Augustine (de Adulter. Conjug. lib. i. c. 13 et seq.), Anselm, and S. Thomas interpret it: I give the following advice, viz., that the believing husband is not to put away an unbelieving wife who lives at peace with him, and vice versâ. There is a third interpretation, and the best of all, given us from the Roman, Plantinian, and other Bibles, which put a full stop after the words, But to the rest speak I, not the Lord, this separating them from what follows and joining them to what precedes. We have then the meaning as follows: To the rest, viz., the unmarried, the Lord gives no command (supply command from ver, 10), but I say, and I advise what I said and advised before in ver. 8, viz., that it is good for them to remain as they are, unmarried. This interpretation too is supported by the antithesis between the rest and the married, by which it is clear that the rest must be the unmarried, not married people of different faiths. Moreover, he explains himself in this way in ver. 25, where he says, "Now, concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my judgment," which is identical with what he says here, "To the rest speak I, not the Lord."
If any brother hath a wife that believeth not. This is the third question put to Paul by the Corinthians: Can one of the faithful that is married live with an unbelieving partner? S. Augustine and others, as I have said, connect these words with the preceding, which then give as the meaning: Although Christ permitted a believer to put away his wife that believeth not, yet I give as my advice that he do not put her away; for to put her away is neither expedient for her salvation nor for that of the children, if she is willing to live with a believer without casting reproach on her Creator and on the faith. Hence many doctors, cited by Henriquez (de Matrim. lib. xi. c. 8), gather indirectly by analogy that, since Paul forbids what Christ permits, one of the faithful that is married may, by Christ's permission, put away an unbelieving partner that refuses to be converted, and contract another marriage. On the contrary, when both are believers, neither is allowed this, as has been said. But if we separate these words, as the Roman Bible does, from the preceding, by a full stop, nothing if the kind can be proved. Nay, Thomas Sanchez (de Matrim. vol. ii. disp. 73, no. 7), who does not read any full stop, as S. Augustine does not, and so refers these words to what follows, thinks that all that is exactly to be gathered from this is that Christ permits to a married believer separation a toro, but not dissolution of a marriage entered into with one that believes not. In the third place, this passage might be explained to mean that Christ laid down no law on this matter, but left it to be settled by His Apostles and His Church, according to needs of different ages, as, e.g., the Church afterwards declared the marriage of a believer with as unbeliever null and void, if one was a believer at the time of the marriage. According to S. Augustine's reading, this rendering is obtained with difficulty; according to the Roman, not at all. For all that the Apostle means is that the believer is not to put away an unbeliever, if the latter is willing to live with the former. Cf. note to ver. 15. Infidelity in S. Paul's time was no impediment that destroyed a marriage contracted with a believer, nor did it prevent it from being contracted, if the believer ran no risk of apostatising, and if the unbeliever would consent to live in peace with the believer, retaining his faith, as S. Paul here lays down. But now by long custom it has become the law of the Church that not heresy but infidelity not only impedes, but also destroys a marriage which any one who was a believer at the time might wish to contract with an unbeliever. Ver. 14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife. Such union by marriage is holy. The believer, therefore, is not, as you so scrupulously fear, defiled by contact with an unbeliever, but rather the unbeliever, as Anselm says, is sanctified by a kind of moral naming and sprinkling of holiness, both because he is the husband of a holy, that is a believing, wife, and also because by not hindering his wife in her faith, and by living happily with her, he as it were paves the way for himself to be converted by the prayers, merits, words, and example of his believing wife, and so to become holy. So did S. Cecilia convert her husband Valerian; Theodora, Sisinnius; Clotilda, Clodævus. So say Anselm, Theophylact, Chrysostom. S. Natalia, the wife of S. Adrian, is illustrious for having not only incited her husband to adopt the faith, but also most gloriously to undergo martyrdom for it. For when she had heard that women were forbidden to serve the martyrs, and that the prison-doors would not be opened to them, she shaved off her hair, and having donned man's dress, she entered the prison and strengthened the hearts of the martyrs by her good offices. Other matrons followed her example. At length the tyrant Maximianus discovered the fraud, and ordered an anvil to be brought into the prison, and the arms and legs of the martyrs to be placed on it and smashed with a crow-bar. The lictors did as they had been ordered; and when the Blessed Natalia saw it, she went to meet them and asked them to begin with Adrian. The executioners did so, and when the leg of Adrian was placed on the anvil, Natalia caught hold of his foot and held it in position. Then the executioners aimed a blow with all their might, and cut off his feet and smashed his legs. Forthwith Natalia said to Adrian, "I pray thee, my lord, servant of Christ, while your spirit remains in you, stretch forth your hand that they may also cut that off, and that you may be made like the martyrs in all things: for greater sufferings have they endured than these." Then Adrian stretched out his hand, and gave it to Natalia, who placed it on the anvil, and then the executioners cut it off. Then they took the anvil away, and soon after his spirit fled. Cf. his life, September 8th. It is worth our notice what Gennadius, Patriarch of Constantinople, writes, in his exposition of the Council of Florence (Sess. v.) of Theophilus, a heretic and not a heathen emperor, son of Michael the Stammerer, who was saved by the prayers of his wife Augusta. He had made an onslaught on images, and his mouth was in consequence so violently pulled open that men might see down his throat. This brought him to his senses, and he kissed the holy image. Shortly afterwards he was taken away to appear before the tribunal of God, and through the prayers offered for him by his wife and by holy men he received the pardon; for the queen in her sleep saw a vision of Theophilus bound and being dragged by a vast multitude, going before and following. Before him were borne different instruments of torture, and she saw those following who were being led to punishment until they came into the presence of the terrible Judge, and before Him Theophilus was placed. Then Augusta threw herself at the feet of the Dread Judge, and with many tears besought Him earnestly for her husband. The terrible Judge said to her: "O woman, great is thy faith; for thy sake, and because of the prayers of thy priests, I pardon thy husband." Then He said to His servants: "Loose him, and deliver him to his wife." It is also said that the Patriarch Methodius, having collected and written down the names of all kinds of heretics, including Theophilus, placed the roll under the holy table. Then in the same night on which the queen saw the vision, he too saw a holy angel entering the great temple, and saying, "O Bishop, thy prayers are heard, and Theophilus has found pardon." On awaking from sleep he went to the holy table, and lo! the unsearchable judgment of god, he found the name of Theophilus blotted out. Cf. also Baronuis (Annal. vol. ix., A.D. 842).
7:14
Else were your children unclean. If you were to put away a wife that believed not, your children would be looked upon as having been born in unlawful wedlock, and as therefore illegitimate. But, as it is, they are holy, i.e., clean conceived and born in honourable and lawful wedlock. So Ambrose, Anselm, Augustine (de Peccat. Meritis. lib.ii. c. 26). In the second place they would be strictly unclean, because they would be enticed into infidelity, and educated in it by the unbelieving parent, who had sought for the divorce through hatred of his partner; and especially if it is the father that is the unbeliever, for in such cases the children for the most part follow the father. But if the believer remain in wedlock with the unbeliever, the children are holy, because, with the tacit permission of the unbeliever, they can easily be sanctified, baptized, and Christianly educated through the faith, the diligence, and care of the believer. So S. Augustine (de Peccat. Meritis. lib. iii. c. 12), and after Tertullian, S. Jerome (ad Paulin. Ep. 153). It is from this passage that Calvin and Beza have gathered their doctrine f imputed righteousness, teaching that the children of believers are strictly holy, and can be saved without baptism. They say that by the very fact that they are children of believers they are regarded as being born in the Church, according to the Divine covenant in Gen. xvii. "I will be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee." Similarly, in the Civil Law, when one parent is free the children are born free. But these teachers err, For (1.) the Apostle says equally that the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife. But it is not precisely correct to say that such a man is sanctified through his wife; neither, therefore, is it strictly true of the child. (2.) The Church is not a civil but a supernatural republic, and in it no one is born a Christian; but by baptism, which has taken the place of circumcision, every one is spiritually born again and is made holy, not civilly but really, by faith, hope, and charity infused into his soul. This is the mind of the Fathers and the whole Church. (3.) It is said absolutely in S. Joh 3:5, that "except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." It is therefore untrue that any one not born of water, but merely of believing parents, can enter into the kingdom of God. Ver. 15. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. If the unbeliever seek for a dissolution of the marriage, or will not live with his partner without doing injury to God, by endeavouring to draw her way to unbelief or to some wickedness, or by uttering blasphemy against God, or Christ, or the faith, then, as Sanchez lays down from the common consent of the Doctors of the Church (vol. ii. disp. 74), he by so acting is rightly regarded to wish for a separation; then let the unbeliever depart from the unbelieving, because it is better, says S. Chrysostom, to be divorced from one's husband than from God. Observe that the Apostle in this case allows a separation, not only a toro but also a vinculo; and therefore the believer may contract another marriage, this being a concession made by Christ in favour of the faith; otherwise a Christian man or woman would be subject to slavery. For it is a grievous slavery to be bound in matrimony to an unbeliever, so as not to be able to marry another, and to be bound to live a life of celibacy, even if the unbeliever depart. So S. Augustine (de Adulter. Conjug. lib. i. c. 13), S. Thomas, and S. Ambrose, who says: "The marriage obedience is not owing to him who scoffs at the Author of marriage, but in such case remarriage is lawful." Further, many doctors, cited by Henriquez (de Matrim. lib. xi. c. 8), amongst whom is S. Augustine (de Adulter. Conjug. lib. i. c. xix.), gather from this verse and from verse12 that the believer whose unbelieving partner is not willing to be converted, even though he may be willing to live with her without injury to God, has by this very fact a right to enter upon a new marriage. But S. Paul and the Canonical decrees (c p. quanto, cap. Gaudemus, tit, de Divort, and cap. Si Infidelis 28, qu. 2) only deal with the case where the unbeliever wishes to depart, or where he is a blasphemer against the faith. And, therefore, other doctors, cited by Henriquez, think that in this case it is lawful for the believer to marry again. And this opinion is the more sound not only for the reason given above, but also because the Fathers who support the first opinion rely on glosses on the various capitula, which are merely glosses of Orleans, and if anything darken the text. Moreover, no gloss by itself can be the foundation of a right, or of a new law. Since, therefore, it is agreed that the marriage of unbelievers is true marriage, and that it is not dissolved by the conversion of either party, because there is no law of God or of the Church to dissolve it, it follows that they must hold to their contract, which by its very nature is indissoluble. This is strengthened by the consideration that each party possesses good faith; therefore it cannot set aside, unless it is agreed that either or both have no right to this marriage, or that one loses his right through the conversion of the other. This, however, is not agreed on, but is highly doubtful. In matters of doubt the position of the possessor is the stronger, and he ought not to be ousted from it because of any doubt that may arise. Nevertheless, Sanchez adds (disp. 74, Num 9) that it is lawful for the believer to marry again, because it is now forbidden by the Church to live with an unbeliever who will not be converted, because of the danger of perversion which exists nearly always. The unbeliever is then looked upon as having departed, because he refuses to live with the believer in a lawful and proper manner. But Sanchez means that the Church now forbids in general a believer to continue to live with an unbeliever. But this is denied by Navarrus and others; for though the Fourth Council of Toledo forbids a believer to live with an unbeliever if he is a Jew, this was done merely because of the obstinate tenacity of the Jews to their creed. Neither here nor elsewhere is marriage with a heathen forbidden. Moreover, the Council of Toledo was merely local, and this same canon has been differently interpreted by different authors, as Sanchez says (disp. 73, Num 6). And in truth it would be hard and a just cause of offence if, in India, China, and Japan, when the faith is first preached, Christians should be compelled to put away the wives that they had married when unbelievers, or if wives should be compelled to leave their husbands who were unwilling to be converted to Christianity, especially when they were in high position; for occasion would be taken from thence to exterminate Christians and their faith. The case is different in Spain and amongst Christians, where the Church might, without causing scandal, enact this, either by a general law (which as a matter of fact does not exist, as I have said), or by use and custom, by forbidding individuals in particular to remain in marriage with one that was not a believer, because of the danger of perversion. Such a precept it would be the duty of the believer to obey, and therefore it would not be he that was in fault, but the unbeliever, who, by refusing to live in marriage, according to the law binding on the believing partner and the precept of the Church, becomes the cause of the separation. By so acting, the unbeliever will be reckoned to wish for separation, and consequently it would be lawful for the believer to contract another marriage, as Sanchez learnedly argues. For example, Queen Cæsar, wife of the King of the Persians in the time of the Emperor Mauritius, fled secretly to Constantinople, and was there converted and baptized. When her husband requested her to return, she refused to do so unless he became a Christian. He when went to Constantinople and was there baptized, and assisted out of the font by Augustus, and having received his wife again, he returned joyfully to his home. This happened about the year 593, as Baronius related on the authority of Paul the Deacon and Gregory of Tours. All that has been said must be clearly understood to refer to matrimony contracted when both partied are unbelievers, followed by the conversion of one and the refusal of the other to be converted; for matrimony contracted by an unbeliever with a believer has been declared null and void by the Church since the time of S. Paul and thence it is that difference of faith is a barrier to matrimony. This was the reason why Theresa, sister of Adelphonsus, King of Liège, refused to marry Abdallah, King of the Arabs, unless he adopted the Christian faith. This he promised, but falsely. Therefore on the arrival of Theresa he forced her, in spite of her struggles; but being smitten by God with a sore disease, he was unable to be cured without sending back Theresa to her brother. This is told by Roderic, Vazæus, and Baronius (A. D. 983). S. Eurosia too, daughter of the King of Bohemia, having been taken prisoner by the King of the Moors, chose death rather than marriage with him; and while she was patiently awaiting the sword of the executioner, she heard an angel saying, "Come, my elect, the spouse of Christ, receive the crown which the Lord hath prepared for you, and the gift that your prayers shall be heard as often as the faithful call upon you for help against rain or any storm whatsoever." Having heard these words, her arms and legs having been lopped off, she gave up the ghost, being renowned for her miracles, as Lucius Marinæus Siculus related (de Rebus Hispan, lib. v.).
7:15
But God hath called us unto peace. Peace of conscience with God, and of agreement with men. Therefore, on our part, let us not depart from unbelieving husbands, but live with them as peacefully as we can. Secondly, and more fitly, peace here stands for that rest and tranquil life to which the Apostle is urging the married believer. Such a life in separation and solitude is to be preferred to marriage with an unbeliever who wishes to depart, and who is perpetually provoking the believer to quarrel, and disturbing his peace. This better agrees with the mention of departure which has gone just before these words, and of which I shall have more to say. Ver. 16. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? If we take the first meaning of "peace" given above, the sense will be: Live in peace as far as you can, O believer, with your unbelieving partner, for you know not the good that he may derive thence: perhaps by living with him you will convert him and save him. So Chrysostom, Ambrose, Anselm, Theophylact, and others, If we take the second meaning of peace, the sense will be still better. Peace is the gift of Christ; to this have we been called by Christ, not to unhappy and quarrelsome slavery. If, therefore, the unbeliever seeks by quarrels, abuse, by threats against the faith and against his faithful partner, to drive her away, let her depart and live peacefully, and give up all hope of his conversion. For what ground of hope is there of one that is a heathen, blasphemous, and quarrelsome? Therefore, what do you know, or whence do you hope to save him? Ver. 17. But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. I have said this much about the marriage of an unbeliever with a believer, and about separation and divorce, if the unbeliever seek for it, and about living together in peace; but I do not wish to be understood to mean that a divorce is to be sought for, or that peace is to be broken, merely through lust and a desire to change one's state, as, e.g., that a believer, because he is a believer and called to Christian liberty, may desire and find an excuse for changing his servile condition into one of freedom, his position as a Gentile into that if a Jew. I ordain, therefore, that each one of the faithful, whether he be a Jew or a Gentile, bond or free, maintain the state and condition which the Lord has given him, and which he had before he became a believer. Let each one walk in his own line; let him be content with that, and live as becometh a Christian; let him not grow restless to change his state because of his Christianity, and so cause the Gentiles to stumble.
7:1
Postquam apostolus reprehendit fornicarium et sustinentes eum, hic accedit ad tractandum de matrimonio. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo determinat de coniugatis et matrimonio iunctis; secundo, de virginibus, ibi de virginibus autem, etc.; tertio, de viduis, ibi mulier alligata est, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo instruit eos qui non sunt matrimonio iuncti, utrum scilicet debeant matrimonium contrahere; secundo manifestat quod dixerat, ibi hoc autem dico, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo manifestat quid circa hoc sit per se bonum; secundo, quid necessarium, ibi propter fornicationem autem, et cetera. Circa primum considerandum quod in detestationem fornicationis, contra quam locutus iam fuerat, aliqui non habentes zelum Dei secundum scientiam, intantum procedebant, quod etiam matrimonium condemnabant, secundum illud I Tim. IV, 2 s.: in hypocrisi loquentium mendacium, prohibentium nubere. Et quia hoc durum Corinthiis videbatur fidelibus, super hoc apostolo scripserunt, eius sententiam requirentes, et ideo apostolus eis respondet: ita reprehendi ea quae facitis. De quibus autem scripsistis mihi, respondeo, quantum ad matrimonium, bonum est homini mulierem non tangere. Circa quod notandum quod mulier data est viro ad adiutorium generationis: et in hoc differt vis generativa a nutritiva, quia vis nutritiva deservit homini ad conservationem individui; unde bonum est homini nutrimento uti, quia per hoc eius vita conservatur; generativa autem non deservit homini ad conservationem individui, sed ad conservationem speciei. Unde non potest dici quod bonum est homini, ad suum individuum, mulierem tangere, primo quidem quantum ad animam, quia, ut Augustinus dicit in Soliloquiis, nihil sic deiicit animam ab arce virtutis suae, sicut contactus ille corporum, sine quo uxor haberi non potest; et ideo Ex. XIX, 15 dicitur populo accepturo legem Dei: estote parati in diem tertium, et ne appropinquetis uxoribus vestris. I Reg. XXI, 4 dixit Abimelech ad David: si mundi sunt pueri, maxime a mulieribus, manducent panem sanctum. Secundo quantum ad corpus, quod vir subiicit per matrimonium potestati uxoris, se ex libero servum constituens. Servitus autem haec prae omnibus aliis est amara. Unde et Eccle. VII, 27 dicitur: inveni amariorem morte mulierem. Tertio quantum ad res exteriores, quarum occupatione necesse est hominem implicari, qui habet uxorem et filios nutriendos, cum tamen dicatur II Tim. II, 4: nemo militans Deo implicat se negotiis saecularibus, ut ei placeat cui se probavit.
7:2
Deinde cum dicit propter fornicationem, etc., ostendit quid circa hoc sit necessarium. Primo quantum ad contractum matrimonii; secundo quantum ad actum matrimonii iam contracti, ibi uxori vir debitum, et cetera. Circa primum considerandum est, quod actus generativae virtutis ordinatur ad conservationem speciei per generationem filiorum, et quia mulier data est viro in adiutorium generationis, prima necessitas tangendi mulierem est propter procreationem filiorum. Unde Gen. I, 27 s. dicitur: masculum et foeminam creavit eos, et benedixit eis Deus, et ait: crescite et multiplicamini, et replete terram. Sed haec necessitas fuit circa institutionem humani generis, quamdiu oportuit multiplicari populum Dei per successionem carnis. Sed apostolus, considerans humanum genus iam multiplicatum et populum Dei iam esse augmentatum, non propagatione carnis, sed generatione quae est ex aqua et spiritu sancto, ut dicitur Io. III, 5, praetermisit hanc necessitatem, qua scilicet primitus institutum fuerat matrimonium in officium naturae, et proponit secundam necessitatem secundum quam institutum est in remedium culpae. Quia enim carnalis concupiscentia adhuc post Baptismum in fidelibus remanet, licet non dominetur, instigat homines maxime ad actus venereos propter vehementiam delectationis. Et quia maioris virtutis est totaliter hanc concupiscentiam superare, quam possit hominibus convenire, secundum illud Matth. XIX, v. 11: non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, necessarium est quod in parte concupiscentiae cedatur, et in parte superetur; quod quidem fit dum actus generationis ratione ordinatur, et non totaliter homo concupiscentia ducitur, sed magis concupiscentia subditur rationi. Habet autem hoc ratio naturalis, quod homo utatur generationis actu, secundum quod convenit generationi et educationi filiorum. Hoc autem in brutis animalibus invenitur, quod in quibuscumque speciebus animalium sola foemina non sufficit ad educationem prolis, masculus simul nutrit prolem cum foemina; et ad hoc exigitur, quod masculus cognoscat propriam prolem. Et ideo in omnibus talibus animalibus, ut patet in columbis, turturibus et huiusmodi, naturaliter indita est sollicitudo de educatione prolis. Et propter hoc in huiusmodi non sunt vagi et indifferentes concubitus, ex quibus sequeretur incertitudo prolis; sed masculus determinatus determinatae foeminae coniungitur, non indifferenter quaelibet cuilibet, sicut accidit in canibus et aliis huiusmodi animalibus, in quibus sola foemina nutrit prolem. Maxime autem in specie humana masculus requiritur ad prolis educationem, quae non solum attenditur secundum corporis nutrimentum, sed magis secundum nutrimentum animae, secundum illud Hebr. XII, 9: patres quidem carnis nostrae habuimus eruditores et reverebamur eos; et ideo ratio naturalis dictat quod in specie humana non sint vagi et incerti concubitus, quales sunt concubitus fornicarii, sed sint determinati viri ad determinatam foeminam, quae quidem determinatio fit per legem matrimonii. Sic igitur triplex bonum habet matrimonium, primum quidem quod est in officium naturae, prout scilicet ordinatur ad generationem et educationem prolis, et hoc bonum est bonum prolis. Secundum bonum habet prout est in remedium concupiscentiae, quae scilicet coarctatur ad determinatam personam, et hoc bonum dicitur fides, quam scilicet vir servat uxori suae, non accedens ad aliam, et similiter uxor viro. Tertium bonum habet, prout in fide contrahitur Christi, quod quidem bonum dicitur sacramentum, inquantum significat coniunctionem Christi et Ecclesiae, secundum illud Eph. V, 32: sacramentum hoc magnum est, ego autem dico in Christo, et Ecclesia. Hoc est ergo quod dicit: dictum est quod bonum est homini mulierem non tangere, sed quia ad hoc bonum non sunt omnes homines idonei, unusquisque vir, propter fornicationem, scilicet vitandam, suam uxorem habeat, id est, sibi determinatam, ut tollantur vagi et incerti concubitus, quod pertinet ad fornicationem. Unde et Prov. V, 18: laetare cum muliere adolescentiae tuae, et postea subditur: quare seduceris, fili mi, ab aliena?
7:3
Deinde cum dicit uxori vir debitum reddat, etc., agit de usu matrimonii contracti. Et primo agit de debito reddendo; secundo de debiti intermissione, ibi nolite fraudare, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit quod intendit, dicens: dictum est quod vir habeat uxorem, et uxor virum; habendi autem haec est ratio, ut vir reddat debitum uxori, scilicet de suo corpore per carnalem commixtionem, similiter autem et uxor viro, quia quantum ad hoc ad paria iudicantur. Unde mulier non est formata de pedibus viri tamquam ancilla, nec de capite tamquam domina, sed de latere tamquam socia, ut legitur Gen. II, 21. Unde et mutuo debent sibi debitum reddere, secundum illud Rom. XIII, 7: reddite omnibus debita. Secundo assignat debiti rationem, dicens mulier non habet potestatem sui corporis, scilicet ad actum generationis, ut scilicet possit proprio arbitrio vel continere, scilicet vel alteri se tradere; sed vir, scilicet habet potestatem sui corporis, quantum scilicet ad usum carnalis copulae, et ideo uxor debet viro proprii corporis officium offerre.
7:4
Similiter autem et vir sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed mulier, et cetera. Unde et ipse debet sui corporis officium offerre uxori, legitimo impedimento cessante. Unde et Gen. c. II, 24 dicitur: adhaerebit uxori suae, et erunt duo in carne una. Deinde cum dicit nolite fraudare invicem, etc., agit de intermissione debiti reddendi. Et primo ostendit qualiter intermitti debeat actus coniugalis. Circa quod docet unum esse cavendum, ne scilicet hoc per fraudem fiat, dicens nolite fraudare invicem, ut scilicet velit vir continere, invita uxore, aut etiam e converso. Quod apostolus fraudem nominat, quia unus subtrahit alteri quod ei debetur, quod ad fraudem pertinet, non minus in actu matrimonii, quam in aliis rebus. Unde et Prov. c. XII, 27 dicitur: non inveniet fraudulentus lucrum, quia scilicet ille, qui tali fraude continentiam Deo offert, non lucratur meritum vitae aeternae. Sicut enim dicit Augustinus non vult Deus tale lucrum tali damno compensari, ut dum unus coniugum continet, altero invito, ille incidat in damnabiles corruptelas. Tria autem docet observanda in tali intermissione: quorum primum est ut fiat ex communi consensu.
7:5
Unde dicit nisi forte ex consensu. Unde dicitur Eccli. XXV, 1 s.: in tribus beneplacitum est spiritui meo, quae sunt probata coram Deo et hominibus: concordia fratrum, et amor proximorum, vir et mulier bene sibi consentientes. Secundum est, ut sit ad certum tempus. Unde subdit nisi forte ad tempus, secundum illud Eccle. c. III, 5: tempus amplexandi, et tempus longe fieri ab amplexibus. Tertium est, ut hoc fiat propter debitum finem, scilicet causa spiritualium actuum, ad quos continentia reddit magis aptos. Unde subdit ut vacetis orationi, secundum illud Ioel. II, 14: sacrificium et libamen domino Deo nostro, et postea subdit: egrediatur sponsus de cubili suo, et sponsa de thalamo suo. Secundo agit de reiteratione coniugalis actus; et primo ponit documentum, dicens iterum revertimini in idipsum, ut scilicet vobis invicem debitum reddatis, finito tempore orationis. Unde et III Reg. VIII, 66 dicitur, quod celebratis dedicationis solemniis, profecti sunt in tabernacula sua laetantes. Secundo assignat rationem documenti. Non enim hoc dicit, quasi sit necessarium ad salutem, sed ad periculum vitandum. Unde subdit ne tentet vos Satanas, id est, ne sua tentatione vos prosternat; sicut etiam dicitur I Thess. III, 5: ne forte vos tentaverit is qui tentat, et inanis sit labor noster. Tentatio autem Satanae non est fortibus timenda, de quibus dicitur I Io. II, 14: scribo vobis, iuvenes, quoniam fortes estis, et verbum Dei manet in vobis, et vicistis malignum. Est autem timenda debilibus, unde subdit propter incontinentiam vestram, id est, propter pronitatem ad incontinentiam, ex quo contingit, quod Diabolus hominem tentando prosternit, et provocatur ad tentandum, secundum illud I Petr. ult.: circuit quaerens quem devoret. Deinde cum dicit hoc autem dico, etc., manifestat quo sensu praedicta sunt accipienda, et primo facit quod dictum est; secundo, rationem assignat, ibi volo autem, etc.; tertio, exponit quod dixerat, ibi dico autem, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dixi, quod unusquisque suam uxorem habeat, et unaquaeque mulier virum suum, et iterum quod post continentiam determinati temporis, iterum revertamini in idipsum.
7:6
Hoc autem dico secundum indulgentiam, id est, parcens infirmitati vestrae, non secundum imperium, quasi scilicet vobis necessarium ad salutem. Subditis enim sunt quaedam eorum infirmitati indulgenda, et non ad bona imperio cogendi. Unde contra quosdam praelatos dicitur Ez. XXXIV, 4 s.: cum austeritate imperabatis eis, et cum potentia, et dispersi sunt greges mei. Sed videtur apostolus inconvenienter loqui; indulgentia enim non est nisi de peccato. Per hoc ergo quod apostolus, secundum indulgentiam se dicit matrimonium concessisse, videtur exprimere quod matrimonium sit peccatum. Sed ad hoc potest responderi dupliciter. Uno modo ut indulgentia sumatur hic pro permissione. Est autem duplex permissio: una quidem de minus malo, sicut dicitur Matth. c. XIX, 8, quod Moyses permisit Iudaeis dare libellum repudii propter duritiam cordis eorum, scilicet ad vitandum uxoricidium, ad quod erant proni. Talis enim permissio non fit in novo testamento propter sui perfectionem, secundum illud Hebr. VI, 1: ad perfectum feramur. Alia autem est permissio de minus bono, cum scilicet homo praecepto non cogitur ad maius bonum; et hoc modo apostolus hic indulget, id est, permittit matrimonium, quod est minus bonum quam virginitas, quae non praecipitur, quae est maius bonum. Alio modo potest accipi indulgentia prout respicit culpam, secundum illud Is. XXVI, 15: indulsisti, domine, indulsisti genti. Et secundum hoc indulgentia refertur ad actum coniugalem secundum quod habet annexam culpam venialem, tamen propter bona matrimonii sine quibus esset mortalis. Unde considerandum est quod actus coniugalis quandoque quidem est meritorius, et absque omni culpa mortali vel veniali, puta cum ordinatur ad bonum prolis procreandae et educandae ad cultum Dei: sic enim est actus religionis; vel cum fit causa reddendi debitum: sic enim est actus iustitiae. Omnis autem actus virtutis est meritorius, si sit cum charitate. Quandoque vero est cum culpa veniali, scilicet cum quis ad actum matrimonialem ex concupiscentia excitatur, quae tamen infra limites matrimonii sistit, ut scilicet cum sola uxore sit contentus. Quandoque vero est culpa mortalis, puta cum concupiscentia fertur extra limites matrimonii, scilicet cum aliquis accedit ad uxorem, aeque libenter vel libentius ad aliam accessurus. Primo ergo modo actus matrimonii non requirit indulgentiam; secundo modo habet indulgentiam inquantum aliquis consentiens concupiscentiae in uxorem, non fit reus peccati mortalis; tertio modo omnino indulgentiam non habet. Deinde cum dicit volo autem etc., assignat rationem eius quod dixerat, et primo quare non loquatur secundum imperium; secundo quare loquatur secundum indulgentiam, ibi sed unusquisque, et cetera. Circa primum considerandum est quod nullus sapiens praecipit illud cuius contrarium magis vult fieri. Ideo apostolus non praecipit quod homines matrimonium contrahant, vel matrimonio contracto utantur, quia magis vult quod homines contineant. Et hoc est quod dicit volo autem omnes, homines, esse sicut meipsum, ut scilicet contineant, sicut ego contineo. Et similiter dicit Act. XXVI, 29: opto apud Deum omnes qui audiunt, fieri tales qualis ego sum. Sed contra hoc videtur esse, quia si omnes homines continerent, sicut apostolus continebat, cessasset generatio, et sic non fuisset impletus numerus electorum, quod erat contra dispositionem divinam. Dicunt quidam quod apostolo revelatum erat, quod si omnes homines salvarentur in continentia viventes, sicut ipse vivebat, sufficiebat ad implendum numerum electorum. Sed hoc nulla auctoritate fulcitur; et ideo potest dici, quod apostolus volebat omnes esse continentes, quia scilicet volebat hoc de singulis, non tamen volebat quod omnes simul continerent. Vel potest dici, et melius, quod volebat omnes homines esse continentes voluntate antecedente, sicut ipse dicit I Tim. II, 4, quod Deus vult omnes homines salvos fieri, non autem voluntate consequente, qua Deus vult quosdam salvare, scilicet praedestinatos, et quosdam damnare, scilicet reprobatos, secundum illud Mal. I, 2 s.: Iacob dilexi, Esau autem odio habui. Est autem voluntas antecedens de eo, quod absolute consideratum est melius, sicut omnes homines esse salvos, vel continentes: voluntas autem consequens est de eo, quod est melius, consideratis circumstantiis personarum et negotiorum, et secundum hoc Deus vult quosdam damnare, et apostolus quosdam matrimonio iungi. Deinde cum dicit sed unusquisque, assignat rationem quare secundum indulgentiam matrimonium permiserit, quia scilicet non quilibet tantae virtutis donum accepit a Deo, ut scilicet possit totaliter continere, sicut et dominus dixit Matth. XIX, 11: non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, sed qui capere potest, capiat.
7:7
Et hoc est quod dicit: vellem quidem omnes esse continentes, sed unusquisque proprium, id est, secundum certam mensuram, habet donum ex Deo, alius quidem sic, puta ut in virginitate Deo serviat, alius vero sic, id est, ut Deo serviat in matrimonio, secundum illud Matth. XXV, v. 15: uni dedit quinque talenta, alii vero duo, alii vero unum, unicuique secundum propriam virtutem. Et Sap. VIII, 21: scivi quoniam aliter non possum esse continens, nisi Deus det, et hoc ipsum erat sapientiae scire cuius esset hoc donum. Deinde cum dicit dico autem, etc., exponit quod obscure dixerat. Et primo quantum ad hoc quod dixerat: volo omnes homines esse sicut meipsum, quia scilicet hoc est absolute melius.
7:8
Unde dicit dico autem, scilicet exponendo, non nuptis, id est, virginibus, et viduis: bonum est illis si sic permanserint, scilicet continentes, sicut ego, secundum illud Sap. c. IV, 1: quam pulchra est casta generatio cum claritate. Secundo quantum ad hoc quod dixerat: sed unusquisque, etc., quasi dicat: quia non quilibet hoc donum accepit a Deo ut contineat. Unde dicit quod si non continent, id est, si donum continendi non acceperunt, nubant, id est, matrimonio iungantur, secundum illud I Tim. V, 14: volo iuvenes nubere.
7:9
Et assignat rationem, subdens melius est enim nubere, quam uri, id est, concupiscentia superari. Concupiscentia enim est calor quidam noxius; qui ergo concupiscentia impugnatur, calescit quidem, sed non uritur, nisi humorem gratiae perdat a concupiscentia superatus. Unde Iob XXXI, 12 dicitur: ignis est usque ad consummationem devorans, et universa eradicans germina. Est autem hic attendendum quod apostolus utitur abusiva comparatione; nam nubere bonum est, licet minus, uri autem est malum. Melius est ergo, id est magis tolerandum, quod homo minus bonum habeat, quam quod incurrat incontinentiae malum; et hoc est quod supra dixit propter fornicationem, scilicet vitandam, unusquisque suam uxorem habeat, etc., et postmodum: ne tentet vos Satanas propter incontinentiam vestram.
7:10
Supra apostolus posuit documenta de contractu matrimonii, hic instruit eos qui iam matrimonium contraxerunt de matrimonio non dissolvendo: et primo docet eos qui sunt in matrimonio iuncti, ut in matrimonio maneant; secundo ponit utilem doctrinam quantum ad omnes status vel conditiones hominum, ibi unumquemque sicut vocavit Deus, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit: primo agit de indissolubilitate matrimonii quantum ad eos qui sunt unius cultus; secundo quantum ad eos qui sunt in dispari cultu, ibi nam caeteris ego dico, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit: primo ponit praeceptum de indissolubilitate matrimonii; secundo docet quid sit servandum quando matrimonium quodammodo separatur, ibi quod si discesserit, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dixi non nuptis, id est, virginibus et viduis, quod melius est eis si sic permanserint, his autem qui matrimonio sunt iuncti non patet eadem conditio: his enim praecipio non ego, scilicet indicta mihi auctoritate, sed dominus, hoc praecepit.
Dicens Matth. XIX, 6: quos Deus coniunxit, homo non separet. Praecipio, inquam, uxorem a viro non discedere, et subintelligendum est, excepta causa fornicationis, quam Christus excepit, et hic tacetur, quia notissima est. Hanc solam excepit dominus, caeteras omnes molestias iubet pro fide coniugii fortiter sustineri. Matth. XIX, 9: quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam et aliam duxerit, excepta causa fornicationis, moechatur. Hoc autem quod dicitur hic, secundum Glossam Augustini, intelligitur de coniunctis matrimonialiter, quorum uterque fidelis est. Quod si discesserit, scilicet propter causam fornicationis, praecipio, inquam, manere innuptam, vivente marito, quia si solvitur matrimonium quoad thorum, non tamen quoad vinculum, aut viro suo reconciliari, scilicet si vir non continet.
7:11
Et similiter vir uxorem non dimittat, nisi ob causam fornicationis. Similis forma in viro et in muliere servatur. Unde supplendum est quod de uxore praemisit, scilicet quod si omnino dimiserit, non ducat aliam, vel reconcilietur uxori. Sed contrarium videtur dicere Ambrosius super hunc locum. Unde dicit: ideo non subdit de viro sicut de muliere, quia licet viro aliam ducere, quia inferior non omnino hac lege utitur qua et superior. Sed Magister dicit a falsariis esse appositum, et ideo nullatenus est tenendum. Notandum est hic quod septem sunt casus in quibus vir non potest ob causam fornicationis uxorem dimittere. Primus casus quando ipsemet eam prostituit; secundus quando ipse cum alia fornicatus fuerit; tertius quando ipse ei occasionem fornicandi dedit, ut quia non vult reddere debitum; quartus quando ipsa credens probabiliter virum mortuum, alteri nupsit; quintus quando violenter ab aliquo oppressa fuit; sextus quando sub specie viri sui ab altero cognita fuit; septimus quando fuit a viro post adulterium manifeste deprehensum, nihilominus retenta.
7:12
Deinde cum dicit nam caeteris dico, etc., agit de inseparabilitate matrimonii personarum disparis cultus, cum alter est fidelis, alter non. Ubi primo dicit quod fidelis non dimittat infidelem volentem sine contumelia creatoris cohabitare; secundo quod si non vult, fidelis non tenetur eum sequi, sed potest alteri nubere, ibi quod si infidelis discedit, etc.; tertio quod nisi infidelis prior recedat, fidelis debet patienter commanere, ibi unde enim mulier, et cetera. In prima, primo ponit admonitionem; secundo admonitionis rationem, ibi sanctificatus est enim, et cetera. In prima, primo loquitur generaliter tam viris quam foeminis; secundo specialiter viris, ibi si quis frater, etc.; tertio specialiter foeminis, ibi et si qua mulier, et cetera. Dicit ergo nam caeteris, id est, ubi non uterque fidelis est, sed alter fidelis, alter infidelis, dico ego, consulendo non praecipiendo, non dominus dixit hoc proprio ore. Ac si dicat: et hoc dico ex Deo, licet ipse non dicat hoc ore proprio. Dico, inquam, hoc: si quis frater, fidelis, conversus scilicet ad fidem in coniugio. Intelligitur enim hoc de his qui in infidelitate contraxerunt, non de his qui in dispari cultu; tunc enim nullum esset matrimonium, sed essent separandi, sicut fecit Esdras Esdrae X, T. Si quis, inquam, habet talem uxorem infidelem, et haec consentit habitare cum illo, sine contumelia scilicet creatoris, non dimittat illam; consilium est, non praeceptum, ut qui contrarium agit, non sit transgressor, secundum Glossam. Deinde cum dicit et si qua mulier, hic loquitur specialiter foeminis, ubi primo supponit fidem in aliquo, cum dicit et si qua mulier; secundo infidelitatem in altero, cum addit virum infidelem; tertio infidelis voluntatem cohabitandi, ibi et hic consentit; quarto consulit fideli commanere illi, ibi non dimittat.
7:13
Dicit ergo: et similiter si qua mulier fidelis habet virum infidelem, et consentit habitare cum illa sine contumelia creatoris; nam si nollet cohabitare sine contumelia nominis Christi, debet fidelis eum dimittere, quia contumelia creatoris solvit matrimonium, secundum Glossam, et potest fidelis contrahere. Si, inquam, ita est, non dimittat virum: consilium est, non praeceptum; licet enim infidelem fideli dimittere, sed tunc non expediebat. Deinde cum dicit sanctificatus est vir, posita admonitione, hic ponit admonitionis rationem, ubi allegat exemplum; secundo periculum, ibi alioquin, etc.; tertio fructum, ibi nunc autem sancti, et cetera. In prima primo exemplificat de viro infideli, secundo de muliere, ibi: et sanctificata est mulier, et cetera. Dicit ergo, sanctificatus est, quasi dicat: fidelis infidelem volentem cohabitare non dimittat; hoc ideo dico, sanctificatus est enim, et cetera. Hoc dupliciter legitur. Primo modo sic: sanctificatus est enim vir infidelis, aliquando, per mulierem fidelem; id est, aliquando contingit quod unus per alium convertitur ad fidem, et sic sanctificatur; et hoc iam forte contigerat, sicut Sisinnius per Theodoram Romae tempore Clementis conversus est. Et similiter sanctificata est mulier infidelis per virum fidelem, scilicet per ipsius admonitionem et doctrinam. Alio modo legitur sic: ita fidelis infidelem non dimittat, sanctificatus est enim vir, etc., id est, nullam immunditiam contrahit fidelis ex cohabitatione vel ex commixtione cum infideli, sed servat veram pudicitiam, secundum Augustinum. Deinde cum dicit alioquin filii, etc., hoc legitur dupliciter: uno modo de filiis nascituris; alio modo de iam natis. Primo modo sic: alioquin, scilicet si disceditis, et vos aliis copulatis, filii vestri, qui de hac copula nascerentur, immundi essent, scilicet spurii, quia non de legitimo matrimonio. Nunc autem, si permanetis, sancti sunt, id est, mundi, quia de legitimis coniugiis nati. Secundo modo legitur sic: alioquin, scilicet si disceditis, filii vestri, iam nati, immundi essent, id est, in infidelitate remanerent, sequentes scilicet maiorem partem quae tunc erat infidelium; nunc autem, si permanetis, sancti sunt, id est, Christiani fiunt.
7:14
Deinde cum dicit sanctificatus est vir infidelis per mulierem fidelem. Thema in festo beatae Caeciliae quae convertit virum suum ad fidem. Inter omnia quae regunt hominem in via salutis praecipuum est sequi societatem sanctorum. Hoc ostendit Psalmista verbo, cum dicit: cum sancto sanctus eris, etc.; hoc ostendit Caecilia facto, secundum quod hic dicitur: sanctificatus est vir, etc.; in quibus verbis tria commendant ipsam, scilicet natura, gratia et doctrina. Natura humana quae notatur in muliere: gratia, quae notatur in viri sanctificatione, ut sibi sit nobilis per naturam, Deo humilis per fidem, proximo utilis per doctrinam. Doctrina enim redditur commendabilior consideranti actum, obiectum, et oppositum. Actus est sanctificare, obiectum est vir, oppositum est infidelitas. Infidelitas est culpa tenacior: virilitas sexus robustior: sanctificare actus difficilior. Et tamen cum esset mulier, per doctrinam suam convertit incredulum, emollivit robustum, mundavit immundum, et sic sanctificavit infidelem virum. Multae vero sunt proprietates mulieris commendabiles, quae huic conveniunt, ut sint tres proprietates quoad actum cordis, tres quoad actum oris, et tres quoad actum operis. Tres primae sunt: sapientia ex parte rationalis, Prov. XIV, 1: sapiens mulier aedificat sibi domum, munditia ex parte concupiscibilis, Eccli. XL, 19: aedificatio civitatis confirmabit nomen, et super eam mulier immaculata computabitur, constantia ex parte irascibilis, Ruth III, 11: scit omnis populus te esse mulierem virtutis, etc.; tres secundae sunt: modestia contra multiloquium, Eccli. XXVI, 18: mulier sensata et tacita non est immutatio animae eruditae: veritas contra mendacium, Iudith VIII, 28: omnia quae locuta es vera sunt, discretio contra stultiloquium, I Reg. XXV, 3: erat mulier prudentissima et speciosissima; Iudith c. XI, 19: non est talis mulier super terram in aspectu, et in pulchritudine et in sensu verborum. Tres ultimae sunt: sanctimonia in facto, Iudith VIII, 29: ora pro populo, quia mulier sancta es, verecundia in signo, Eccli. XXVI, v. 19: gratia super gratiam mulier sancta et pudorata, gratia in conversando, Prov. XI, 16: mulier gratiosa inveniet gloriam. Propter eminentiam horum dicitur de beata virgine Maria: benedicta tu in mulieribus.
7:15
Superius ostendit quod fidelis non debet dimittere infidelem cohabitare volentem, hic autem dicit quod si non vult cohabitare, non tenetur fidelis eum sequi, sed potest alteri nubere; ubi primo ponitur ipsa concessio; secundo concessionis ratio duplex: prima est libertas, ibi non est enim servituti, etc.; secunda est pacis tranquillitas, ibi in pace autem, et cetera. Dicit ergo: quod si infidelis, vel mulier, discedit, a fideli, odio fidei, discedat, et potest fidelis qui dimittitur contrahere; primum enim matrimonium dissolubile erat, quia numquam fuit ratum. Non enim servituti, scilicet coniugali, subiectus est frater aut soror, fidelis, id est, non cogitur sequi infidelem odio fidei discedentem, sicut dicit Glossa Io. VIII, 36: si filius vos liberaverit, vere liberi eritis. In pace autem, quasi dicat: ideo discedat fidelis, quia in pace vocavit nos Deus, id est, ideo non debemus litigare cum eo qui odio fidei discedit. Vel sic, quamvis ita sit quod fidelis non est subiectus servituti, nihilominus tamen non debet occasionem discordiae et dissidii praebere, sed pacem servare. In pace autem vocavit nos Deus. Non est enim Deus dissensionis, sed pacis, infra XIV, 33.
7:16
Deinde cum dicit unde enim scis, mulier, etc., hic dicit quod si infidelis non discedat, fidelis debet patienter commanere. Ad quod allegat primo spem alienae conversionis; secundo permanentiam in statu propriae vocationis, ibi unumquemque sicut vocavit Deus, etc.; tertio exemplum in ritu conversationis, ibi circumcisus aliquis, etc.; quarto exemplum in statu conditionis, ibi servus vocatus es, et cetera. In prima, primo innuit quod mulier fidelis commanendo, virum ad fidem potest convertere; secundo quod similiter vir fidelis mulierem infidelem potest salvare, ibi aut unde scis hoc, vir, etc.; tertio quod ideo debent patienter commanere, ibi nisi unicuique, et cetera. Dicit ergo unde enim scis, quasi dicat: vere debet manere fidelis cum infideli, quia unde scis, id est, scire potes, o tu mulier fidelis, si virum infidelem salvum facies? Eum scilicet commonendo et convertendo ad fidem; quasi dicat, hoc potest contingere. Ambrosius: hoc ideo dicit, quia forsan potest credere qui horret nomen Christi. Aut unde scis, id est, scire potes, o tu vir fidelis, si mulierem infidelem salvam facies, eam ad fidem convertendo? Quia hoc sperare debes. Nisi unicuique, hoc dupliciter legitur; uno modo sic: unde scis hoc, nisi ita habeas te, supple ad tuum comparem, sicut dominus divisit unicuique? Scilicet viro praeesse, et mulieri subesse. Secundo modo sic: unde scis hoc, nisi, supple, patienter expectes fieri, sicut divisit dominus unicuique? Id est, ordinavit de unoquoque quando credat et quando salvetur. Ergo tu debes expectare et commanere. Rom. XII, 3: unicuique sicut divisit dominus.
7:17
Deinde cum dicit unumquemque sicut vocavit, etc., hic ostendit quod fidelis debet manere cum infideli coniuge, allegans permanentiam in statu propriae vocationis. Primo ergo allegat divinam vocationem; secundo suam auctoritatem, ibi sicut in omnibus Ecclesiis, et cetera. Dicit ergo, unumquemque, quasi dicat: et quomodo scis hoc, o vir et mulier, nisi quilibet ambulet perseveranter ita sicut Deus vocavit unumquemque, id est, in eo statu in quo Deus vocavit unumquemque, non autem quomodo sint. Quasi dicat: et hoc ita praedico in Ecclesia vestra, sicut in omnibus Ecclesiis. Turpis enim est pars quae suo toto non convenit. Est ergo sua ratio talis: unusquisque debet manere in eo statu in quem Deus vocavit; ergo si vocavit aliquos in coniugium, debent manere in ipso. Haymo: si habeas uxorem, maneas cum ea, et si non habeas, ducere non concupiscas.
7:18
Deinde cum dicit circumcisus aliquis, etc., hic ponit exemplum: ubi primo ponit ipsum exemplum; secundo exempli rationem, ibi circumcisio enim nihil est; tertio regulam generalem, ibi unusquisque in qua vocatione. Ponit autem exemplum in ritu vivendi, primo Iudaeorum, secundo gentilium, ibi in praeputio aliquis vocatus est, et cetera. Dicit ergo circumcisus, etc., quasi dicat: unusquisque ambulet in eo statu in quo vocatus est; verbi gratia circumcisus quis vocatus est, id est in ritu Iudaico? Non adducat, id est, non cogatur adducere, praeputium, id est, ritum gentilium. In praeputio, id est, in ritu gentili, quis vocatus est? Non circumcidatur, id est non cogatur ad ritus Iudaicos. Augustinus: servat ubique apostolus construere Ecclesias, sive Iudaeorum, sive gentilium; numquam enim aufert consuetudinem, quae servata non impedit salutem; ergo si coniugium non impediat, debent vocati in coniugio commanere. Deinde cum dicit circumcisio enim nihil est, hic subdit rationem exempli, quae talis est: ritus non impediens salutem, non debet mutari propter vocationem ad fidem, sed ritus tam Iudaicus quam gentilis est huiusmodi, ergo et cetera. A simili ergo arguit in matrimonio. Primo ergo tangit quod est ad salutem indifferens; secundo quod est necessarium et expediens, ibi sed observatio mandatorum, et cetera.
7:19
Dicit igitur circumcisio nihil est, id est nihil prodest, et praeputium nihil est, id est nihil prodest vel obest; quasi dicat: talis vel talis ritus vivendi nihil proficit ad salutem. Gal. ult.: in Christo Iesu nec circumcisio aliquid valet, nec praeputium, sed nova creatura. Ambr.: ad salutem nec prodest nec obest Iudaicus aut gentilis ritus. Sed observatio mandatorum Dei, aliquid prodest. Sap. VI, 19: custoditio legum, consummatio est incorruptionis.
7:20
Deinde cum dicit unusquisque in qua vocatione, etc., hic concludit regulam generalem, dicens unusquisque, etc., quasi dicat: ita gentilis non inducatur ad circumcisionem, nec econverso; sed potius unusquisque in qua conditione vocatus est, in ea, scilicet conditione vocationi non repugnante, in ea permaneat, et in qua, non a qua. In Glossa Augustini: hoc enim ad eas consuetudines vitae retulit, quae nihil obsunt fidei bonisque moribus; sicut enim coniux, sic et latro ad fidem vocatur. Sed ille in coniugio manet, non a coniugio revocatur. Iste vero a latrocinio revocatur, et in latrocinio non manet. Non enim necesse est ut coniuges desinant esse coniuges propter Christi fidem, sicut necesse est ut latrones desinant esse latrones. Hic quaeritur super illud uxorem a viro non discedere, quare solam causam fornicationis dominus excipit, caeteras vero omnes molestias iubet fortiter sustineri. Contra Lev. XIII, 26 praecipit lex leprosum extra castra eiicere; ergo pro lepra debet uxor a viro discedere. Respondeo: licet possit ob lepram discedere a cohabitatione, non tamen a thoro, quin aliquando teneatur reddere debitum, prope eam manendo. Item aut viro suo reconciliari. Contra, Deut. XXIV, 4 dicitur, quod semel repudiata non potest amplius reconciliari. Respondeo: illud habebat locum in repudio legali, istud vero in divortio evangelico. Lex enim erat severitatis, sed Evangelium pietatis. Item super illud: vir uxorem non dimittat, Glossa notabilis: non subdit de viro sicut de muliere, quia licet viro aliam ducere. Contra Augustinus dicit quod similis forma debet servari in viro et muliere. Respondeo: illud primum in libris Ambrosii a falsariis creditur additum. Vel dicendum quod illud Ambrosii intelligitur in repudio, hoc autem in divortio; nam in repudio legali licebat viro contrahere, non uxori, quia licebat antiquitus uni viro habere plures uxores, non econverso, quia per repudium illud solvebatur matrimonium, non autem per divortium. Item nam caeteris ego dico, non dominus. Contra Matth. IX: qui vos audit, me audit. Respondeo. Non dominus dicit ore proprio, sed inspirando. Item super illud si quis frater habet uxorem, Glossa: coniux fidelis licite potest dimittere infidelem. Contra, Catholica non potest dimittere haereticum. Glossa loquitur de infideli qui caret sacramento fidei, non solum habitu. Item ibidem Glossa: non est reputandum matrimonium quod extra decretum Dei factum est. Contra: ergo matrimonium contractum causa voluptatis non est matrimonium. Respondeo. Extra decretum Dei matrimonium contrahi dicitur, quando contrahitur inter personas lege prohibitas. Item si qua mulier habet virum infidelem, et cetera. Contra: ergo Iudaea conversa non debet dimittere virum Iudaeum, cohabitare volentem. Respondeo. Secus est hodie quam tempore primitivae Ecclesiae, quia tunc erat spes conversionis, nunc autem potius est spes subversionis propter obstinationem infidelium. Item super illud quod si infidelis, discedat, Glossa: recte dimittitur mulier si dicat viro. Non ero mulier tua, nisi de latrocinio divitias mihi augeas. Contra Matth. XIX, 9 excipitur sola causa fornicationis. Respondeo. Tunc debet dimitti, ne scandalum, ad tempus exortum, sit in perpetuum. Item super illud non est enim servituti subiectus, Glossa: contumelia creatoris solvit ius matrimonii in eo qui relinquitur. Contra: matrimonium semper est inter duos; ergo in utroque solvitur vel in nullo. Respondeo. Matrimonium solvitur in utroque, sed impedimentum ex matrimonio resultans, manet in discedente solum. Item circumcisio nihil est. Contra circumcisio quidem prodest, si legem observes. Respondeo. Ante Christum proderat, sed post non prodest. Item super illud unusquisque in qua vocatione, Glossa: ad salutem nihil prodest vel obest Iudaicus vel gentilis ritus. Contra, Gal. V, 2: si circumcidimini, Christus vobis nihil prodest. Responsio. Glossa loquitur de ritu conversandi inter homines, non de ritu Deum colendi.
Superius ostendit quod si infidelis coniux non discedat, fidelis debet patienter commanere. Primo ad hoc allegando spem conversionis infidelis; secundo permanentiam in statu propriae vocationis; tertio exemplum in ritu conversationis, hic; quarto allegat exemplum in statu conditionis. Ubi primo ipsum exemplum ponit; secundo rationem exempli subdit, ibi qui enim in domino, etc.; tertio ex hoc regulam generalem concludit, ibi unusquisque ergo, et cetera. In prima primo proponit in aliquo statum servilem; secundo supponit libertatis possibilitatem, ibi sed et si potes, etc.; tertio horum praeeminentiam ad salutem, ibi magis utere. Dicit ergo servus, etc., quasi dicat: unusquisque in qua vocatione vocatus est, in ea permaneat, verbi gratia, servus vocatus es?
7:21
Ad fidem scilicet Christi, non sit tibi curae, ut scilicet velis servitutem effugere. Unde Onesimum servum Philemonis, qui ad eum confugerat, cum precibus remittit ad dominum, ut patet in epistola ad Philemonem; sed, potius, si potes fieri liber, maneas in servitute, quia causa est humilitatis. Et sicut ait Ambrosius: quanto quis despectior est in hoc saeculo propter dominum, tanto magis exaltabitur in futuro. Gregorius: quanto quis Deo pretiosior est, tanto propter eum utilior. Boetius: cum omnis fortuna timenda sit, magis tamen prospera quam adversa.
7:22
Deinde cum dicit qui enim in domino vocatus est, etc., hic subdit rationem exempli. Et primo ponit rationem exempli ex parte servorum; secundo ex parte liberorum, ibi similiter qui liber est, et cetera. Et est ratio talis in generali: servitus et libertas sunt in domino ad salutem, sed solum debemus esse solliciti de pertinentibus ad salutem, ergo pro indifferenti debet esse nobis servitus et libertas. Dicit ergo qui enim in domino, quasi dicat: et vere non debes curare, enim, pro quia, qui in domino, id est in fide domini, vocatus est servus, servitute corporali, libertus est domini; quia scilicet a domino manumissus liber est libertate spirituali. Est autem libertus a servitute liberatus, et talis a servitute peccati a domino est liberatus; ideo domini libertus. Io. VIII, 36: si filius vos liberaverit, vere liberi eritis. Deinde cum dicit similiter qui liber vocatus est, etc., hic ponit rationem ex parte liberorum. Ubi primo tangit in liberis cum servis pro Christo debitam servitutem; secundo servitutis rationem, ibi pretio empti; tertio servitutis obligationem, ibi nolite, et cetera. Dicit ergo: similiter et qui liber vocatus est, libertate corporali, servus est Christi, servitute spirituali, Rom. I, 1: Paulus servus Christi Iesu, etc., quia sive servus, sive liber, omnes tamen servi. Et hoc iustum est, quia pretio empti estis. Hoc dicitur, quia pretio inaestimabili sanguine Christi. I Petr. I, 18: non corruptibilibus auro vel argento redempti estis de vestra vana conversatione, et cetera.
7:23
Et quia tanto pretio empti estis, nolite fieri servi hominum, postponendo servitium Dei et vos humanis superstitionibus occupando, hoc enim faciebant isti. Supra I, 12: ego sum Pauli, ego autem Apollo.
7:24
Unusquisque ergo, et circumcisus et praeputiatus, servus et liber, in quo, statu, vocatus est frater, id est fidelis, in hoc permaneat apud Deum, scilicet observando divina mandata. Qui enim perseveraverit usque in finem, hic salvus erit, Matth. XXIV, v. 13. Ergo si coniugatus vocatus est ad fidem, maneat coniugatus, servando fidem.
7:25
A principio huius cap. egit de matrimonio, hic incipit pars secunda, in qua agit de virginitate. Ubi primo agit de virginibus; secundo de virginum custodibus, ibi si quis autem turpem se videri existimat, et cetera. In prima, primo ponit virginibus permanendi in virginitate consilium; secundo nubentibus dat bene vivendi modum, ibi hoc itaque dico, fratres, et cetera. Tertio ostendit quod magis expedit servare continentiae propositum, ibi volo autem vos sine sollicitudine esse, et cetera. In prima parte virginitatem consulit et laudat; secundo matrimonium iam contractum concedit et approbat, ibi alligatus es uxori, etc.; tertio matrimonium contrahendum defendit, et a peccato excusat, ibi si autem acceperis uxorem, et cetera. In prima dicit duo de virginitate. Primo quod non est servanda ex praecepto; secundo quod est servanda ex consilio, ibi consilium autem do. Ubi ponit duplicem rationem quare istud consilium est servandum. Prima est consiliarii auctoritas; secunda rei consultae dignitas, ibi existimo enim hoc bonum. Dicit ergo de virginibus, etc., quasi dicat: de coniugatis non separandis praeceptum Dei est, de virginibus autem praeceptum domini non habeo; ut scilicet contineant, vel ut nubant. Quod enim de hoc dixit dominus, Matth. XIX, 12, dixit consulendo: qui potest, inquit, capere, capiat. Virginitas autem, secundum Augustinum res est non praecepta, suaderi potest, imperari non potest. Consilium autem do, scilicet de continendo, consilium mihi a spiritu sancto inspiratum. Tob. IV, 19: consilium semper a sapiente perquire. Consilium, inquam, do, et hoc tamquam consecutus a domino misericordiam, id est, apostolatum mihi misericorditer concessum. Consecutus, inquam, ad hoc ut sim fidelis, in dispensatione mihi credita. Unde credendum est mihi in consiliis. Lc. c. XII, 42: quis putas est fidelis servus? Haymo: quia ei mandatum fuit ut esset fidelis consiliator, non debuit consilium indigentibus abscondere. Et est argumentum quod est acquiescendum consilio praelati. Deinde cum dicit existimo ergo, etc., hic tangitur dignitas eius quod consulitur. Et haec duplex: una quia expediens bonum; secunda, quia honestum, ibi quoniam bonum est, et cetera. Dicit ergo existimo, etc., quasi dicat: quia fidelis consiliarius sum, existimo ergo hoc bonum esse, scilicet manere in virginitate, et hoc propter instantem necessitatem, coniugium scilicet vitandum, quia multae necessitates instant. Unde dicuntur esse in mola, Lc. XVII, 31. Unde vulgariter dicitur quod matrimonium habet magnum os.
7:26
Existimo, inquam, et vere, quia bonum est homini sic esse, scilicet in virginitate. Bonum scilicet honestum propter puritatem, delectabile propter libertatem, utile propter mercedem, quia ei debetur aureola et fructus centesimus, Lc. VIII. Augustinus in Glossa: supergreditur virginitas conditionem humanae naturae, per quam homines Angelis assimilantur. Maior tamen victoria virginum quam Angelorum. Angeli enim sine carne vivunt, virgines autem in carne triumphant.
7:27
Deinde cum dicit alligatus es uxori, etc., hic matrimonium contractum concedit et approbat. Ubi primo dicit quod coniugatus non debet quaerere divortium; secundo consulit quod solutus non quaerat coniugium, ibi solutus es ab uxore, et cetera. Dicit ergo alligatus, etc.; quasi dicat: licet continere sit bonum, tamen alligatus es uxori? Noli quaerere solutionem, maxime si bona est. Eccli. VII, 21: noli discedere a muliere sensata. Et dicit alligatus, quasi duplici vinculo ligatus, scilicet consensu per matrimonium initiatum, et copula carnali per matrimonium consummatum. Si enim tantum uno vinculo, scilicet solo consensu ligatus esset, posset quaerere solutionem, scilicet intrando religionem. Solutus es ab uxore? Noli quaerere uxorem, si potes continere, quia, sicut dicunt apostoli Matth. XIX, 10, si ita est causa hominis cum uxore, non expedit nubere. Deinde cum dicit si autem acceperis, etc., hic excusat matrimonium contrahendum a peccato. Ubi primo ostendit quod matrimonium potest contrahi sine peccato; secundo quod levius est esse sine coniugio, ibi tribulationem tamen, et cetera. In prima, primo proponit veritatem de non virgine; secundo de virgine, ibi et si nupserit, et cetera. Dicit ergo: si autem solutus es, noli quaerere uxorem. Si autem acceperis uxorem, scilicet bono fine, non ad expletionem libidinis, non peccasti. Hic autem est argumentum evidens contra haereticos qui contemnunt matrimonium, de quibus I Tim. IV, 3: prohibentes nubere. Et similiter si nupserit virgo, non virgo Deo dicata, quia, secundum Hieronymum, voventibus virginitatem non solum nubere, sed etiam velle nubere peccatum est, non peccavit, scilicet nubendo, alioquin peccasset beata virgo, cum desponsata esset Ioseph.
7:28
Tribulationem tamen carnis habebunt huiusmodi, scilicet coniugati, id est, afflictionem pro rebus necessariis procurandis et sibi et filiis suis et aliis. Unde levius est esse sine coniugio. Ego autem vobis parco, quasi dicat: consulo evitare coniugium, quod tamen concedo, parcendo infirmitati vestrae. Vel sic: ego autem vobis parco, in hoc quod consulo cavere tribulationes carnis. Notandum est hic quod sancta virginitas magnum bonum est propter multa. Primo, quia carnis munditiam servat, Apoc. c. XIV, 4: hi sunt qui cum mulieribus non sunt coinquinati, virgines enim sunt: sicut bonum est sal quia conservat carnem a corruptione. Secundo, quia animam decorat et ornat. Unde frequenter in Scriptura iungitur virgo pulchra, Sap. IV, 1: o quam pulchra est casta generatio cum claritate; Cant. IV, 7: tota pulchra es, amica mea. Tertio, quia Angelis caeli assimilatur, sicut hic dicit Glossa, et Matth. XXII, 30: in resurrectione neque nubent, neque nubentur, sed erunt sicut Angeli Dei. Hieronymus: in carne praeter carnem vivere, et cetera. Quarto, quia Christo desponsat, II Cor. c. XI, 2: despondi enim vos uni viro virginem castam exhibere Christo. Quinto, quia iungit et approximat Deo, Ps. XLIV, 15: adducentur regi virgines post eam; Ier. III, 4: dux virginitatis meae tu es. Sexto, quia caeteris statibus praeponderat, Eccli. XXVI, 20: non est digna ponderatio animae continentis; infra: qui matrimonio iungit virginem bene facit, qui non iungit melius facit. Septimo, quia odorem bonae famae spirat. Lucae dicitur: et nomen virginis Maria; Cant. II, 2: sicut lilium inter spinas, sic amica mea inter filias Ierusalem. Octavo, quia ad nuptias aeternas invitat, Matth. XXV, 10: quae paratae erant intraverunt cum eo ad nuptias. Sed, heu, quia ad conservandum difficilis, ideo Eccli. XLII, 9: filia patris abscondita est, et cetera. Et hoc quia Diabolus suggerit contrarium. Corruptio inclinat ad actum, pulchritudo allicit ad consensum.
7:29
Haec est secunda pars, ubi nubentibus sive nuptis ostendit bene vivendi modum, docens primo qualiter utantur uxoribus; secundo qualiter fortunae casibus sive eventibus, ibi et qui flent, etc.; tertio qualiter mundi rebus sive possessionibus, ibi et qui emunt, etc.; quarto subdit rationem in his admonitionibus, ibi praeterit enim figura. In prima implicat tria, scilicet auctoritatem consiliarii, hoc itaque dico, etc.; necessitatem consulendi tempus breve est, etc.; formam consilii reliquum est, et cetera. Dicit ergo hoc itaque, quasi dicat: quia non est peccatum nubere, hoc itaque dico, fratres, si coniugii tempus breve est, quo scilicet non generatione carnali propagandus est populus Dei, sed regeneratione spirituali colligendus, secundum Glossam; et quia tempus breve est, reliquum est, id est hoc solum restat agendum, ut qui habent uxores, sint tamquam non habentes, studendo servitio Dei, non autem operi carnali, debitum scilicet exigendo. Unde dicitur sint tamquam non habentes, non dicit: tamquam non habenti, sicut erant antiqui patres; propter quod dicit Augustinus quod caelibatus Ioannis non praefertur coniugio Abrahae; sed hodie faciunt e converso, quia qui non habent sunt tamquam habentes. Est autem notandum quod tamquam non habens uxorem est qui vel uxori debitum reddit nec exigit, vel propter infirmitatem uxorem ducit, dolens quod sine ea esse nequit, vel pari affectu continentiam custodit, vel causa generandae prolis ad cultum Dei uxorem propriam cognoscit. Et qui flent, pro casibus coniugii vel pro aliqua tristitia saeculi, sint tamquam non flentes, consolati scilicet spe appropinquantis boni futuri. Prov. XII, 21: non contristabit iustum quidquid ei acciderit. Et qui gaudent, pro aliqua prosperitate saeculi, tamquam non gaudentes, sed tamquam in timore existentes imminentis mali periculi. Eccli. XI, v. 27: in die bonorum ne immemor sis malorum. Deinde, cum dicit et qui emunt, hic ostendit qualiter utantur mundi rebus sive possessionibus. Et primo qualiter uti debeant acquirendis; secundo qualiter acquisitis, ibi et qui utuntur, et cetera.
7:30
Dicit ergo qui emunt, tamquam non possidentes, id est, post haec terrena non sedentes, scilicet supple, non apponendo cor rebus perituris. Ps. LXI, 11: divitiae si affluant, nolite cor apponere. Ez. VII, 12: qui emit, non laetetur: et qui vendit, non lugeat. Et, ut universaliter colligam, qui utuntur hoc mundo, id est, rebus mundanis; non dico fruuntur ut mali qui de eis malum faciunt finem, qui dicunt, Sap. II, 6: fruamur bonis quae sunt, id est, praesentibus; sed qui utuntur eis ad finem debitum referendo, sint tamquam non utantur, id est, non adhaereant eis nimia delectatione. I Tim. VI, 8: habentes alimenta et quibus tegamur, his contenti simus. Praeter actum ergo coniugalem ponit quatuor differentias actuum circa sollicitudinem mundanorum, scilicet flere, gaudere, emere, uti. Duo primi pertinent ad affectum, duo alii ad effectum. Ex humana vero sollicitudine generatur duplex effectus, scilicet emendi respectu habendorum, et utendi respectu habitorum; et secundum hoc ponit apostolus consilium temperantiae in his quatuor actibus.
7:31
Deinde, cum dicit praeterit enim figura, etc., hic subdit rationem praedictarum admonitionum, quae talis est: transitoria sunt reputanda quasi non sint, sed talia sunt mundana peritura, ergo quasi non sint sunt reputanda. Et hoc est quod dicit, quod ideo mundana quasi non sint aestimanda sunt, quia praeterit figura, id est, exterior pulchritudo, vel quod est ibi fragile conveniens statui fragilitatis. Transibunt enim qualitates mortales, et remanebunt immortales. Ideo transibit mundus et concupiscentia eius. Omnia notanda: quia figura, non substantia mundi, non Paradisi, praeterit, non sistit. Hic quaeritur super illud: si potest fieri liber, Glossa: quanto quis propter Deum despectior est in hoc saeculo, tanto magis exaltabitur in futuro. Contra, ergo magis exaltabitur bonus subditus, quam bonus praelatus. Respondeo. Glossa intelligenda est caeteris paribus. Item super illud: unusquisque, in quo vocatus est. Glossa: contra, ergo qui vocatus est in statu saeculari, non debet intrare religionem. Respondeo. Apostolus loquitur de statibus promoventibus ad salutem, non de impedientibus. Item, super illud: existimo hoc bonum esse, Glossa: maior est victoria virginum, quam Angelorum. Contra, ergo maior corona; ergo homines erunt maiores Angelis, non solum aequales. Respondeo. Maior extensive, id est, multiplicative, quia habent aureolam non solum auream. Item super illud: bonum est homini sic esse, Glossa: in virginitate. Contra Gen. I, 28: crescite et multiplicamini; virginitas autem contraria est huic praecepto. Respondeo. Illud praeceptum non est perpetuum, sed datum usque ad tempus sufficientis multiplicationis humani generis. Item super illud: qui habent uxores, Glossa: beatiora coniugia iudicanda sunt quae prole concepta, pari consensu continentiam servare potuerunt. Contra, unumquodque tanto beatius est, quanto magis convenit fini suo: finis autem coniugii est generatio prolis. Respondeo. Expone: coniugia, id est, coniuges. Vel dicendum est quod ille non est ultimus finis coniugii, sed adimpletio numeri electorum, qui citius impleretur, si omnes continerent. Item super illud: praeterit figura huius mundi, Glossa: in iudicio mundanorum ignium flagratione huius mundi peribit non substantia, sed figura. Contra II Petr. III, 10: per quem caeli magno impetu transient. Respondeo. Ille transitus et illa solutio accidentalis est, non substantialis, id est, secundum qualitatem, non secundum substantiam.
7:32
Superius dedit primo virginibus consilium continendi, secundo nubentibus documentum bene vivendi, hic tertio ostendit quod magis expedit tempus continendi. Et hoc ostendit, primo ratione maioris tranquillitatis; secundo ratione maioris sanctitatis, ibi et mulier innupta, etc.; tertio ratione maioris utilitatis, ibi porro hoc ad utilitatem vestram, et cetera. Prima ratio talis est: tranquillitas in amore solius Dei praeferenda est sollicitudini mundanorum; sed continentes habent tranquillitatem, coniugati sollicitudinem mundi: ergo status continentium praeferendus est statui coniugatorum. Primo ergo dehortatur sollicitudinem mundi; secundo subdit quod continentes non sunt solliciti nisi in his quae sunt Dei, ibi quoniam qui sine uxore, etc.; tertio ostendit quod coniugatos oportet esse sollicitos in his quae sunt mundi, ibi qui autem cum uxore, et cetera. Dicit ergo volo autem, quasi dicat: si nubitis, praedicta facere consulo; sed magis volo vos esse sine sollicitudine rei uxoriae. Phil. IV, 6: nihil solliciti sitis. Nota quod dehortatur nos Scriptura a sollicitudine triplici: scilicet circa mulierem, ut hic volo vos sine sollicitudine esse, circa ventrem, Matth. VI, 25: ne solliciti sitis animae vestrae, etc., circa bursam, Prov. XI, 7: expectatio sollicitorum peribit. Et recte hoc volo, quia qui sine uxore est, sollicitus est quae domini sunt, ut complaceat ei. Non enim habet excusationem illorum qui dicunt Lc. XIV, 20: uxorem duxi, et non possum venire.
7:33
Sollicitus, inquam, scilicet quomodo placeat Deo, interiori scilicet pulchritudine sua. Felix cuius votum est uxorem fugere, cuius sollicitudo est domino servire, cuius intentio est Deo placere. Deinde, cum dicit qui autem cum uxore est, etc., hic ostendit quomodo coniugatos oportet esse sollicitos in his quae sunt mundi, ubi implicantur quatuor gravia. Primo vinculum coniugale, ibi qui cum uxore est, studium mundiale, ibi sollicitus est, subiectio uxoris, ibi quomodo placeat, operis divisio, ibi et divisus est. Dicit ergo qui autem cum uxore est, scilicet in matrimonio, sollicitus est quae sunt mundi, id est, de regimine familiae et huiusmodi. Unde Iacob, acceptis uxoribus, ait Gen. XXX, 30: iustum est ut aliquando provideam domui meae, id est, sollicitus sim quomodo placeam uxori. Et hoc fine potest se licite ornare. Nam, secundum Glossam, magna amaritudo in domo est uxor tristis. Et talis divisus est non natura, sed actu, scilicet divisione officii, non intentionis principalis; unde Glossa partim servit Deo, partim mundo. Deinde, cum dicit et mulier innupta, etc., hic ponitur secunda ratio probans quod magis expedit servare propositum continentiae quam nubere, ratione maioris sanctitatis. Et est ratio sua talis: continens studet sanctitati et divinitati et amori Dei, nupta vero mundo: ergo illa praeferenda est isti. Primo ergo tangit studium innuptae, quia cogitat totaliter placere Deo; secundo studium nuptae, quia cogitat partim placere mundo, ibi quae autem nupta est. In prima implicat tria, scilicet continentium statum, cogitatum et fructum; statum honestum, quia innupta et virgo; cogitatum rectum, quia cogitat quae domini sunt; multiplicatum fructum, quia ut sit sancta, et cetera. Dicit ergo: et similiter mulier innupta, id est vidua, et virgo cogitat, id est, maiorem habet facultatem cogitandi, quae domini sunt, id est, spiritualia et aeterna. Cogitat, inquam, ut sit sancta, magis quam nupta. Multae enim nuptae sunt sanctae. Augustinus, de bono coniugali: ampliorem non nuptarum et in corpore et in spiritu sanctificationem intelligi voluit, non tamen nuptas omnino sanctificatione privavit. Sancta, inquam, corpore, id est, corporalibus actionibus, et spiritu, id est, spiritualibus actionibus. Vel sancta corpore, contra vitia carnalia, et spiritu, contra spiritualia. Deinde, cum dicit quae autem nupta est, hic tangit sollicitudinem nuptarum, ubi implicat tria. Primo coniugium; secundo sollicitudinem, ibi cogitat quae, etc.; tertio coniugii studium, ibi quo modo placeat, et cetera.
7:34
Dicit ergo: quae autem nupta est cogitat quae mundi sunt, scilicet de cura filiorum, de regimine domus, et huiusmodi. Unde parentes monuerunt Saram honorare socrum, diligere maritum, gubernare domum, etc., Tob. X, 30. Cogitat, inquam, quomodo placeat viro, unde hoc fine ornantes se non peccant: verumtamen magis debent studere ei placere ornatu morum quam vestimentorum. I Tim. II, 9: mulieres in habitu ornato ornantes se, non in tortis crinibus, auro, et cetera.
7:35
Deinde, cum dicit porro hoc ad utilitatem, etc., hic allegat tertiam rationem, scilicet maiorem utilitatem. Et est ratio talis: illud quod est utilius, magis expedit; sed continere est utilius quam nubere, ergo magis expedit eligere continentiam quam nuptias. Primo ergo ostendit quod utile est continere; secundo quod honestum est, ibi sed id quod est honestum, etc.; tertio quod facile, ibi et quod facultatem, et cetera. Dicit ergo porro, etc., quasi dicat: consulo non nubere, porro hoc ad utilitatem vestram, maiorem scilicet, dico, ut expeditius Deo serviatis, quia sic mortificatur caro quae est inimica spiritus. Augustinus de verbis domini: sicut inimicus occisus non facit tibi iniuriam, sic caro mortificata non turbat animam. Dico, inquam, non ut laqueum, fornicationis scilicet, incontinentibus vobis iniiciam, aliquid difficile super hoc faciendo; imo potius laqueus poneretur, si consuleret nubere, quia de muliere dicitur Eccle. VII, 27, quod laqueus venatorum est, sed potius intendens inducere omnes ad id quod honestum est, scilicet ad sanctitatem corporis et animae: non quia coniugalis status non sit honestus, sed quia minus honestus. Augustinus, de bono viduali: non matrimonium turpe esse monstravit, sed quod honestius erat generalis honesti nomine commendavit, et monens ad illud quod facultatem praebeat alicui observandi se in domino, id est, ad servitium domini, et hoc sine impedimento quod est in coniugio. II Cor. XI, 2: despondi vos uni viro virginem castam exhibere Christo. Vere eligendus est status continentiae, ubi maius commodum, quia hoc ad utilitatem, ubi minus periculum, quia non ut laqueum, maior honestas, quia id quod honestum, liberior facultas serviendi Deo, quia facultatem praebet, et cetera. Notandum est hic quod multiplex sollicitudo est bona. Prima praelationis, sicut nauta sollicitus est de regimine navis, pater de filiis. Rom. XII, v. 8: qui praeest in sollicitudine. Secunda praedicationis, sicut paedagogus sollicitus est de puero, doctor de discipulis. I Thess. II, 2: fiduciam habuimus loqui ad vos verbum Dei in multa sollicitudine. Tertia dilectionis, sicut amicus verus sollicitus est de conservatione amoris. Eph. IV, 3: solliciti servare unitatem spiritus in vinculo pacis, et cetera. Quarta compassionis, sicut vir misericors sollicitus est de egenis et afflictis. II Tim. I, v. 17: cum venisset Romam, sollicite me quaesivit et invenit. Quinta devotionis, sicut servus sollicitus est de placendo domino, religiosus Deo. Mich. VI, 8: indicabo tibi, o homo, quid sit bonum, et post: sollicite ambulare cum Deo tuo. Sexta circumspectionis, sicut speculator est de castro custodiendo. Deut. IV, 15: custodite animas vestras sollicite. Corpus enim cum organis, anima cum potentiis quoddam castrum est. Septima actionis, sicut agricola sollicitus est de opere perficiendo. Lc. X, 41: Martha, Martha, sollicita es. II Tim. II, 15: sollicite cura teipsum probabilem exhibere Deo. Octava provisionis, sicut dispensator de domo, mercator de computo, pauper de pane quaerendo. Rom. XII, 11: sollicitudine non pigri.
7:36
Superius egit de virginibus hic agit de virginum custodibus, ostendens primo quod licet eis virgines suas coniugio copulare; secundo quod non similiter nuptis licet, nisi post mortem viri, contrahere, ibi mulier alligata est, et cetera. In prima, primo ostendit quod custos potest dare virginem suam in coniugio; secundo quod non peccat hoc faciendo, ibi nec peccat, si nubat, etc.; tertio quod etiam bene facit servando, ibi nam qui statuit, etc.; quarto quod licet utrumque sit bonum, tamen hoc est melius illo, ibi igitur et qui matrimonio, et cetera. In prima, primo supponit in virgine aetatem nubilem; secundo voluntatem nubendi, ibi et ita oportuit fieri, etc.; tertio dat nubendi licentiam, ibi quod vult faciat, et cetera. Dicit ergo si quis autem, etc., quasi dicat: esse sine coniugio, honestius est et expeditus, sed tamen si quis turpem se videri existimat apud iudicium hominum super virgine sua, timens ne corrumpatur, eo quod sit superadulta, id est, ultra pubertatem et iam in nubilibus annis, et ita oportet fieri ut nubat, quia non vult continere, quod vult, virgo, faciat, custos. Eccli. VII, 27: trade filiam tuam, et grande opus fecisti, et homini sensato da illam. Nec peccat custos, si nubat virgo: hoc ideo dicit, secundum Glossam, ne, etsi virgo non peccet, custos videatur peccare. Augustinus, de bono viduitatis: quae se non continet, nubat; quae non coepit, deliberet; quae egressa est, perseveret; nulla adversario detur occasio, sed falsa retrahatur oblatio.
7:37
Deinde, cum dicit nam qui statuit, etc., hic ostendit quod custos virginis bene facit eam in statu virginali servando, ubi implicatur quadruplex conditio ad hoc expediens. Prima quod custos firmus sit in proposito eam virginem custodiendi; secunda quod non timeat de casu virginali, ibi non habens necessitatem, etc., tertia quod cognoscat in virgine propositum continendi, ibi potestatem autem habens, etc., quarta quod hoc faciat ex deliberatione, ibi et hoc iudicavit. Dicit ergo nam qui statuit, etc., quasi dicat: ideo autem dico quod non peccat qui tradit virginem, nam de alio, qui servat eam, patet quod bene faciat. Nam qui statuit in corde servare virginem suam, firmus in proposito suo, non curans sobolem, vel aliud huiusmodi, non habens necessitatem tradendi eam, cum virgo velit continere, potestatem autem habens, secundum alumnae continentiam, voluntatis suae perficiendae. Et hoc iudicavit in corde suo, id est, ex iudicio rationis, non ex levitate mentis discernit esse bonum. I Tim. V, 21: sine praeiudicio nihil facias. Iudicavit, inquam, servare virginem suam. Ambrosius, super hunc locum: non ingerens ei fomitem nuptiarum. Eccli. c. VII, 26: filiae tibi sunt? Serva corpus illarum. Qui facit, inquam, sic bene facit.
7:38
Deinde, cum dicit igitur et qui matrimonio, etc., hic ostendit quod licet utrumque sit bonum, tamen virginitas est melior matrimonio. Ubi primo approbat statum coniugalem: secundo praeponit statum virginalem, ibi qui non iungit, et cetera. Dicit ergo igitur et qui, etc., quasi dicat: quia oportet fieri ut diximus, igitur et qui matrimonio iungit virginem, bene facit, quia licitum est quod facit; et qui non iungit, cum virgo acquiescat continere, melius facit. Glossa: melius facit qui apud Deum meritum suum collocat, et a sollicitudine liberat eam. Melius est enim quod licet et expedit, quam quod licet et non expedit. Hic enim bene utitur malo, ibi vero bene utitur bono. Bene utitur quis bono, continentiam dedicans Deo; male utitur quis bono, continentiam dedicans idolo. Male utitur quis malo, concupiscentiam relaxans adulterio; bene utitur malo, concupiscentiam restringens connubio. Bonum est pudicitia coniugalis, sed melius est continentia virginalis vel vidualis, secundum Glossam.
7:39
Deinde cum dicit mulier alligata est legi, etc., hic ostendit quod non similiter coniugata, nisi viro mortuo, potest contrahere. Ubi primo ostendit quod coniugata non potest nubere, viro vivente; secundo quod, viro mortuo, potest alii nubere, ibi quod si dormierit, etc.; tertio quod melius est illi continere, ibi beatior autem erit, etc.; quarto quod debet consilio eius credere, ibi puto autem quod et ego, et cetera. Dicit ergo mulier alligata est, etc.; quasi dicat: qui non iungit virginem suam, melius facit. Et vere melius, quia mulier alligata est, et cetera. Vel sic: virgo quocumque tempore potest nubere, sed uxorata non, quia mulier alligata est legi, ita ut non possit nubere alteri quanto tempore vir eius vivit. Rom. VII, 2: quae autem sub viro est mulier, vivente viro est alligata legi viri. Deinde, cum dicit quod si dormierit, somno mortis. De qua dormitione Io. c. XI, 11: Lazarus amicus noster dormit. Vir eius, et cetera. Augustinus: non dicit primus, secundus, vel tertius, vel quartus, vel quousque licet. Nec nobis diffiniendum est quod non diffinit apostolus. Unde nec ullas nuptias debeo damnare, nec eis verecundiam numerositatis afferre. Si dormierit, inquam, liberata est a lege viri, unde permittitur ei nubere. Hic patet quod resurgenti non tenetur copulari. Sed cui vult nubat. Invitae enim nuptiae solent habere malos proventus; ideo dicitur Gen. XXIV, 57: vocemus puellam, et quaeramus voluntatem eius. Nubat, inquam, tantum in domino, id est, viro suae religionis; nam in dispari cultu prohibitum est in lege matrimonium. Deut. VII, 3. Per hanc licentiam apostoli revocatae sunt omnes poenae et infamiae, quae secundum leges infligebantur olim mulieri secundo nubenti infra tempus luctus, scilicet intra annum. Ergo in nuptiis exigitur personarum legitimitas, unde dicitur liberata est, consensus libertas, unde addit cui vult nubat, cultus paritas, unde subdit tantum in domino. Deinde, cum dicit beatior autem erit, etc., hic ostendit quod melius est illi continere quam nubere, dicens: quamvis liceat ei nubere, tamen beatior erit, si sic permanserit, scilicet innupta. Et hoc est consilium meum super eodem datum: habebit enim fructum sexagesimum qui debetur viduis, Matth. XIII. Augustinus: satis ostendit beatam esse post mortem viri, et secundo nubentem, sed beatior est non nubens. Deinde, cum dicit puto autem quod et ego, etc., hic ultimo ostendit quod debent consilio eius credere, quia, inspirante spiritu sancto, hoc consulit. Et hoc est quod dicit puto autem, etc., quasi dicat: faciendum est secundum consilium meum, quia puto quod et ego, sicut caeteri apostoli, spiritum Dei habeam. Rom. VIII, 23: sed et nosipsi primitias spiritus habentes, et cetera. Hoc ergo consilium debet impleri et propter fructum sequentem, quia beatior erit, et propter consulentis auctoritatem, quia secundum consilium meum, et propter spiritum Dei inspirantem, quia puto, et cetera. Hic quaeritur super illo verbo volo vos sine sollicitudine esse. Contra Rom. XII, 11: sollicitudine non pigri. Responsio. Ibi loquitur de sollicitudine spirituali, hic de temporali. Item super illo divisus est. Contra Osee X, 2: divisum est cor eorum, nunc interibunt. Responsio. Ibi loquitur de divisione intentionis principalis, hic de divisione actionis. Item Glossa ibid.: partim servit Deo, partim mundo. Contra Matth. VI, 24: nemo potest duobus dominis servire. Responsio. Verum est ita quod aequaliter serviat utrique in eo quod duo, id est contrarii, sunt. Item super illud: mulier innupta cogitat quae domini sunt, Glossa: non cogitat ne damnetur a Deo. Contra: damnari potest, ut patet in parabola de fatuis virginibus. Responsio. Non cogitat hoc solum, sed cum hoc etiam ne offendat sponsum. Item super illud: ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu, Glossa: non potest fieri ut non sit sanctum corpus quo utitur sanctificator spiritus. Contra: spiritus sanctus usus est lingua Caiphae non sancta, Io. XI, 49 s. Responsio. Utebatur ea ut spiritus, non ut sanctificator. Item: sed ad id quod honestum est. Contra: ergo matrimonium turpe. Responsio. Secundum Glossam positivum posuit pro comparativo. Item super illud: qui non iungit, melius facit, Glossa: hic, scilicet in coniugio, bene utitur homo malo. Contra: cuius usus bonus est, ipsum quoque bonum est. Responsio. Illud intelligitur de usu rei per se, scilicet ad quem ordinata est, non per accidens, scilicet ad quem ex prudentia utentis ordinatur. Item Glossa ibid.: melius est bene uti bono, quam bene uti malo. Contra: hoc difficilius illo. Responsio. Loquitur hic de malo vitii, non supplicii. Item super illo verbo in Glossa, duae permissae. Contra: ergo duae nuptiae non sunt a Deo. Responsio. Non ex eo quod duae, nisi ex consequenti. Item si dormierit vir; quid dicendum est, si resuscitatur? Responsio. Requiritur consensus novus ad hoc quod sit matrimonium.
7:40
Item super illud puto quod spiritum Dei habeam. Contra, Rom. VIII, 38: certus sum quod neque mors, neque vita, et cetera. Responsio. Secundum Glossam non dicit hoc dubitando, sed quasi increpando.
7:1
1. De quibus autem scripsistis mihi. Sermo supplendus in hunc sensum: Jam quod attinet ad ea, de quibus me per epistolam consuluistis, ita vobis respondeo. Nam scripto transmiserant ad Paulum Corinthii sua quaedam dubia de matrimonio, deque ejus usu et abstinentia. Apparet enim fuisse quosdam apud eos, qui dicerent, debere Christianum hominem omnino a complexu mulieris abstinere. Qua occasione tradit Apostolus toto hoc capite saluberrimam et valde necessariam doctrinam de matrimonio, virginitate et continentia.
Bonum est homini mulierem non tangere. Bonum, graece xaAov, quod nonnulli vertunt pulchrum, id est, res praeclara et eximia, quemadmodum exponit Theophylactus. Mulierem. alii uxorem vertunt. Nam C^raeca vox ad utramque significationemambigna est. Etcumsaepe repetatur in hoc capite, ipse noster interpres pro suo arbitratu nunc mulierem, nunc uxorem transtulit. Quanquam hoc quidem loco uterque sensus in altero continetur. Nam si bonum est omnino mulierem non tangere; bonum quoque est uxorem non attingere. Et si bonum est uxorem non tangere; bonuiu etiam est, imo necessarium, quamcumque aliam mulierem non attingere. Neque enim uUam mulierem praeter suam tangere cuiquam fas est. Porro non tangere mulierem non est, ut exponunt Erasmus et Cajetanus, non ducere uxorem; sed cum uxore sive muliere non commisceri, a mulieris amplexu sese continere. Erat enim a Corinthiis Apostolo proposita quaestio generalis: num ad vacandum orationi et pietati ab opere carnali prorsus esset abstinendum, etiam iis, qui uxores haberent? Atque ille sensus patebit amplius ex iis, quae statim sequuntur. Quaeres quomodo non pugnet haec Apostoli sententia cum eo, quod scriptum est Genes. 2. Non est bonum hominem esse solum. Hanc enim Scripturam adversus continentiae consilium, quod hic ab Apostolo datur, objicere nobis solent haeretici. Respondeo nullam esse repugnantiam. Nam illic Scriptura loquitur de bono speciei, Paulus hic de bono individui. lilud dictum pi-o eo tempore, quo mundus erat hominum vacuus: istud pro tempore, quo mundus erat plenus. Item Moses loquitur de bono vitae temporalis; Paulus de bono conducibili ad vitam aeternam, Sane quod attinet ad bonum individui, non minus bene fuisse Adamo, si solus mansisset, quam fuit Antonio, Paulo et aliis, qui solitariam duxerunt vitam cum magna tranquillitate corporis et animi; eo praesertim, quod Adam in illo statu integritatis nullo movebatur incentivo ad coitum; cui proinde non minus facile fuerit abstinere se a muliere, quam ea uti. Bonum autem hic intelligi morale et spirituale bonum, et per se conducens ad pietatem et salutem (quod sectarii negant, et cum his Erasmus, qui tam in annotat., quam in paraphrasi bonum interpretatur commodum, videlicetmolesto contrarium), liquet ex sequentibus: nominatim ex eo, quod dicit, innuptos solicitos esse et cogitare, quae Domini sunt, quomodo placeant Deo; conjugatos autem, tam virum quam mulierem, cogitare, quae mundi sunt, quomodo alter alteri placeat. Ab hac enim sive inordinata affectione, sive indigna servitute, quam adfert homini carnalis concupiscentia conjugio per peccatum adhaerens, liberat abstinentia conjugii propter Deum. Amplius autem idipsum constat ex eo, quod adjicit, mulierem innuptam et virginem cogitare, quae Domini sunt, ut sit sancta et corpore et spiritu. Quibus verbis quale et quam excellens sit bonum, de quo hic praefatur Apostolus, evidenter exprimitur. Qua de re videat, qui volet, Augustinum multa praeclare disserentem libro pene toto de sancta virginitate. Taceo caetera hujus capitis, velut ubi hortari se dicit ad id, quod honestum est etc. Ubi bene facere affinnat eum, qui matrimonio jungit virginem suam; sed melius, qui non jungit; iibi beatiorem pi'onuntiat viduam, si sic permanserit. Quae omnia de commoditate vitae praesentis interpretari, nimis violentum est, et a Pauli mente alienum: praesertim cum ille diserte nominet bonum honestum, quod ipso genere a bono commodo diversum est. Ex dictis intelligi potest, non absurde B. Hieronymum scribentem adversus Jovinianum libro 1. cap. 4. ad hunc modum ratiocinari: Si bonum est homini mulierem non tangere, malum est ergo tangere. Non enim infert peccatum esse, sed malum; quia tangere mulierem in statu hujus corruptionis non contingit sine malo turpis et inordinatae delectationis. Quod tamen malum excusatur per bonum con- Venim, nteumque se habeat argumentatio Hieronymi, quam accepit ex Tertulliani lib. de monog. cap. 3., non improbabile est, quod quidam bonum exponunt comparative, id est melius, quemadmodum exponitur infra: Bonum est iUis, si sic permaneant, id est melius. Subauditur enim comparationis alterum membrum: quam si nubant. Tta et hic: Bonum est homini mulierem non tangere, id est melius, quam tangere. Estque Hebraismus, nisi quod exprimi soleat alterum membrum, ut Psalmo 117. Bonum est confidere in Domino, quam confidere in humine. Bonum est sperare in Domino, quam sperare in principibus. Obiter hic observa, in uno sexu etiam alterum intelligi. Sicut enim viro bimum est, mulierem non tangere; sic et irudieri bonum, virum non tangere. Sexum utrumque exponit sententia sequens.
7:2
2. Propter fornicationem autem unusquisque mam uxorem habeat, et unaquaeque suum virum habeat. Suum graece X5'.o\, proprium, duntaxat posteriori loco. Sed et illud: propter fornicationem, subaudi, vitandam, graece plurali numero legitur dioi. TOtg uopvsiat;, propter fornicationes: quemadmodum et legit Hieron. lib. 1. contra Jovinian. cap. 4. et Augustin. lib. de adulter. conjugiis cap. 2. Ita scripsit fortassis Apostohis, ut innueret diversas libidinis species. Non praecipit autem, ut unusquisque vir Christianus uxorem ducat, et unaqunequemulier virum capiat; uti perverse quidam haereticorum hanc Apostoli sententiam acceperunt, ex ea docentes, conjugium omnibus Christianis esse in praecepto. Quae doctrina non modo refellitur ex consensu totius ecclesiae, et tot sanctorum exemplis; venim etiam palam repugnat iis, quae Paulus ipse docet hoc capite. Mox enim prcfitetur, se haec dicere secundum indulgentiam, non secundum imperium. Vult autem omnes homines esse sicut seipsum. Non nuptis etiam et viduis bonum esse dicit, sisic permaneant. Denique eum, qui virginem suam non jungit matrimonio, melius facere dicit eo, qui jungit. Sensus igitur est: Quamvis dixi bonum esse homini, mulierem, etiam uxorem, non tangere: tamen propter fornicationem et omne genus immunditiae vitandum, permittitur atque indulgetur, ut unusquisque maritus sua utatur uxore, eique commisceatur, et unaquaeque uxor suo marito. Habere pro eo, quod est uti, phrashn esse Scripturae saci-ae, supra ostendimus ad illud cap. 5. hujus epist.: ita ut uxorem patris sui alujuis habeat. Et hunc locum ita exponunt Hieron. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 4. et Chrjsost. in comment. ac caeteri interpretes. Quanquam, sicut uti conjuge, ita et accipere conjagem fomicationis vitandae gratia, ponendum est inter ea, quae secundum indulgentiam conceduntur. Sunt, qui exponant: habeat, id est, retineat. Verum Paulus nondum hic agit, an dimittere conjugem liceat, quod reservat suo loco, infra versu 10. et sequentibus. Et quidem de usu conjugii, non de ducenda aut.etinenda conjuge eum loqui declarat etiam, quod sequitur.
7:3
3. Uxori vir debitum reddat; similiter autem et uxor viro. Vir pro marito accipitur toto hoc contextu. Pro voce debitum, duae dictiones sunt in Graeco, debitum benevolentiam. Quo honestiori nomine rem alioqui pudibundam, id est, carnalis operis debitum, texit Apostolus: simul insinuans, cum benevolentia et ex amore conjugali reddendum esse hoc debitum. Quod annotamus, si tamen Apostolus scripsit benevolentiam. Nam verisimile nobis est, quod et Erasmus censet, a Paulo scriptum id solum, quod est in nostra versione, nimirum hac Graeca voce, TTjV ocpstXTjv, id est, debitum; non autem quod in Graecis codicibus nunc legitur, T7JV ocp£'.Xoji2vrjv suvotav, debitam benevolentiam. Nam ocpstXTj pro debito, et non solum 6cp£tX7jjuia_, legitur in sacris literis, ut Matth. 18. Omne debitum dimisi tibi, et Rom. 13. Reddite omnibus debita. Conjecturae nobis ratio est, quod in hanc lectionem omnes Latini tractatores consentiant, etiam antiquissimus Tertullian. lib. de pudic. cap. 16. et post eum Cyprianus lib. 3. testimon cap. 32., et Hieronymus passim: Graeci autem codices varient nonnihil. Sunt enim, in quibus non Euvotav legatur, sed xtfirjv^ id est, honorem. Quae et ipsius Chrysostomi lectiofuit, ut liquido probat ejus commentarius. Atque eo respexisse videtur Hieronjm., quando in epist. ad Celant. cap. 9. scripsit: Debitam honorificentiam viro exhibe. Quod ergo simpliciter a Paulo scriptum erat ttjv ocpctXf^v debitum, id declarandi gratia (quod suspicari licet) alii mutarunt in debitam benevolentiam, alii in debitum honorem, nomine videlicet in participium converso, et additis vocabulis, quibus res parum verecunda verecunde notaretur. Nec vero apparet, cur alteram dictionem Latinus interpres omittere voluisset. Sensus Apostoli est: Item propter fornicationem jam non in se vitandam, sed a conjuge avertendam, vir debitum conjugale reddat uxori, similiter et uxor viro; intellige, dura exigitur; et omnino quoties infirmitas conjugisob incontinentiam periclitantis id admonet; excepto tamen, uti Thomas annotat, impedimento legitimo. Recte autem debitum vocatur, quia ex justitia quadam debetur. Cujus ratio sequitur:
7:4
4. Mulier sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed vir. Similiter autem et vir sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed mulier. Rursum pro sui in utroque hoc membro, graece t3tou, proprii. Et conveniebat huic loco potius uxor quam mulier: sicut et in duobus versibus praecedentibus transtulit. Atque ita legunt Cyprianus et Hieronymus locis ante ci tatis. Corpus intelligitur secundum ea membrr., quae sexum distinguunt, et quatenus ea serviunt usui conjugali: quemadmodum explicat Augustinus lib. 5. contra Jul. cap. 5. Sensus est: Uxor non habet potestatem, sive jus sui corporis (nam Graece est i$ouota'C£t), ita scilicet, ut liberum ei sit pro sua voluntate, vel continere, vel alteri cuipiam se conjungere; sed maritus jus habet corporis uxoris suae: et contra, maritus non habet jus sui corporis, sed uxor: ut proinde neutri liceat, alteri conjugale debitum poscenti denegare. Hac enim in parte pares sunt ambo, et sibi mutuo quadam servitute subjecti; licet in aliis impares, secundum id, quod ad mulierem dictum est Gen. 3. Sub viri potestate eris.
7:5
5. Nolite fraudare invicem. Id est: Ne fraudetis alter alterum. Fraudationem vocat denegationera debiti conjugalis, etiamsi fiat studio continentiae. Adversatur enim justitiae, cujus praeceptum est: Reddite omnibus debita, Rom. 13.
Nisi forte ex consensu ad tempus. Graece: Nisi quod utique ex consensu ad tempus. Hoc est: nisi aliquantuhxm, modo ex consensu mutuo fiat, idque ad tempus; graece Tzphc, xatpov, Quod etiam verti potest, secundum tejnpus, et ut Erasmus interpretatur, pro tempore, id est, pro temporis opportunitate et exigentia: quando videlicet hujusmodi abstinentiam res postulare videtur. Ut enim est tempus amplexandi, ita est et tempus longe fieri ab amplexibus, Ecclesiastae 3., quale maxime est tempus orationis, ut liic sequitur. Ita Sophocles in Ajace dixit, Tipog xaipov TXOveTv^ opportune laborare. Quanquam melius, opinor, sese habet ad tetnpus: ut significetur abstinentia a concubitu temporaria, ad discrimen perpetuae. Sic enim et alibi sumitur npbq xatpoVj ut Luc. 8. Qui ad tempus credunt, et 1 Thess. 2. Desolati a vobis ad tempus horae. Qaadrat huic intellectui, quod statim subjungit: Et iterum revertimini in idipsum. Atquehanc nostri interpretis versionem ut planissimam, alii fere omnes secuti sunt. Porro quod tanquam exceptive dicit Apostolus, nisi forte ex consensu etc, non significat fraudem esse in hac mutua abstinentia. Nam fraus semper peccatum est, si proprie dicatur. Sed vel fraudare dixit pro eo, quod est privare, ut exponit Cajetanus: vel quod verisimilius, Hebraea phrasi usus est, qua nisi pro sed tantum accipitur non infiequenter in Scripturis: velut 4 Reg. 5. loquente ad Elizaeum Naaman Syro: Non faciet ultra servus tuus holocaustum aut victimam diis alienis, nisi Domino, id est, sed tantum Domino, et Apoc. 21. Noti intrabit in eam aliquid coinquinatum, nisi qui scripti sunt in libro vitae agni, et apud ipsum PauJum ad Gal. 2. Non justificatur homo ex operibus legis, nisi per fidem Jesu Christi. Itaqae sensus hujus loci est: Ne fraudetis invicem, sed tantum ex consensu mutuo abstinete vos interdum. Nam hujusmodi verbo supplenda est oratio alioqui imperfecta. Dixi verisimilius. Nam fraudare proprie accipiendum est. Sentit enim Paulus eos, qui debitum conjugale negant, vere et proprie conjugem fraudare. Jam ex huc Apostoli iiraecopto non recte collegeris, illicitam esse conjugibus ex consensu perpetuam abstinentiam eo, quod dicat, ad tempus. Nam illud quidem ex consensu, pro quo Cyprian. legit ex conventione, juris est conjugalis. Neque enim aliter licet. Quod autem id non absolute dicit, sed cum addito ad tempus, indulgentiae est, uti mox ipse explicat: quum profecto sit per se multo melius, perpetuo abstinere.
Ut vacetis orationi. Graece, ut vacetis jejunio et orationi. Syra quoque jejunii meminerunt. Quamquam Chrjsostomus et Theophylactus non plus legisse videntur, quam quod in Latinis est: quibus et Graeca quaedam exemplaria adstipulantur. Cjprianus item et Hieronymus tantum legunt ora^tom. Adde,quod t^acanc^i verbum, ut bene monet Erasmus, non perinde congruit jejunio. Declarat Apostolus id, quod dixerat ad tempus, ostendens quodnam tempus abstinentiam operis conjugalis deposcat: id est, tempus orationis, quod idem a Petro Apostolo expressum est 1. epist. 3. dicente, ut non impediantur orationes vestrae. Quippe conjugalis actus, quo animus quodammodo carni totus immergitur, ineptum reddit hominem ad orationem, qua mens in Deum elevanda est. Sed objiciet aliquis: Christianis quotidie orandum esse, Domino dicente: Quoniam oportet semper orare Luc. 18. et ipso Paulo praecipiente: Sine intermissione orate 1 Thess. 5. Quod igitur tempus eritreliquum conjugibus ad amplexum mutuum? Responsio est, Petrum et Paulum monentes abstinendum ab usu conjugii ad vacandum orationi, non de quacumque oratione loqui (quamvis et id verum est, ex concubitu semper ineptiorem reddi animum ad orandum), sed de oratione, aJ quam fideles publice conveniebant, velut Dominicis ac solennibus diebus. Nam id erat orationi vacare. Non enim dicit Apostolus, ut oretis, sed, ut vacetis orationi; ut observat et urget Theophylactus. Et quidem nomine orationis arbitror utrumque Apostolum comprehendere voluisse etiam sacrificium eucharistiae, cujus participes fiebant fideles illis diebus, quibus solenniter ad orationem conveniebatur; quemadmodum et Act. 6. comprehendunt Apostoli dicentes: Nos orationi et ministerio verbi instantes erimus. Imo quod dicit Petrus, ut non impediantur orationes, sic quibusdamaccipiendum videtur: ut a communione corporis Dominici (quae sub orationis generali nomine continetur) non impediamini: tametsi magisplacet sensus jamdictus de oratione publica, sub qua tamen oucharistiae perceptio comprehendatur. Sic enim verba Pauli commodius accipiuntur. Igitur ex consequenti monet uterque Apostolus fideles, ne sic vacent operi conjugali, ut per hoc impediantur ab eucharistia statis diebus percipienda: praesertim cum majus sit accipere corpus Christi, quam simpliciter orare, teste Hieron. iu apol. ad Pammachium cap. 6., ubi defendit, quod dixerat hunc Pauli locum tractans, lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 4. Oro te, quale illud bonum est, quod orare prohibet? quod corpus Christi accipi non permittit? Porro orationis nomine, sicut et adorationis comprehendi sacrificium et reliquum cultum, etiam aliae Scripturae nos docent, ut illud Jes. 56. memoratum a Domino apud tres Evangelistas: Domus mea domus orationis vocabitur. Item Joann. 4. Jerosolymis est locus, ubi oportet adorare. Act. 16. Die sabbatorum egressi sumus, ubi videbatur oratio esse. 1 Tim. 2. Obsecro primum omnium fieri obsecrationes, orationes, etc. Quem locum Augustinus epist. 59. ad Paulinum, et commentatores diserte exponunt de sacrificio missae et orationibus, quae sacrificii tempore a sacerdote et populo ad Deum fiunt: quemadmodum in nostro ejusdem loci commentario ostendemus. Apparet autem non solum a perceptione eucharistiae, verum etiam ab ipso conventu publico, in quo sacrificium offerebatur, abstinendum fuisse illis, qui operi conjugali vacassent. Nam qincumque sacrificio intererant, communicare solebant. Quam rem postea suo decreto firmavit Anacletus Papa. Quare si qui quacumque ratione inepti erant adcommunionem, iidemetiam a conventu et publica oratione sese abstinere debebant. Unde et Romanorum vetus fuit consuetudo, ut post coitum nocturnum eodem die sacra loca non accederent. Sic enim de illis Hieronymus loquitur in dicta apologia: Quare ad martyres ire non audent? quare non ingrediuntur ecclesias? Cujus rei meminit etiam Gregorius Pontifex ad interrogationes Augustini Anglorum episcopi resp. 10. Verumtamen, quod hic notandum est, nec orationis causa permiftit Apostolus usum tori conjugalis alterutro petente intermitti, sed tantum ex consensu. Quod sitantum debitireddendigratia quis uxori commixtus fuerit, non prohibetur eouem die cum caeteris fidelibus eiacharistiam percipere. Id quod Gregorius etiam illi concedit, qui solo procreandae sobolis desiderio conjugi miscetur: quoniam, inquit, a nobis prohiberi non debet accipere, qui in igne positus nescit ardere. Sed quis est hic? et laudabimus eum. Caeterum ex hoc loco Pauli recte probant orthodoxi scriptores, iis, qui ex ufficio sacratioribus ministeriis perpetuo sunt addicti, id est sacerdotibus, uxores nec ducendas esse, nec habendas. Nam ut Hieronymi verbis utar: Si Jaicus et quicumque fidelis orare non potest, nisi careat officio conjugali: sacerdoti, cui semper pro popido offerenda sunt sacrificia, semper orandum est: si semper orandum est, ergo semper carendum matrimotiio. Sic ille lib. 1. adversus Jovin. cap. 19.
Et iterum revertimini in idipsum. Graece: Et iterum ad idem conveniatis,. ut sensus sit: orationis tempore fiuiito 1 conjugibus redeundum ad opus consuetum; quod, inquit Hieronymus, erubescit suo vocare noynine lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 4. Potest etiam verti £7tl t6 auto in unum, quomodo vertit Erasmus hoc loco, et noster interpres infra cap. 11. convenientibus vobis in unum. Est enim particula frequentata a LXX. maxime in Psalmis: pro qua Hebraeis est dictio Tin^ id est, in simul. Atqui res eodem redit: et alterum ex altero intelligitur.
Ne tentet vos Satanas. Id est, ne in adulterium aliasve damnabiles corruptelas vos tentando pertrahat diabohis, si diu- tins maneatis toro separati. Significatur enim tentatio cum effectu. Ostendit hic locus, etiam ea peccata, ad quae sola sufficeret carnis tentatio, comn\itti instig-aute diabolo. Quod tamen utrumne semper fiat, et an omnia peccata daemonum instinctu committautar, alia quaestio est, et alibi tractanda. Nos ex professo de ea egimus in 2. sent. dist. 21.
Propter incontmentiam vestram. Graeca dictio axpaaca magis intemperantiam significat: quomodo legit Ambros. commentator, et August. lib. 1. de nupt. et concup. cap. 14., tametsi inter voces Latinas incontinentiam et intemperantiam non multum est discriminis. Plerique partem hanc construunt cum ea, quae proxime praecessit, hunc reddentes sensum: Ne Satanas videns incontinentiam vestram et carnis infirmitatem, qua fit, ut minus apti sitis ad perpetuo continendum, per eam vos tentet, et tentando impellat in graviora peccata. Hi propter incontinentiam, exponunt per incontinentiam, tanquam Paulus scripsisset <3'.a xriz ky.par:ict.r;. At vero melius haec pars sic accipitur, ut construenda cum illa, revertimini in idipsum, sitque sensus: Post orationem redite ad opus conjugale: quod ut faciatis, moneo propter incontinentiam vestram, ne alioqui Satanas vos solicitet et inducat ad deteriora. Confirmat hanc constructionem, quod jam ante similiter dixerat: Propter fornicationem unusquisque suam uxorem habeat, etc.
7:6
6. Hoc autem dico secundum indulgentiam, non secundum imperium. Graece secundum veniam, non secundum praeceptum. Et August. passim hunc locum citans veniam legit: quemadmodum et Cyprianus testim. lib. 3. cap. 32. Quod autem in nonnullis Graecis Erasmo teste legitur xaTOt yvoj^uTjV juxta sententiam vel consilium, pi-o xa-a ouYyvcojjir/^ secundum veniam: legitur id quidem in fine hujus capitis, sed praesenti loco non convenit, cum hic non consilium, sed permissio sit. Exponit enim Apostolus hac parte, quemadmodum in- telligi velit, quod dixerat revertimini in iiipsum: eademque prorsus est ratio de prioribus illis verbis: Unusquisque suam uxorem habeat: et unaquaeque suum virum. Poterat enim videri haec praecipiendo dixisse, quod ita fieri oporteret. Declarans igitur seipsum, affirmat se ea dixisse non ex praecepto, sed ex permissione et indulgentia quadam: qua nimirum solent minora quaedam mala concedi ad avertendum majora. Quocirca recte B. Augustinus et alii patres ex hoc loco colligunt ac docere non dubitant, concubitum conjugalem, quando fit per incontinentiam, semper esse peccatum: etiamsi vitandae fornicationis causa fiat. Tunc autem solum culpa carere, quando non expetitur, nisi sobolis procreandae gratia: ad exemplum ejus, qui dicebat in oratione sua ad Deum: Tu scis Domine, quia non luxuriae causa accipio sororem meam conjugem: sed sola posteritatis dilectione, in qua benedicatur nomen tuum. Tob. 8. Augustini de hac re sententiae sunt apertissimae, ut homil. 50. cap. 7. Sola generandi causa est inculpabilis utriusque sexus commixtio, et in epist. 121. de orando Deo cap. ultimo: Sola excusat nuptias procreandorum causa filiorum. Eadem doctrina ejus est lib. de bono conjug. cap. 6. et sequentib., serm. 63. de diversis cap. 13. et serm. 41. de sanctis, et aliis locis, quae longum est hic annotare et non necessarium, quandoquidem per se clarum est, quod ait Apostolus: Hoc dico secundum veniam. Evidenter enim, dum tribuit veniam, denotat culpam, inquit Augustinus lib. de peccato originali cap. 38. Nam quis ambigat absurdissime dici, non eos peccasse, qxiibus venia datur? ait idem libro de bono conjugali cap. 10. Ei quis esse peccatum neget, cum dari veniam facientibus apostolica autoritas fateatur: enchiridii cap. 78. Neque tamen sufficit generandi causa, si non et ea referatur ad sanctam prolis educationem, in qua, sicut ait Tobias, benedicatur nomen Dei. Nam, ut idem.^ugust. praeclare scribit lib. 1. de nuptiis et concup. cap. 4,, qui non hae intentione, huc voluntate, hoc fine generant filios, ut eos ex membris hominis primi in membra transferant Christi, etiamsi tanta sit observantia, ut secundum matrimoniales tabulas non nisi liberorum procreandorum causa concumbant, non est in eis vera pudicitia conjugalis. Haec ille. Dixi concubiturD conjugalem tunc solum culpa carere, quando non expetitur nisi prolis generandae causa. ISlam si non expetitur, nec debitum exigitur, sed tantum redditur, non peccatum est, sed actus justitiae, quem jam ante praecepit Apostolus illis verbis: Uxori vir debitum reddat, et uxor viro. Verum hac de re tota late egimus ad dist. 31. lib. 4. sent.
7:7
7. Volo enim omnes vos esse sicut meipsum. Haec pars varie legitur iu Latinis codicibus, etiam pervetustis. In multis autem pro enim scriptum est. Rarsum in plerisque non vos sed homines, quemadmodum et legit Ambros. commentator. In nonnuUis nec vos, nec homines. At alii quidam, suffragante textu Aquinatis et Lirani, haec tria conjungunt, omnes vos homines. Porro Graeca constanter sic habent: Volo enim omnes homines esse sicut et meipsum. Quam facile existimem veram esse lectionem. Sunt autem haec verba non absolutae voluntatis, sed optativae. Nam Hebraismus est volo pro vellem, ut legit Augustin. libro de grat. et lib. arb. cap. 4. et alibi. Nec diverso sensu commentator Ambros. legit oolebam, nempe praeterito imperfecto optativi loco posito: quomodo Paulus dixit, optabam pro optarim Rom. 9. vers. 3. Itaque quod hic dicit tale est: Adeo non praecipio conjugium aut conjugii usum, ut potius velim atque optem, omnes sic esse, ut ego sum: id est, liberos et expeditos a curis et actibus hujus sac- culi, impedientibus libertatem vacandi
Deo, rebusque divinis; cujusmodi inpri- mis est status et actus conjugalis. Id quod ex sequenti doctrina hujus capitis amplius constabit. Pro quo sensu vide, quae diximus ad illud capitis praecedentis: Sed ego sub nullius redigar potestate. Ex hac parte sic generaliter intellecta, jam consequens est, quod patres ex ea colligunt et docent, Paulum ab omni concubitu sese continuisse, et in perpetua castitate vixisse, ut Epiphanius haeresi 58., quae est Valesiorum, Hieron. in libro de custodia virgin. ad Eustochium cap. 8. et in epist ad Celantiam cap. 8., quamvis hanc epistolam alii Paulino tribuant. Item Augustinus lib. de gratia et libero arb. cap. 4. Ac praeterea commentatores, tam hunc locum explicantes, quam illud, quod paulo post sequitur: Sicut et ego. Latini quidem Ambros., Sedulius et omnes posteriores. Graeci vero Chrysosto mus, ac magis expresse Theodoretus, Theophylactus et Oecumenius. Quibus omnibus adde vetustissimum TertuUianum, disserte nuptias a Paulo removentem lib. scripto ad uxorem cap. 3. De exhort. cast. cap. 4. et de monogamina cap. 3. et 8. Valeat proinde Erasmus, qui in suis annotationibus ex hoc ipso loco conjicit, Paulo haec scribenti conjugem fuisse: posteaquam, inquit, de conjugatis agens, sui facit mentionem. Quae conjectura prorsus infirma est. Primum, quia non de solis conjugatis Apostolum loqui manifestum est. Dicit enim omnes homines, ut habet ipsius Erasmi versio. Deinde, si conjugatus erat Paulus, quando haec scribebat, quia de conjugatis agens sui facit mentionem, eosque ad suum hortatur exemplum: igitur etiam innuptus et viduus erat haec scribens, aula statim post non nuptis et viduis loquens, similiter sui facit mentionem addendo, sicut et ego. Qui locus profecto suspicionem Erasmi prorsus dissipat, et Patrum, quos memoravi, sententiam amplius etiam confirmat, ut illic ostendemus. Certe non ita confidenter Pauhis, de continentia disserens, semetipsum proponeret omnibus exemplum; si non in ipso esset, quod non solum conjugati imitarentur, verum etiam quod virgines et omnes caelibes, id est, cnntinentia perpetua. Quo fere modo ratiocinatur ad hunc locum Tlieodoi-eius. Caeterum haec Pauli optatio, quo vult omnes homines esse sicut seipsum, de unoquoque est homine, non de omnibus simul. Aut certe, quod mavult Aquinas, antecedente voluntate id voluit, non consequente, sciens id non futurum. Unde vanum est, quod objiciebat Jovinianus apud Hieronymum lib. 1. cap. 21. dicens: Si omnes virgines futrunt, quomodo stabit genus humanum? Cui post alia bene respondet Hieronymus: Noli metutre ne omnes virgines fiant. Difficilis res est virginitas: etideorara, quia di ff icilis, etc. Ad eandem objectionem dicentium: Quid si omnes velint ab omni concubitu continere; unde subsiUet genushumanum? Augustinus lib. de bono conjugali cap. 10. hoc modo respondet: Utinam omnes hoc vellent, dumtaxat in caritate de corde puro, et conscientia bona, et fide non ficta; multo citius Dei civitas compleretur, et acceleraretur terminus saeculi. Quod et aliis verbis repetit lib. de bono viduitatis cap. ult. Jam quomodo non pugnet haec optativa Pauli voluntas cum eo, quod dicit 1 Tim. 5. Volo juniores nubere, reperies explicatum in ejus loci commentario.
Sed unusquisque proprium donum habet ex Deo: alius quidem sic, alius vero sic; id est, alius tale, alius autem tale. Non significat, omnes homines aliqua habere dona a Deo. Nam multi sunt, inquit Hugo Victorinus in quaestione hujus loci, quibus nihil collatum est, unde salvari possint (quod notent, qui gratiam omnibus sufficientem introducunt), sed de fidelibus agit Apostolus, ac dicere vult, non unum omnia habere, sed alios alia. Quidam enim (ut a re proposita sumatur exemplum) donum habent castitatis conjugalis, alii vidualis, alii virginalis. Indicat autem Apostolus, iis qui donum continentiae, qua omnino a concubitu abfitineant, sentiunt se non habere, nec ad illud serio niti volunt; paratum esse remedium ex conjugio. Verum de iis loquitur, quibus non ob- Gnil. EsUi Comm. Tom. I. stat aut votum continentiae sponte emissum, aut lex ecclesiastica sponte suscepta, quo minus illud remedium apprehendant. Nam astricti voto, si nubere volunt, aut uti conjugio, damnationem habent, quia primam fidem irritam fecerunt, ipso Paulo teste 1 Tim. 5. Par ratio de iis, qui legi se submiserunt. Tales igitur necesse est ad alia sanctiora suae incontinentiae remedia col fugere; cujusmodi sunt jejunium, oratio, vigilia, lectio sacra, piae meditationes, otiifuga, labores et occupationes honestae, et quicquid his simile. Nam commune et obvium illud remedium, quod hic ostenditur ab Apostolo, jam eis fjictuim est illicitum; et per hoc, moraliter et in genere agendorum, impossibile. Porro sicut ex hoc loco non est consequens, hominem conjugatum, si non habeat donum continentiae conjugalis, ad eam servandam non teneri: ita nec sequitur, eos, qui non habent donum continentiae simpliciter, ad hanc praestandam non teneri, si ad eamlegeautvoto sint astricti. Etenim ad multa tenentur homines partim lege Dei, partim lege superiorum, partim etiam lege privata, quam quis sibi vovendo imponit: quorum habitum, facultatem, gratiam seu donum non habent, habere tamen possunt Deo donante, et habebunt si petant, secundum id, quod Dominus promisit dicens: Petite et accipietis. Ideo non dicit Apostolus, unusquisque propriam virtutem habet; sed: proprium donum, et addit, ex Deo: ut et donum agnoscatur, et autor doni, et ab eo petatur, si nondum habetur. Cavendus hoc luco commentarius Pelagii, qui proprium donum, quod unusquisque accepit a Deo, interpretatur propriae vuluntalis donativum, videlicet more suo donum seu gratiam Dei constituens in facultate naturali et omnibus insita a Deo, qua quisque eligere potest, quod vult. Quae interpretatio legitur etiam in libro quodam de castitate, quem cum duobus ahis ante annos quadraginta in lucem protulit Solanius quidam, inscriptum Sixto tertio pontifici Komano: cum ne catholici quidem scriptoris sint libri, sed, ut ex multis colligitur, Pelagiani cujuspiam. Tantum abest, ut a memorato pontifice conscripti sint, quem constat haeresis Pelagianae fuisse acerrimum expugnatorem. Ita de iis libris post Wilhelmura Lindanum doctissimum episcopum censuit Cardinalis Baronius in fine tomi 5. suorum annalium.
7:8
8. Dico autem non nuptis et viduis. Non nuptis, Graece toTc a-{di).o<.Q innuptis, ut legit Hieronymus: seu potius, quemadmodum alii vertunt, inconjugatis, quos caelibes vocant Latini: ut intelligatur etiam ad viros pertinere, cum m Graeco masculinus sit articulus. Viduis, graece xaT': yji<^aic,, feminei sexus. Sed quaestio est,'utrum aYafioo^ Paulus intelligat eos, qui nuptias non sunt experti, quos Graeci proprie ai:a>oug appellant: an generalius eos, qui sine conjuge sunt, sive conjugati fuerint aliquando, sive non. Priorem intellectum exigere videtur discrimen inter aYaV&ug et viduas. Nam nisi stricte ac proprie aYafioug accipias, comprehendentur eo nomine etiam viduae: quas tamen adjungit Apostolus ut diversas. Nec quo minus comprehendantur, obstabit genus femineum. Nam mens Apostoli est, sub utroque nomine utrumque sexum instruere, et de abstinentia a conjugio, et de continentia in viduitate post obitum conjugis: quemadmodum hic annotant Theodoretus et Oecumenius. Viduas autem nominat Apostolus, non viduos; tum quod usitatius sit femininum nomen, ut Latinis vidua, sic et Graecis yr;pa: tum quod hoc genus exhortationis ad feminas magis dirigi soleat. Verumtamen posteriori intellectui fa- vere videtur ipse Paulus, qui non multo post aYajjiov vocat mulierem etiam con- jugatam, sed a viro digressam. Quod si discesserit,mqint,maneata^aixOQ: qMRnto magis eo vocabulo comprehensurus eos, qui nuptias experti, conjuges amiserunt? Quod quidem facere videtur infra versu 32. dicens: Qui sine uxore est, graece, 6 a^OL\ioc,, solicitus est quae Domini sunt. Nam subjungit: Qui autem cum uxore est, solicitus est, quae sunt mundi, insinuans utique per «Yajiov se intellexisse eum, qui conjugatus jam non est, etiamsi fuerit. Similiter et in eo, quod ibidem sequitur juxta Graecam lectionem: Divisa est mulier et virgo. Innupta curat quae Domini sunt. Nam cum virginem dixisset, non repetit, ut diceret:^ Virgo curat, quae Domini sunt, sed t] a-^aixoc:, innupta curat etc, nimirum volens extendere doctrinam ad caeteras continentes, etsi non virgines. Idque magis etiam apparet ex Latina lectione ejusdem loci, quae manifeste, etiam Hierou. test. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 7., indicat discrimen innuptae et virginis, saltem ut generis et speciei. Sic enim habet: Mulier innupta et virgo cogitat, quae Domini sunt, ac si dicat: Innupta mulier, praesertim si virgo sit, cogitat etc. Ad quem modum etiam hoc loco cum dixisset: Dico non nuptis, quamvis ibi viduae comprehensae possint intelligi, tamen ad majorem expressionem addere voluit, etviduis; ut non propterea consequens sit avafAOUc hic dici de solis iis, qui vel quae nunquam nupserunt. Quod et Augustinus aperte tradit lib. de bono vid. cap. 3., quamvis utrumque, innuptis et viduis, ad solum muliebrem sexum referens, Graeco textu non consulto, innuptarum nomine, inquit, illa^ significat, quae non sunt nuptiis alligatae, sive fuerint, sive non ficerint. Cumque id etiam ex ipsius Pauli verbis infra positis probasset, demum concludit ita dixisse Paulum: Dico innuptis et vi-
duis: tanquam diceret, quod dico in-
nuptis, non eis solis dico, quae virgi- nes sunt, sed etiam eis, quae viduae sunt. Ita Augustinus. Sed nunc quid in-
nuptis et viduis dicat Apostolus, audiamus.
Bonum est illis, si sic permaneant. Graece: Bonum eis est, si maneant. Multi quoque Latini codices MSS. mane- ant habent, non permaneant: tametsi sensus idem est. Bonum est, inquit, illis, i id est, melius ac magis eligendum, ut maneant sicuti sunt, innupti et viduae, quam ut nubant. Bonum ergo posuit pro meliore, ait August. lib. de bono vid. cap. 5. Est enim hoc bonum suo genere praestantius eo, quod est nubere. Dico, suo genere, non prorsus absolute, sed in hoc statu corruptionis. Nam in statu primaevae integritatis non erat melius: imo simpliciter nec eligendum.
Sicut et ego. Supple, maneo ava;jiog, innuptus, inconjugatus. Si in parte praecedente ayafjiot intelligantur, qui nec habent conjugem nec habuerunt: erit hic locus, ut arbitror, evidens pro perpetuo Pauli caelibatu, quem multi hinc colligunt. Nam ad posterius membrum et vi~ duis, quod femininum erat, non nisi incommodissime referri potest haec adjectio, sicut et ego. Sin autem ayafioi Paulo dicantur (quod ex supra dictis magis apparet), qui sine conjugio sunt, qualescumque prius fuerint: tum saltem ex hoc loco planissime consequens erit, Paulum aut nunquam uxorem duxisse, aut certe caelibem ac sine uxore fuisse, quando haec scribebat: ut hinc optime refellatur eorum opinio, qui existimarunt Paulo fuisse uxorem, vel quando hanc epistolam scripsit, eo quod dicat cap. 9. Numquid non habemus potestatem mulierem so~ rorem circumducendi? vel etiam multo post, ut qui in epistola ad Philip. 4. uxorem suam compellans dicat: Etiam rogo et te germana compar, ut illi legendum contendunt. Quae duo loca quam nihil illorum opinioni patrocinentur, ostendemus, quum usque ad ea ventum erit. Quanquam et juxta generaliorem hanc acceptionem vocabuli ava/Jiotj non ineptum ex isto loco ducitur argumentum pro perpetua Pauli continentia. Nam qui uxorem habuit et ea usus est, etiam.si nunc ea careat et in continentia vivat, is profecto parum idoneus consebitur, qui suum ad continentiam exemplum communiter omnibus obtendat innuptis, etiam virginibas, atque iis dicat: ita pennanete, sicut et ego.
7:9
9. Quod si non se continent, nubant. Nubant, Graece Ya,urjoa'Tcooav matrimo~ nium contrahant. Nam de utroque sexu Paulum loqui, jam patet ex praecedentibus. Sensus est: Quod si per infirmitatem carnis continere se non possunt, amplectantur remedium nuptiarum. Verum hoc quoque secundum indulgentiam consulit Apostolus. Dicuntur autem se continere non posse, non quibus impossibile hoc sit; sedquibus arduumatque difficile: tametsi difficultas haec potissimum nascatur ex defectu bonae ac firmae voluntatis continendi. Ideoque non dixit Apostolus: si non possunt se continere, sed, si non se continent. Gregorius part. 3. curae past. admonit. 28. mentem Apostoli sic extulit: Admonendi sunt, inquit, caelibes, ut si tentationum procellas cum difficultate solutis tolerant, conjugiiportum petant. Caeterum etiam hic loquitur Apostolus de iis, quibus conjugii contrahendi potestas est: id est, qui a lege ac voto continentiae sunt liberi. Unde consequenter idem Gregorius: Sine culpa quippe ad conjugium veniunt, si tamen necdum meliora voverunt. Nam quisquis bonum majus subire proposuit (id est, vovit), bonum minus, quod licuit, sibi illicitum fecit. Haec ille, et quidem ex ipsius Pauli sententia; qui alio loco viduas quasdam non se continentes, ideoque nubere volentes, damnationi pronuntiat obnoxias, eo quod primam fidem irritam fecerint, 1 Timoth. 5. Nam fidem illam, de qua loquitur, non aliam esse, quam qua sese Deo ad perpetuam continentiam obstrinxerant, ostendemus in ejus loci commentario. Nec vero praesentem Apostoli hicum aliter, quam dixi, intellexerunt patres Gregorio priores, ut Epiphanius haeres. 61. quae est Apostolicorum, Chrysostom. lib. de virgin. cap. 39. (ad quem librum suum in hujus capitis commentario lectorem remittit), Hieronym. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 6. 7. et 8. August. de bono viduit. cap. 8. 9. et 10. et de conjug. adulter. lib. 1. cap. 15. Item Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum cap. 3. Sedulius in comment. et denique Ambrosius, seu quisquis autor in libi-o ad virginem lapsam cap. 5. Sane liquet ex his, quam perverse locum istum Apostoli proferant apostatae sacerdotes et monachi, quo sacrilega sua connubia post contineatiae votum attentata excusent. Vide et ea, quae commentabimur ad illa verba, quae sunt infra versu 28. Si nupsent virgo, non peccavit.
Melius est enim nubere quam uri. Nubere, Graece yaix^oai, id est, jungi matrimonio. Ratio consilii non se continentibus dati: quoniam, inquit, melius est, conjugem accipere et nuptiarum uti remedio, quam uri, id est, ab igne concupiscentiae laedi per actum vel consensum peccati; ita pati libidinis aestum,^ ut aduraris, aut etiam comburaris. Uritur ergo, non qui tentatur incentivo libidims, sed qui a tentatione superatur: non qui sentit, sed qui consentit; quomodo dicitur uri igne, non qui calorem ejus qualitercumque molestum sibi sentit, sed qui admoto igne laeditur ac sauciatur. Quod eatis declarat Graecum verbum ab igne deductum Tiupouo^at, igniri, incendi, comburi. Hinc Augustinus lib. de saucta virginitate cap. 34. Vri, inquit, est occulta flamma concupiscentiae vastari. In eundem sensum ustionem banc interpretantur veterum commentarii tam Graecorum quam Latinorum. Nec secus Hieronymus, qui in apologia ad Pammachium cap. 7. uri exponit fornicari: nomine fornicationis omne genus impudicitiae comprehendens, iu quodcumque incidere solent incontinentes extra conjugium. Quod si uri non plus esset quam pati motus libidinis, et inquietari stimulis carnis, ut volunt sectarii, jam ipse Paulus, qui supra dixit: Volo omnes homines esse sicut me ipsum, juxta suum hoc consilium uxorem ducere debuisset. Nam de stimulo carnis alibi queritur: Datus est, inquit, mihi stimulus carnis meae, etc. 2 Cor. 12. Quem locum de sensu ac motu libidinis graves autores interpretati sunt, \\t ibi docebimus. Jam nec ista Apostoli ratio quicquam facit pro conjugiis eorum, qui continentiae voto sunt alligati. Talibus enim non est melius nubere, quam uri: cum vel ipso Paulo teste, etiam velle nubere sit iis, damnabile malum 1 Tim. -5., adeoque illis ipsum nubere sit uri, idque multo gravius, quam si quis extra hujusmodi nuptias uratur. Nam qui post votum nuptias contrahit, peccatum libidinis peccato voti violati cumulat. Igitur secundum expositionem sanctorum Patrum, quos ante citavimus, illis nubere quam uri melius est, qui adhuc nubere possunt. Unde et in oratione quadam adscripta B. Ambrosio sic legitur: Moechanti in corde suo, necdum castitatem professo, juxtaApo- | stolum melius est nubere quam uri. Sed 1 obsecro Domine, ut cui non licet nubere, non contingat aduri. Ecceorationis, remedium, ubi nubere non licet. | Quaeritur autem, quo sensu nubere sit melius quam uri: num impropria comparatione, scilicet boni cum malo, qualis illa Ecclesiastae 7. Melior est patiens arrogante; an vero impropria acceptione melioris, ut melius dicatur, quod minus malum est, quomodo melius olim erat in excelsis Deo vero sacrificare quam idolis: et quomodo melius est non cognoscere viam justitiae, quam post agnitionem retrorsum reverti, 2 Pet. 2. Prior sensus veritatem habebit, si nubere per se consideretur ac sine circumstantiis; quemadmodum nuptias considerat August. lib. de bono conjugali cap. 10., docens nec ipsis non se continentibus nuptias esse peccatum, cum aperte dicat Apostolus in consequentibus: Si acceperis uxorem, non peccasti: et si nupserit virgo, non peccavit. Et post multa: Quod vult faciat; non peccat, si nubat. Ratio manifesta est, quia nuptiae per se sunt res honesta a Deo instituta: praesertim si non de solo contractu nuptiarum agatur, sed de statu ipso conjugali. Verum fortasse posterior sensus, si bene explicetur, accommodatior est tex- tui, ut nubere dicatur melius quam uri, quia nubere minus malum est, et secun- dum veniam concessum; uri vero deterius, ac minime concedendum. Nam ut reverti in idipsum propter incontinentiam, ab Apostolo secundum veniam conceditur; ita et nubere per incontinentiam. Cum hac enim circumstantia nubere accipitur hoc loco. Quod si, inquit, non se continent, nubant. Melius est enim, intellige non se continentibus, nubere quam uri. Sic autem nubere est per incontinentiam nubere. Quod profecto tam est culpabile, quam per incontinentiam misceri cum conjuge. Nam utrobique culpam inducit eadem circumstantia finis. Huc respexit Hieronjmus de nuptiis incontiuentium disserens lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 4. et 8. et iu apologia ad Pammach. cap. 6. et 7. Quibus locis inter alia dicit ac repetit, dictumque defendit, ideo melius est nubere, quia pejus est uri, quasi dicat, nubere per incontinentiam, de quo loquitur Apostolus, non in se bonum est, sed in comparatione pejoris. Cujusmodi verbis etiam Sedulius utitur in commentario. Sed et Thomas melius interpretatur magis tolerandum. Tale quoque est, quod S. Martinum dicere solitum refert Sulpitius in ejus vita, dialogo 2. Conjugium pertinet ad veniam, virginitas spectat ad gloriam; fornicatio deputatur ad poenam. Considerabat enim ille sanctus conjugium, quale a plerisque, tametsi Christianis ac Deum timentibus suscipitur. Vide etiam, quae infra dicemus ad ea verba Apostoli: Si acceperis uxorem, non peccasti. Illud adjicio, nonnullos ustionem hanc, de qua Paulus, interpretari de igne gehennae, tanquam sensus sit: Melius est nubere, quam ob vitam in fornicatione actam ardere in gehenna. Sic Faber in commentariis, ac rursum in examinatione literae. Meminit et Sedulius, eodemque alludunt Pelagius et Primasius. Sed merito rejicit hunc sensum Erasmus, ut huic loco minus aptum: quum satis liqueat de libidinis incendio sermonem esse.
7:10
10. lis autem, qui matrimonio juncti sunt, praecipio non ego, sed Dominus. Redit ad institutionem conjugatorum, acturus de matrimonii insolubilitate. Graeca breviter: conjugatis autem praecipio non ego, sed Dominus: pio eo quod diceret, non ego praecipio, sed Dominus, id est Christus, praecipit. In Graeco est verbum TCapayylXAw denuncio, ut quidam vertunt: quemadmodum et legerunt Tertull. in exhortat. castitatis cap. 3. et Ambrosius super Lucam cap. 16. et Ambrosii titulo commentator. Hoc enim proprium est illius verbi significatum. Sed saepe capitur pro eo, quod est praecipio, ut hujus epistolae cap. 11. Hoc autem praecipio: non laudans, etc. Item Act. 4. Et vocantes eos denunciaverunt, id est, praeceperunt, ne omnino loquerentur, etc. et cap. 5. Caesis denunciaverunt ne loquerentur, etc. Est enim idem Graece, quod superius in eodem capite, ubi melius transtulit interpres, praecipiendo praecepimus vobis. Nec dubium, quin et hoc loco vertendum fuerit praecipio: quemadmodum et alii plerique vertunt. Satis autem insinuat hic sermo: praecipio non ego, sed Dominus, Apostolos et eorum successores posse quaedam praecipere, quae Christus ipse per se non praecepit.
Uxorem a viro non discedere. Graece, jxTj ^(copiaO^vat, non separari; quomodo legit Cyprianus cap. 90. lib. 3. testim. Quanquam illud separari est discedere. Nam invitam separari non cadit sub prohibitione; tametsi possunt hic etiam intelligi prohibitae occasiones separationis: hoc e&t, ne ea faciat aut committat, propter quae vir eara oderit et a se dimittat, quale maxime est adnlterinm. Nam et hujusmodi separationem facile comprehendit pars sequens: Quod si discesserit, etc. quemadmodum ibi declarabitur. Sensus: Uxor non separet se, non discedat a viro, virum suum ne relinquat, nec omnino causam det separationis. Respicit Apostolus ad praeceptum Dominicum, quod referunt tres evangelistae, Matth. cap. 5. et 19. Marc. cap. 10. et Lucas cap. 16. Ex quibus locis inter se collatis haec colligitur Dominici praecepti plena sententia: non licere viro dimittere uxorcra, nec uxori virum, excepta causa fornicationis. Et tam virum moechari, si uxore dimissa aliam duxerit; quam mulierem, si viro dimisso alii nupserit. Cujus praecepti seu legis priorem partem Paulus sic extulit: Uxorem a viro non discedere: et vir uxorem non dimittat, itatamen, ut exceptionem, quamMatthaeo referente Dominus expressit excepta causa fornicationis, hic subintelligas, tam ubi de muliere, quam ubi de viro Paulus loquitur. Posteriorem vero partem significavit his verbis: Quod si discesserit, manere innuptam, aut viro suo reconciliari. Cur enim manere innuptam aut viro reconciliari, nisi quia nubens alii viro fieret adultera? Porro discessum sive separationem hic intellige, qua mulier virum nolit amplius habere pro marito, aut qua fiat, ut ipsam vir habere nolit pro uxore, facto nimirum quoad torum divortio: quod quidem fieri legitime non potest, nisi propter fornicationem. Nam de separatione, quae tantum fit jure ac via defensionis, ut si conjugem habeat haereticum, ad scelera cogentem, aut saevum et intolerabilem, alia ratio est. De separatione autem, qua vinculum solvitur conjugale, paulo post agitur.
7:11
11. Quod si discesserit, manere innuptam. Graece: Si vero et separata fuerit, maneat innupta. Illud si discesserit, intelligitAugustinuslib. 1. deadult. conjugiis cap. 3. et sequentibus, ex causa, qua discedere licet. Nam aliter non dicturum Apostohim, maneat innupta: sed omnino jussurum, ut revertatur ad virum suum. Igitur his illam innui vult exceptionem, quam Dominus in suo praecepto expressit dicens, nisi ob fornicationem: quae hoc loco propterea tacita est, ait Augustinus, quia notissima est. Verum hac tanta restrictione verborum tam ge- neralium, nihil arbitror opus esse. Nec video, quid obstet, quominus ge- neraliter, ut verba sonant, hunc discessum sive separationem interpretemur, ut sen- sus sit: Quod si separata fuerit a viro, idque vel sponte digressa, sive propter ejus fornicationem, sive propter aliud; vel ab illo dimissa ob quamcumque cau- sam (ut solent tam gentiles quam Judaei suas uxores qualibet ex causa dimittere), non licebit ei cum alio viro conjungi; cum Dominus expresse dicat, si uxor dimiserit virum suum et alii nupserit, moechatur. Marc. 10. Sed maneatinnupta, aut etc. Nam quod objicitur de optione mulieri data, quae locum non habeat, nisi discesserit ex justa causa; quomodo dilui possit, infra dicemus. Seususautemgeneralis, quem dedimus, invenitur in Graecorum commentariis, eundemque brevissime complexus est Primasius dicens: Si ob aliquam causam ^ discesserit, alii non nubat. Innuptam manere, hoc loco non est manere sine conjuge (nam si per discessum nexus prioris conjugii solutus erat, non prohiberetur ipsa alii viro nubere, maxime si incontinentia laboraret), sed est manere separatam a viro, ac sine usu conjugii: ita nimirum, ut nec priore conjugio utatur, nec aliud contrahat. Et haec est illa servitus, quam infra vers. 15. removet a Christianis respectu conjugum infidelium nolentium cohabitare. Qui locus proinde exceptio quaedam est, ut illic dicetur, ab hac sententia generali, qua jubetur mulier a viro separata, aut innupta manere, aut (quod sequitur) reconciliari viro.
Aut viro suo reconciliari. Graece, aut viro reconcilietur, id est, revertatur ad virum suum: cum eo redeat in gratiam, correcto tamen, si illius adulterium causam dedit separationis. Nam ad virum adulterii causa dimissum aut derelictum et in eo crimine adhuc perseverantem, J non licet mulieri redire, sed eo casu in- \ nupta manere debet. Ex vocabulo reconciliandi sumunt argumentum Erasmus et ahi nonnulli, quo doceant, Apostohim hic tantum agere de muliere sine jurta causa ac temere a marito digressa, non de ea, quae discessit ob viri fornicationem: ne videlicet fateri cogantur hanc, quae vinun fornicantem dimisit, debere secundum Apostohim innuptam manere, aut viro reconciliari. Volunt enim per hujusmodi dimissionem snlvi vincuhim conjugii, ut liberum sit mulieri alium virum accipere. Argumentum est: quoniam, inquiunt, reconciliari dicitur is, qui offendit, non qui offensus fuit. Quibus respondendum est, tam verbum Graecum xaxaXXay^va^ quo Paulus utitur, quam Latinum reconciliari, non de eo tantum dici, qui laesit et in gratiam recipitur; sed et de eo, qui laesus est et in gratiam recipit. Est enim partium prius dissidentium reconciliatio mutua, sicut et reditus in gratiam. Quod manifeste patet, dum numero plurali dicuntur aliqui inter se reconciliari et in gratiam rediisse. Quin et Deus reconciliari hominibus dicitur 2 Machab. 1. v. 5. et 7. V. 33. et 8. v. 29. Et quod ad rem praesentem propius spectat, Judicum 19. de Levita, cujus uxor juxta veritatem Hebraicam fornicata fuerat, legitur, quod secutus est eam, volens ei reconciliari. Cum autem Apostolus eam mulierem, quae discessit a viro, disjunctive jubeat aut manere innuptam, aut viro suo reconciliari: restat breviter dicendum, quando innupta manere possit aut debeat, et quando reconciliari viro. Primum igitur innupta manere potest absque reditu ad virum, si propter ejus fornicationem ab eo digressa fuerit. Sic enim agens utitur suo jure, quo potest adulterum ob iidem conjugii violatam simpliciter a carnibus suis abscindere. Poterit nihilominus, imo caritate suadente debebit, operam dare, ut viro resipiscenti reconcilietur; si vel sua, quod sentiat se non posse continere, vel viri salus alioqui in discrimen vocanda, postulet ita fieri. Innupta vero manere debebit, si vir in adulterio, propter quod dimissus ab ea fuit, perseveret. Cogetur etiam innupta manere, propter quamlibet causam dimissa aut digressa, si vir eam recipere nolit, nec compelli possit ut recipiat. Hisque casibus ad alia suae incontinentiae remedia necessario confugiendum ei erit, cujusmodi supra commonstravimus ad illud: Unusquisque proprium donum habet ex Deo. Caeterum extra casum adulterii, si vir paratus sit aut compelli possit, ut uxorem recipiat, debebit ipsa satagere, nisi periculum obstet, ut recipiatur, ac viro suo reconcilietur, sive ipsa causam dederit separationis, sivevirejus. Excipio casum, quo conjuges ex consensu mutuo separantur ad vacandum Deo, servaturi continentiam perpetuam. Ex bis intelligitur, Apostolum non dare mulieri, quae discessit, optionem liberam, ut quomodo- Cumque discesserit, aut innupta manere possit, aut ad virum redire: sed disjunctivum sermonem Apostoli diversos casus spectare; quorum alii cogant mulierem manere innuptam, alii compellant ad reditum: quamvis et contingat existere casum, in quo libera mulieri sit optio utrumlibet eligendi.
Et vir uxorem non dimittat. Graece, et virum uxorem non dimittere, quomodo legit Cjprianus. Pendet enim haec pars ab eo, quod dixit: Praecipio non ego, sed Dominus: et respondet illi membro priori: Uxorem a viro non discedere. Supplenda rursus exceptio Dominica, nisi ob fornicationem. Sed quare non hic addidit Apostolus, quod de muliere: quod si dimiserit, maneat innuptus aut uxori reconcilietur? Autor commentarii, qui fertur Ambrosii titulo, rationem banc reddit, quod viro liceat aliam ducere uxorem, si priorem adulterii causa dimiserit: quia non ita, inquit, lege constringitur vir, sicut mulier. Caput enim mulieris vir est. In eandem sententiam propendent Ambrosii nominedecepti (nam commentarium illum non esse sancti Ambrosii episcopi Mediolanensis, satis manifestum est) Cajetanus in expos. Matth. cap. 19. et Catharinus in hujus loci commentario, et lib. 5. annotat. in comment. Cajetani. Sed ut in autore suo, ita et in sententia multum a vero aberrant: licet eam ecclesiae judicio ac definitioni submittant. Verus Ambrosius ea de re quid senserit, perspicuum est ex iis, quae scribit in comment. super Lucam cap. 16. et lib. 1. de Abraham cap. 4. Quo utroque loco aperte derogat legi humanae, quae contra legem divinam plus juris conjugalis attribuebat viro quam mulieri; quasi viro dimittere conjugem et aliam ducere aliquando liceret, mulieri non item: quum lex divina in hoc negotio pares eos fecerit. Nec vero solius Ambrosii, sed totius ecclesiae haec doctrina est perpetua, ejusque praxi confirmata: ut hic agnoscat Cajetanus torrentem doctorum et judiciorum ecclesiasticorum (sic enim loquitur), cui se opponere non audeat, suam interim opinionem non dissimulans; sed quae cessare jani omnino debeat, posteaquam Synodus Tridentina clare ac diserte ■ eam rem totam definivit can. 7. sess. 24. Sane si viro post dimissam adulterii causa conjugem liceret aliam ducere, res vehementer absurda sequeretur: melioris conditionis esse, quantum ad potestatem nubendi. attinet, adulteraxn a viro dimissam, quam innocentem, quae virum adulterum dimisit. Nam illa posset alteri nubere, soluto per adulterium priori matrimonio, postquam vir aliam duxisset, haec autem non posset. Igitur vera ratio est, Apostolum illud, quod de muliere dixerat, hic non addidisse, quia reliquit intelligendum ac supplendum ex superiori membro: praesertim cum id de viro satis fuisset a Christo Domino expressum. Et ita docet August. lib. 1. de sermone Domini in monte cap. 14. et 16. Sed forte quempiam adhuc moveat, quod supra non dixit Apostolus, uxorem non dimittere virum, quomodo nunc dicit: Vir uxorem non dimittat: sed dixit, uxorem a viro nun separari: tanquam hac differentia sermonis insinuetur quaedam juris imparitas inler virum et uxorem: ut viro quidem jus competat, ubi causa subest, uxorem a se dimittendi, mulier aiitem dimittere virum non possit: si tamen a viro eam dimittente separetur, ut maneat, quod Apostolus praecipit, innupta, aut viro reconcilietur. Ex quo deinde consequens sit, banc praecepti partem ad virum non pertinere: quod volebat Ambrosius ille '}su^ovufx&q. Verum facile tollitur hic scrupuUis. Nam dunittere et separari, pro quo noster interpres vertit discedere, eadem sunt in re praesenti: nisi quod vir dimittere soleat jubendo ac dicendo, uxor vadeforas, ut est in epigrammate: mulier autem, quae jubere non potest, dimittat discedendo ac virum relinquendo. Patet id ex verbis Domini apud Marcum cap. 10., ubi prorsus similiter de utroque conjuge loquitur: Quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam. Et si uxor dimiserit virum suum. Q.uo certe loco facere velle exceptionem in priori membro, et non in posteriori, periniquum est. Quin etiam ex Paulo hoc ipsum liquet; qui verbis sequentibus id, quod statuit de viro uxorem habente infidelem et consentientem cohabitare, dicens, non dimittat illam, statim similiter dicit de muliere, non dimittat virum. Sed et separari, sive discedere, aeque viro tribuit ac mulieri, in eo, quod subjicit: Quod si infidelis discedit, discedat. Nam virilis generis est infidelis, 6 aTZiaxrj(^, etsi muliebre comprehendat.
7:12
12. Nam caeteris ego dico, non Dominus. Graece, Caeteris autem, etc. Quaeritur, quibus caeteris? Multi caeteros intelligunt Christianos habentes conjuges infideles, quibus scilicet ante fidem Christi susceptam fuerant conjuncti. Hos enim consequenter instruit Apostolus, quantum ad conjuges dimittendos, vel non dimittendos: cum in praecedentibus tantum egerit, ut volunt, de conjugibus, quorum uterque Christianus esset. Sensum autem hunc faciunt: Caeteris ego suadeo, caeteros hortor et moneo. Non enim habeo praeceptum Domini, quod iis annuntiem. Haec Augustini expositio est lib. 1. de serm. Domini iu monte cap. 16. et lib. 1. de adult. conjug. cap. 13. 17. et sequentibus. Augustini sententiam ipsius verbis reddidit SeduHus in commentario. Juxta quos non praecepti, sed consilii est id, quod sequitur, ne fidelis conjugem infidelem dimittat, si consentiat recum habitare. Qua in re Augustinum sequuntur autor g^ossae interlineabs, Petrus Lombardus lib. 4. Senten. dist. 39. etGratianus 28. quaest. 1. cap. Sic enim, approbante glossa. Item Hervaeus, Aquinas, Liranus et Carthusianus in commentariis: nec non seutentiarii plerique, quibus et Dominicus Sotus accedit. Verum aliis haec sententia non probatur, nec vero probanda est. Nunquam enim in ecclesia permissum fuit, ut fidelis conjugem infidelem, cui in paganismo conjunctus fuerat, absque religionis injuria commanere volentem, a se dimitteret. Quod si licuisset, uti prudenter Theophylactus et Oecumenius annotant, in magnam reprehensionem venisset religio Christiana, per quam conjugia legitime contracta tam facile dirimerentur, non sine gravi perturbatione societatis humanae. Quapropter et ipse Augustinus diligenter inculcat, hoc, quod licitum dici posse putat, non tamen expedire. Sed et lib. 2. retract. cap. 57. fatetur, se in eo opere, quod deadulterinis conjugiis scripsit, non pervenisse ad perfectam enodationem quaestionis, quam ibi tractavit. Igitur alii caeteros quidem similiter ut priores exponunt, sed hoc sensu verborum Apostoli: Caeteris egb praecipio, videlicet autoritate apostolica, licet Dominus non praeceperit. Non enim de ea re exstare videtur expressum Christi praeceptum. Ita fere Graeci commentatores, et inter Latinos scriptores Hieron. lib. 1. adversus Jovin. cap. 5. et 6. item Haimo, Cajetanus et Gaignaeus in comment. Sed et hanc expositionem improbabilem arguit, quod superioribus verbis nulla significatio est, Apostolum de iis tantumloqui, qui ambo sint Chi-istiani: ut nec ratio est, cur ad eos solos Apostoli sermo contrahatur. Est itaque tertia ac verior expositio, caeteros ad superiora referri, atque intelligi non conjugatos. Nam de conjugatis proxime egerat dicens: lis^ qui matrimonio juncti sunt, praecipio non ego, sed Dominus. Quod ergo hic dicit: Cae~ teris ego dico, non Dominus, de non conjugatis accipi debet, ut constet adversativus sermo. Respicit autem ad id, quod dixerat: Dico non nuptis et viduis, bonum est illis, si sic permaneant. Unde sicut illic dicere non est praecipere, sed magis habet significationem suggestionis et consilii, ita et hoc loco; ut sit sensus: Caeteris ego dico, non dominus praecipit. Quem sensura planius o.stendit eadem sententia aliis verbis inferius repetita, ubi dicitur: De virginibus praeceptum Domini non habeo, consilium autem do. Atque ideo non ait: Caeteris ego dixi, quamvis superiora respiciens, sed dico: quia nimirum adhuc de iisdem dicturus est. Hunc sensum atque constructionem indicat Tertull. lib. de exhort. castit. cap. 3. et lib. de monog. cap. 3. Tradit autem et solide probat inter neotericos Ambrosius Catharinus, suffragante etiam Joanne Hesselio praeceptore meo, et aliis nonnullis. Hoc ergo, quod sequitur de fratre uxorem habente infidelem, novum et a superiori diversum argumentum est: eatenus tamen cohaerens illis, quae dixit de conjuge non dimittendo, quia continet peculiarem casum, quo possit conjux dimitti, non obstante Domini praecepto. Notandum, quod Apostolus ait, ego dico, non eum dicere a seipso, sed doctum et motum a spiritu divino. Quamvis enim praeceptum Domini non esset id, quod dicit, consilium tamen Domini erat, et ad illud proponendum a Spiritu Dei movebatur. Unde postea de virginibus agens ita scribit: Consilium do, tanquam misericordiam consecutus, ut sim fidelis. Et de vidua cum dixissef: Beatior erit, si sic permanserit, secundum meum consilium, adjunxit: Puto autem, quod et ego Spiritum Dei habeam. Ad hunc fere modum August. lib. 1. de adulterinis conjugiis cap. 18.
Si quis frater uxorem habet infidelem, ethaec consentit habitare cum illo, non dimittat illam. Rescribit de imparibus conjugiis. Nam et de iis verisimile est eum a Corinthiis consultum fuisse. Frater, id est fidelis, Christianus, baptizatus. Infidelem, id est, noii Christianam: cui scilicet ipse in infidelitate fuerat conjunctus. Coni-ensum autem cohabitationis intellige, salvo religionis honore, et ut dici solet, citra ccntumeliam creatoris: extensa tamen hac locutione ad quamvis notabilem ac permanentem iujiiriam Christianae religionis; ubi et studium pertrahendi conjugem ad damnabilia peccata comprehenditur. Sic enim post Augustinum epist. 89., quae est ad Hilar. quaest. 4. et lib. de fide et oper. cap. 16. mentem Pauli interpretatur ac declarat Innocentius tertius extrav. De divortiis cap. quanto, et cap. gaudemus. Quod sequitur non dimittat ilJam, praecepti est, non consilii, tam ex eorum sententia, qui secundam expositionem partis praecedentis tradunt, quam qui tertiam: praecepti, inquam, quo prohibet viro fideli, ne uxorem infidelem dimittat, modo consentiat cum ipso habitare, eo sensu, qui jam expositus est. Ita quoque Tertull. intellexit hunc locum lib. 2. ad uxorem cap. 2. et 7. Pertinet autem hoc praeceptum ad legem naturae divinitus propalatam iis verbis: Et adhaerebit uxori suae, Gen. 2. Nec adversatur huic doctrinae factum Esdrae sacordotis, quo jubente Judaei, utique fideles, dimiserunt uxores alienigenas, id est infideles, ut refertur Esdrae 10. Nam facti species est diversa. Non enim in infidelitate sibi conjunxerant illas mulieres. Et illud accedebat, quod Judaeis uxorum infideUum dimissio necessaria erat, ne per eas a vera religione abducerentur, homines ad peregrinum cultum propensi. Ubi interim dubium manet non hoc loco discutiendum, an per illam dimissionem soluta fuerint qucad vinculum conjugia; an vero nec ante dimissionem vere cohaeserint, obstante aliqua lege divina.
7:13
13. Et si qua mulier fidelis habet virum infidelem, et hic consentit habitare cum illa, non dimittat virum. Graece: Et mulier, quae habet virum infidelem, et is consentit hobitare cum ea, non dimittat eum. Dictio fidelis addita videtur a quopiam ad sensum explendum. Nam et multi Latini codices non habent, ut nec editio Syriaca. Constat tamen mulierem intelligi sororem, id est, fidelem, Christianam. Et quidem sororis vocabukim paulo post exprimit Apostokis. Apparet autem, interpretem in Graeco pro f^Tig quae, legisse sT xic si qua. Quanquam in re non est diversitas. Porro con- sensum expone velut supra, sine religionis injuria etc. Non dimittat virum, id est, non se ab eo separet, sive dimittendo illum a se, sive ab eo recedendo.
7:14
14. Sanctificatus est enim vir infide- Hs per mulierem fidelem, Graece et Syre in muliere, id est, per mulierem, Hebraea phrasi. Nec in Graeco additur fideli, sed intelligitur. Quod quidem Syrus, quemadmodum Latinus, expressit.
Et sanctificata est mulier infidelis per virum fidelem. Hic quoque Graece et Syre in viro, id est per virum; nec in Graeco additur fideli, sed intelligendum reknquitur: quod rursus supplent Latinus et Syrus. Caeterum Tertulkanus Hebraismum in utroque membro aka praepositione exponit: a fideli uxore, a fideli marito, kb. 2. ad uxorem cap. 1. Citat hunc locum Augustinus, ut est in Graeco, kb. 2. de baptis. parv. cap. 26. et kb. 3. cap. 12., nisi quod pro viro fratrem legit, in uxore, in fratre. Rationem reddit Apostolus, cur infideks conjux a fidek non debeat dimitti, si cohabitare consentiat, sed retineri potius. m Sic enim per fidelem conjugem sanctifica- " tur. Non quod jam absokite sanctus aut sancta sit conjugem habens fidelem, cui commanere consentit: nam quomodo sanctus, qui adhuc infideks? Sed sanctificari dicitur sanctitate quadam analogica sive imperfecta. Quaeritur autem, quaenam sit ea sanctitas? Apostolus sanctitatem exponit munditiem, quum ikam immunditiae mox opponit dicens: Alioqui filii vestri immundi essent; nunc autem sancti sunt. Constat quoque sanctitatem in Scripturis habere significationem munditiae seu puritatis a sordibus et inquinamentis. Sed ut haec immunditia varia est, ita et munditia sive sanctitas tUi opposita. Commentator Ambros. et post eum Lombardus, Hervaeus, akique nonnuki immunditiam interpretantur adulterium. Nam aduUeri essent conjuges, si manente vinculo prioris conjugii cum akis jungerentur: ac fiki inde nati reputarentur et essent spurii atque adiiUerini. Verum hoc pacto non tam conjux infideks sanctificaretur per conjugem fidelem, quam uterque per alterum; dum pari consensu manent in priori conjugio. Cajetrnus legalem qu&ndam munditiem hic significari nomine sanctitatis imaginatur, atque huic opponit immunditiam legalem, quam adscribit tam parentibus in dispari conjugio constitutis, quam illorum filiis; quos dicit esse minus legitimos, ex eo, quod variam trahant a parentibias institutionem, ad quam ordinatur conjugium. Tolli vero hanc illegalitatem tam parentum quam filiorum ex consensu conjugis infidelis ad commanendum cum fideli. Intelligit autem legale et illegale, non jure Mosaico, sed spectando ordinem rationis. Subtiliter haec a Cajetano dicuntur, ac modo loquendi inusitato: et haud scio an ad mentem Pauli. Magis placet sensus et sermo eorum, qui sanctificationem hanc interpretantur praeparationem quandam ad veram et Deo probatam sanctitatem. Nam sanctificare pro eo, quod est praeparare vel deputare ad aliquid sacrum more Scripturae dicitur, ut Jes. 13. Mandavi sanctificatis meis. Zach. 7. Numquid sanctificare me debeo? et frequenter in Levitico. Sanctificatur ergo conjux infidelis, acquiescens atque consentiens habitare cum conjuge fideli: quia candidatus est timoris, ut loquitur Tertull. lib. 2. ad uxorem cap. 7. Timoris inquam sancti, id est verae pietatis: et quia candidatus fidei: quemadmodum imitatione Tertulliani Hieronym. loquitur lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 5. Dum enim Christo non maledicit, dum pia conjugis exercitia non impedit, dum signum crucis domui vel thalamo praefixum aequis aspicit oculis, dum patitur etiam filios imbui fide Christi; per haec, velut purificationes quasdam, quasi praeparatur ad Christum; spem bonam ostendens, fururum, ut Christianam religionem ipse quoque suscipiat, praesertim accedente sancta et pacificaconversatione conjugis fidelis, secundum illud 1 Pet. 3. Mulieres subditae sint viris suis: ut et si qui non credunt verbo, per mulierum conversationem sine verbo lucrifiant; considerantes in timore castam conversationem vestram. Tradunt hunc sensum Theodoretus, et apud Oecumenium Photius, et Latinorum complures. Imo Paulus ipse videri potest hoc modo sanctificationem istam interpretari, quum non multo post ait: Lude enim scis mulier, si virum salvum facies? aut unde scis vir, si mulierem salvam facies? Cum hoc sensu satis convenit Pelagii commentarius, quem allegat et suis verbis expUcat Augustinus lib. 3. de baptismo parvulorum cap. 12. Paulum dicentem in praeterito, Sanctificatus est, etc. significasse, quod exempla jam praecesserant et virorum, quos uxores, et feminarum, quas mariti lucrifecerant Christo, etparvulorum, ad quos faciendos Christianos voluntas Christiana etiam unius parentis evicerat. Quem sensum etiam alibi tradit Augustinus, ut lib. 1. de serm. Domini in monte cap. 16. et lib. 1. de adult. conjug. cap. 13. alque ex his repetunt in suis commentariis Primasius et Hervaeus. Hic si quaeras, cur potius infidelis sanctificetur per conjugem fidelem, quam e contrario fidelis profanetur et immundus reddatur per conjugem infidelem, ratio jam patet: quin suum errorem non sic amat infidelis, quin consentiat fideli cohabitare. Ex quo sperandum, ut illius immunditiam et infidelitatem hujus sanctitas ac munditia tandem vincat atque expugnet, quod annotant Chrysostomus et Theophylactus. Porro sunt alii, qui non minus probabiliter Apostolum exponunt de ea sanctificatione, qua quis sanctificatur ab immunditiis, quibus gentiles turpiter et contra naturam inquinari solent. Id quod etiam congruit loco Petri jara citato. Videns enim conjux infidelis sanctam et castam conversationem conjugis fidelis, abhorrentis non adulterium modo, verum etiam foedas ciim conjuge commixtiones, quae vel usum naturalem immutant, vel in menstruo cruore fiunt, vel aliter torum conjugalem deturpant; ipse quoque eo exemplo discit et assuescit a talibus abstinere, sicque quodammodo sanctificatur. Nam sanctificationem immunditiis carnalibus etiam alibi Paulus opponit, ut 1 Thess. 4. Haec est, inquit, voluntas Dei sanctificatio vestra: ut abstineatis vos a fornicatione: ut sciat unusquisque vestrum vas suum possidere in sanctificatione et honore, non in passione desiderii, sicut et gentes, quae ignorant Deum. Et paucis interpositis: Non enim vocavit nos Deus in immunditiam, sed in sanctificationem. Hujusmodi sensum in Pauli verbis contineri sentit Augustinus loco memorato de baptismo parvulo rum. Denique favet admodum huic sensui, quod sequitur:
Alioquin filii vestri immundi essent. De filiis adultis loquitur, qui sanctius et castius instituuntur a parentibus simul habitantibus, si alter eorum fidelis sit, quam si digresso fideli maneant apud parentem infidelem; idque etiamsi ipsi filii nondum fidem Christi receperint. Hinc est, quod idem Apostohis vult episcopi filios (qui forte parente adhuc infideli nati et educati fuerant) subditos esse cuJii omni castitate et alienos a crimine, sive accusafione luxuriae. Quo vitio potissimum laborare solent infidelium filii. Videtur autem supplenda conjunctio et dicendo: Et alioquin filii vestri immundi essent. Nam duo sunt argumenta, tametsi similia et conjuncta, quibus suadeat, conjugem infidelem, si commorari non detrectet, dimittendum non esse: alterum a sanctificatione conjugis, alterum a sanctificatione filiorum. Exponitur aulem ilkid alioquin hoc modo: nisi tu fidelis niaueas cum conjuge infideli, fi'ii vestri erunt immundi. Potest etiam sic exponi alioquin, id est, si non sanctificaretur conjux infidelis per conjugem fidelem, filii ex illis nati immundi essent. Hoc jam avertitur, dum sanctitas etiam infideli parenti communicatur.
Nunc autem sancti sunt. Nimirum ea sanctitate, quae praedictis iraraunditiis opponitur. Unde Syrus interpres vertit: Nunc autem mundi sunt. Quocirca male ex hoc loco quondam Pelagiani, et hodie Calviniani docuerunt, filios parentum fide- Hum non opus habere baptismo, quo sanctificentur, utpote sanctos hoc ipso, quod ex sanctis parentibus nati sunt. Cui argumento respondet August. lib. 2. de baptis. parvul. cap. 25. et 26. et lib. 3. cap. 12. nec non serm. 14. de verbis Apost. cap. 19. ostendens, secundum Scripturas muhiplicem esse sanctificationem, non rerum modo, sed etiam hominum, quae non semper cum remissione peccatorum sit conjuncta. Nam et catechumeni priusquam baptizentur, secundum quendam modum suum, ut ait, sanctificantur per signum Christi, et orationem manus impositionis. Et aperte testatur hoc eodem loco Paulus, sanctificari conjugem infidelem per fidelem, tantum quia consentit cum fideli cohabitare. Quod de justificatione seu peccatorum remissione non potest accipi. Super eadem quaestione consultus a Paulino B. Hieronymus, quomodo sancti sunt, qui de fidelibus, id est, baptizatis nascuntur: epist. 153. pro responso Tertullianum adducit asserentem, sanctos dici fidelium filios, quod quasi candidati sint fidei, j et nullis idololatriae sordibus polluan- | tur, tametsi locum apud Tertull. non reperio: nisi quod in libro de anima cap. 39. sanctos ab Apostolo vocari dicat fidelium filios, quasi designatos sanctitatis, ac per hoc etiam salutis.
7:15
15. Quod si infidelis discedit, discedat. Graece, separatur, separetur. Syriace, separat se, separet se. Haec altera pars est rescripti Paulini de conjugiis imparibns, per antithesin respondens illi priori, et haec consentit habitare cum illo, etc. Est autem haec quaedam exceptio ab eo, quod supra dixit: Vxorem a viro non discedere: quod si discesserit, manere innuptam, aut viro suo reconciliari. Et vir uxorem non dimittat. Sensus est: Si infidelis di.scedit, non consentiens habitare cum fideli, ut fideli, id est, si religione ejus offensus eum reliuqiiat; non est, quod conjux fidelis existimet se debere illum sequi; sed sinat eum discedere, tanquam per ejus discessum libertati suae relictus. Sub quo casu secundum canones etiam alter continetur, nempe, si commaneat quidem infidelis conjux, sed non sme religionis injuria, aut generaliter sine studio pertrahendi conjugem fidelem ad damnabilia peccata. Sic enim posse eum dimitti aut relinqui. Id quod etiam ex praecedenti membro perspicue datur intelligi. Nam si de consentiente cohabitare, dicitur fideli, non dimittat illum; igitur de eo, qui non consentit cohabitare, scilicet eo modo, quo superius expositum est, intelligitur fideli dictum, ut vel debeat vel possit talem a se dimittere. Dixi, tanquam libertati suae relictus. Id enim significant verba sequentia, quae servitutem excludunt.
Non enim servituti subjectus est frater aut soror in hujusmodi. In Graeco et Syriaco non additur enim. Et illud in hujusmodi, Graece ev toI*; xqiquxqic,, in talibus, vel ad res vel ad personas referri potest. Ad personas apertius refert ea lectio, quae praepositionem omittit: cujusmodi codicem unum observavit Robertus Stephanus. Nec obstat illi lectioni prior dativus servituti. Nam totum hoc servituti subjectus est, unum est verbum, in Graeco oeSouXtoxai, ut, si praepositionem non legas, sic verti possit: Non est serciliter subjectus frater aut soror talibus, hoc est, infidelibus, qui discedunt, aut cohabitare non consentiunt. Ita Paulus alibi, £<3ouX{^a)yjTS t^ diy,cx.iooi>VQ, servi facti estis justitiae, et SouXcD&evTsg TW ^soT^ servi facti Deo, Rom. 6. Item Petrus 2. epist. 2. xouxia dzdouXwzai, huic servus addictus est. Caeterum addita praepositione melius ad res accommodatur, quemadmodum id plerique intellexerunt: ut sensus sit, Christianum et Christianam cum infidelibus matrimonio copulatos, in hujusmodi rebus seu casibus, cujusmodi videlicet sermo proxime praecedens comprehendit, non esse subjectos servituti; ut vel innupti manere, vel cum conjugibus remanere, eisve digressis reconciliari debeant. Ad hanc enim servitutem superius expressam in muliere, et intellectam in viro, qua nimirum debeant separatione facta vel innupti manere, vel conjugibus reconciliari, et non ad eam solam, qua conjux sequi deberet conjugem discedentem, omnino respicit Aposlolus: ut cujus intentio sit, quemadmodum dictum est, his verbis: Quod si infidelis discedit, discedat, exceptionem adferre ab eo, quod ante dixerat, uxorem a viro non discedere, etc. Quo praecepto dicta servitus exprimebatur. Cum igitur eam, quam dixi servitutem, a conjuge fideli respectu conjugis infidelis, idque specialiter in casu praesenti, removeat hoc loco Paulus, recte ex eo tradunt canones Pontificii 28. quaest. 2, cap. si infidelis, et extra de divortiis, ca^pit quanto, et cap. gaudemus, quae sunt Innocentii III., conjugem fidelem, si infidelis ob causam aliquam memoratam discesserit aut dimissus fuerit, aliud matrimonium priore, soluto contrahere posse. Nam alioqui praedictae servituti subjectus remaneret. Et ad hunc modum Apostoli mentem exposuerunt Ambrosius scribens in Luc. 16. et ejusdem titulo Pauli commentator in hunc locum. Itera Graeci interpretes Chrysost., Theophylact., Oecum. et apud hunc Photius. Quibus adde Latinos, glossographum, Lombardum, Aquinatem, Liranum, Carthusianum ac caeteros posteriores: quorum sententiam vel ipsa praxis fidelium ab ecclesia probata satis superque confirmat. Itaque parum considerate scriptum est a Cajetano, ex Apostoli verbis non haberi, quod solvatur hoc casu vinculum conjogale, cum ipse e diverso contra sensum Ecclesiae putet, xxt in superioribus dictum est, dissolvi per uxoris adulterium, Jam quomodo Pauli dotrina, sic uti diximus intellecta, non sit contraria verbis Christi Domini: Quod Deus conjunxit, homo non separet, Matth. 19. et aliis quibusdam Scripturis, nullam vinculi solutionem inter conjuges quoad vivuntadmittentibus; petatur ex iis, quae disputantur ad dist. 39. lib. 4. sent. Qua de re etiam nonnihil egimus in comm. Rom. 7. vers. 2.
In pace autem vocavit nos Deus. In pace, id est, ad pacem. Quod autem dicit, tale est: Religio Christiana, ad quam a Deo vocati sumus, non cogit nos ad hanc servitutem, qua pax Christiana turbetur, hoc est, pacificus et tranquillus Christi cultus in familia impediatur. Quare sicut pater filium et filius patrem potest plena libertate relinquere ex ejusmodi causa; sic et conjux fidelis infidelem. Quidam sic exponunt: Quamvis permitti possit, ut discedat, nec discedentem prosequi teneatis, tamen providendum, quan- i tum in te est, ne discedat. Nam Deus pacem nostram amat, et aversatur dissidia. Non placet hic commentarius; quia manente hujusmodi conjuge pax Christiana turbatur, discedente serenatur atque servatur: juxta verbum Sapientis: Ejice derisorem, et exibit cum eo jurgium: cessabuntque causae et contumeliae, Proverb, 22.
7:16
16. Unde enim scis mulier, si virum salvum facies? TJnde, Graece x'' gmd, et vocula si pro an posita est Hebraeo more; quemadmodum et in eo, quod sequitur.
Aut unde scis vir, si mulierem salvam facies? Potest haec gemina interrogatio referri ad id, quod proxime dictum erat de dimittendo seu non retinendo conjuge infideli, si nolit absque Christi injuria cohabitare; simul ad id, quod subjunxerat: In pace vocavit nos Deus; ut sit sensus: Non est quod illum, spe ejus convertendi, retinere studeas cum tanto pacis dispendio. Res enim admodum incerta est. Itaque potius utere libertate tua, ae sine eum discedere: ne dum tu niteris eum attrahere, ille te retrahat. Hic sensus apud Liranum est, quem Gaignaeus et alii nonnulli sequuntur. At vero plerique tam Graeci quam Latini re ferunt ad superiora, ubi docuit infidelem conjugem non esse dimittendum, si con- sentiat cohabitare; et hunc faciunt sen- sum: Si infidelis vult tecum permanere, nec pacem Christi turbat, forte eum tan- dem ad Christi fidem pertrahes; sicque eum salutis, quae est in Christo, participem facies; quandoquidem perseverans illa et pacifica cohabitatio bene sperandi de eo materiam praebet: ideoque non debes eum dimittere. Sic et Augustinus intellexit hunc locum lib. 1. de adult. conjug. cap. 13. Quae sane expositio potior videri potest. Hanc enim vim habet apud Hebraeos illa phrasis, qui scis vel quis scit, ut probabilem, et ut ita dicam, sperabilem faciat afiirmantem interrogationis partem, ut Joel. 2. Quis scit, si convertatur et ignoscat Deus, et relinquat post se benedictionem? id est: si conversi fueritis in toto corde vestro (id enim praecesserat), omnino sperandum erit, Deum quoque conversum iri ad vos, et remissurum poenas comminatas, et benedictionem, id est, bonorum abundantiam largiturum. Item Jonae 3. Quis scit, ait rex Ninivae, si convertatur et ignoscat Deus; et revertatur a furore irae suae, et non peribimus? et 2 Reg. 12. Dicebam enim, inquitDavid, quis scit, si forte donet eum mihi Dominus, et vivat infans? Quanquam non est hoc perpetuum. Nam interdum difficultatem significat ea phrasis, ut Ecclesiastae 3. Quis novit, si spiritus filiorum Adam ascendat sursum: et si spiritus jumentorum descendat? id est, difficile est, hoc scire, et paucis notum est. Deinde nec eadem est hoc loco forma locutionis, sed talis, quae rem dubiam indicare soleat, ut Genes. 15. Unde scire possum? Lucae 1. Unde hoc sciam? Matth. 15. Unde nobis in deserto pones? Equidem censeo Lirani expositionem non esse rejiciendam, maxime quod et textui probe congruat, adeoque per se obvia sit, faveatque, quod sequitur: Aisi unicuique, etc. Interim notandus sermo, salvum facies, id est, fidelem facies: quia per fidem justificamur, et in via salutis constituimur, secundum illud Ephes. 2. Gratia estis salvati per fidem. Rursus observa, quod uxor virum, et vir uxorem salvam facere dicitur; non utique dando salutem, quod solius Dei est, sed ad ea, quae salutis sunt, monitis acvitae exemplis adducendo. Qua in re, teste Chrysostomo, nullus doctor tantum potuerit valere, quantum mulier. Sic et alibi loquitur Scriptura. Vide, quae diximus ad illud Rom. capite 11. Et salvos faciam aliquos ex illis.
7:17
17. Nisi unicuique sicut divisit Dominus. Subaudi, dona sua. Respicit enim ad id, quod ante dixit: Unusquisque proprium donum habet ex Deo. Dominus, Graece Deus. Sciendum est, Oecumenium pro £i fXTj nisi, quod hodie in omnibus pene Graecis est, legere r] jxtj an non, ut haereat cum praecedenti interrogatione. Unde scis vir, si mulierem salvam facies, an non? Deinde sequatur: Unicuique sicut divisit Deus. Atque hujus distinctionis autorem citat Severianum. Meminit quoque Theophylactus utriusque distinctionis: sed ita, ut praeferat eam, quae in nostris est codicibus. Cui et Erasmus adstipulatur, ac merito. Nam cur particula an non, posteriori interrogationi potius annectatur quam priori? Ut et hoc addam, quod in aliis locis, ubi latine legimus an non, graece non est tj iirj, sed r) ou, quod certe magis est usitatum. Erasmus hanc partem ita vertit: Utcumque fuerit, unusquisque ut ipsi partitus est Deus. Cujus suae versionis rationem reddit in annotat., docens adverbium si jjir^ interdum usurpari, quum omisso, quod dubium est, ad id, quod certum est, redimus. Alius dixerit ita vertendum esse: Quod si non, aut, sin minus, unicuique sicut, etc. ut sensus sit hujusmodi: Quod si non succedat de conversione conjugis; id tamen servetur, quod dico: quisque ambulet, agat et conversetur secundum talentum sibi creditum a Deo donorum distributore, atque in statu suae vocationis permaneat: nec conjugem deserat, quamvis infidelem, dum spes est salutis ejus. Nam verbum ambulet, quod est in parte sequenti, huc revocant, ut serviat utrique membro. In hanc fere sententiam interpretantur hunc locum, qui praecedentia crotemata referebant ad infideles consentientes cum Christianis conjugibus cohabitare. Verum si referas ad discedentes, juxta alteram expositionem illic datam; nihil opus erit huc adferre insolitam significationem exceptivae dictionis £? jarj, et supplementum hujus partis petere ex sequenti. Nam sensus erit: Unde scis etc, nisi forte Deus, prout varie sua partitur dona, quempiam seu virum, seu mulierem ea gratia dignetur, ut conjugem infidelem et?i religionis nomine sibi molestum et gravem, ac divortium facere volentem, retineat, retentumque patientia, monitis et obsequiis evincat, Christoque lucrifaciat et ad salutem adducat. Hac parte sic intellecta significatur, fidelem praecepto non teneri ad dimittendum conjugem infidelem discedentem, ut supra; sed discedere volentem retinere posse cum spe luci'ifaciendi eum Christo. Porro notanda metathesis dictionum, nonnullam faciens obscuritatem, cum ait, unicuique sicut divisit: pro eo quod diceret, sicut unicuique divisit. Similiter in eo quod seqiutur.
Unumquemque sicut vocavit Deus, ita ajnbulet. Deus, Graece Dominus. Transitum facit ad doctrinam servandae constantiae in statu seu genere et conditione vitae, in qua reperit unumquemque fides Christiana: ne mutatio status, occasione religionis facta, pariat oflfensionem, ipsamque religionem reddat odiosam. Dixi, inquit, fidelem infideli conjuge discedente non esse subjectum servituti, ut eum sequatur aut retineat, ne quidem salutis ejus procurandae causa: non prohibeo tamen quo minus id faciat, si praesertim occulto Dei dono et instinctu ad id moveatur. Imo sententia mea haec est, ut quisque, quoad fieri potest, ita ambulet, sicut vocavit eum Deus: hoc est, conversetur, Deoque serviat, manens in eo genere vitae, in quo ad fidem a Deo vocatus est; sive in conjugio, sive extra conjugium; sive in servitute, sive in libertate; sive in alio quocumque: nec vitae statum mutet ex imprudenti studio suae sahitis. Sentit, ob susceptam Christi religionem non esse necessarium, ut quis statum mutet, nec vero id faciendum temere. Si quis objiciat de statu quopiam aut artificio turpi, vel injusto, vel alias inhonesto, quale meretricum et foeneraturum; quale etiam histrionum, quos ad communionem admitti vetuit B. Cyprianus epist. 61., breviter respondeo, Paulum agere de statu ac modo vitae licito et iuculpato, quales plurimi etiam apud infideles. Caeterum lector observet, hic et in sequentibus sermonem esse non de statu, ad quem quis vocatus est, sed in quo vocatus, scilicet ad fidem Christi. Quae duo video a nonnullis hoc loco confundi, praeter mentem Apostoli. Significari vero vocationem efiicacem, vix opus ut admoneam.
Et sicut in omnibus ecclesiis doceo. Graece: Et sic in ecclesiis omnibus ordino, sive dispono, ^iaxaaaojaat; Syriace, praecipio. Sensus: Nec vobis solum, sed omnibus ecclesiis hanc meam sententiam propono et praescribo: Christianismum non cogere ad mutandum vitae statum; nec nisi magna ratio cogat, mutandum esse. Merito doctrinam hanc ecclesiis inculcabat, ne Christiana religio res humanas turbare videretur. Atque vel hinc satis intelligitur illud quod ante dixit: Si quis frater uxorem habet, etc. non dimittat illam; praecepti esse, non consilii. Nam profecto, si consilii tantum esset, licuisset dimittere. Quae res haud leviter perturbasset atque ofi^endisset statum publicum. Deinceps suam doctrinam declarat aliquot exemplis, iisque ad instructionem fidelium valde commodis.
7:18
18. Circumcisus aliquis vocatus est? Idest: quispiam prius circumcisus, utpote Judaeus aut proselytus, vocatus est ad fidem. Nec refert sive legas interrogative, quemadmodum plerique, sive non. Sensus enim idem efficitur. Quod etiam observa in sequentibus. Quomodo locum hunc totum usque ad illud: Nolite fieri servi hominum, exponat S. Hieronymus, infra dicemus. Ko7i adducat praeputium. Sensum reddidit interpres. Nam Graece tantum est uri iTziOTzdo^iu, ne attrahat, vel potius, ne attrahatur, id est, ne se attrahi faciat. Et sensus est: ne sibi curet attrahi praeputium. Quid sit attrahere, sive adducere, sive ut alii vertunt, adsciscere, accersere praeputium, quaeri solet: quandoquidem constet, praeputium semel amputatum reponi non posse. Certe quod hic dicitur, si proprie et sine tropo intelligas, impossibile esse, censent Origenes lib. 4. de principiis, Hieron. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. e.etincomraent. Jesaiae 52., August. libr. de mcudacio cap. 5. et Cajetanus hoc loco. Verum alii rectius fieri posse fatentur. Agit ea de re Epiphanius rerum Judaicarum peritus, lib. de pond. et meus., ubi cum retulisset, Symmachum veteris Scripturae interpretem secundo circumcisum fuisse, docet quemadmodum id facere i soleant illi, qui ex Judaeis transibant ad f Samaritas, aut contra; nimirum arte medica et quibusdam instrumentis residuam praeputii pelliculam attrahentes, eandemque rursus amputantes. Quod et Cornelius Celsus posse fieri docet lib. 7. cap. 25. Meminit etiam hujus modi Photius ex Epiphanio: meminit et Theophyl. Quanquam quod Epiphanius et Photius | scribunt, originem facti quosdam referre » ad Esau, qui ad abnegationem Dei, et ad deletionem caracteris patrum ipsius, illud primus invenerit, cuiproptereaDeus dixerit: Esau odio habui, fabulosum esse vix dubito. Nam apud Idumaeos circumcisio a patribus accepta, quemadmodum et apud alias quasdam gentes, mansit in usu, teste Hieronymo super Jeremiae cap. 9. Porro Judaeos, qui ad ritum gentilem se transferebant, aliquid tale facere solere, satis apparet ex 1 Machab. 1., ubi de eis dicitur: Et fecerunt sibi praeputia, et recesserunt a testamento, id est, a foedere circumcisionis, quod Deus sancivit ac pepigit cum Abraham et posteris ejus. Hoc quidem Hieron. in Jesaiae comment. de nascentibus filiis et non de patribus dictum esse vult. Id enim habeat lex Antiochi Judaeis data, de qua eodem capit., relinquere filios suos incircum- cisos. Unde et Cajetanus existimat, Pau- lum non aliud velle, quam ut, qui cir- cumcisus est, perseveret circumcidendo filios. Sed profecto diversa sunt, facere sibi praeputia, et relinquere filios incir- cumcisos. Nam ut testatur Josephus antiquitatum Judaicarum libro 12. capit. 6., propter hoc adduxerunt sibi praeputia, ut nudi quoque Graecis non essent dissimiles: videlicet in gjmnasio, quod Hierosolymis aedificandum a rege impetraverant, exercendi. Quamvis autem haec ita se habeant, tamen non id solum vult Paulus, ne qui circumcisus ad fidem vocatus est, arte praeputium sibi reparet, quo circumcisionem suam aboleat: sed ne poeniteat eum aut pudeat circumcisionis, nec affectet esse praeputiatus; imo nec propter hoc, quia Clmstianus est, desinat instituta Mosaica servare; modo sciat legem mortuam esse, quae cum honore sepelienda sit: quod ipse Paulus et alii Apostoli, plurimique ex circumcisione fideles, fecerunt.
In praeputio aliquis vocatus est? non circumcidatur. Hoc est: praeputiatus quispiam vocatus est ad fidem? nempe quomodo vocati gentiles: non circumcidatur. Hoc enim esset judaizare et Christum abjicere, Paulo gentibus denunciante Galat. 5. Quoniam si circumcidamini, Christus vobis nihil proderit. Itaque praeputiatum, id est, gentilem circumcidi, non solum non cogit lex Christiana, sed nec permittit. Quod si quis genere Judaeus in praeputio vocatus esset tempore PauU, non prohibebatur circumcidi. Nam ipse Paulus Timotheum matre Judaea natum circumcidit propter Judaeos, cum quibus erat illi conversandum Act. 16., non tamen alioqui facturus. Quod de circumcisione dicitur, de caeteris legis caerimoniis similiter intellige. Nominat autem circumcisionem, tanquam praecipuam caerimoniara, in qua totius legis esset professio.
7:19
19. Circumcisio nihilest, et praeputium nihil est. Sensus: Nihil haec valent, nihil conferunt ad justitiam et sa- Gnll. Es tii Comm. Tom. I. lutem; ideo non sunt affectanda. Quaeres, quomodo dicat circumcisionem nihil esse et nihil valere: cum, ut est multorum opinio, valuerit ad tollendum peccatum originale? Primum respondeo, loqui Paulum pro eo tempore, quo circumcisio jam erat sacramentum mortuum. Deinde circumcisionem etiam tempore legisantiquae nihil valuisse ad salutem et justitiam, quatenus erat illius legis sacramentum. Nihil enim ad perfectum adduxit lex, Hebr. 7. et: Si per legem justitia, ergo gratis Christus mortuus est, Galat. 2, An autem et quid valuerit, per fidem ad legem gratiae relatum circumcisionis sacramentum; in quaestione versatur apud Theologos. De qua aliquid diximus ad illud Rom. 4. JEt signum accepit circumcisionis signaculum justitiae fidei, etc. Illud extra controversiam est, circumcisionem tempore Mosaicae legis, et ex quo praecepta fuit Abrahae et posteris ejus, quatenus erat observatio divini praecepti, non fuisse nihil, sed aliquid; ut hic consequenter dicitur, et a nobis exponitur. Cur autem non pugnet haec sententia cum illa ejusdem Apostoli Rom. 2. Circumcisio quidem prodest, si legem observes; eo loco a nobis explicatum reperies.
Sed observatio mandatorum Dei. Supple, est aliquid, confert ad justitiam et salutem: quia scriptum est: Factores legis justificabuntur, Rom. 2. et: Si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata, Matth. 19. Repetit hanc sententiam Apostolus ad Gal. 5. et 6. verbis nonnihil diversis: In Christo Jesu, inquit, neque circumcisio aliquid valet, neque praeputium; sed fides, quae per caritatem operatur. Et cap. 6. Sed nova creatura. Ex quo intelligitur eadem esse, saltem concomitanter, haec tria, observationem mandatorum Dei, fidem, quae per caritatem operatur, et novam creaturam.
7:20
20. Unusquisque in qua vocatione vocatus est, in ea permaneat. Graece: Unusquisque in vocatione qua vocatus est maneat. Repetit generalem sententiam, ut aliud subjungat exemplum de statu servitutis. Vocationem intelligit vitae statum seu conditionem; quod et ea, qualiscumque sit, vocationis sit divinae. Nam hoc ad eas consuetudines vel conditiones vitae retulit, quae nihil obsunt fidei bonisque moribus, ait Augustinus in exposit. epist. ad Galat. 2., quod et supra diximus aliis verbis. Et alioqui non erit vocatio, quae utique relationem habet ad Deum vocantem: sed humanae cupiditatis praesumptio. Sensus est: Nemo factus Christianus prohibetur manere in statu, in quo erat, quando vocatus est ad fidem Christi. Nec vero mutare eum debet, nisi justa ratione: et ita quidem, nt non turbetur respublica, nec caritas proximorum laedatur. Igitur hac sententia non tam praecipit Apostolus, quam significat, quid cuique Christiano liceat. Ad quod ipsum tamen etiam hortatur, nisi quid aliter expediat.
7:21
21. Servus vocatus es? Non sit tibi curae. Servus eras, inquit, quando vocatus es ad fidem? non te res illa angat, ne doleas, te, qui jam religione Christianus es, adhuc conditione servum esse. Nolo te solicitum esse, ut onere servitutis libereris.
Sed et si potes fieri liber, magis utere. Graece: Sed si etiam potes, etc. Sensus est: Etiamsi possis assequi libertatem, magis tamen, id est, potius utere servi- tute, et in ea permane majoris boni causa, scilicet ad tuam exercitationem, et do- mini tui salutem. Nam ex tua servitute, si liberaliter et christiane servias, major spes erit dominum tuum lucrifaciendi
7:22
Christo, quam ex adepta libertate. In hunc sensum fere commentatores expo- nunt. Nonnulli sic: Si tamen potes fieri
liber, potius utere libertate, tanquam bono per se desiderabili. Et in hunc sensum Syriaca supplevit Tremellius. Sic enim vertit: Sed etiam si potes liber fieri, elige tibi potius, quam ut servias. Ve- rum hic sensus, ut bene declarat Chry- sostomns, repugnat ipsius Pauli scopo. Versatur enim in eo, ut suadeat condi- tionem vitae non esse mutandam. Unde et sequitur:
22. Qui enim in Bomino vocatus est servus, libertus est Domini. Nationem reddit ejus quod dixerat, non sit tibi curae, ac docet, servi liberique parem esse conditionem in Christo: quandoquidem et servi sunt liberti Christi, et liberi servi sunt Christi. Qui enim, inquit, servus cum esset, vocatus est ad fidem Christi Domini, libertus ejus est: hoc est, e servitute peccati in libertatem ab eo viadicatus, eique tanquam liberatori suo obnoxius. Tales enim liberti dicuntur.
Similiter qui Uber vocatus est, servus est Christi. Graece, Similiter et qui, etc. Qui, inquit, conditione liber cum esset, vocatus est ad fidem Christi Domini; servus est Christi, quia redemptus ab eo. Nam hoc sequitur.
7:23
23. Pretio empti estis. Emphasis est iu eo quod addit, pretio: cum alioqui quicquid emitur, pretio ematur. Significat ergo magnum et inaestimabile pretium, videlicet sanguinis ejus, qui emit. Pluribus hoc explicatum est cap. super. vers. ult. Dicitur autem tam ad servos quam ad liberos, adeoque communiter ad omnes fideles; quemadmodum et id quod sequitur.
Nolite fieri servi hominum. Infert generalem et salutarem admonitionem. Pretio sanguinis sui Christus vos emit, et servos suos fecit: igitur nolite fieri servi hominum. Id est: ne vos ita subjicite hominibus, ut Christo Domino debitum subtrahatis, aut quoquo modo minuatis obse- quium atque servitium. Velut qui sunt iu obsequio regis hominis, si aliis se dedant, quo fiat, ut minus queant regi debita prae- stare ministeria, peccant in regem; ut milites, a quibus idem Apostolus Timo- theum exhortans exemplum sumit 2. epist. 2. cum ait: Nemo militans implicat se negotiis saecularibus: ut ei placeat qui se probavit, ac in militem delegit. Fiunt ergo servi hominum, qui sic homi- nibus serviunt, ut Christo non serviant, aut minus serviant: et omnino quicumque impensa hominibus obsequia non referunt ad gloriam Christi, sed ad solam respi- ciunl hominum voluntatem, quos vel ti- meni vel amant inordinate. Non dissimili sensu Paulus alibi in vitio ponit hominibus placere, ut Gal. 1. vers. 10. Ool. 3. vers. 22. et 1 Thessal. 2. v. 4. Qui partem hanc ad solos liberos referunt, ita expotfunt: Ne libertatem vestram commutetis in servitutem, quantum per vos fieri potest: sed manete in bono libertatis, quod habetis. Verum magis apparet, ad omnes fideles referendam esse, sicut ad omnes perlinet illud: Pretio empti estis. Atque ea est expressa Chrysostomi et sequacium ejus sententia. Nec vero opus erat liberos hortari ad retinendam libertatem, ut nec servos ad eam adipiscendam: quum libertas in iis sit bonis, quae naturaliter ab omnibus appetuntur. Scito, lector, totum hunc Apostoli contextum ab eo loco: Circumcisus nliquis vocatus est, a B. Hieronymo longe aliter exponi. Vult enim parabolicum esse sermonem, quo sub parabolis circumcisi et praeputiati, liberi et servi, disserat Apostolus de coelibatu et conjugio, doceatque quomodo tam coelibes, quos per circumcisum et liberum putat Hieron. significari, quam conjugatos, quos per praeputiatum et servum, permanere debeant, illi in coelibatu, hi in matrimonio, sicut eos deprehendissetChristibaptisma; secundum illud, quod proxime praemiserat dicens: Unumquemque sicut vocavit Deus, ita ambulet. Haec docet lib. 1. adversus Jovin. cap. 6. ac repetit in Apologia ad Pammach. cap. 2. Rursus ita docet in epistola 12. ad Gaud. scripta, ubi inter alia, adducere praeputium interpretatur quaerere pelliceas tunicas nuptiarmn. Denique in ea sententia persistit, exponens Jesaiae cap. 52. Quem et Sedulius sequitur in hujus loci comm. Sed et ante istos eodem modo locum hunc intellexit Origenes lib. 4. de principiis. Certat autem Hieronymus adversus Jovin. scribens pro hoc intellectu sex rationibus: quas apud eum legat, qui volet. Puto, comperiet omnes ex contextu Paulino bene considerato juxta vulgatum et obvium commentarium, quem dedimus, haud aegre dissolvi posse. Fatetur etiam ipse Hieronymus in apologia, quosdam prudentissimos interpretes scripturarum aliter, hoc est simpHciter ac sine metaphora hunc locum exposuisse. Quod autem idem Hieronymus etiam illa verba: Circumcisio nihil est, et praeputium nihil est, ad virginitatem et conjugium applicat: ne quem ofi^endat, tanquam virginitati meritum detrahat, aut eam aequet conjugio, contra suum in illo opere scopum et institutum: audiat quemadmodum ipse se declaret. Additis enim Apostoli verbis: sed obseroatio mandatorum Dei • ita subjungit: Nihil enim prodest absque operibus, caelibatus et nuptiae: cum etiam fides, quae proprie Christianorum est, si opera non habuerit, mortua esse dicatur. Haec ille.
7:24
24. Unusquisque in quo vocatus est, fratres, in hoc permaneat apud Deum. In multis codicibus erat frater, non fra~ tres. Sed veram lectionem, id est fratres vocandi casu, restitutam habemus ex editione Romana, suff"ragante textu Graeco et Syriaco, nec non Latinis expositoribus Ambr. et Primasio, quibus omnibus etiam legitur maneat, non permaneat: tametsi familiare est interpreti nostro compositum permanere loco simplicis usurpare. Repetit Apostolus jam tertio sur.m propositionem, concludens, unicuique in ordine, statu, conditione, qua ad fidem Christi vocatus est, manendum esse; verum id salva fide et obsequio, quod Deo debetur. Hoc enim est, quod addit, apud Deum, exponente Theophylacto. Nonnulli putant verti posse a Deo, et sententiam sic ordinant: Quisque in quo vocatus est a Deo, in eodem permaneat. Nam Ttapa Tol dsco, id est a Deo, legitur alicubi. Quanquam id rarissime, nec usquam, ut arbitror, in sacris literis. Simul ab hoc intellectu revocat hyperbaton minime necessarium. Nam prior sensus, maneat apudDeum, id est Deo serviens, et a Deo non recedens, optime constat,
7:25
25. De virginibus autem praeceptum Domini non habeo. Redit ad sermonem de virginibus ct innuptis, intermissum ac suspensum ab eo loco: Caeteris ego dico, non Dominus: atque de iis nunc agit plenius et explicatius. Dicit itaque, de virginibus, quae tamen nondum vovermt Deo continentiam (et eadem ratio de omnibus a vinculo conjugali liberis), nullum se habere praeceptum a Christo traditum: scilicet ut vel maneant, vel non maneant sine conjugio. Quod enim superius dixit et inculcavit, unicuique in eo manendum, in quo vocatus est, tantum admonitio fuit, ne quis factus Christianus temere mutet conditionem vitae priorem; quum id rereligio Christi non exigat.
Consilium autem do. Consilium Graece YVOJfiTjv sententiam. Dico, inquit, quod sentio, quodque melius judico. Hoc autem est consilium dare. Nam utique sententia de rebus agendis, consilium est. Sic in fine capitis secundum meum consilium, Graece v^M'. Ostendit hic locus et alii similes, non omnia bona, quae tacimus, esse praecepti, quod vohmt hujus aevi sectarii: sed quaedam esse consilii; ad quae nimirum absolate fideles non teneantur ex aliquo Dei praecepto. Nam nraeceptum quidem est, ait Aug. hb. de sancta virginitate cap. 15., cui non obedirepeccatum est: consilium vero, quo si uti nolueris, minus boni adipiscens, non mali aliquid perpetrabis. Objicit Calvinus generale praeceptum: Biliges Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo. Verum eo praecepto non ju- bentur omnes omnia bona facere quae- cumque possunt; sed praecipitur, ut quis- que in sua vocatione Deum diligat, eique serviat ex toto corde. Nam etsi dilectio Dei non cadat sub praecepto secundum aliquam mensuram, ita ut id, quod est ultra, subconsilio remaneat, ut patet ex ipsa forma praecepti, cum dicitur, diliges ex toto corde: quemadmodum do- cet^S. Thomas 2. 2. quaest. 185. art. ^., non tamen ad dihgcndum ex toto corde Deum, omnia media ex praecepto omni- bus proposita sunt, ut nec omnia omnibus conveniunt: tametsi culpa non caret in- consuUae electionis, qui posthabito bono, quod sibi melius est, ehgitminus bonum. Jamut ostendat Apostolus, suum etiam consilium esse a Domino, subjungit:
Tanquam misericordiam consecutus a Domino, ut sim fidelis. Ut sim fidelis, Graece roaxoc slvai^ fidelis esse, id est, in hoc ut sim fidelis. Et sensus est: Consilium do tanquam apostolatu dignatus a Christo Domino per ejus gratiam et misericordiam; ut bona fide, sicut Apostolum et internuncium facere oportet, proferam super re proposita sententiam et consiliummeum, dicamque quid melius esse censeam. Sic et in fine cap., cum rursus consiUum suum allegasset dicens: Beatior autem erit, sic sic permanserit, secundum meum consilium, mox addidit: Puto autem, quod et ego spiritum Dei habeam: scilicetut consilium suum ostenderet a Spiritu sancto proficisci, et consentaneum esse vohintatiDomini sui. Nam revera consilium hoc ipse Christus proposuit in evangelio, quando dixit: Sunt eunuchi, qui se ipsos castraverunt propter regnum coelorum. Qui potest capere capiat, Matth 19. Partem hanc sic exponit Augustinus hb. de sancta virginit. cap. 14., ut effectus misericordiae Domini sit, esse fidelem; ac si dicat Apostolus: Neque enim inmdere debeo fidele consilium, qui non meis meritis, sed Dei misericordia sum fidelis. Sensus hic verissimus quidem est: sed priorem, quem inter alios apertis verbis tradit Aquinas, germaniorem esse probat locus similis 1 Tim. 1. quia fidelem me existi- mavit ponens in ministerio.
7:26
26. Existimo ergo hoc bonum esse propter instantemnecessitatem. Hic jam profert suum consilium. Dicit autem exi-
stimo, sive arbitror, Graece vojaiCw, modestiae causa, cum de re certa loqna- tur, sicut et infra viduis consulens dicit: Puto quod et ego etc. Hoc, id est virgi- nt s manere, uti statim exponit. Bonum intellige non qualecumque, sed eximium et praeclarum; quod nonnulli vertunt pul- crum, quemadmodum et initio capitis. Aut bonum pro meliore posuit, ut supra versu 8. Praecellentiam hujus loci brevi- ter explicat Thomas per tria genera.
Bonum, inquit, honestum propter puritatem, delectabile propter libertatem, utile propter mercedem: quia debetur ei fructus centesimus. Instantem seu praesentem necessitatem nonnulli interpretantur necessitatem moriendi. Quod non placet. Alii ingruentes persecutiones, quas facilius ferunt, atque expeditius fugiunt, qui conjugem et liberos non habent, secundum illud Salvatoris: Vae praegnantibus et nutrientibus in illis diebus, Matth. 24. Verum quia generalis est Apostoli doctrina, pertinens etiam ad tempora ecclesiae pacata: magis probo generalem commentarium, quem huc adferunt plerique tam Grraeci quam Latini, per instantem necessitatem intelligentes hujus saeculi molestias et incommoda, quae plurima secum trahit status conjugalis: quas paulo post alio nomine tribulationes carnis Apostolus appellat. Unde conjugati comparantur molentibus in mola, Matth. 24. Quum ergo dicit: propter instantem necessitatem, subaudi evitandam seu declinandam: quomodo supra versu 2. propter fornicationem vitandam. Atqui considerat Apostolus hujusmodi necessitatem ut impedimentum, quo minus quis libere et expedite possit Deo servire. Talia namque fere sunt incommoda status conjugalis. Et hoc modo necessitatem istam a Paulo considerari docet ac probat Augustinus lib. de saucta virginit. cap. 13. et 14. Probat autem hac firmissima ratione: quia Paulus haec scribit, procidens et consulens in futurum: cum omnis ejus dispensatio non nisi ad vitam aeternam vocet. Eandem rem pulcre explicat Hieron. in lib. de custodia virgin. ad Eustoch. cap. 9. et adversus Helvid. cap. 10. Patetigitur, quam nihil hic locus faveat Joviniano et novis hujus saeculi Jovinianistis, qui mirabili insipientia ac sententiae vanitate (sic enim de talibus loco memorato loquitur Augustinus) virginitatem ob id solum colcndara et conjugio anteponendam censent, quod hominem liberet a multis hujus vitae molestiis: non quod hominem Deo commendet, aut ad regnum coelorum promoveat. Quin etsi de necessitate nihil impediente spiri- tuale bonum ageretur in his verbis: tamen non haec sola causa fuisset Apostolo virginitatis conjugio praeferendae. Nam paulo post diserte illam ex eo praefert, quod aptiorem reddat hominem ad serviendum Deo.
Quoniam bonum est homini sic esse. Quoniam exegeticum est. Declarat enim quod dixerat, hoc bonum esse • et dicens homini, consilium suum facit commune utrique sexui: ne quis ad solas foemiiias virgines referat. Itaque sensus est: Hoc quod dico bonum esse homini tam mari quam foeminae, est sic esse, sive, ut supra dixit, sic permanere, scilicet ut sunt, sine conjugio, in virginitate. Nam de virginibus sermonem suscepit, in quibus tamen etiam alios coelibes, etsi non virgines, comprehendit.
7:27
27. Alligatus es uxori? Noli quaerere solutionem. Ac si dicat: non ita commendo virginitatem et abstinentiam conjugii, ut eos, qui vinculis coujugalibus astricti sunt, adhorter ac solicitem ad divortium et separationem. Nam pridem hortabar unumquemque ad manendum in quo vocatus est. Loquitur Apostolus haud dubie de vinculo matrimonii consummati. Sed etsi sermonem ejus ad inconsummatum matrimonium extendas; non hinc coasequens erit, eos adversari praecepto Paulino, qui docent inconsummati matrimonii vinculum per ingressum religionis solvi posse: recteque eos facere, qui ab hujusmodi matrimonio ad religionem transeunt. Non enim his verbis prohibet Apostolus, ne quis solutionem quaerat, sive quoad vinculum, sive quoad torum, quando id legitima ratione fieri posset: sed generalem adhortationem solutionis, etiam licito modo faciendae, a se removet, sciens quia non omnes capiunt verbum hoc.
Solutus es ab uxore? Noli quaerere uxorem. Solutum ab uxore intelligit liberum a conjugio, sive uxorem aliquando habuerit, sive non. Nam et qui nunquam habuerunt, vulgo soluti dicuntur. Nec obstat verbum praeteriti temporis Aikoaai, quod Latinis in participium resolvi debet. Nam ut Oecumenius docet, solutus per oppositi negationem exponi potest, id est, nunquam ligatus. Tertullianus quidem de secundo matrimonio accepit in exhort. castit. cap. 4. Verum antitlaesis Apostoli inter alligatum esse et solutum,^ generaliorem sensum postulat. Quod si, inquit, a conjugio liber es, ne quaereas uxorem; idest, non te hortor ad conjugium, sed magis hortor et consulo, ut sic permaneas. Hoc enim bonum est. Sed quia non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, iis, qui non capiunt, consulendo dicitur: Si non se continent, nubant, et 1 Tim. 5. de quibusdam viduis: Yolo juniores nubere.
7:28
28. Si autem acceperis uxorem, non peccasti. Graece lav 5s xal XTgjaT[iC. Quod ita vertas licet: Sed et si uxorem acceperis, etc. Ubi nota verbum rVjiairjg, pro quo dixit interpres acceperis uxorem, utrique sexui esse commune: quomodo nubere ab eodem nostro interprete saepe sumitur ob inopiam aptioris verbi. Quanquam hoc loco videtur proprie ad virum dici, tum quia praecessit: Solutus es ah uxore, tum quia peculiariter ad foeminas pertinet quod sequitur: Et si nupserit virgo. Sensus Apostoli: Non ita dico, ne quaeras uxorem, quasi peccatum sit uxorem ducere, et id a me prohibeatur. Nam nuptiae non sunt peccatum, sed res bona a Deo instituta: proinde nequaquam consequens est, si quis uxorem duxit, eum peccasse. Quod etsi ita sit, contingit ta- men actum seu contractum, quo ducitur
uxor, vitiari fine, vel aliqua alia circum- stantia mala; sicut et alios actus genere suo bonos. Unde l^homas ita locum hunc exponit: Si acceperis uxorem, scilicet hono fine, non ad expletionem lihidi- nis, non peccasti. Vide quae superms dicta ad illud: Melius est nubere quam. uri.
Et si nupserit virgo, non peccavit. Diligenter admonent commentatores Pho- tius, Theophyl., Oecumenius et alii post Chrysostomum tam in comment., quam ui sermone de libello repudii, non h)qui Paulum de ea virgine, quae Christo di- cata sit. Hanc enim si nupserit, adulterum Christo sponso suo superinducere, et proinde graviter admodum peccare. Hieron. quoque libro 1. contra Jovin. cap. 7. haec Apostoli verba: Si nupserit virgo. non peccavit, suis verbis ita prosequitur: Non illa virgo, quae semet Dei cultui dedicavit: harum enim si qua nupserit, hahehit damnationem, quia primam fidem irritam fecit. Et addit: Virgines enim, quae post consecrationem nupserint, non tam adulterae quam incestae sunt. Incestas vocat, propter id quod dixit eas primam fidem irritam fecisse, ex Apostolo 1 Tim. 5., id est votum continentiae Deo factum violasse. Quas et propterea damnationem habere ibidem Apostokis pronunciat. Ex quibus liquet, quam impie agant autore ae duce Martino Luthero nostrae tempestatis haeretici, dum hoc Apostoli testiminio abutentes, quo dicit, virginem si nupserit non peccasse, virgines voto obuoxlas, et per iUud Christo consecratas, provocant ad nuptias. Vide, quae diximus ad illud hujus capitis: Quod si non se continent, nubant. Neque tamen exceptione seu limitatione opus habet dictum Apostoli: Si nupserit virgo, non peccavit: sed negationem continet hujus consequentiae: Si nupserit virgo, peccavit; quasi videlicet nubere peccatum sit, in quem sensum etiam priorem partem | exposuimus. Igitur istiusmodi sententiae " recte usurpantur, et a Patribus usurpatae sunt, adversus veteres quosdam haereticos, qui nuptias damnarunt, tanquam diaboli inventum, aut alioqui rem per se malam. Quos venturos Apostohis praevidit et praedixit illis verbis, prohibentes nubere, 1 Tim. 4.
Tribulationem tamen carnis habe- hunt hujusmodi. Graec^: AffUctionem autem carni, seu carne (ttq aapx'.) ha- hehunt tales. Pro carne Erasmus et Hen- tenius in carne verterunt. Syrus exponit in corpore. Et sensus est: Attamen hu-
jusmodi, id est virgines, et in universum coelibes, si conjugio se copulayerint, multas secundum carnem molestias et afflictiones experieatur, a quibus liberi sunt coelibes. Est enim vita conjugalis plena molestiis, curis, et angoribus: quod genus incommodorum enumerat Chrysost. in serm. de libello repudii; ac multo latius lib. de virgin. cap. 57. Nec minus copiose ea percenset Basilius libr. de virgin., vocans inter alia conjugium dolorum officinam. Igitur hic oblique deterret Apostolus a conjugio, et ad excellentius bonum invitat, propositis incommodis conjugii: maxime quod ea talia sint, quae mentem hominis plurimum impediant a Dei servitio, vitaeque spiritualis profectu. Unde recte B. Augustinus in lib. de sancta virginitate cap. 16. Istam, inquit, tribulationem carnis, quam nupturis praedicit Apostolus suscipere tolerandam, perstultum esset, nisi metueretur incontinentibuSj ne tentante Satana in peccata damnabilia laberentur.
Ego autem vobis parco. Hoc quidam sic interpretati sunt: Quum dico, non peccare eos, qui matrimonium contrahunt, id dico parcens vestrae infirmitati. Sed rejiciendus est hic sensus, utpote significans, Apostolum contra quam sentiret, imo contra veritatem aliquid dixisse. Sunt igitur alii duo sensus probabiles. Prior hujusmodi: Nolo pluribus commemorare conjugii incommoda, ne etiam incontinentes cum periculo suae salutis absterreantur a conjugio. Consulo vestrae infirmitati, dum de his taceo, ac potius remedium nuptiarum ostendo. Sic Augustinus loco proxime citato, et post eum Primasius, caeterique fere Latini. Qui tamen et alterum sensum a Graecis traditum attingunt, nominatim commentator Ambro?., istum videlicet: Ego autem vobis tanquam filiis parco, cupiens afflictionum et molestiarum, quae nuptias consequuntur, expertes esse, ideoque continentiam suadeo. Quem commentarium probabiliorem arbitror: tum propter verbum parco, quod ad poenas et afflictiones referre solet Paulus, ut Rom. 8. Proprio filio non pepercit. 2 Cor. 13. Si venero iterum, non parcam: tum propter ea, quae continuo subjungit, utique pertinentia ad suadendam continentiam et animos a cupiditalibus et curis temporalibus avocandos: ut idem sit: Ego vobis parco, cum eo, quod infra dicit: Volo vos sine solicitudine esse.
7:29
29. B.OC itaque dico fratres. Graece TOUTO dk, hoc autem etc, Tempus breve est. Graece: 6 xatpoc: auvsaTaAfilvog, id est, tempus contractum: pro quo Hieronymus super Ecclesiastae 3. legit: Tempus nunc in angusto est, et lib. 1. adv. Jovin. cap. 13. Tempus in coUecto est, secutus in hoc Tertullianum ita legentem lib. 5. advers. Marcion. cap. 7. et alibi. Cyprianus autem magis ad verbum, tempus collectum, lib. 3. testim. cap. 11. Quanquam Hieron. eodem lib. contra Jovin. cap. 7. semel et iterum, nec non alibi, cum nostro interprete legit: Tempus breve est. Potest autem hoc duobus modis explicari, juxta duplicem sensum partis praecedentis. Uno modo: Quamvis, inquit, vobis indulgeam propter infirmitatem carnis vestrae: ue tamen immoderatius obsequamini voluptati, quae est in usu conjugii, illud non taceo, cogitandum vobis esse, quam tempus istius vitae contractum, accisum et breve sit, ac plerumque spe nostra multo brevius: ut proinde ex eo quam minimum decerpendum sit ad voluptates, aut etiam ad curas hujus saeculi, cum totum debeatur studio sahitis aeternae. Alter sensus est, idemque simplicior: Dico, et volo cogitetis, quam breve sit tempus hujus vitae, et quam cito transeat hoc saeculum: ita fiet, ut de uxore ducenda deque rebus hujus saeculi curaadis, quibus animus a Deo avocetur, cogitare minus libeat.
Reliquum est. Haec pars in quibusdam Graecis codicibus annectitur praecedenti: 6 xatpoc auvsaTaAjxevo^; t6 Xomov iaxtv_, tempus contractum de caetero est. Idque voluit Syrus interpres vertente Tremelio: Tempus deinceps abbreviatum est. Sic et Theophylact. in comm. et ante eum Basilius in lib. de vera virginitate, et Chrysost. in ejusdem argumenti libro cap. 73. videntur hujus loci textum distinxisse, et inter Latinos Ambros. commentator, qui sic legit: Tempus abbreviatum et reliquum est: ut utrumque adjectivum cum tempore construatur: quod de posteriori Graeca lectio non permittit. Caeteri Latini tam veteres, quam recentiores, particulam reliquum est ad sequentia referunt: quorum Tertull. lib. 1. ad uxorem cap. 5. atque alibi, et Hieron. in epist. ad. Ageruchiam legunt superest, quod idem valet. Habet autem ^dm signi illativi, quasi dicat: Ergo agendum, quod sequitur.
Ut et qui habent uxores, tanquam non habentes sint. Bifariam hoc intelligi potest: uno modo, ut qui in conjugio sunt non nimium rei uxoriae sint addicti; parcius uxoribus utantur: idque temporis ad Deo serviendum lucrifaciendi causa: quemadmodum supra dixit, ut vacetis orationi. Altero, ut qui uxoribus suis commiscentur (id enim interdum significat habere uxorem, ut supra vers. 2.), non id faciant, ut obsequantur suae libidini, sed quasi inviti, tantum ob generationis aut reddendi debiti necessitatem. Porro quod de viris dicit habentibus uxores, id similiter intellige de mulieribus habentibus viros. Et observa Paulum non dicere: ut qui uxores non habent, accipiant et moderate utantur: sed, ut qui jam habent, ac solutionem quaerere non debent, tanquam non habentes sint. Ex quo colligendum relinquit hoc, quod intendit, quodque ei propositum erat: ut qui non habent, maneant non habentes. Cum autem Apostolus velit habentes esse tanquam non habentes; bene et acriter e contrario S. Basilius in lib. de vera virginitate notat eos, qui non habentes sunt, tanquam habentes. Qui, inquit, cum ex virginitatis voto uxoribus careant, ac si eas hahtiant se agentes, virginitati contumeliam faciunt.
7:30
30. Et qui flent, tanquam non ftentes. Hoc est: Quibus tristia accidunt quae sunt flendi materia, cujusmodi plurima occurrunt in matrimonio, non iis admo- dum commoveantur: sed patienter et aequanimiter ferant, utpote non diu duratura, seque consolentur spe vitae futurae.
Et qui gaudent, tanquam non gaudentes. Id est: Quibus laeta obveniunt, quae sunt gaudendi materia, non sint effusi in gaudium: sed reprimant sese, consideratione brevifatis ac vanitatis gaudiorum hujus mundi.
Et qui emunt, tanquam non possidentes. Hoc est: Qui res aliquas hujus mundi emunt, vel licite quomodolibet acquirunt (nam in specie genus intelligitur), non iis cor suum apponant: sed tantum habeant eas ad usus necessarios suos et proximorum. Annotat Gaignaeus verbum Graecum xaTexovxec non significare quomodocumque possidentes, sed eos, qui magno studio aliquid tenent seu possident, et ad retinendum tota cura incumbunt. Atqui Graeci interpretes nihil urgent hujusmodi. Et constat, Graecam vocem saepe generaliter ursurpari pro eo, quod est occupare, possidere; quemadmodum et Paulus accepit in 2 ad Cor. epist. cap. 6., cum ait: Tanquam nihil habentes, et omnia possidentes. Sicut ergo media vocabula sunt in tribus membris superioribus, habentes, flentes, gaudentes, sic et in isto possidentes: sed vis sermonis est in adverbio tanquam.
7:31
31. Et qui utuntur hoc mundo, tanquam 7ion utantur. Graece, toc jxtj xa- Ta/pojjisvoi^ tanquam non abutentes. Et ita legit TertulUanus lib. de cultu feminarum cap. 9. Hoc autem verbo tam Graecis quam Latinis usus vitiosus significari solet, ut appareat hunc esse sensum: Et omnino, qui rebus hujus mundi utuntur, non immoderate nec perverse utantur; quod esset abuti. Sic enim exponunt Theodoretus, Theophylactus et Oecumenius. In quem sensum etiam Sji-us interpretatus est: Et illi, qui utuntur mundo hoc, non praeter justitiam usus, scilicet utantur; quae est periphrasis abusionis. Sciendum tamen, compositum aoc verbum in utraque lingua sumi interdum pro simplici; quomodo et hic recte sumitur, etiam Erasmo suffragante, qui nostrum interpretem secutus vertit, tanquam non utantur: quemadmodum et legit Cjprianus in libro de habitu virg. Ita quoque respondebit praecedentibus quatuor vocabulis mediis, nec redandabit particula tanquam. Etenim si vitium sonat xaxa- Xpiu|Ji£VOt, simpliciter dicendum erat: Qui utuntur hoc mundo, non abutantur. Proinde sensus Apostoli esse videtur: ut qui rebus hujus mundi utuntur, utantur obiter, ac velut in transcursu, quantum fert necessitas, eoque modo sint quasi non utentes.
Praeterit enim figura hujus mundi. Natio supradictorum, eadem fere cum eo, quod prius dixit: Tempus breve est. Figura Graece ox^fta, quod interpres alias habitum vertit, ut Philipp. 2. Habitu inventus ut homo. Sicque legit hanc partem Tertull. lib. de pudicitia cap. 16. et de cultu femin. cap. 9. nec non Irenaeus Latinus lib. 5. cap. 35. Sensus autem est: Tota hujus mundi facies et dispositio, secundum quod venit in usus nostros, transitoria est, aliquando cessabit, succedente ejus statu longe alio, semperque duraturo. Non ergo debemus praesentibus immorari et adhaerescere: ne et ipsi cum mundo transeunte transeamus. Metaphora est a scenis comicis aut tragicis sumpta, quae subito cum personis mutantur. Graecum verbum iiapays!, significat etiam seducit, decipit, atque ita vertit hoc loco et exponit Stapulensis: quem et Cajetanus secutus est, nec improbat Gaignaeus. Sed bene refellit hoc in suis annotationibus Erasmus. Nam passim accipitur in sacris literis pro pi-aeterire, abire, ut Psahu. 128. Et non dixerunt, qui praeteribant, et 143, Dies ejus sicut umbra praetereunt. Matth. 20. Audierunt, quia Jesus transiret. Joann, 9. Et praeteriens Jesus, etc. Ubi seducere significet in Scriptura, legisse non memini. Quod si vertas decipit, bonum quidem sensura efficies, quo significetur homines falli blanda specie rerum hujus mundi: verum sensus lectionis vulgatae multo melius quadrat contextui. Ex quo praeterea intelligitur, eas Scripturas, quae coelum et terram peritura significant, ut Psahn. 101., Matth. 24., 2 Petr. 3. non de interitu substantiae illorum accipienda esse, sed de qualitatum immutatione, qua fiat, ut mundus quasi novam formam induat. Quod verbo significavit Hieron. super Jesaiae 65. dicens: figura praeterit, non substantia.
7:32
32. Volo autem vos sine solicitudine esse. Rursus exhortatio est a commodo. Volo, id est, velim, ut supra: Volo omnes vos esse sicut meipsum. Sine solicitudine, Graece a/Jisptfxvouq;, quasi dicas incurios, id est, solicitudinis expertes. Ideo vos, inquit, dehortor a conjugio, ut eximam solicitudinemrerum temporalium, quo liberius vacare possitis rebus divinis. Hanc enim solicitudinem intelligi, non autem quamcumque, sequentia declarant, in quibus duplicem solicitudinem distinguit, alteram volens a Corinthiis removere, alteram cis commendans.
Qui sine uxore est, solicitus est, quae Domini sunt. Confert coelibem et conjugatum inter se, quantum ad curas et studia cuique propria. Qui sine uxore est, Graece 6 ayaimog, id est, coelebs, ut referri possit ad utrumque sexum: tametsi Paulus de viro solum hic intendit loqui, statim acturus etiam de sexu muliebri. Coelebs legitur apud Cyprianum tract. de hab. virg. et lib. 3. testim. cap. 32. Solicitus est, Graece fJL£ptjj,va curat. Et est sensus; Qui caret uxore, cum sit vacuus a curis, quibus impHcantur uxoi-ati, magnam habet opportunitatem occupandi se totum cogitatione earum rerum, quae Domini Christi sunt, id est, quae spectant ad aeternam salutem.
Quomodo placeat Deo. Graece: Quomodo placebit Domino, scilicet Christo; ut sit explicatio ejus, quod dixit, quae Domini sunt. Placetur autem Christo per opera pietatis. Considerat Apostolus Christum Dominum nostrum, et nos servos ejus emtitios; quorum est, ea solicite curare et agei'e, per quae Domino suo placituros se sperent.
7:33
33, Qui autem cum uxore est, solicitus est, quae suntmundi. Qui cum uxore est, 6 yapiVjaac, conjugatus, uxoratus. SoUcitus est, ixBpiixva curat. Qui, inquit, uxorem duxit, proptev matrimonium implicatur, velit, nolit, curis hujus mundi, quas secum trahit matrimonii status: ut proinde non possit libere vacare Deo.
Quomodo placeat uxori. Placeat Graece placeUt. Ut enim pax conservetur inter conjuges, necesse est, ut alter alteri placere studeat, et mutuis oflaciis invicem obsequantur.
Et divisus est. In multas scilicet so- Ucitudinum partes miseriarumque distractus, ut ait Hieron. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 7. Alii sic: Divisus est, id est, distractus curis quasi contrariis; dum hinc nititur curare, quae Domini sunt, quatenus Christianus est: inde cogitur curare, quae mundi sunt, quatenus est conjugatus. Ergo divisus, quia duorum quasi dominorum servus, Christi et uxoris ad diversa vocantiura. Nam quod vir servus sit uxoris, ut eum appellat Hieron. adversus Jovin. lib. 1. cap. 6. constat ex superioribus. Non enim ipse sui corporis habet potestatem, sed uxor. Unde et mundo servire cogitur propter uxorem. Et haec quidem juxta lectionem codicum Latinorum pene omnium. Sicque legunt et exponunt Pelagius, Primasius, Haimo, caeterique post eos Latini commentatores. Juxta quos etiam sequitur:
7:34
34. Et muUer innupta et virgo cogitat, quae Domini sunt. Quae dixit de viro, repetit in sexu muliebri. Cogitat, Graece jJi8pi|ava cwraf, quod jara semel et iterum verterat soUcitus est. Sensus est: Mulierem innuptam, quod a curis conjugalibus libera sit, specialiter autem virginem, quae carnis voluptatem non est experta, totam sine impedimento vacare posse ad ea, quae sunt Christi Domini. Hieron. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 7. putat eandem intelligi posse mulierem innuptam et virginem. Alii mulierem innuptam in- terpretantur viduam. Atqui plenior est sensus, quem dedimus, quemque dicto loco simpliciter probat Hieron., ut mulier innupta ad viduas etiam, et quascumque continentes extendatur. Haec, ut ante dixi, lectio Latinorum est codicum atque interpretum. Citantque ad hunc modum Ambrosius initio lib. de viduis, et Fulgentius epist. 2. cap. 5. et epist. 3. cap. 7. Cyprianus autem utroque loco superius indicato non legit illud, divisus est, aut divisa est: sed tantum, uno quidem loco: Sic et virgo et muUer innupta cogitat quae, etc, Altero: Sic et muUer et virgo: innupta cogitat quae, etc. Quod ad Graecorum lectionem nonnihil accedit. Etenim Graeci locum hunc aliter omnino quam Latini legunt ac distinguunt. Nam post illud: quomodo placeat uxori: sic habent: Divisa est muUer et virgo. Innupta curat, quae Domini sunt. Quibus consonat textus Syriacus, in quo sic legitur: Differentia est inter uxorem et virginem. Ea, quae virgo est, cogitat, quae Domini sunt. Graecis codicibus suffragantur Graecorum omnium commentarii (dempto Theodoreto, qui partem hanc non attingit), ac praeterea Basilius in libro de vera virg. et inter Latinos Tertull. lib. de velandis virg. cap. 4. Hieron. de custodia virgin. ad Eustoch. cap. 9. et advers. Helvid. cap. 10. et commentatores Ambrosiaster et Sedulius. Caeterum August. de bono viduit. cap. 2. et de bono conjug. cap. 10. sic legit: Divisa est muUer innupta et virgo. Quae innupta est, soUcita est ea quae sunt Domini, etc. Quae lectio Graecorum est: nisi quod priori parte additum habet innupta. Et tamen sic Augustinum scripsisse, non autem nupta, quod legitur in impressis exemplaribus Ubri de btmo conjug., constat exprioriloco, ubinou legit tantum innupta, sed etiam exponit. Verurataraen notandum, quod Hierou. alibi, id est, lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 7. scribit, hanc qaidem suo tempore fuisse Latinorum codicum lectionem, qaam et ipse tractaverit alicubi: verum alteram, quae nunc in nostris est Latinis, affirmat esse veritatis Apostolicae. Ex quo liquet, in Latinis codicibus id olim fuisse, quod nunc est iu Graecis; id autem, quod nunc in Latinis est, ex Hieronymi castigatione nos habere: ac proinde et ipsa Graeca illius temporis variasse. Non enim transtulit, quod in Graeco non legit. AfErmat autem se transtulisse. Sed nec hodie desunt exemplaria Graeca Latinis conformia. Annotat ejusmodi duo MSS. Robertus Stephanus. Tertium ex typograpbia Simonis Colinaei profectum an. 1534. observavit Franciscus Lucas. Quin et sequitur atque exponit hanc nostrorum codicum lectionem catena Genevensis, Graeca lectione dissimulata. Quae quidem lectio, si quis propius attendat, inepta merito videatur ad sensum, quem reddunt interpretes. Quis enim vel Graece vel Latine sic loquitur: Dissidet Aristoteles et Plato: pro eo quod diceretur, dissidet Aristoteles a Platone; aut verbo plurali, dissident Aristoteles et Plato? Ita dicendum hic fuisset: Divisa est muUer a virgine: juxta quam formam vertit Hentenius id quod legit in Oecumenio: Divisa est conjugata a virgine: vel potius in pkirali, fxspicpia/jisvai Bloi, divisae sunt mulier et virgo. Nam cur Erasmus verterit: Divisa sunt haec duo, mulier et virgo; quum Graece sit \it\i.igiQxai, divisa est, nec adsit suppositum plurale neutrum, quod verbo numerum suum communicet, ipse viderit. Illud addo, Paulum esse locutum more Scripturae, quo divisum aliquid dicitur, quia partes habet aut membra inter se dissidentia, ut Matth. 12. regnum divisutn, civitas, domus divisa. Similiter Marc. 3. et Luc. 11. Item Act. 14. Divisa est multitudo, et hujus epistolae cap. 1. Divisus est Christus? licet interdum addatur in se, adversum se. Sic Paulo vir uxoratus divisus est in seipso, nimirum studiis actibusque contrariis. Porro sensus Graecae lectionis, ut eam acceperunt Graeci commentatores, et Basilius supra citatus, ejusmodi est, quem expressit versio Syriaca: Divisae sunt ac differunt inter se studiis ct curis quodammodo contrariis nupta mulier et virgo, seu mulier innupta. Haec enim curat ea, quae Domini sunt, juxta sensum superius datum.
Vt sit sancta corpore et spiritu. In Graeco geminatur conjunctio et corpore et spiritu: quemadmodum et in multis Latinis etiam vetustis. Exponit Apostolus quod dixit, cogitat quae Domini sunt. Hoc enim studium est, haec cura et cogitatio mulieris innuptae et virginis, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu. Sancta corpore, id est, ut corpus habeat atque conservet mundum a foeditate libidinis, sine qua non est actus conjugalis. Sancta spiritu, ut ad munditiem corporalem etiam animi puritas accedat, qua mulier hujusmodiDeo propinquior, et ad ea cogitanda, quae Domini sunt, aptior reddatur. Quamvio igitur etiam mulier nupta suo modo possit ac debeat esse sancta corpore et spiritu, dum se continent intra fines honesti ac Christiani matrimonii (nam quomodo non sancta, per quam sanctificatus est vir infidelis? supra versu 14.), multo tamen eminentior in muliere innupta, praesertim in virgine, sanctitas commendatur, ut ({nae prorsus aliena sit ab opere et voluptate carnali. Qua consideratione negat Primasius nuptam e.^^se sanctam corpore et spiritu. Suo tamen modo sanctam esse et corpore et spiritu, docet atque ex scripturis probat August. lib. de bono viduitatis cap. 5. et 6. et de bono conjugali cap. 11. Scripturae sunt: Templum Dei sanctum est, quod estis vos, supra cap. 3. Membra, seu corpora vestra templum sunt Spiritus sancti, qui in vobis est, cap. 6. Sic aliquando et sanctae mulieres sperantes in Deo, ornabant se subjectae propriis viris. 1 Pet. 3. Nam et ecclesia non in solis virginibus atque innuptis sancta est, sed in iis etiam, qui casto conjugio copulati sunt. Notandus hic locus contra haereticos, qui docent virginitatis studium ab Apostolo commendari solum eo nomine, quod hominem expeditum reddat a curis hujus mundi, non autem quod per se Deo placeat.
Quae autem nupta est, cogitat quae sunt mundi: quomodo placeat viro. Graece placebit. Haec altera pars est discriminis, cujus sensus patet ex superioribus. Caeterum non ideo quis suspicetur nuptias esse malas, quod secundum Apostolum conjugati curare seu cogitare coganturea, quae mundi sunt, et quomodo suis conjugibus placeant. Nam cogitare quae sunt mundi, id est, rerum temporalium habere solicitudinem, non est malum; uti nec studium placendi conjugi, dum tamen utrumque refertur ad bonum finem, illud quidem, ut liberi honeste secundum Deum educentur, hoc autem, ut servetur pax et amor iuter conjuges, et avertantur occasiones violandi tori conjugalis; denique tam hoc quam illud, ad Dei servitutem, amorem et gloriam. Quanquam suo genere multo melius est, simpliciter et sine avocamentis saeculi cogitare ea quae Domini sunt, et quomodo placeatur Deo: maxime cum perdifficile sit inter solicitudines domesticas et amores conjugales, animum purum, et ad ea quae Domini sunt intentum sic conservare, ut non saepe sordes ex saeculo et carne contrahat. Vide S. Augustinum de bono conjugali cap. 12.
7:35
35. Porro hoc ad utilitatem vestram dico. Quoniam superiora verba continent exhortationem ad caelibatum, nunc eam moderatur et exponit, ne videatur esse praeceptiva. Graece ad verbum: Hoc autem ad vestrum ipsorum conducihile dico, id est, ad vestram. utilitatem, ut noster vertit. Est enim Paulo frequens, concretum ponere pro abstracto. Sensus autem est: Quod tam studiose vobis commendo tt^v dyajjitav, id nonaliorsumfacio, quam ut vestram curem ac promoveam utilitatem, nempe spiritualem. Hanc enim superius declaravit et statim rursus explicat.
Non ut laqueum vobis injiciam. Quod facerem, si praecepti necessitate vos constringerem ad abstinentiam matrimonii. Esset enim ejusmodi praeceptum laqueus iis, qui continere non possunt; quia necessitate quadam impelleret eos in peccatum fornicationis; utpote prohibitos a remedio suae incontinentiae, id est, a conjugio. Metaphora laquei desumptaab aucupibus.
Sed ad id quod honestum est. Supplenda sententia repetitione verbi superioris: Sed hoc dico vos adhortans ad id quod honestum est, Graece Tipog xo su ay Tjixov, ad id quod decorum, sive pulcrum est. Quo nomine pulchritudinem virginitatis oppositam turpitudini, quae in concubitu est, indicare voluit Apostolus; ut proinde non sit necesse, quod quidam hic faciunt, pobitivum per comparativum exponere, honestum, id est, honestius. Nam et membra quaedam corporis propter eandem causam dayjfjfxova inhonesta, indecora Paulus appellat infra cap. 12. CaeterumErasmusHieronymum imitatus utrumque conjunxit, quod honestum ac decorum est. Unde refellitur ejusdem Erasmi sententia, quam cum sectariis habet communem, in verbis Apostoli bonum virginitatis et continentiae praedicantis, bonum accipi pro commodo. Nam genere differunt bonum honestum et commodum.
Et quod facultatem praebeat sine impedimento Dominum obsecrandi. Duo postrema verba varie leguntur in exemplaribus Latinis tam MSS. quam impressis. Pleraque recentiora habent Dominum obsecrandi: quod sensum habet promptum et facilem, et convenientem cum eo, quod supra dixit Paulus, ut vacetis ora~ tioni, et quod Petrus 1. epist. 3. ut non impediantur orationes vestrae. Quaedam vero habent, Domino obsecrandi. Quod Liranus sic interpretatur, Domino obsecrandi, id est, sacre serviendi. Carthusianus autem: Domino obsecrandi, id est, Deum per sacra invocandi. Vetustiora non pauca, et in his codex Donatianus, et duo Constantienses, citante Erasmo legunt, Domino observandi. Atque eo modo legisse se declarat autor glossae interlinealis, dum supplet reciprocum se: Domino se observandi: licet textus illic habeat obsecrandi. Nam Domi7io se obsecrandi non facit sensum. Similiter exponit Lombardus, observandi se Domino. Nec secus Hugo Carrensis: itemque Thomas Aquinas, cujus commentarius sic habet: Ad illud, quod facultatem praebeat alicui observandi se in Domino, id est, ad servitium Domini. Ubi tamen suspicor in adjectitium esse, cum sine eo legant et exponant alii quos dixi: meliusque dativo Domino respondeat expositio S. TLiomae, id est, ad servitium Domini. Pro eodem casu faciunt Graeca roI xupt'w. Qnauquam sunt alii codices, quos in bibliis castigandis secuti fuere Lovanienses, qui pro casu dante legant accusantem. Dominum observandi. Quo videtur allusisse Tertull. lib. 2. ad uxorem capit. 3. dicens: Quaevis fidelis mulier Dominum observet necesse est. Conjicit Erasmus eo, quod in multis codicibus legitur Domino observandi, primam scripturam fuisse, Domino observiendi. Ac ita sane legitur apud Gregorium parte 3. curae pastoralis admonitione 28. in editione Basiliensi et aliis posterioribus. Sed ea lectio an sit incorrupta, multum dubito. Nam in codice Gregorii manuscripto Aquicinctensis coenobii, qui nobis ad manum erat scribenti, legitur Domino obsecrandi: et in vetusto quodam impresso, qui nec locum nec annum habebat adscriptum, Domino observandi: quod facile postea per Erasmi conjecturam mutari potuit in observiendi: lectionem alioqui nullis hujus epistolae, quod sciam, autographis probatam. Certe vel ideo magis placere debet observandi quam observiendi vocabulum: quod observire sit inusitatum, quo nec usquam alibi Scripturae interpres utitur, nec quisquam alius scriptor, et observare magis, opinor, ad Graecam vocem accedat. Si qui codices haberent Domino deserviendi, probari posset ea lectio ex capite 9. Qui altari deserviunt. Nam jllic Graece est upoos5ps6ovT£g_, qui assident, Erasmus, qui assistunt, verbum respondens composito nomini quod hic legitur, y.oC'. suTrpoasSpov toT xupuo «TispiouaoTCog. Nam quod in nonnullis codicibus a Roberto Stephano signatis legitur euuapsSpov^ nihil diversum significat. Quod autem in aliis suTrpooSsxTOV, id est, acceptum, minus quadrat. Caeterum plurimi codices habent su- TcpoosSpov, quemadmodum etGraecos expositores legisse probant eorum commentarii. Sic autem et Hieron. legit lib. 1. adversus Jovin. cap. 7., ubi testatur haec verba in Latinis codicibus ob translationis difficultatem penitus non inveniri: quoniam, inquit, proprietatem Graecam Latinus sermo non explicat. Ut haec sit causa, cur apud antiquiores commentatores Ambros., Pelagium, Primasium, Sedulium, Haimonem, haec pars non legatur exposita; nisi quod Sedulius, nescio quo usus interprete, tantum habet, ut sit frequens oratio. Nec putabit Augustinum legisse, qui consideret ea quae disserit de bono viduitatis cap. 5. Graeca quidem verbotenus ita sonant: Et bene assidens Domino indistente, seu indivulse et indistracte. Quae Hieronymus, adjuncta parte superiori, ita transfert eodem loco: Sed ut ad id quod honestum est (infra, et decorumj, et intente facit servire Domino absque ulla distractione (pro qua paulo post distentione) vos adhorter. Erasmus hoc modo: Sed ut quod honestum ac decorum est sequamini: et adhaereatis Domino absque ulla distractione. Stapulensis concretis in abstracta mutatis sic interpretatur: Sed ad honestatem et bonam perseverantiam, sive assistentiam immobiliter Domino praestandam. Gaignaeus Graeco propius assidentiam vocat. Arbitror autem clariorem fore sententiam, si Graeca suppleas verbo substantivo, sicque legas: xal t6 suTipoosSpov slvai^ etc. Tum vertere licebit ad hunc modum: Sed ad id quod honestum est, et (ad id quod est) assiduum esse Domino sine distractione. Quod igitur in nostris est sine impedimento, hocest, sine distractione, quam multiplicem adferunt affectus et curae conjugales. Summa est, Apostolum hortari Corinthios ad id, quo facile et expedite queant Domino adhaerere et assidue adesse, quomodo, non sine mysterio hujus rei significandae, Domino assidebat Maria Marthae soror: de qua refert Lucas cap. 10., quod sedens secus pedes Domini audiebat verbum ejus. Similis quaedam significatio est in observandi vocabulo ex interpretatione Hieron. 1 Keg. 2. Cum mulieribus, quae observabant ad ostium tabernaculi. Quo fit, ut prae caeteris magis placeat lectio observandi seu Domino seu Dominum. Nam qui dominum aut magistrum observat, assiduus ei est et adhaerens, et perpetuo pendens ab ore vel praecipientis vel docentis.
7:36
36. Si quis autem turpem se videri existimat super virgine sua, quod sit superadulta. Quia dixerat se hortari ad id, quod honestum et decorum est; ne quis objiciat, inhonestum atque indecorum haberi, quod virgo jam adulta non detur nuptui: ad id respondet, de patre seu de custode virginis loquens, hoc versu et duobus sequentibus. Hanc partem ex Graeco clarius et magis ad verbum ita reddas: Si quis autem indecenter agere super virginem suam se existimat. Verto cum nostro interprete se existimat. Nam in talibus usu Graeci sermonis subauditur pronomen. Quod miror Erasmum et alios quosdam interpretes non animadvertisse. Sic cap. seq. Si quis se existimat scire aliquid et cap. 10. Qui se existimat stare, videat ne cadat, et Jacob. 1. Si quis putat se religiosum esse, et in fine hujus capitis: Puto et ego Spiritum Dei me habere. Sensus igitur est: Si quis turpe et probrosum sibi putat de filia sua virgine, quae aetatem nubilem dudum impleverit; subaudi, quod eam non elocet viro. Solet enim vulgus obloqui, ai quis illocatam servet domi filiam. Et Graeca ' scholia de patre carnaliter adhuc sapiente sententiam hanc intevpretantur.
Et ita oportet fieri. Oportet, Graece o^ciXsi debet. Sensus: et si ita potius fieri debere putat, ut eam elocet. Quidam istud oportet exponunt ob periculum incontinentiae virginis. Sed si id vellet Apostolus, potius diceret: si se non continet, nubat: non autsm hoc quod sequitur. Quod vuH faciat. Id est, liberum sit ei, elocare filiam aut non elocare. Neutrum facere prohibetur. Quidam hoc modo: Quod vult virgo, faciat custos. Sed praeter mentem Apostoli, qui in consequentibus manifeste de voluntate patris ostendit se loqui. Cur autem voluntatem patris seu custodis nominet, non virginis; infra dicemus.
Non peccat, si nubat. Id est, non peccat pater, si eo autore nubat filia. Veruntamen hoc negativo sermone quo dicit, non peccat, satis signiacatur non esse magLium bonum nubere; a quo tantum Apostolus peccatum removeat. Notandum in Graecis et Syris codicibus, ac nonnullis etiam Latinis, abesse conjunctionem si; et pro nubat in Graeco legi verbum pluralis numeri ya|jL£tTcooav, quod Erasmus vertit, jungantur matrimonio; Theophylacti interpres, contrahant matrimonium; Hentenius Oecumenii interpres, elocent. Et hoc rectius. Nam Graecum verbum activum vel de eo dicitur, qui matrimonio jungit, vel de eo, qui ducit uxorem: non autem nisi rarissime de mu- Nere quae nubit. Igitur juxta hanc lectionem, qua repente mutatio fit numeri singularis in pluralem, sensus est: Parentes, si volunt, elocent filiam suam in matrimonium. Atque hunc observare est in commentario Theophylacti et Oecumenii. Sequitur nunc de patre seu custode virginem servaute.
7:37
37. Nam qui statuit in corde suo firmus. Graece: Qui autem stat firmus in corde. Nam statuit, id est, decrevit, ex Graeco verti posse non arbitror. Graeci quoque expositores stat, non statuit intellexerunt. Quanquam utrovis modo vertatur, sensus eodem redit. Qui vero, inquit, stabile ac firmum habet animi propositum, nec movetur vulgi sermonibus, ut secus faciat quam constituit apud se.
Non habens necessitatem. Scilicet, praecepti. Nam supra dixit, de virginibus se praeceptum Domini non habere, sed consilium dare. Quocirca minus recte Cajetanus et alii quidam necessitatem interpretantur eam, qua quis ob inopiam dotis, aut deformitatem, aut aliam similem ob c^aisam, filiam cogitur illocatam servare. Eodem loco habendus est et ille cujusdam commentarius: Non habens necessitatem, id est, qui servus non sit, ut pendeat ex alterius voluntate, sed liber, ut possit elocare filiam cui voluerit. Obstat etiam hujusmodi glossis id, quod protinus subjungitur, servare virginem suam: quod emphatice dici non est dubixim.
Fotestatem autem habens suae voluntatis. Graece: Potestatem autem habet circa propriam voluntatem: hoc est, voluntatem habet a necessitate seu coactione praecepti liberam: ut possit sine peccato utruravis eligere. Etsi vero his verbis, quemadmodum et illis superioribus, quod vult faciat, expresse tantum significetur libertas a praecepto: consequenter tamen ex iis colligitur etiam libertas arbitrii, quae in eligendo consistit. Vult enim Apostolus sic liberam esse voluntatem cujuspiam a praecepto; ut ei liceat utrumlibet eligere, prout placuerit. Proinde recte his scripturis utuntur orthodoxi adversus haereticos, qui liberum arbitrium hominibus adimunt. Simul notandum, utrobique in vohmtate patris etiam intelligi voluntatem filiae, sine qua constare non posset ejus matrimonium. Solum autem patrem nominavit, quia solent honestae puellae negotium sui matrimonii parentibus relinquere, seque quod ad hanc rem pertinet, eorum voluntati consentiendo permittere. Qua tamen in re prudentes illos esse oportet: ut de filia nihil statuant, nisi prius bene perspecta ejus voluntate ac propensione. Nam revera parentum ista libertas, sive potestas, de qua hic loquitur Apostohis, a voluntate filiae dependet.
Et hoc judicavit in corde suo. Id est, maturo judicio apud se decrevit ac statuit hoc quod sequitur. Servare virginem suam. Servare, Graece xryj trypsTv^ ut servet. Subauditur enim e vsxa causale. Itaque non tantum objectum decreti, sed et finis consilii paterni significixtur. Is est, ut servet suam virginem cogitantem quae Domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu: sicut dictum est supra.
Bene facit. Hoc ad distinctionem patris elocantis filiam, de quo tantum dixerat, non peccat. Sed quoniam in humanis actionibus omne, quod non est peccatum, bene fit, ut annotant Theophylactus et Oecumenius; ac proinde et qui elocat filiam suam, si non peccat, bene facit: idcirco Paulus sequentibvis verbis apertum profert discrimen inter elocantem et non elocantem.
7:38
38. Igitur et qui matrimonio jungit virginem suam, bene facit. Graece tantum est: Itaque qui elocat nuptui, bene facit. Interpres, ut plena esset oratio virginem suam adjecit, non de suo, sed ex parte praecedenti. Sensus est: eum, qui filiam suam elocat in matrimonium, rem bonam facere. Bonam intellige, non soUim ratione finis, quem ex eo opei-e intendit et consequitur pater, dum id agens consulit pudicitiae et saluti filiae suae, ac suae famae: qua ratione dictum est ab Ecclesiastico cap. 7. Trade filiam, et grande opus feceris, verum bonam ex natura operis; quia matrim.onium res secundum se bona est, institutionem habens a Deo.
Et qui non jungit, melius facit. Graece: Qui vero non elocat nuptui, melius facit, id est, rem facit meliorem et praestantiorem, scilicet genere suo. Ratio patet ex superioribus. Et vim habet consilii, quod dicit, melius facit- ut annotant commentatores. Dixi bene et melius intelligenda quantum ad naturam et gemxs operis: alioqui, contingit interdum ex aliis causis et adjacentibus hanc comparationem non esse perpetuam. Imo poterit utrumlibet opus ex fine vel alia circumstantia vitiari, tam a parte filiae quam patris. Quod enim dicit Apostohis de patre elocante filiam, bene facit, et non elocaute, melius facit; id totum pari ratione intellige de ipsa filia nubente, vel non nubente; ac generatim de viris et feminis contrahentibus matrimonium, vel ab eo abstinentibus; cum exceptione tamen eorum, qui semel ad continentiam sponte sese voto, aut lege suscepta adstriuxerunt: qui profecto, si nuptias appetant, non bene faciunt, sed praevaricar tionis rei sunt, aut etiam perfidiae in Deum ac sacrilegii crimen incurrunt: quemadmodum adnotavimus ad illud: Quod si non se continent, nubant. Ex hoc loco, simul ex tcto superiori contextu palam destruitur error haereticorum nostri temporis, qui vetus Joviniani dogma renovantes, conjugium aequant virginitati. Refellitur item commentarius, quo bonum in hoc capite interpretantur commodum, quod molesto opponitur. Hoc enim pacto conjugium erit malum, utpote res molestiarum plena. Atqui dicit Apostolus, eum bene facere, qui matrimonio jungit filiam suam: sed melius, qui non jungit. Non ergo bonum intelligit commodum. Sic enim non bene, sed male faceret, qui filiam matrimonio jungeret, ut qui multis eam incommodis, quae in matrimonio sunt, objiceret, Qaare consequens est intelligi bonum morale, et in eo quod dicit bene, et in eo quod dicit melius. Sequitur doctrina de secundis nuptiis.
7:39
39. Mulier alligata est legi. Graece, Hdexai vofjicp^ ligata est legi, vel potius lege, scilicet matrimonii, ut discedere a suo viro et alii nubere non possit. Quae interpretatio magis placet propter locum similem Rom. 7., qui sicut in Graeco legitur, hujusmodi interpretationem plane videtur exigere, quemadmodum illic ostendimus: ubi et illud expositum est, quam legem Paulus intelligat: eam nimirum, quae continetur his verbis: Relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem, et adhaerebit uxori suae: et erunt duo in carne una. Sciendum tamen, illud legi a multis veteribus, praesertim Latinis, non legi. Tertull. lib. de monog. cap. 11. et Cyprianus lib. 3. testim. cap. 62. citant hoc modo: Mulier vincta est, quamdiu vel quantum temporis vivit vir ejus. Aeque non agnoscunt Hieron. lib. 1. con- tra Jovinian. cap. 8. et in apolog. cap. 2. Augustin. de bono viduitat. cap. 4. et 12. et lib. 2. de adult. conjug. cap. 3. et 4. Nec legisse videntur commentatores Amb., Pelagius, Primasius, Sedulius et Carthusianus, quia non exponunt: licet textui apud illos, excepto Primasio et Carthusiano, insertum sit. His accedit ex Graecis Basilius lib. de vera virgin. et codex Apostoli Graecus Vaticanus mirae antiquitatis, teste Mariano in scholiis super Hierou. Huc denique facit antithesis Apostoli, ligata est, Uberata est. Quam et Hieronymus attendit in epistola ad Ageruchiam cap. 2. dicens: Vivente viro mulier alligata est, et mortuo soluta. Sane fieri potuit, ut ea dictio legi, tam in Graecis quam in Latinis codicibus huc transscriberetur ex loco simili quem dixi, | Rom. 7. Sensus autem clarus est: mulie- ^ rem Jigatam esse vinculo conjugii.
Quanto tempore vir ejus vivit. Pro quo Rom. 7. vivente viro, sive, ut est Graece: viventi viro. Ex utroque autem loco recte docent Theologi, insohibile esse matrimonium utroque conjuge vivente. Idque ex professo tradit, hac potissimum utens scriptura, Chrysost. in serm. de libello repudii. Intellige vero dictum ApostoU, extra casum quem ipse dudum excepit illis verbis: Quod si infidelis discedit, discedat. Non enim servituti subjectus est, etc. Et quia de matrimoniis consummatis Apostolo sermo est; nihil quoque ejus doctrinae obstat dissolutio matrimonii inconsummati, quae fit in ecclesia per religionis ingressum alterius conjugum: uti declaravimus ad dictum locum Rom. 7.
Quod si dormierit vir ejus: Graece: Si autem et dormierit, etc. Verum et redundare videtur. Qui pleonasmus Paulo non infrequens. Dormierit, id est, mortuus fuerit, ut exponitur Rom. 7. Observandum est de solis hominibus mortuis dicere Scripturam taiu veteris quam novi testamenti, quod dormiant; propter spem i resurrectionis. Nam de brutis animanti- 1 bus nihil usquam tale legitur. Nec vero in hac locutione nudus charientismus est, velut cum puerum pro servo dicant Scripturae: sed mysterii significatio. Cujus A indicium, quod haec phrasis sit propria |! fidelium, id est eorum, qui credunt mor- tuorum resurrectionem.
Liberata est; cui vultnubat. Graece: Libera est cui vult nubere, id est, ad nubendum cui voluerit; et, ut legit Cyprianus, ut cui vult nubat. Atque eam lectionem Graecam urget Chrysostomus sermone jam citato, dicens Apostolum non dixisse, nubat; sed: libera est cui voluerit ut nubat. Porro libera est legunt etiam Latini, Tertull, lib. 2. ad uxorem cap. 2. Hieron. lib. 1. contra Jovin. cap. 8. et commentator Ambros. Quibus et Augustinus accedit, quatenus pro liberata est, legit, in potestate habet, lib. 1. de adulterinis conjugiis cap. 25. Quod autem in multis codicibus cum addito legitur, libera est a lege: quamvis id Lombardus, Hervaeus et alii posteriores etiam exponant: meliora tamen exemplaria Graecis et Syris consentanea, quibus etiam vult Carthusianus, probant adjectitium esse: videlicet huc adscriptum, ut opinor, imitatione ejus, quod Rom. 7. dicitur, soluta est a lege viri. Locus hic manifestus pro secundis et ulterioribus nuptiis, adversus veteres haereticos Cataphrygas ac Novatianos, et eorum astipulatorem Tertullianum; qui nuptias omnes post primas damnarunt. Recte etiam ex Apostoli verbis: Quod si dormierit vir ejus, liberata est: inferunt Aquinas et Carthusianus, non teneri mulierem ad recipiendum virum a morte resuscitatum.
Tantum in Domino. Hoc vane patres exponunt. Graeci isto fere modo: Tantum in Domino, id est, secundum legem Dei, quae praecipit, ut cum temperantia et suscipiendae prolis studio matrimonium contrahatur; non ex impetu libidinis. August. loco proxime citato duas alias adfert expositiones, ut tantum in Domino, scilicet Christo, sic intelligatur; aut Christiana permanens, aut Christiano nubens. Christiana permanens, id est, Christi religionem occasione novi conjugii non deserens. Christiano nixbens, non infideli: ne sit impar conjugium. Quarum tamen expositionum priorem sibi magis placere significat ibidem Augustinus, dum ita subjungit: Non enim tempore revelati testamenti novi, in Evangelio, vel ullis Apostolicis literis sine ambiguitate declaratum esse recolo, utrum Dominus prohibuerit fideles infidelibus jungi. Qaibus similia scribit libro de fide et oper. cap. 19. Verum posteriorem expositionem plurimi probant: ut dictum sit, nubat in Domino, id est, viro Christiano: quomodo dixit idem Apostolus 2 Cor. 12. Scio hominem in Christo, id est, hominem Christianum. Ita locum hunc intellexerunt TertuII. Jib. 2. ad uxorem cap. 1. et 2., de monog. cap. 7. et 11. et advers. Marc. lib. 5. cap. 7. Cyprian. lib. 3. testim. ad Quirinum cap. 62. Hieron. lib. 1. conti-a Jovin. cap. 5. et in epist. ad Ageruchiam cap. 2. ac praeterea commentatores Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, Sedulius, Haimo, Lombai-dus, Hervaeus ac caeteri Latini: et inter Graecos Theodoretus. Quin et Augustinus loco memorato pro hoc sensu tanquam probabili Cyprianum allegat affirmantem, quod jungere cum infidelibus vinculum matrimonii, sit prostituere gentilibus membra Christi. Quod apud illum legitur in serm. de lapsis: et ab Hieronymo similibus verbis repetitur, advers. Jovin. scribente. Proinde Scripturam hanc merito proferunt Theologi, qua doceant illicitas esse, ac lege sive divina, sive Apostolica prohibitas nuptias fidelium cum infidelibus: adjuncto praesertim et altero loco ejusdem Apostoli in 2. epist. cap. 6. ita praecipientis: Nolite jugum ducere cum infidelibus. Nam quod de secundis nuptiis hic dicitur, id pari ratione de primis fidelium nuptiis intelligi debere, nulli dubium esse pqtest. Qui enim, ait Hieronymus, secundas, tertiasque nuptias concedit, dumtaxat m Domino, utique primas cum ethnico prohibet. Si quis objiciat exempla sanctarum feminarum, Monicae matris S. Augustini, Clothildis reginae Francorum, et aliarum, quae Christianae cum essent, viris nupserunt ethnicis: respondeo factum id partim ignorantia legis, eaque probabili; quando et ipse Augustinus de ea dubitavit; praesertim cum negotium sui conjugii parentibus ex more et honestate committerent filiae: partim ipsius legis interpretatione, certis casibus non obligantis; quod exemplis sanctorum virorum et mulierum veteris testamenti, qui conjuges acceperunt infideles, ostendere promptum est.
7:40
40. Beatior autem erit, si sic permanserit. Graece: Beatior autem est, si sic maneat. Sic, id est, sine viro. Sic manentem beatiorem vocat, non ob praesentis vitae commoditatem, quia molestiis conjugii careat, ut vult Erasmus in annotat., quod tamen in paraphrasi quadautenus corrigit, Apostolum ita faciens loquentem: Feliciorem arbitror, quae studio vacandi Christo tuetur redditam libertatem: sed ea beatitudine hujus vitae, quam Scriptura passim commendat, et quae proprie ad Christi beneficia pertinet: quomodo beati dicuntnv pauperes spiritu, et mundo corde, etc. Matth. 5., nimirum beatitudine spirituali inchoata, et promovente ad illam, quae in futuro saeculo perficienda speratur. Beatior ei-go vidua si sic maneat; quia non jam cogitat, quae mundi sunt, quomodo placeat viro sed per continentiam vidualem e carnali voluptate remota, Deo se propius applicat, servitqueliberius et expeditius. Hinc igitur constat vidualem castitatem conjugali potiorem esse, et majoris apud Deum meriti.
Secundum meum consilium. Graece yvu){Ji7jv sententiam. Hoc non est referendum ad illud beatior erit: sed ad verba proxima, si sic permanserit. Nam et supra dixit se consilium dare virginibus, ut sic permaneant: atque eodem nunc respicit. Itaque sensus est: si maneat sine viro, quomodo manendum ego censeo et consulo; et jam ante consului, quando de virginibus agebam.
Puto autem, quod et ego spiritum Dei habeam. Puto, Graece ^o/a> opinor; mihi videor et ego spiritum Dei habere. Minus dicit plus volens intelligi; velut si pater filio parum morigero dicat: Puto me patrem tuum esse, cui debeas obedire. Saepe loquitur ad hunc modum Paulus modestiae causa, et ut arrogantiae speciem vitet. Ita supra vers. 26. Existimo hoc bonum esse, et cap. 4. Puto {^0'/.Si), quod Deus nos Apostolos novissimos ostendit, etc. Sensus est: Existimo sane me quoque, perinde ut alios Christi Apostolos, Spiritum Dei habere, quo possim bona et sancta fidelibus suggerere. Quod dico, ne quis hoc meum consilium parvi pendat. Sunt, qui illud et ego dictum putent propter Pseudapostolos, qui sibi, Paulo contempto, Spiritum Dei vendicabant. Sed priorem sensum arbitror veriorem. Nam cum veris Christi Apostolis sese confert etiam infra, atque ex professo cap. 9.
7:1
1. Je quibus autem. scripsistis mih? (haec. dico; περὶ δὲ ὧν ἐνράψατέ uoc — λέγω τὰ) omnia illa doctrinae capita, quac sequuntur, complecti, ipse tractandi modus ostendit. Utrum quidem Corinthii varia argumen!a eo ordine, quo Apostolus illa tractat (: 1. De matrimonio et coelibatu, 2. de idolothytis, 3. de decoro in coetibus sacris servando, ^. de charismatis, 5. de futura resurrectionc), an alio proposuerint, ignoramus; veri tamen simillimum est, Paulum fornicariorum reprehensione adductum csse, ut primo in loco de matrimonio et coelibatu ageret; quae enim de castitate extra matrimonium servanda monuerat, ea intime cum illis cohaerent, quae de matrimonii usu et de maiore coclibatus perfectione traditurus cst. Corinthiorum quaestio quae fuerit, ex solo Pauli responso coniicere licet : « scripserunt ei, inquit CA»js., utrum oporteret ab uxore abstinere, annon, et de matrimonio legem ferens simul etiam de virginitate sermonem facit ». Valde inutiliter moderni interpretes multi hic inquirunt, quaenam ex corinthiisfactionibus quaestionem Apostolo proposuerit aut eam provocaverit; pro suo enim quisque arbitrio aut Paulinis aut Petrinis aut Apollonianis aut Christinis talem doctrinam affingit, ut eos huius quaestionis auctores faciat. [d unum eum 7/:0m. vel potius cum G/ ord. aut cum S. Aug., a quo haec glossa dependet, recte dici videtur, « in detestationem fornicationis aliquos habentes zelum Dei, . sed non secundum scientiam, eousque processisse, ut matrimonia quoque damnarent iuxla illud 1 77». ^4, 9 (« in hypocrisi loquentium mendacium et prohibentium nubere »); quod quum neophytis durum visum esset, eos hac de re Apostoli sententiam exquisivisse ». Post apostolicam quoque aetatem non defuisse haereticos, qui falsa ascesi seducti matrimonium omnino damnarent, docet historia. Quaestionem ipsam Apostolus ita tractat, ut 1. quid de matrimoni usu sentiendum sit exponat (7,1-9), 2. de matrimonialis vinculi ipsius indissolubilitate agat (7,10-24), 3. coelibatum virginibus commendet (1,25-38) et viduis (7,39-^0). Neque tamen omni ex parte Apostolus totam quaestionem agitare voluit, sed ea sola exposuit, quae tum temporis necessitatibus neophytorum corinthiorum censuit adaptata; errant igitur acath. illi (B«ur etc.), qui ex hoc solo capite integram Pauli de matrimonio doctrinam diiudicare audent. A sententia generali, «qua abstinentia ἃ consortio mulieris commendatur, exorsus (7,1) Paulus licitum tamen esse matrimonii usum ob incontinentiae periculum vitandum proclamat (2-5), atque ob eandem rationem non nisi cerlis in casibus ab eo abstinendum esse monet (5-6), nisi coniuges donum continentiae possideant, quod non omnibus concessum esse insinuat (1-9). Verba, a quibus Apostolus tractatum suum de matrimonio ct coelibatu inchoat : 1. Bonum est homini mulierem non tangere, per se quidem et de commercio coniugali et de fornicatione intelligi possunt et ab haud paucis interpretibus sensu hoc amplo intelliguntur; at commercium illegitimum verbis illis non comprehendi, contextus ni fallor evidenter docet. Postquam enim tam gravibus verbis foeda fornicutionis turpitudo immediate antea descripta est, nec simplici χαλόν (bonum est) eius evitatio commendari nec legitimo coniugum commercio quasi aequiparari potuit. De solis igitur coniugibus Apostolus loquitur, atque ἄνθρωπος et γυνή (homo , mulier), sicut in reliquo capite ἀνήρ et γυνή (vir et multer, pro qua ultima voce Vulg. interdum vocabulo :zo7?s utitur) solos designat coniuges; itaque parum recte interpretes aliqui antiqui (ZAom. Dzon. Cai. etc.) et moderni (Mai. Disp. L R. etc.) maxime acath. (Mey. Κι Dr. God. Heinr. etc.) de viro coelibe sermonem esse putant. Neque enim usquarm expressio mulierem tangere significat uxorem ducere , uti explicarunt aliqui (Thom. Cat. etc.), sed idem est, quod « cum muliere conimisceri », quo sensu non tantum in Scriptura (Gen. 20, ^. 6; 26,11; Prov. 6,99), sed etiam a profanis scriptoribus adhibetur !. Abstinere ab actu coniugali igitur iuxta doctrinam apostolicam &onum est (καλόν), qua voce non utilitas quaedam ob matrimonii molestias cvitatas (ita antiquiores acath. cfr Wolf. Beng.) sed bonitas moralis, quae ad salutem aeternam confert , exprimitur, aut saltem utilitas quaedam spiritualis?. superfluum additamentum. — xat πάλιν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ἥτε (ct iterum ad id ipsum sitis, S. Aug. : estote DBNACDETYG, pauci minusc. et PDP.;scd textus rec. : «21 πάλιν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ συνέρχησθς (et iterum revertimini in id ipsum vel rcvertamini) cum KLD, plcrisque minusc. ct omnibus verss. ; sensus vix variatur cir Comment. — 7. Utrum praeferendum sit θέλω γάρ (rolo enin) BKLP, pleriquo minusc., Vulg. (Clem.) Syr. Arm. Aeth, an θέλω δέ (volo autem) NACDFG, pauci minusc., Jt. Vulg. (Fuld. Am. Demid.) Copt. Goth., ex contextu diiudicetur oportet. — πάντας ἀνθρώπους (omnes homines) ost lectio communis codd. et PP. graec., quam cum Fuld. Am. ctc. ctiam tuentur multi iuniores codd. Vulg.; alii tamen habent : omnes vos hominos (Lyr. eic.), alii tantum : omnes cos (Vulg. Clem.). Sensum comparativum vocabulo attribuisse S. Aug. (Enchir. 191j videtur, quum hanc Apostoli sententiam inter illas referat, « quae non iubentur, sed spirituali consilio monentur » ac proin de bono meliore agunt; atque eodem modo illud Graeci interpretati sunt, idque rectissime, siquidem oppositione ad sententiam sequentem (simili ratione , qua v. 8. 9. etc.) comparatio quaedam habetur, quam optime expressit Chrys. : « Si quid bonum sit et valde excellens, quaeris, melius est cum muliere nullam habere consuetudinem; si quaeris quid tutum sit et infirmitatem tuam iuvet, utere matrimonio »!. Ita enim Apostolus :
7:2
2. propter fornicationem (fornicationes) autem unusquisque suam wrorem habeat et unaquaeque suum virum habeat. Accuratiore lectione (διὰ τὰς πορνείας), quam etiam 7er. (de Monog. 3), S. Hier. (c. lovin. l. 7), S. Aug. (de adult. coni. 2) retinuerunt, varia incontinentiae peceata innuuntur, quorum periculo homo expositus est. Parum bene Apostolum de matrimonio sensisse, quum illud ob vitandum fornica- Üonis dumtaxat periculum permitteret, aliqui rationalistae putarunt (Baur etc.); sed quanti illud aestimaverit, ex Ep. 5,22 sqq. liquido apparet, ubi illud cum Christi et Ecclesiae unione comparare non dubitavit. Verum erronce interpretes illi cuin. plerisque acath. et nonnullis catholicis (TAom. Dion. Cat. etc., Maz. Disp.) de ineundo matrimonio sermonem esse arbitrantur; nam Apostolus rationem tantum indicat, quae plerisque coniugibus usum contracti iam matrimonii necessarium reddit. Id iam ex huius versus cum praecedente et scquentibus nexu clare elucet ct ipsis verbis clarius manifestatur; etenim expressiones wzorem habere, virum habere matrimonium iam contractum esse supponunt atque idem significant, quod «in matrimonio degcre eiusque implere officia et uti iuribus » (cfr ad 5,1); alius sensus nusquam eis attribuitur idemque hoc loco multo magis est retinendus, quia suam quisque uxorem (τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα), suum quaeque virum (τὸν ἴδιον ἄνδοα) habere fideles iubentur; inepte Paulus esset locutus, si his verbis ineundum matrimonium commendasset. Ineptissime igitur antiquiores acath. ex hoc versu deduxerunt, omnibus hominibus matrimonium esse praeceptum atque coelibatum prohiberi (cfr Lap. etc.). Praeceptum quidem hic habemus, siquidem coniugi- . bus usus matrimonii praecipitur, neque tamen absolute, sed propter fornicationes; ubi igitur incontinentiae periculum deest, ibi etiam praeceptum cessat, uti in sequentibus Apostolus accuratius explicat. Duobus his versibus de usu matrimonii agi, iam tradunt PP. gracci (Chrys. Theod. etc.) et inter Latinos S. Hier. (c. lovin. I. 7), quos plerique antiquiores (Herv. Lomb. etc.) et recentiores (Gagn. Est. Tust. Lap. Sa, Tirin. Nat. Pic. etc.) atque etiam aliqui moderni acath. (Ztück. KI. etc.) secuti sunt; hanc solam explicalionem verbis congruere, nisi cis inusitatas significationes attribuere velimus, iam vidimus, eandemque postulat nexus cum sequentibus versibus, uti statim videbimus; sed antea pauca de duobus illis versibus «ddamus oportet. Justos limites transgressus S. ier. vcrba priora nimis urget : « Si bonum est mulicrem non tangere, inquiens, malum est ergo tangerc; nihil enim bonum contrarium est, nisi malum ; si autem malum cst et ignoscitur, ideo conceditur, ne malo quid deterius fiat » (1. c.). Quae verba a 7ert. (De monog. 3.) mutuatus est, non attendens, bonum ct malum contraria quidem, sed non contradictoria esse; quapropter ctiam postea verba sua &ccuratius explicare coactus cst, « secundum comparationis sensum se malum dixisse mulierem tangere », sicut « 1nalum dicitur hordeum, si cum frumento comparatur » (ad Pam. ep.:48.14). Simili modo contra Jovinianum verbum (angendi nimis urgot : « non dixit : uxorem non habere, sed : bonum cst mulierem non tangere, quasi in tactu periculum sit : quasi qui illam tetigerit, non evadat, quae viroruni pretiosas animas rapit, quae facit adolescentium corda evolare. Alligabit quis in sinu ignem οἱ non comburetur? Quomodo igitur, qui ignem tctigerit, statim aduritur, ita viri tactus et feminae sentit naturam suam οἱ diversitatem sexus intelligit ». Quae, etsi pcr se vcra sunt, a Pauli tamen sententia longe aberrant, qui expressionem £angere mulierem delinito, quem indicavimus, sensu adhibuit. Ceterum hallucinantur acath. (Mey. Heinr. ctc.), si catholicos interpretes hac S. Hieronymi exaggeratione indigere putant. ut coclibatum matrimonio praestare demonstrent; si duobus versibus illis dc ineundo matrimonio serino esset (id quod negavimus), sua sponte praestantia coelibatus cluccret, sicut procul dubio Paulus duobus illis versibus abstinentiam ab usu matrimonii, quam in priore versu bonam dicit, usui ipsi praefert, qucm in altero plerisque coniugibus ad incontinentiam evitandam necessarium csse asserit. Aliqui interpretes catholici (Cai. etc. LR. Bisp. otc.), qui, uti diximus, primam sententiam de incundo matrimonio intelligunt, interrogant, qua ralione Apostolus cum Domino Deo consonct, qui dixerat : « Non est honum, cesse homincm solum ; faciamus ci adiutorium simile sibi » et Evam crcaverat (Gen. 2,48 sqq.); respondent quidem, Dominum de bono speciei, quae propagari debuerat, Paulum de bono individui, Dominum de bono. vitae temporalis, Paulum de bono ad vitan: aeternam conducibili , Dominui de homine in statu integritatis, Paulum de homine lapso loqui ; sed num haec omnia recle respondeantur, dubitare licct. Verumtamen diflicultas nulla adest nec ulla oppositionis species, si abstinentia ab actu coniugali per Apostolum velut maior perfectio commendatur. In altera sententia aliqui difficultatem inveniunt, quoniam primario finc matrimonii (propter generationem instituti) omisso Apostolus de solo fine secundario (propter fornicationes vitandas) loquatur. ld profecto aliquid miri haberet, si de inecundo matrimonio loqueretur ; neque enim planc satisfacit Cai. responsio, eum non agere « de matrinionio in esse naturali, sed in ordine ad vitam spiritualem , cui longe inagis adversetur fornicatio quam matrimonium »; atque multo minus tolerari potest aliquorum acath. sententia, Apostolum, quia Dominum mox ad iudicium venturum esse crodidisset, ad primarium finem non attendisse (Mey.). Res iterum facillime expeditur, si de usu matrimonii iam contracti sermo cst; illam enim rationem indicare voluit Apostolus, quae non aliquoties tantum, sed ordinarie usum licitum reddit. Severiores enim sese exhibebant nonnulli theologi, qui petitionem debiti coniugalis ad proprium incontinentiae periculum vitandum pro peccato veniali habcbant; non recte enim cum S. 7AÀom. (Summ. theol. Suppl. qu. 49. a. ὅ a. 2) verba Apostoli propter fornica- (tonem. explicabant « propter fornicationem in coniuge vitandam »; miro sane modo locutus esset Apostolus, si dixissct : « propter fornicationem coniugis vitandam unusquisque suam uxorem habeat » ! Praeceptum suum , ut matrimonii officia coniuges impleant iuribusque eius utantur, Paulus disertius explicat ratione addita, quae ex ipsa matrimonii natura profluit :
7:3
3. Uxori vir (maritus) debitum reddat, similiter autem et uxor viro (marito); namque
7:4
4. mulier (uxor) suz corporis potestatem non habet, sed vir (maritus) : similiter autem el vir (maritus) suz corporis potestatem non habet, sed mulier (uxor), ita ut de vero debito agatur, quod sine iniustitia erga coniugem ei subtrahi aut negari non potest, nisi, uti per se intelligitur, legitimum adsit impedimentum !. Ex ipsa autem matrimonii natura maritus et uxor sunt una caro, quare necessario sicuti corpus uxoris potestati viri, ita viri corpus potestati uxoris subiectum est. Graecam textus recepti lectionem : τὴν ὀφειλομένην εὔνοιάν vel τιμιάν (debitam benevolentiam vel debitum honorem), quae forte publico epistolae in ecclesiis usui originem suam debet, codem sensu explicant CArys. Theod. ctc. idque recte, quia contextus alium non admittit. Scite autem TAeod. ad v. 3. adnotat : « Marito priori hoc praeceptum statuitur, quia mulieris caput est vir. Humanae enim leges uxores quidem castas esse iubent puniuntque eas, quae contra legem agunt, sed 8 maritis eandem castitatem non exigunt. Quum enim viri essent, qui leges tulerunt, aequalitatem non curarunt, sed sibi veniam dederunt. Divus autem Apostolus divina gratia inspiratus praeprimis legem fert viris ». Atque ad v. ^. haec monet : « Hic quidem uxoribus legem priore in loco tulit, quia hae maxime ante viros continentiam solent amplecti ». Praeceptum vero suum repetens illud non ita intelligendum esse explicat, ut exceptionem non admittat, sed ut, si certae conditiones adsint, aut ad tempus (5. 6), aut etiam perpetuo (v. 1.) cesset.
7:5
5. Nolite fraudare inmicem, nisi forte ex consensu ad tempus, wt vacetis orationi. Severo veebo praeceptum inculcat, quum ἀποστερεῖν τινὰ τινος sit i. q. aliquem aliqua re privare (6,8) aut alicui id, quod ei debetur, non reddere (lac. 5,85), veram igitur iniustitiam denotet. Vocabuli tamen sensum 7/eod. exaggervat : «illis, inquiens, se quisque fraudari existimat, quac alter znvztus dat » ; accuratius TAom. : « nolite fraudare invicem, ut sc. vir velit continere invita uxore, aut etiam e converso : quod Apostolus fraudem (potius : iniustam privationem) nominat, quia unus subtrahit alteri, quod ei debetur; quod ad fraudem pertinet non minus in actu matrimonii , quam in aliis rebus ». At iniustitia haec non adest, quando coniuges er mutuo consensu , ad tempus, ut vacent orationi se continent. Prima conditio (ex consensu) omnino necessaria est, quia nisi maritus et uxor iure suo cedant, debito negato eis iniustitia infertur. Altera conditio («d (empus , πρὸς χαιρόν cfr. Luc. 8,13 ad certum et definitum tempus ; plerumque : ad breve tempus) exceptionem admittit, de qua statim aget Apostolus, Tertia conditio («4 vacetis orationi) altiorem finem spiritualem ad interrumpendum matrimonii usum requiri docet (cfr 1 Petr. 3,7). Uti iam Chrys. monuit, de consueta oratione , quae continua sit oportet , Paulus non loquitur; neque enim dixit : wt oretis, sed wt vacettis orationi (ἵνα σχολάσητε τῇ προσευχῇ) ; supponit enim, fideles orationi, vel in genere exercitiis pietatis certa tempora specialiore modo destinare; id quod indicarunt Graeci iuniores, quum orationi ieiunium adderent (τῇ νηστείᾳ xai τῇ προσευχῇ), et Thom. sua explicatione : « hoc fiat propter debitum finem, sc. spiritualium actuum causa, ad quos continentia reddit ma;zis aptos ». Neque immerito ex hoc loco Orig. (in Num. hom. 93,3) rationem colligit, «qua sacerdotibus coelibatus suadetur : « unde videtur mihi, quod illius solius est offerre sacrificium indesinens, qui indesinenti et perpetuae se devoverit castitati ». Nimis tamen a S. Hier. (c. lovin. I. 84) apostolica verba urgeri equidem arbitror, qui ex eis »ecessztatem coelibatus derivat : « Si laicus, inquit, et fidelis quicumque orare non potest, nisi careat officio coniugali, sacerdoti, cui semper pro populo offerenda sunt sacrificia , semper orandum est; si semper orandum, ergo semper carendum matrimonio »; neque enim S. Doctor attendit, Apostolum dixisse : ut vacetis orationi. Magis igitur cum sacerdotio convenire et congruere coelibatum, quam matrimonium, Apostoli verba innuunt, sed eum sacerdotibus necessarium esse non docent. Ceterum apposite Hier. (l. e.) addit : « etiam in veteri lege qui pro populo hostias offerebat [sc. summus sacerdos semel in anno, in magno expiationis die] non solum in domibus suis non erant, sed purificabantur ad tempus ab uxoribus separati ». Quae abstinentia aliis quoque in occasionibus sollemnioribus requirebatur (cfr Exod. 19,15; 2 Iieg. 21,4) neque ipsis ethnicis erat incognita; unde nihil miri habet, quod Apostolus matrimonii usum velut impedimentum quoddam consideret, quo fideles ab arctiore et intimiore cum Deo commercio retrahantur. Quoniam inter conditiones etiam indicaverat, separationem illam esse ad tempus, monet quid peracto illo tempore sit agendum : et terum vevertzmint! in idipsum , ne lentet vos satanas propter incon- &nentiam vestram. Graeca expressio ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό (zn idipsum) plerumque sensu locali intelligitur (eundem in locum 11,20; Mat/A. 229,35; Act. 2,1 etc.), sed quia coniuges loco non erant separati, euphemistice hic adhibita videtur; ad idem enim, quod antea usurpaverant, i. c. ad usum matrimonii, reverti monentur, ne propter suam incontinentiam a satana tententur et superentur. C/Arys. aliique Graeci, uti etiam I;st., verba propter. incontinentiam vestram cum verbo revertimtni coniungere malunt, ut duae quasi rationes revertendi innuantur (« ut discas, inquit CArys., non tantum diabolum adulterii causam esse, subiunxit : propter incontinentiam vestram »); at ordo et series verborum interpretationem nostram praeferendam esse docent, quae tamen ab altera parum dumtaxat distat. Eodem enim modo, quo v. 2. Corinthios monuerat, ut ad vitandas fornicationes iuribus matrimonii uterentur, eos ad matrimonii usum recipiendum exhortatur satanae tentationibus propositis, quae ob eorum incontinentiam periculosiores sint. Ne vero fideles putarent, se ad usum matrimonii omnino esse lege ita obligatos, ut etiam ex mutuo consensu et ad bonum spirituale obtinendum eis ad breve dumtaxat tempus ab eo abstinere liceret, Paulus ultima sua verba non praeceptum continere docet, sed aequam concessionem :
7:6
6. Hoc autem dico secundum indulgentiam, non secundum praeceptum. sit S. Augustini doctrina, non est dubium, scd ctiam dubium non cst, quin in hoc nostro loco, quem S. Doctor semper affert, non habeat fundamentum. S. Aug. enim nostrum locum legit : « Hoc autem dico secundum veniam, non secuudum imperium », atque concludit : « evidenter, dum tribuit veniam, denotat culpam » (De pecc. orig. 38), « quis lam esse peccatum neget, quum dari veniam facientibus apostolica auctoritas fateatur » (Enchir. 78)? « quis ambigat absurdissime dici, non cos peccasse, quibus venia datur » (De bono coniug. 10)? etc. Totum igitur S. Doctoris areumoen- (um nititur vocabulo veniae, quod sensu remissionis sumsit non attendens, veniam etiam significare aequam concessionem nec alio sensu in hoc loco intelligi posse, ubi de actibus futuris agitur; num forte Apostolus futura peccata remisit? Mirum quod S. Gregorius M. simili modo argumentetur, licel nostram lectionem habuerit : « Non indulgetur, quod licet et iustum est ; quod enim indulgeri dixit, culpam esse demonstravit » (Epist. X. 64 ad August. Anglorum ep. ad dub. 10): indulgentia utique, quae idem est, quod remissio, reatum culpae vel poenae supponit; at indulgeri, i. c. permitti, id quoque potest, quod minus cst bonum. Ceteroquin principium, iuxta quod haec verba explicanda sunt, egregie S. Thom. exponit, licel ipse quoque cum S. Aug. actum coniugalem ad vitandam fornicationem exercitum suo principio non inhaerens censeat esse peccatum veniale : « Indulgentia sumitur hic pro permissione; est autem duplex perrmissio : una quidem de minus malo, sicut dicitur, quod Moyses permisit dare libellum repudii propter duritiem cordis corum, sc. ad vitandum uxoricidium, ad quod erant proni (?!); falis autem permissio non fil in Novo Test. propter eius perfectionem. Alia autem est permissio de minus bono, quum sc. homo praecepto non cogitur ad maius bonuni, et hoc modo Apostolus hic indulget matrimonium (vel potius : usum matrimonii!, quod est minus bonum, quam virginitas (vel potius : abstinentia ab isto usu), quae non praecipitur, quia cst maius bonum ». Profccto mirum esset, si Apostolus peccatum quodcumquo, etiam levissimum, commendasset ad maius peccatum vitandum; neque enim velut simile exemplum afferri potest libellus repudii in Vetere Lege concessus; nam Deus ibi, utique propter cordis duriliem Iudaeorum, ad vitandum maius malum dispensationem concesserat, ita ut illi, qui secundum Legis praescripta libello repudii uxores suas dimittebant, peccati non essent rei; toto igitur coelo dispensatio illa a permissione vel potius commendatione peccati differt, quac hoc in loco Paulo attribuitur. Itaque secundum tndulgentiam i. e. fidelium infirmitati indulgens (κατὰ συγγνώμην) ' cum eorum infirmitate quasi consentiens eique concedens! locutus est Apostolus, quando eos ad recipiendum matrimonii usum exhortatus est, quia sciebat, quam plurimos propter suam incontinentiam satanaeque tentationes continuo abstinere non posse. Neque tamen eos ad idipsum reverti iussit (secundum tmperium κατ᾽ ἐπιταγήν), nam quum continua abstinentia maius sit bonum , pro sua erga neophytos, immo erga omnes homines, caritate hanc etiam ab omnibus: neophytis atque adeo ab omnibus hominibus observari desiderat :
7:7
7. Volo enzm omnes vos (rectius : omncs homines) esse szcut me ipsum , quippe qui inatrimonii vinculis numquam ligatus in continua et completa continentia degam. De huius versiculi lectione non satis constare diximus (cfr VV. LL.), aliis testibus exhibentibus volo enim, alis volo autem. Contextu tamen integro prior lectio praeferenda designatur, qua ratio innuitur, cur coniugibus reditus ad matrimonii usum non praecipiatur, si ex mutuo consensu et ad altius bonum obtinendum perpetuam continentiam servare velint : « non praecipiendo vobis dico, ut ad usum matrimonii revertamini , sed indulgendo tantum, nam omnes homines ad meum exemplum perpetuam castitatem observare atque ita ad maiorem perfectionem tendere desidero »?. Hodierna lectio Vulgatae : « volo omnes vos esse sicut me », difficultatem aliquam evitare vult, quam in genuino textu (omnes homines) nonnulli jam patristico tempore invenerunt? atque 7Àom. his verbis proponit : « siomnes homines continerent, sicut Apostolus continebat, cessaret generatio et non impleretur numerus electorum, quod est contra dispositionem divinam ». Quam difficultatem effugientes' potius quam solventes alii cum Lyr. legere vel explicare maluerunt : « omnes vos homines » (sc. eos, quibus Paulus scripsit), ut universalitatem sententiae restringerent, alii cum nonnullis modernis verbo θέλω (volo) sensum optativum attribuerunt illud explicantes ac si Paulus scripsisset θέλοιμι (velim) aut ἔθελον (rellem), ut sententia meram sterilem velleitatem exprimeret. At Apostolus omnibus omnino hominibus maius illud bonum, quo ipse fruitur, sincere et ex toto corde exoptat!, neque tamen inquirit, num omnes ad illud pertingere possint, quin etiam optime scit, non omnes illud esse assecuturos, quia specialis gratia requiritur, quam Deus pro sua sapientia aliis concedit, aliis non concedit : sed unusquisque proprium donum habet ez Deo, altus quidem sic, alius vero sic. « Donum » (χάρισμα) continentiam perpetuam, quam ipse observavit, vocans illam a Dei bonitate et liberalitate dependere docet, qui aliquos ita disponit et talibus gratiis internis instruit, ut eam servare possint; recte autem monet CAÀrys., non ea ratione illam esse donum Dei, ut hominis ipsius, cui conceditur, cooperalio non requiratur; errant igitur acath. illi, qui putant, Paulum loqui de tali dono, quo omnis pugna in eo, cui conceditur, excludatur (God.), aut omne meritum observatae castitatis impossibile reddatur (Schn.). Porro clarum quoque est, illos, qui sive ex voto libere suscepto sive ob alias causas, quae ab eorum voluntate non dependent (uti ipsi quoque coniuges ex. gr. in diuturno compartis morbo) hoc apostolico verbo incontinentiam suam excusare non posse, quia hoe donum: non acceperint; neque enim sine ratione donum hoc ez Deo esse dicit, qui quodcumque in nomine Iesu pctierimus, daturus sit nobis (lo«n. 15,16). Demum illud quoque adnotetur oportet , Apostolum, licet secundum totum contextum continuam continentiam velut melius perfectiusque bonum describat, tamen ad matrimonium quoque donum a Deo requirere; nam unumquemque, i. c. quum coelibem tum matrimonio iunctum, proprium donum habere dicit; itaque « eos quoque, qui matrimonio iuncti sunt, consolatus est Dei donum appellans matrimonium; huius enim doni ope adiutus aliquis etiam eam, quae in matrimonio observetur oportet, temperantiam (τὴν iv γάμῳ σωφρο- σύνην) tenebit » (Theod. cfr Theoph. Thom. etc.). Varia igitar sunt dona divina, atque hominem ad haec attendere debere, antequam aut ad matrimonium ineundum aut ad perpetuam continentiam servandam se decidat, Apostolus monet :
7:8
8. Dico autem non nupttis et viduis : Bonum est illis , si sic permaneant, sicut et ego.
7:9
9. Quod si non se continent , nubant. Melius est enim nubere, quam wu*t. Recte 7Àom. duos hos versus intime cum praecedente connectit, cuius quasi sunt explicatio!. Etenim in praecedentibus Apostolus, quomodo desiderium (volo omnes homines esse sicut me) a coniugibus esset intelligendum, satis explicaverat, attamen illud una cum restrictione addita (unusquisque proprium donum habet) alios quoque attingebat, qui matrimonii vinculo non erant ligati; quapropter explicari debuit, quo sensu ad eos pertineret. lamvero matrimonio soluti duobus nominibus designantur, oi ἄγαμοι, αἱ χῆραι; prior expressio universalis per se omnes, qui extra matrimonium degunt, complectitur sive virgines (viri et mulieres) sive vidui et viduae sunt; cam tamen hic altero nomine addito (χῆραι, viduae) ita restringi multi dicunt, ut solos viduos designet ( Erasm. Est. Calm. Bisp. etc. — Grot. Pottetc.)?, sed cur id admittatur, nulla est ratio. Universali enim expressioni specialis altera est addita, quia in primitiva ecclesia viduae illae, quae perpetuam continentiam servare proposuerant, certis muneribus fungebantur, ad quae obeunda novis nupliis reddebantur ineptae; itaque sensus phraseos esí : « dico non nuptis ac praesertim viduis » 3, Itaque illis omnibus bonum est (καλόν ἐστι cfr ad v. 1), si sic, i. e. a vinculo matrimonii soluti, permansuri sint exemplum Apostoli imitantes, qui ctiam nullo vinculo erat ligatus. Moc igitur sensu prior versiculi 7. pars ad cos pertinet; at altera. quoque eos attingit; ea enim sola in couditione eos sic permanere vult, si donum continentiae & Deo acceperint. Quodsi non se continent, nubant. Uti latinum verbum nubere de solis mulieribus, quae matrimonium ineunt, ita graccum verbum γαμεῖν, quo Apostolus utitur, de solis fere viris uxorem ducentibus adhibetur; hoc tamen loco utrumque sensu latiore de utroque sexu usurpari clarum est. Maioris momenti est graeca expressio in priore membro : εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἐγχρατεύονται, siquidem negatio οὐκ (pro ux) ita est adhibita, ut cum verbo ad unam ideam exprimendam coalescat, atque latine dicendum sit : quodsi zncontinentes sunt, i. c. si se dono continentiae carere sentiunt, nubant. Demum rationem addit, cur eos matrimonium inire vclit, quia nimirum melius est matrimonium inire eiusque iuribus ad vitandas fornicationes uti, quam uri, i. e. vehementibus tentationibus non tantum agitari, sed etiam vinci. Qui ignis calorem sentit, nondum uritur, sed qui igne ipso corripitur et laeditur. « Concupiscentia enim, inquit 70o:., est calor quidam noxius : qui ergo concupiscentia impugnatur, calescit quidem, sed non uritur, nisi humorem gratiae perdat a concupiscentia superatus » atque S. Aug. « uri est occulta flamma concupiscentiae vastar ». In quaestione hac tractanda Apostolus matrimonia fidelium ab iis coniugiis distinguens, in quibus una tantum pars fidem acceperat, priora ex praecepto Domini absolute indissolubilia esse (10. 11), alia certis in casibus dissolvi posse docet (12-16), sed caute in his quoque esse procedendum monet, quum in genere omnes conditiones, in quibus aliquis ante vocationem vixit, etiam post acceptam fidem sint retinendae (17-24). Apte igitur duas particulas cum SS. 7Aom. facimus : « primo docet eos, qui sunt matrimonio iuncti, ut in eo permaneant (10-16), secundo ponit utilem doctrinam quantum ad omnes status vel conditiones hominum » (17-24). 1. Quae matrimonit. christiani et quae coniugiorum mixtorum sit firmitas (1,10-16). Praemisso Domini praecepto, quo matrimonia fidelium dissolvi non posse inculcatur (10. 11), Apostolus in illis quoque coniugiis, in quibus una pars est infidelis, separationem nec necessariam nec suadendam esse docct, si infidelis cum fideli (sine contumelia creatoris) cohabitare velit (12-14), licitam tamen, si pars infidelis discedat (15. 16). Quemadmodum nonnullorum neophytorum falsa ascesis Paulum adduxit, ut quid de matrimonii usu sentiendum esset, diligentius exponeret, ita similis error hanc cominentationem de matrimonii firmitate videtur provocasse. Licet enim omnes ad suum exemplum ab omni matrimonii vinculo solutos Domino servire vellet, praecavere debuit, ne hoc suum desiderium perverse ab illis intelligeretur, qui isto vinculo jam erant ligati. Itaquc a non nuptis ad coniuges transiens praeceptum Domini de matrimonio non solvendo illis in memoriam revocat :
7:10
10. 115 autem, qui matrimonto iuncti sunt, praecipio non ego, sed Dominus , uxorem a viro non discedere (χωρισθῆναι 1. e. separari). Qua in sententia ad expressionem τοῖς γεγαμηχόσιν (matrimonio iunctis) attendatur oportet, quippe qua natura matrimonii, de quo praeceptum Domini est, innuatur. Etenim oi veyausmxozec, quum in. hoc contextu una ex parte τοῖς ἀγάμοις (non nuptis), quibus si donum continentiae non habent, matrimonium commendatur (v. 9), altera ex parte τοῖς λοιποῖς (ceteris v. 12), i. e. iis qui cum infideli coniuncti sunt, opponantur, illi soli possunt intelligi neophyti, qui cum fideli vinculis matrimonii ligati in matrimonio iam degunt; sermo igitur est de matrimonio, quod theologi ratum et consummatum dicunt; de eo autem, quod dumtaxat est ratum, Apostolus nihil statuit, de matrimoniis mixtis statim dicet. Itaque coniugibus christianis praeceptum datur, quod Paulus non suum, sed Domini esse asserit; quo autem sensu ita distinguat, clarum est. Neque enim ignoravit, illa quoque, quac in reliqua epistola praeceperat ct praecepturus erat, esse Domini mandata (15,37), quum ,non privata sua auctoritate sed ex plenitudine apostolicae potestatis ct ex inslnctu Spiritus S. illa praescriberet (puto autem, quod et ego Spiritum Domini habeam v. 40); ergo humanum inter et divinum praeceptum hoc loco non distinguit, sed inter praeceptum immediate a Domino promulgatum ct inter praeceptum a Domino per Apostolos promulgatum; utriusque auctoritas quidem est eadem, sed prius, quod Dominus divino suo ore ipse promulgare dignatus est, maiorcm videtur habere dignitatem. « Quia Dominus, inquit TheopA. verba Chrysostomi fere repetens, legem disertis verbis sancivit, non debere fieri divortium nisi fornicationis causa, propterea ait : non ego, sed Dominus. Ea enim, quae antea dixerat, non erant ἃ Domino expresse et verbotenus praecepta, etiamsi quaecumque Paulus dicat, Domini sunt et non humana ». (uodsi pauci acath. (B«ur etc.) contra hanc explicationem, quae inter acath. non minus, quam inter cath. communis est, obiiciunt, Paulum dicere debuisse : « non ego praecipio, sed Dominus praecepit », non attendunt, Dominum non semel pro semper haec praecepisse sed viva sua auctoritate semper praecipere. Porro praeceptum iuxta textum graecum est : γυναῖχα ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς αὐ χωρισθῆναι... χαὶ ἄνδρα γυναῖκα μὴ ἀφιέναι (uxorem a viro non separari... et virum. uxorem non dimiltere), velut parenthesis vero inter duo membra inseritur : ἐὰν δὲ xai χωρισθῇ, μενέτω ἄγαμος ἢ τῷ ἀνδρὶ χαταλ- λαγήτω (sin vero nihilominus separetur, maneat tinnupta aut viro reconcilietur) ; sensu igitur Vulg. ἃ textu primigenio non dissentit, sed constructione, quae in graeco est concinnior. Iam non ex Evangelio scripto (id quod insinuat CArys.) sed ex viva traditione praeceptum est haustum ; iuxta Math. 5,32 et 19,9 et Luc. 16,18 quidem Dominus de solo viro uxorem dimittente locutus est, quia apud Iudaeos mulieribus a viris recedere non licuit; iuxta Marc. 10,11. 19 vero Dominus discipulis privatim hac dc re interrogantibus respondit : « Quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam et aliam duxerit, adulterium committit super eam, etsi uxor dimiserit virum suum et alii nupserit, moecbatur ». Ad hoc igitur praeceptum vel potius ad hanc praecepti formam Apostolus respexit, quum ipse quoque utrumque membrum ponat; ordinem tamen invertit primo in loco de muliere se separante loquens. quia forte mulieres ob pietatem male intellectam ad solvenda matrimonia erant proniores. Ceterum ea, quae addit :
7:11
11. quodsz (ct, «at i. e. praecepto non obstante) discesserit, manere innuptam aut. viro suo reconciltari, non minus de viro mulierem dimittente, quam «de muliere a viro sese separante, valere, ita ut iuxta Apostoli doctrinam vinculum matrimonii dissolvi plane nequeat, clarum est. Quaecumque enim separationis coniugum fuerint causae, coniuges uut reconciliari et ad pristini matrimonii usum reverti debent , aut si non reconcilientur, nec priore coniugio uti nec ad alterum transire possunt ; vinculo igitur semper remanent ligati. Neque liberam optionem verba Pauli concedunt coniugibus, ut pro arbitrio aut separati remaneant aut reconcilientur, sed disiunctio diversas esse causas innuit. quarum aliae eos ad reconciliationem cogunt, aliae continuatam separationem permittunt. Quae quidem iustae causae separationis sint , Paulus non indicat: eiusmodi vero adesse posse evidenter supponit, nisi sibi ipse contradixisse dicatur; postquam enim supra praecepit : nolite fraudare invicem , hic permittit, ut mulier etiam non consentiente viro discedat et separata remaneat. At licet dicat : δὲ sese separaverit, nondum sequitur, uxorem aut virum propria auctoritate secedere aut dimittere posse; quid propria auctoritate facere possint, supra indicavit (r. 5); ubi-autem mutuus consensus deest ac proin alterutrius ius in quaestione versatur, ad legitimam auctoritatem recurrant oportet, Sed haec innuisse sufficit. dicuntur, verba autem, quac refert Marc., solis discipulis iterum de hac re interrogantibus privatim sunt dicta. Facile intelligitur, cur moderni acatholici Paulum ad Matth. potius quam ad Luc. vel Marc. respexisse dicant; quoniam enim Dominum ibi adulterium tamquam causam matrimonii vinculum dirimentem promulgare opinantur, Apostolum eandem causam hic subintelligere debuisse contendunt. At vehementer errant, non tantum quia Dominus illis verbis adulterium velut causam dirimentem non agnovit, sed etiam quia Paulus, si eam agnovisset, hic necessario cam exprimere debuisset. In matrimoniis mixtis quidem causam dirimentem agnovit eamque statim (v. 12 sqq.) explicabit ; at in matrimoniis christianis praeceptum Domini ci est absolutum , quod exceptionem nullam admittat : « coniuges ab invicem non separari; si vero non obstante dominico praecepto ob aliquam causam sese separaverint, aut reconciliari aut separatos absque novis nuptiis degere ». Lcvissima quoque sunt effugia, quibus omissionem exceptionis, quam Dominumi statuisse erronee putaut, explicare conantur; haec tria a variis proposita coniungunt Δί Br. : aut l'aulum illam exceptionem ignorasse (sc. acath. interpretes doctrinam Christi melius , quam ipse Apostolus gentium, cognoscunt eL intelligunt!), aut promulgationem exceptionis Corinthi supcrfluam fuissc , quia ibi propter adulterium separatio nondum erat facta (sc. incestuosus , qui uxorem patris sui superstitis habuit [3,1] , adulterium non commiserat, et Apostolus in tota epistola de illis solis peccatis elc., quac Gorinthi iam commissa erant, loquitur et monita praeceptaque sua tradit ';, aut promulgalionem exceptionis superfluam fuisse, quia adulterium ipso . facto matrimonium destruit (sc. ea, quae Dominus iuxta acatholicorum explicationem apud Ma/(A. 3. et 19. tradit, etiam erant superflua, et acatholici omne matrimonium, quamprimum vir aut inulier adulterium coinmittit, pro irrito babent, ita ut coniuges, nisi fornicationis rei esse velinl , ab usu matrimonii abstinere aut renovato consensu matrimonium iterum contrahere debeant!'!). -— Curiositatis causa denium addamus, aliquos acath. ex v. 10. deducere, Paulum coelibatum matrimonio non praetulisse (Heinr.); nonne res cst evidens? Coniuges legitimo matrimonio iuncti sese separare prohibentur; ergo matrimonio coelibatus non praefertur! À matrimoniis fidelium Apostolus ad matrimonia mixta transit, i. e. ad illa, quae ab ethnicis ante eorum con versionem contracta baptismo unius coniugis mixta evaserant. De hisce Dominus, dum in terris vivebat, diserte nihil praeceperat; hinc Apostolus pergit :
7:12
12. Nam ceteris (rectius : celeris autem !) ego dico , non Dominus : δὲ quis frater etc. Hic primo videndum est, quibus ceteris loquatur; communem sententiam iam indicavimus, illos sc. intelligendos esse, qui post contractum matrimonium fidem receperunt altero coniuge ethnicismum retinente; de his enim et omnes Graeci (CArys. etc.) et plerique Latini (Aug. Hier. A'*" etc., Gl ord. etc.) verba interpretantur cum iisque consentiunt tantum non omnes moderni cath. et acath. At pauci iuniores (Est. Lap. Men. Gord. etc., Palm.) non nuptos, de quibus *. 8. sermo fuit, designari censent, ut Paulus ad ea respiciens, quae non nuptis dixerat, parenthesi quadam haec non praeceptum Christi sed suum consilium esse innuat. Quin huic explicationi latina lectio (Coniugibus praecipio non ego sed Dominus... 5aA ceteris i. e. non nuptis ego dico) et interpunctio Vulgatae Clem. faveant, quae verba: nam ceteris ego dico, non Dominus, puncto posito a sequentibus prorsus separat, non est dubium; at legendum esse : « ceteris auteni ego dico », iam diximus, atque minus quoque accurata est interpunctio Vulgatae Clem., quia nec λέγω (d?zco) suo obiecto carere potest nec l'aulus de praecedentibus loquens praesente tempore (λέγω) uti potuit. sed aoristum (εἶπον) adhibere debuit. Communis igitur οἱ antiqua interpretatio omnino retinenda est; mirum quidem videri potest, quod Apostolus praeter non nuptos (ἀγάμους v. 8) et nuptos vel coniuges (γεγαμτκχότας) tertiam classem (ceteros) distinguat, qui igitur nec sunt non nupii nec nupt; sed ni fallor, responderi potest, nupios (v. 12.) esse solos eos « qui sic copulati sunt, ut pariter in fide Christi sint » (S. Aug. de serm. in monte I. 46), quorum igitur matrimonium est sacramentum ac proin ratum; ab his autem distingui eos, quorum matrimonium, quia cum ethnico coniuncti sunt, iuxta probabiliorem sententiam non est sacramentum sed contractus mere naturalis; itaque nec non nupt: sunt, quia in legitimo matrimonio degunt, nec nupti sensu exposito, quia eorum matrimonium gratia sacramentali non est ratum. Altera quaestio est, utrum ea, quae Apostolus ce/erzs dicit (quum ad praeceptum Domini v. 10. non amplius pertineant) velut praeceptum an velut consilium proponantur. Praeceptum ub Apostolo his verbis imponi censent ex Graecis TAeod. Oecum. (CÀrys. ct Theoph. hac de re non loquuntur), ex Latinis Tert. (ad Uxor. II. 2), S. Hier. (c. lovin. 1. 10), Caz. Gagn. Sa, Calm. et moderni plerique (Maz. Hisp. Dr.), uti etiam acatholici. Merum consilium ab Apostolo dari ex Graecis tenent SS. Cyr. A. et Dam., ex Latinis S. Aug. (De coni. adult. 1. 13 sqq.), A" (ἢ), Pel., et quum Augustini explicatio in G4. ord. et interlin. transisset, eadem quum media aetate tum recentiore tempore omnino praevaluit (Herv. Lomó. Thom. Lyr. Dion. Tust. Τὸ". Nat. ctc.). Verior quoque esse videtur, non tantum quia Apostolus pro verho praecipiendi (παραγγέλλειν), quo v. 10. legem Domini attulit, nunc iam verbo dicendi (λέγειν) utitur. quo vv. 6. et 8. sua consilia tradidit, sed quia ipsa quoque forma, qua sententiam suam profert, eiusque expresiones, uti ex explicatione patebit , consilio, quam praecepto, magis sunt adaptatac. Eidem sententiae etiam decretum quoddam Clementis III. omnino favet, quo statuitur, » quod laliter ad fldem Christi conversi , quamdiu voluerint uxores eorum remanerc cum ipsis, eas, sive conversae sint sive non, licentiam habeant, si volucrint, retinendi, no» tamen sunt cogendi ad hoc » (Compil. II. cp. 4. De conv. infid. [Π|. 20! cfr Friedberg Quinque compilat. antiq. Lipsiae 1882 p. 81); quibuscum praeter alios theologos multos con- : sentit Sanchez (De matrim. VII. disp. 73) monens, « numquam obligatum fuisse coniugem fidelem ad cohabitandum cum in(deli, etsi hic vellet cohabitare sine iniuria creatoris et sine periculo fidelis ». Si quis vero hic de praecepto agi censeat, quaerendum cst, utrum illud sit proprio sensu divinum, ut Apostolus illius dumtaxat sit promulgator (ceteris ego ex instinctu Spiritus S. legem divinitus latam promulgo, quam Dominus in vita sua terrestri non promulgaverat', an apostolicum, ut Paulus velut verus legislator agat (ceteris ego ex instinctu quidem divino sed apostolica mea auctoritate legem fero, quam Dominus non tulerat). Utraque explicatio per se est probabilis, secundam tamen, quia parallelismum inter v. 10., ubi Dominus et Apostolus tamquam legislatores considerantur, et v. 12. accuratius retinct, praefere ndam duco, dummodo simul adnotetur, legem hanc ab Apostolo latam ius divinum de solutione matrimoniorum mixtorum iam stabilitum supponere. Deus enim solus matrimonii dissolutionem concedere potest, nam « quod Deus coniunxit, homo ne separet »; Paulus vero apostolica auctoritate praecipiens, ut certa in conditione matrimonium mixtum non «solvatur, alia eiusmodi matrimonia aliis in conditionibus iuxta divinam ordinationem solvi posse evidenter supponit et in secunda parte decreti sui diserte enuntiat*. Cum hoc igitur praecopto (si pro praecepto admittitur) conferri potest decretum apostolicum de legalibus (Acf. 15,98 sq.); divino enim iure Ethnicochristiani a legis mosaicae observantia soluti erant: nihilominus placuit Spiritui S. et Apostolis nonnulla praecepta antiquae legis eis imponere. Sicuti autem hoc decretum concilii apostolici ab Ecclesia mutalis temporibus legitime mutari et abrogari potuit, ita etiam paulinum illud praeceptum (si praeceptum est) mutari aut abrogari potest manente semper dispositione divina de matrimoniorum istorun: dissolubilitate. De coniugiis igitur inixtis, quae uno ex coniugibus iudaicis nut ethnicis ad fidem converso exoriebantur, quum Dominus in vita sua terrestri diserte nihil docuisset, Apostolus nunc ipse, sed uli per se patet ex instinctu Spiritus S. Corinthios instruit atque coniugibus in matrimonio mixto degentibus consilium dat, quod pro diversa ratione, qua infidelis ad fidelem se habet, duas partes complectitur : primum enim exponit, quid faciendum suadeat, si infidelis cum fideli remanere velit (12. 13), simul explicans, cur hoc suadeat (v. 15); deinde quid agendum censeat, si infidelis discedat (v. 15), atque iterum consilii sui rationem addit (v. 16). Qui proponendi modus ipse iam, ni fallor, de praecepto immediate divino non agi, satis clare demonstrat; tanta enim cautione in legibus divinis proponendis non utitur, atque sua ipsius quoque pra ecepta, etsi illis rationem quandam addere soleat, tamen maiore cum auctoritate proponit (11,16; 15,37 etc.). Porro priorem partem his verbis exprimit : 12. S: quis frater urorem habet infidelem , et haec consentit habitare cum llo , non dimittat illam.
7:13
13. Et si qua mulier (fidelis) habet virum infidelem, et hic consentit habitare cum illa, non dimittat virum. Quamvis per se clara sint apostolica verba, pauca tamen addemus. De matrimoniis iam contractis, minime vero de contrahendis agi, in aperto est; frater enim uxorem, mulier virum Aabere dicuntur; quapropter ex his verbis deduci non potest, fidelem inter et infidelem matrimonium licite contrahi; haec quaestio aliunde definiatur oportet, siquidem matrimonia, de quibus hic agitur, uti iam diximus, unius coniugis conversione et baptismo mixta evaserant. Illud vero ex iisdem verbis (frater uxorem infidelem habet etc.) legitime colligitur, matrimonia ab ethnicis rite inita baptismo unius (nedum utriusquo) coniugis non rescindi : « per sacramentum baptismi non solvuntur coniugia, sed crimina dimittuntur » (Innoc. III. Cap. Gaudemus). At illud quoque ex Apostoli verbis sequitur, vinculum istorum matrimoniorum non eiusdem esse firmitatis, atque vinculum matrimonii christiani; etenim si eadem esset matrimonii christiani et mixti ratio, Paulus praecepto Domini (v. 10) supervacance hoc consilium vel praeceptum addidisset; merito igitur Gregorius X1II. « connubia inter infideles contracta vera quidem, non ᾿ tamen adeo rata esse dicit, ut necessitate suadente solvi nequeant » (Constit. « Populis et nationibus » 25. lan. 1585). Porro sequitur, continuationem cohabitationis proxime et potissimum a fideli dependere; namque fideli potestas dimittendi attribuitur, infidelis sese separare vel discedere dicitur!; fidelis igitur est pars potior, in cuius favorem hoc privilegium conceditur. Praeterea alterum quoque vocabulum, quo Apostolus utitur, perpendatur oportet; fideli suddet, ne infidelem dimittat, si hic συνευδοκεῖ habitare cum ipso; ergo partis fidelis τὴν εὐδοκίαν ad continuandam cohabitationem iam adesse supponit; nisi enim prius fideli placet, infideli complacere non potest! ; unde consequens est non tantum, ut infidelis, si fidelis cum eo cohabitare velit. nec licite ab eo discedat nec legitime aliud matrimonium contrahat, sed etiam ut ad omnes conditiones, a quibus beneplacitum fidelis dependet, consentire teneatur. Apostolus nullam quidem conditionem indicat, a qua beneplacitum fidelis dependere velit, evidenter autem supponit, fidelem id non velle, quod honeste velle nequit. Itaque cohabitationis continuatio fideli placere non potest, nisi eam sine contumelia creatoris et sine gravis peccati periculo futuram esse prius constet; unde requiritur interpellatio partis infidelis, antequam fidelis suum beneplacitum exprimat. Fieri quoque potest, ut cohabitatio fidelis cum infideli grave damnum spirituale alis fidelibus creet, atque tunc quoque ad eam continuandam fidelis honeste consentire nequit; quare interdum postulari debet, ut infidelis ad accipiendam fidem paratum se exhibeat, antequam fidelis cohabitationem continuet. Brevi quoniam a fidelis beneplacito consensus infidelis dependet, beneplacitum fidelis autem ecclesiasticae iurisdictioni subiacet, Ecclesia pro rerum et temporum necessitate, quamvis in infidelem nulla iurisdictione polleat (cfr «d 5,19), statuere potest, quibusnam sub conditionibus fideli cohabitationem continuare liceat ac proin ad quas conditiones infidelis consentire debeat, antequam fidelis consilium Apostoli licite sequatur. At Ecclesia etiam invigilabit, ne fidelis hoc privilegio, quod in favorem fidei est concessum , in favorem libidinis abutatur. Rationem iam alfert, qua eos suum consilium sine dedecore sequi posse ostendit :
7:14
14. Sanctificatus enim est vir infidelis per mulierem (fidelem), et sanctificata est mulier. infidelis per virum fidelem (s. per fratrem) : alioquin filii vestri Àimmundi essent, nunc autem sancti sunt. Quo sensu vocabula sancüficatus e sanctus hoc loco sint accipienda, controvertitur. Quin eodem modo coniux infidelis per uxorem fidelem sanctificart et filii nondum baptizati per parentes fideles sanct? esse dicantur, non est dubium ; unde iam corruit Pelagianorum, Calvini etc. sententia de « iustitia traduce, qua fidelium filii absque baptismo salventur ac proprie sancti sint »; sequeretur enim, etiam virum infidelem ipso suo matrimonio cum fideli ab originali peccato liberari, id quod nemo hucusque asserere ausus est!. Neque minus aliorum corruit sententia, usum coniugalem per preces fidelis coniugis sanctificari (Just. etc. — Calov. ctc.). Atque erronea quoque multorum cath. et acath. censenda est opinio, de legitimitate matrimoniorum mixtorum et filiorum ex eo progenitorum agi, sive Apostolus ex legitimitate filiorum ad legitimum matrimonium concludere sive continuationem matrimonii, ne aut filii iam nati aut ex secundo matrimonio exorituri pro spurüs aut adulterinis habeantur, commendare dicatur : nusquam enim vocabula ἅγιος et ἁγιάζεσθαι (sanctus, sanctificari) simili sensu usurpantur. Miraremur, quod haec explicatio, quae nec verbis nec argumentationi Apostoli congruit et inter antiquos a solo 4^" est proposita, tam late propagari potuerit, nisi A'" explicationem in utramque G/oss. transiisse et Glossis antiquitus saepe nimiam auctorilatem attributam esse sciremus. Viam ad genuinam interpretationem Patres graeci et latini nobis ostendunt; atque Graeci quidem (CArys. Theod. etc.) maxime monent, coniugem infidelem per suam cum fideli unionem spem maiorem hahere salutis, sicuti pueri parentum christianorum facilius et securius ad fidem perveniant. Accuratius tamen Latini simul monentes, vocabula sanctus et sanctificatio variis modis adhiberi, sanctitatem quandam externam illis competere innuunt, qui cum Christianis tam intimo nexu sunt coniuncti. Ita 5. Hier. (ad Paulin. ep. 85,5) : « de secundo problemate tuo, inquit, 7erz. in libris de Monog. [ad uxor. 11. 7] disseruit asserens, sanctos dici fidelium filios, quod quasi candidati sunt fidei et nullis idololatriae sordibus polluantur. Simul considera, quod et vasa sacra in tabernaculo legimus et cetera, quae ad ritum ceremonialem pertinent, quum utique sancta [sanctitate interna| esse non possint, nisi ea, quae sentiunt et venerantur Deum. Idioma igitur Scripturarum est, ut interdum sanctos pro mundis et purificatis et expiatis uominent ». Atque S. Aug. (1. c.) non unius modi docet esse sanctificationem, « nam et catechumenos secundum quendam modum suum per signum Christi et orationem manus impositionis puto sanctificari ; et quod accipiunt [sc. sacramentum salis, de quo cfr S. Aug. de cat. rud. 50|, quamvis non sit corpus Christi, sanctum est tamen et sanctius, quam cibi, quibus alimur, quia sacramentum [utique latiore sensu| est. Verum et ipsos cibos, quibus ad sustentandam vitam utimur, sanctificari idem Apostolus dicit per verbum Dei et orationem i1 Tim. 5,5], qua oramus utique nostra corpuscula refecturi ». Talem igitur sanctitatem externam vel legalem Aug. et Hier. innuunt, quae ad internam sanctitatem gratiae disponit et praeparat infideles. Sanctificari in Scriptura in genere omnes ii dicuntur, qui specialiore aliquo modo cultui vel servitio divino deputantur; qua in deputatione duplex quasi elementum distinguitur, negativum, quo a regno principis huius mundi eximuntur, positivum, quo Deo ipsi consecrantur; quae duo plerumque quidem inseparabiliter sunt coniuncta, at separata esse possunt, quatenus aliquis regno huius mundi sese subtrahere :fncip?!, ut ad Deum accedat. Jam vero Christiani omnes sunt sancti (1,2) et utpote baptismo in Christum inserti non tantum secundum animum, sed etiam secundum corpus Deo consecrati, quia eliam secundum corpus sunt membra Christi et templa Spiritus S. (6,15. 19). Porro vir et mulier matrimonio uniti sunt una caro; dum vero Iudaei immunditiem ethnici coniugis ita praevalere censebant, αἴ cum eo communicantes ipsi inquinarentur, iuxta Paulum « mundi&es uxoris fidelis vincit immunditiem viri infidelis, et mundities viri fidelis immunditiem viri infidelis » (CArys.). In muliere fideli (iv τῇ γυναιχῇ) igitur, i. e. in sua unione cum uxore fideli et per hanc unionem, infidelis, qui sine contumelia creatoris cum fideli cohabitare consentiens sese dominio principis huius mundi iam subtrahere coepit, etiam cum Christo, utique imperfecte, coniungitur atque ex hac coniunctione aliquam externam sanctitatem accipit eadem fere ratione, qua iuxta Aug. catechumeni « secundum quendam modum sanctificabantur », ut ius quoddam ad certas Ecclesiae benedictiones possiderent. Praeterea cum Ecclesia, quae sanctis constat, per mulierem fidelem colligatus conversatione eorum sancta et pia siue verbo facilius lucrifieri potest Deo (cfr 1 Petr. 3,1. 2). Rem ita se habere Paulus ratione addita ostendit et accuratius explicat. De sanctificatione coniugis infidelis per fidelem dubitasse Corinthii videntur, at filios parentum fidelium sanctificatos esse omnes admittebant, ideoque filiorum sanctificatione ab omnibus concessa confirmat coniugis infidelis sanctificationem. Post CArys. omnes fere antiquiores interpretes verba Pauli ita explicant, ut /i/i vestri intelligantur filii ex matrimoniis mixtis progeniti; sed cum plerisque modernis omnes filios Christianorum non baptizatos rectius intelligi arbitramur, siquidem Apostolus in toto hoc contextu eos, de quibus agit, plurali numero non alloquitur, neque coniuges in mixto matrimonio degentes apte ita alloqui potuit, quia solis tantum Christianis epistola erat destinata (cfr v. 16). Atqui omnes fidelium coniugum filii, etsi baptizati nondum erant, propter intimam suam cum parentibus coniunctionem pro sazcíts, i. e. non immundis, habebantur; velut Christo iam aggregati et dominio principis mundi ex parte saltem subtracti considerabantur, neque cum illis cohabitare et familiariter agere parentes renuebant. Ergo, concludit Paulus, etiam a cohabitatione cum infideli coniuge non est abhorrendum , quia ex utraque parte eadem 'atio militat : sicut fidelium filii baptismo parentum aliquatenus jam Christo sunt dedicati e& remotum quoddam ius ad baptismum possident, ita infidelis coniux baptismo compartis Deo aliquo modo consecratur et sanctzficatur. Thom. Est. aliique ab Apostolo duas rationes afferri censent, quibus suadeat, coniugem infidelem, si cohabitare non recusct, dímittendum non essc, alterum ἃ sanctificatione coniugis, alterum ἃ sanclificatione liliorum; at nco latina phrasis (alioquin filii vestri etc.) ct 1nulto minus graeca particula (ἐπεὶ ἄρα) hanc explicationem pormittit; uti iam diximus, Paulus ex sanctilicationo. filiorum ab omnibus concessa ad sanctificationem coniugis infidelis concludit, quae ipsa vclut ratio affertur, cur cohabitatio cum illo, dummodo ipsc "consentiat, non sit respuenda. At hinc apparet quoque, ἃ paucis modornis acath. (God. ctc.) immorito supponi, filios, de quibus Apostolus loquitur, ian fuisso baptizatos; quomodo enim ex baptizatorum filiorum »anclitate ad sanctificationem coniugis infidelis concludi potest? Conlra vero ex nostro textu satis clare colligitur, baptisanum pucrorum eo temporc Corinthi nondum fuisse introductum, ac proin immerito aliquos acath. (De W. Neand. Olsh. ctc.) ad hunc Jocum provocare, ut scripturistico argumento puerorum baplismum defendant. Ad alteram consilii sui partem transiens Apostolus explicat, quomodo cum infideli cohabitationem continuare nolente agendum sit. 18. Quodsi infidelis discedit , discedat. Ymperativus (χωριζέσθω « separetur » vel « sese separato »), uti patet, est concessivus et indirecte insinuat, quid fideli rebus ita stantibus agere liceat : infidelis, si ita οἱ placuerit, sese separet et quo voluerit abeat; opus non cst, ut fidelis eum retinere aut retrahere studeat. Sese separare (χωρίζεσθαι) autem vel discedere censendus est infidelis non tantum, si cohabitationem continuare omnino respuat, sed etiam si eas conditiones non accipiat, quae requiruntur, ut fidelis honeste cum eo cohabitare possit. Discedente porro infideli fidelis pro suo arbitrio ab omni vinculo est liber : non (enim) servituti subiectus est frater aut soror in huiusmodi. Parlicula causalis (enzm) ab omnibus codd. graecis et ab aliis versionibus exsulat et rectius omittitur, siquidem Apostolus illud, quod imperalivo suo concessivo iam insinuaverat, nunc diserte exprimit. Respicit autem ad v. 11., ubi docuerat, uxorem christianam discedentem non posse alteri nubere sed aut viro reconciliari aut innuptam imanere debere, ita ut viro suo primo viventi semper lege sit alligata et servituti cuidam subiecta (zc. 39. cfr tom. 1,9 sqq.). Verum aliter se ves habet in matrimoniis mixtis, « quae non adeo rata censentur, ut necessitate suadente solvi nequeant » (Greg. XIIL.); infidelis coniugis enim separatione iuxta Pauli doctrinam servitus partis christianae solvi potest. Quapropter merito inde ἃ Patrum tempore (CArys. etc.. A'^" etc.) omnes catholici interpretes ex hoc versu collegerunt, 1» huiusmodi sc. casibus ipsum matrimonii vinculum solvi posse, ut legis matrimonialis servztut non subiectus fidelis coniux iam aliud inatrimonium licite contrahere valeat!. Atque idem docent verba sequentia : 2n pace autem vocavit nos Deus. Haud pauci interpretes illud ἐπ pace ita interpretantur, ac si idem esset, quod in pacem (Est. Lap. Pic. etc. Bisp. ete.), alii per brachylogiam illud dictum esse censent pro : ut in pace simus (Maz. etc.); alii vero monent, Evangelium, quod Christus attulit Apostolique praedicaverunt, esse Evangelium pacis, ita ut vocatio ad Evangelium sit vocatio pacis atque vocatis una cum Evangelio vera pax cum Deo et hominibus annuntietur. Quaenam ex his explicationibus praeferatur, nihil interest, quum omnes grammatice defendi possint eundemque sensum exprimant. Certum est, Apostolum ex pace, quam Christiani vi vocationis suae colere et promovere tenentur, argumentari; dubitatur autem, «quidnam ex illa demonstrari velit. Antiquiores aliqui Latini (Pe/. Prím. Gl interl. Herv. etc.) Apostolum monere censent, ne fideles litigiis contentionibusque discessum infidelis coniugis provocent ; Graeci (CArys. etc.) vero, Á'"" atque longe maior recentiorum οἱ modernorum interpretum numerus ad servandam hanc pacem separationem ab infideli cohabitare nolente commendari dicunt, idque recte. Intime enim duae phrases : non subiectus servituti est frater in huiusmodi , n pace autem (δέ) vocavit nos Deus inter se cohaerent, atque particula δέ, uti saepius?, post sententiam negativam affirmantem cum maiore vi introducit, ut fere latino 23i mbo vero correspondeat : « tantum abest, ut in huiusmodi casibus frater servituti sit subiectus, ut Deus potius eum plena pace frui velit », id quod fieri non potest, si quotidie ad religionem suam tuendam fidelis cum infideli litigare debet. Cui explicationi omnino consonat ratio, qua Paulus alteram hanc consilii sui partem commendat :
7:16
16. Unde enim scis, mulier, si virum salvum factes eum ad fidem et baptismum adducens? aut unde scis , vtr, si mulierem salvam facies? luxta. Apostolum unica, ut videtur, iusta ratio, quae fidelem permovere potest, ut infidelem cohabitare nolentem retinere studeat, spes est futurae eius conversionis ; at huic spei, utpote prorsus incertae, certa bona, libertas et pax, merito praeferuntur; ab omni conatu igitur retinendi infidelem melius abstinetur. Apostolus tam fuse loqueretur; potuit enim dicere, eadem, quae Dominus de matrimoniis christianis statuerat, ctiam de mixtis valere; multo minus autem opus fuisset, ut utramque consilii sui partem ratione addita confirmaret. 9. Num vocatione ad fidem alia vincula solvantur (1, 11-94). Vinculum matrimonii mixti, si infidelis cohabitationem debito modo continuare nolit, ita dissolvi potest iuxta Apostolum, ut coniugi fideli ad alias nuptias, in quibus pace ab Evangelio allata fruiturus est, transire liceat; quin etiam incerta spes, se infidelem coniugem conversurum esse, sufíüciens non est ratio, cur fidelis infidelem retinere studeat. At eodem modo reliqua vincula vocatione ad fidem non infirmantur; unusquisque potius in co statu, in quo ante conversionem suam secundum divinae providentiae dispositionem degebat, permaneat necesse est (v. 17.) ; quam doctrinam Paulus duobus exemplis (18-20 ; 21-25) illustrat. Prima huius pericopae sententia cum praecedente intime connectitur :
7:17
17. nis? unicuique sicut. divisit Dominus, unumquemque sicut vocavit Deus, ita ambulet (περιπατείτω ambulato), e£ sicut. (melius : et sic , xaX οὕτως) in .omnibus ecclesiis doceo. In huius sententiae consiructione difficultatem non creat hyperbaton, quod facillime expeditur (unusquisque, sicut ei divisit Dominus, sicut eum vocavit Deus, sic ambulato), atque eius sensus quoque, qui in sequentibus versibus exemplis illustratur, est planus. Conversione ad Evangelium nemo iuxta Apostoli doctrinam statum, in quo antea secundum Dei voluntatem vixit, mutare cogitur. Neque tamen omnes vitae conditiones , in quibus ante vocationem neophyti degerant, retineri: posse censet ; eo ipso enim, quod unumquemque sic ambulare iubeat, szeut οἱ dtvisit Dominus, omnes illos status excludit, in quibus sine peccato homo degere nequit. Haud sine ratione igitur hoc in loco duo membra posuit : « unusquisque in eo statu, quem ei attribuit Dominus e£ in quo eum Deus vocavit, ambulet »; vv. 20. et 24. autem prius omisit, quia exempla, quibus regulam suam generalem illustrat, de statibus per se indifferentibus desumta sunt, qui iuxta divinae providentiac ordinem singulis hominibus assignari possunt et assignantur. Quo facilior est sententiae ipsius sensus, eo difficilius dictu est, quomodo cum praecedentibus sit connectenda; quid enim illud mis: (st μή) sibi velit, non satis perspicitur. Recte tamen, ni fallor, plerique moderni (Mai. M Ec. Bisp. L R. Dr. ete.; — Mey. God. Heinr. etc.) particulam hauc cum v. 15 (οὐ δεδούλωται servituti subiectus non est) ita connectunt, ut facultatem ibi concessam velut exceptionem esse doceatur a regula generali, quae nostro in versu exprimitur : « in eiusmodi casibus frater servituti non est subiectus, nisi (i. e. tantummodo) unusquisque in illo statu ambulet, quem divina providentia ei attribuerat et in quo vocationem ad fidem acceperat ». ostendimus. Porro intor eos quoque, qui sententiam v. 17. a praecedente separant, aliqui particulam εἰ uw elliptice positum arbitrantur atquc aut ex r. 15. γωρίζεται (si non discedat) aut ex v. 16. σώσεις (si non salvabis) supplent; itorum parum rcctc, quia ad hunc sensum expriniendum scribi debuit «i 0$ μή (si autem non discedat , si aulem non salvabis), atque regula, quam Paulus statuit, semper observanda est, sive infidelis discedat aut convertatur, sivo non discedat aut non convertatur. Prorsus improbabilis quoque cst ellipsis, quam Est. admitlit : « Quid scis, an mulierem salvaturus sis, nisi Deus, prout varia sua dividit dona, tibi gratiam concesserit, qua illam convcertas ». Alias similes explicationes praetermittimus. | Propter fidem igitur acceptam statum, in quo aliquis iuxta divinae providentiae ordinem degerat, non esse mutandum, doctrina est, quam Apostolus in omnibus ecclesiis tradidit (e/ δὲ. 2» omnzbus ecclesiis doceo) vel potius praeceptum est , quod ubique statuit (διατάσσομα!). Quo amplo sensu hoc intelligi velit, docent exempla, quibus illud illustrat. Primum exemplum ex diversitate religionis, quam ante baptismum professi erant, desumit, quatenus etiain post baptismum haec diversitas externo signo cognosci potuit.
7:18
18. Circumctsus aliquis vocatus est? non adducat praeputium. In praeputto aliquis vocatus est? non circumcidatur. Utrum interrogative cum Vulg., an enunciative cum aliis plerisque editionibus duo priora membra legantur, nihil interest; satis enim clarum est, ea esse protases hypotheticas rhetorico quodam modo expressas. lam Machabaeorum tempore (cfr 1 MacA. 1, 16; Fl. Ios. Antiqu. XII. 5,1) Iudaei nonnulli, ne in gymnasiis, in quibus nudi luctabantur, aut in balneis tamquam ludaei cognoscerentur et irriderentur, scalpelli curatione quadam praeputium circumcisione ablatum artificiose restituere inceperant (n5u7 quí ἐπισπᾶν Sc. τὴν ὀχροδυστίαν, adducere praeputium); idem mos tempore Pauli Corinthi videtur fuisse, atque fortasse aliqui Iudaeochristiani, ut se ad synagogam non amplius pertinere clarius manifestarent, eundem morem imitati sunt !. At id non requiri, monet Apostolus, sicuti non requiritur, ut Ethnicochristiani circumcisione sese ludaeochristianis similes reddant. Nam
7:19
19. circumczsio nihil est , et praeputium niil est; sed observatio mandatorum Dei. Quibus ex verhis clare apparet , iu ecelesia corinthia circumcisionem a iudaizantibus doctoribus velut rem ad salutem necessariam (Act. 15,1) non esse praedicatam; secus enim Paulus eam non velut rem indifferentem tvactassel, sed Corinthiis sicut Galatis dixisset : Si circumcidamini , Christus nihil vobis proderit (Ga/. 5,2). Eam igitur tamquam rem mere externam considerat, quae ab iis, qui illam habent, non repudianda nec ab iis, qui illa carent, quaerenda est; nam et cireumcisi et non circumcisi ad fidem vocantur, in vocatis vero, quamprimum fidem οἱ baptismum receperunt, sola consideratur observatio mandatorum Dei. Similibus verbis Galatis scripserat : « In Christo Iesu (i. e. ut recte explicat CA»ys. « in iis, qui Christum induerunt » et ad corpus mysticum Christi pertinent) neque circumcisio aliquid valet nec praeputium, sed fides, quae per caritatem operatur » (Ga/. 5,6) vel ut paullo post dicit : « sed nova creatura » (Gal. 6,15). Nova creatura autem est homo, qui baptismo regeneratus atque ad statum supranaturalem elevatus gratiam sanctificantem pro nova forma accepit atque fide per caritatem informata leges praeceptaque Dei supranaturalibus actibus observat. Quia ergo nec praeputium nec circumcisio ad vitam christianam quidquam conferunt, etiam hoc respectu
7:20
20. «unusquisque ?n qua vocatione vocatus est, in ea permaneat. Si quis hunc versum cum v. 25. (unusquisque 1n quo vocatus est, in hoc permaneat) comparaverit , merito mirabitur, quod nonnulli moderni (Mai. — Mey. Crem. etc.) vocationem (κλῆσιν) de externa vitae conditione, in qua aliquis ante baptismum degebat, intelligi negent atque vocationem ad fidem designari velint. Profecto plerumque vocabulum χλήσεως, praesertim si epitheto quodam ornatum est (^ ἁγία x4. 9 Tim. 1,9, ἡ ἄνω xX. Pil. 3,15; ἡ ἐπουράνιος xA. Hebr. 3,1 etc.), de actu, quo Deus hominem aliquem ad fidem vocat, intelligendum esse non negamus ; at quomodo Paulus Corinthios exhortari potest, ut in illo actu permaneant? Quodsi respondent, Corinthios debuisse in illo statu permanere, ad quem isto actu a Deo vocati sunt, interrogamus, quid sibi hoc in loco generalis exhortatio velit, ut Corinthii in statu Christianorum permaneant. Itaque κλῆσις hoc loco recte ab omnibus antiquis et plerisque modernis eo fere sensu explicatur, quo etiam a profanis scriptoribus aliquoties adhibetur (Dion. Hal. H. R. IV. 18 κλήσεις i. q. classes) : « quocumque in vitae genere vel ordine vel conditione aliquis fidem Christi acceperit, in iis permaneat » (TÀeopA.). Ut clarius iam ostendat, quam late sese extendat hoc principium, pro secundo exemplo abiectissimam sumit vitae conditionem, in qua homo honeste degere potest :
7:21
21. Servus vocatus es? non stt tibi curae; sed et, si potes fieri liber, magis utere. Quia Apostolus non dicit , qua re servum christianum, qui liber fieri potest, magis uti velit, in duas oppositas sententias interpretes abeunt, aliis supplentibus libertate , alis servitute; iuxta priores Apostolus hortatur, ut recuperandae libertatis occasione utatur, iuxta alios suadet, ut occasione tali neglecta in sua servitute contentus vivere satagat. Graeca lectio ἀλλ᾽ εἰ xai δύνασαι ἐλεύθερος γενέσθαι (sed , si etiam liber fieri potes) secundae sententiae omnino favet, cidemque magis etiam consonat latina. Accedit, quod Paulus sibi ipse contradicere videretur, si ad libertatem recuperandam exhortaretur eos, quos cunctas vitae conditiones relate ad vitam christianam indifferentes esse docet. Atque ratio demum, quam statim addet, secundae magis «quam priori explicationi congruit. Itaque cum Patribus graecis (CÀrys. Cyr. Theod. etc.) et latinis (A'tr, Pel. Prim. etc.) antiquioribusque omnibus et multis modernis interpretibus secundam praeferimus !. Iuxta Pauli enim constantem doctrinans omncs, qui in Christo sunt, inter se sunt aequales, quaecumque eorum externa est conditio (12, 13; Gal. 3,28; Col. 3,11); quare nihil miri habet, quod servo christiano, ut libertatem non quaerat, suadeat; christianus enim servus & libero non differt, quia in Christo libertatem iam accepit et. liber factus est in Christo servus :
7:22
22. Qui enbin in Domtno vocatus est servus, libertus est Domini; similiter qui liber vocatus est, servus est Christi. Nexus cum praecedentibus clarus est : Noli quaerere libertatem, quia jam liber es; quin etiam si externam libertatem adeptus esses, semper maneres servus, siquidem ille ipse, qui liber vocatus est, post vocationem servus est. Est unum ex paradoxis, quae Paulus amat, vocabulorum sensum, quem in vita quotidiana habent, ad vitam spiritualem transferens. Omnes, qui in Domino vocati sunt (i. e. qui vocali sunt, ut iani nunc sint. in Domino), relationem suam ad Dominum duplici modo considerare possunt; quatenus enim Dominus a servitute peccati et principis huius saeculi eos redemit, omnes sunt liberti; sed quatenus sibi ipsi eos emit, in eius potestatem transierunt et servi Christi facti sunt. lam vcro servus, qui ad fidem vo- set ut liber fieres mane potius servus ». ConNzLY Coxa. ΙΝ 1 Con. — 13. catur, priorem maxime relationem sibi ob oculos ponere debet , ut in sua servitute contentus degat; liber vero, ne de sua libertate glorietur servosque despiciat, alteram consideret necesse est; « impossibile enim est, inquit Cyr., homines servitutis nomen evitare, siquidem omnis creatura serva est » : hac ratione ambo in vocatione, in qua Deus eos vocavit, quieti degent nec pristinam vitae suae conditionem mutare studebunt. Originem duplicis huius relationis Apostolus indicat totam alloquens ecclesiam , quae liberis et servis integra constabat :
7:23
23. Pretto emti estis. Quo magno pretio emti essent, dicere hoc loco opus non erat, quia omnes Christiani illud optime cognoverunt et magnitudo pretii in hac argumentatione nullius fuit momen (cfr ad 6,20); a quo autem emti essent, iam indicaverat eos /t?bertos Domini et servos Christi appellans. Itaque statim conclusionem infert, qua, uti recte monet A'er, simul Christi divinitatem innuit! : note fier? serv? hominum. Sed quid .sibi hoc in loco tale monitum vult? Quum omnes alloquatur, Apostolus certe non exhortatur liberos, ne se ipsos servituti mancipent (uti explicant Lap. Tir. Men. eic. ; — Michael. etc.); de hac enim re liberos illo tempore cogitasse , temere coniicitur. Neque solos servos monet, ne:servili animo dominis suis sint subditi ad oculos eis servientes (uti innuunt Pe/. Prim. Vat. etc.; — Billr. etc.); id enim clarius expressisset (cfr (οἱ. 3,22; Tt. 2,9 sq.). Parum recte quoque nonnulli (Cyr. A'*" etc., Bzsp. 1, R. Dr. ctc.; — Rück. Hoffm. etc.) Apostolum Corinthios omnes monere censent, ne factionum capitibus velut servi obediant; nam quomodo hic de factionibus cogitare aliquis potuit? Praeferenda igitur est illa explicatio, quam insinuat Chrys. et plerique sequuntur : « Ne vos ita subicite hominibus, ut Christo Domino debitum servitium subtrahatis aut. quoquo modo minuatis obsequium et servitium... Fiunt ergo servi hominum, qui sie hominibus serviunt, ut Christo non serviant aut minus serviant, qui impensa hominibus obsequia non ad gloriam Christi referunt, sed ad solam respiciunt hominum voluntatem, quos vel timent vel «mant inordinate » (Es/.), uno verbo, qui hominibus magis quam Domino placere student (cfr Gal. 1,10; 1 TAess. 9,5) atque, ut hominibus placeant, contra Dei voluntatem conditionem vitae pristinam mutare volunt. Quare iterum monet :
7:24
25. Unusquisque ?n quo vocatus est, fratres, 1n hoc permaneat apud. Deum, i. e. ita. in pristino statu permaneat, ut a Deo non recedat; unde clarum est, tunc eundem statum non esse retinendum, si cum servitio divino conciliari non potest. Miro modo Orig. (in Rom. 1,1) et S. Hier. (c. lovin. I. 11; ad Pamm. ep. 48,6) totam hanc sectionem (v. 18-24) exponunt; Paulum enim circumcisorum praeputiatorumque atque liberorum servorumque nominibus metaphorice coelibcs et matrimonio iunctos intellexissc putant; nexum enim, quo haec pericopo cum praecedente de matrimonio cohaeret , non perspexerunt. Scd quoniam in hac interpretatione soquaces non habuerunt, ei immorari superfluum est. In «. 21 exponendo communem Patrum cxplicationom secuti sumus, quam cliam iuniores et moderni plerique praeferunt. Attainen inde ἃ saec. 16. aliqui catholici (Lap. Men. Tir. Calm. Bisp. Ramb.) et acath. (Luth. Beng. Κι Br. God. cto.) Paulum servos exhortari putant, ut occasione rocuperaudao libertalis oblata utantur atque liberi (ieri studeant. Quibus argumentis nostra explicatio confirmetur, diximus; contra quae immerito aliqui acath. obiiciunt (God. etc.), Apostolum servo no potuisse quidom suadere, ut in sorvitute remaneat, quamprimum liboríatis occasio οἱ sit oblata ; libertatem externam enim esse bonum , quod respuore homincm aeque parum deceat, atque aegrotum dccceat respuero sanitatem oblatam. At evidens est, noo sanitatem corporis nec externam libertatom osse bona absoluta, quapropter nihil obstat, quominus eis altius ct perfectius bonum praeferatur ; atquo rccte Chrys. Thom. aliiquo monuerunt, scrvitutem hominem ad humilitatom adducere aliarumque virtulum posse esse scholam. Porro clarum quoque est, de apostolico consilio (minime vero de praecepto) hic agi, quod oos solos servos respicit, qui in sua sorvitute tot expositi non sint periculis, ut vitam vcre christianam vix ac ne vix quidem agere queant. Ceteroquin interpretes merito monent, Apostolum, quum in nostro loco atque in aliis similibus servuin ct horum coram Deo aequales csse doceat, certo quodam modo abrogationem servitutis praeparasse nique insinuasso, quum eos, qui coram Deo iisdem iuribus fruantur atque tamquam filii adoptivi Dei intor se sint fratres, eadem quoque iura in oxterna vila habere deceat. Per se quoque elucct fieri omnino non potuisse, ut Chrislianus servos suos, quos non minus quam so ipsum Christi morte redomtos ot Christo velut membra insertos esse soiobat, tamquam rem nullius momenti considcraret, de qua pro beneplacito suo disponere ei liceret ; atqui in co maxime sita esl scrvitutis foeditas, quod scrvus non vclut homo sed velut res inanimis aut animal brutum consideretur ct tractetur. Ex Pauli doctrina, in co statu, in quo ad fidem sint vocati, neophytis post baptismum receptum permanendum esse, sua quasi sponte difficultas aliqua exoriebatur. Procul enim dubio illi quidem, «qui coniuges baptizabantur, iuxta dominicum praeceptum in matrimonio antea inito perseveráre debebant iis solis exceptis, de quibus v. 15. dictum est; at num illi quoque, qui coelibes sive ante matrimonium contractum sive in viduitate ad fidem vocabantur, coelibatum continuare tenebantur, ut ἃ nuptiis inter se iungendis essent retinendi? Probabile est, Corinthiorum ipsorum interrogatione etiam hanc dubitationem esse propositam ; qui enim Apostolum consultandum duxerunt, num in matrimonii usu perseverare sibi liceret, illi multo magis ignorabant, num filiis suis matrimonium permittere possent. Quapropter Apostolus de hac quaestione, etsi eam obiter iam attigerat (vv. 8. 9), diligentius disserere voluit ; itaque 1. virginibus coelibatum non praecipit quidem, sed suadet (7,25-28), ratione addita, qua coelibatum matrimonio praestare ostendit (7,29-335), et consilio hac de re paren- À matrimonio, de cuius usu et indissolubilitate leges divinae latae - sunt, ad coelibatum transiturus Apostolus hac de re nihil a Domino praeceptum esse praemonet :
7:25
23. De virginibus autem. praeceptum Domini non habeo , u ἃ matrimonio abstinentes eo in statu, in quo ante vocationem suam degerunt, permaneant. In terris agens Dominus excellentiam quidem voluntarii coelibatus insinuaverat (Matt. 19,19), sed legem de eo nec ipse promulgaverat nec in coelum elevatus per Apostolos promulgandam curaverat; immo vero iuxta. CArys. (de virginit. 41) de ea re quidquam necessitate praecepti definiri vetuerat: « nam illud : qui potest capere, capiat (Matth. l. c.) liberam auditori optionem concedit ». Ac revera « virginitas suaderi potest, imperari non potest; res magis voti est, quam praecepti. Quod enim gratiae est, non iubetur, sed desideratur, electionisque magis est, quam servitutis » (S. Amór. Exhort, virgin. 3. cfr TÀom.); quibus verbis S. Doctor eos tamen, qui voto perpetuae castitatis sese ipsi ligaverunt, ad eam servandam sub gravi peccato esse obligatos, profecto non negat. Vocabula παρθένου et virginis graeci et latini scriptores profani de solis feminis, ecclesiastici autem praeeunte S. Ioanne (Apoc. 15,8) de utroque sexu adhibent!; iam S. Paulum quoque, etsi singularem numerum vocis παρθένο") sensu strictiore ubique usurpat (vv. 28. 34-38 et 2 Cor. 11,2), pluralem tamen nostro in loco sensu latiore adhibuisse, cum 7Aeod. Mopsuest. nonnulli interpretes moderni (etiam acath. Beng. Flatt, Olsh. etc.) haud immerito tenent. Quidquid tamen de accurata huius vocabuli in hoc loco significatione statuitur, dubium nequaquam est, quin Apostolus de utroque sexu loquatur (cfr vv. 98. 32. 33), sicut Dominus ipse quoque, quamquam vocabulum eunuchi, quo utitur, per se solos viros designat, viris δέ feminis coelibatum velut statum perfectiorem commendavit (MatÀ. 19,12). Praeceptum igitur de virginitate servanda non est datum, consilium autem do , inquit Apostolus, tamquam misericordiam consecutus a Domno, ut sim fidelis. Vvóya, quo vocabulo utitur, proxime quidem est sententia , sed 60 ipso, quod aliquis sententiam suam de re agenda exprimit, consilium dat. Praecepti vero ct consilii differentiam nostrum versum explicans ita definit S. August. (De sancta virgin. 15) : « praeceptum est hoc, eui non obedire peccatum est; consilium, quo, si uti nolueris, minus bonum adipisceris, non mali aliquid perpetrabis », seu aliis verbis : praeceptum est de bono necessario, consilium de bono meliore (cfr v. &0; 2 Cor. 8,10). Optime in hunc locum 77eodor. : « Non legem fero, sed consilium offero; Deus enim, postquam naturae consentanea praecepit, hortatur ad ea, quae sunt supra naturam. Quoniam autem verisimile erat, aliquos consilio utpote rei novae repugnaturos, B. Paulus adiecit : tamquam misericordiam consecutus ἃ Domino, ut sim fidelis. Solita cum modestia apostolicam auctoritatem ostendit; sum, inquit, consiliarius fide dignus (ἀξιόχρεώς εἰμι σύμδουλος) propter ma;rznam Dei misericordiam vocatus et ad praedicationis munus admissus ». ltaque suam sententiam pronuntiat non famquam homo privatus, qui errori est obnoxius, id quod aliqui acath. (God. etc.) asserunt, sed tamquam vir, cui intime persuasum est, se Spiritum Dei habere (cfr v. 40) atque una cum vocatione apostolica illam quoque a Domino gratiam accepisse, ut suis consiliis, utpote omni acceptione dignis (cfr 1 Τῶι. 1,15; 4,9), neophyti sine ullo errandi periculo fidem adhibere possent et deberent; eadem enim ratione, qua supra (v. 12), etiam hic loquitur velut Apostolus. Minus recte tamon aliqui antiqui et moderni explicant : « misericordiam consecutus, ut sim fidelis in ministerio mihi commisso » (Thom. Dion. ctc.); sensus quidem hac interpretatione vix mutatur, sed supplementum illud temero inseritur, quum πιστός (fidelis) etiam alibi a Paulo sensu indicato (fide dignus 2 Tim. 2,13; 1 Tim. 4,9 ctc.) adhibeatur. Neque recto, opinor, Chrys. (De virgin. 42) aliique fidelem hic intelligunt Christianum; evidons enim est, verba tamquam misericordiam consecu- (us etc. eum in finem ab Apostolo addi, ut suae sententiae auctoritatem demonstret ; atqui omnes ncophyti eadem ratione, qua Apostolus, per misericordiam divinam facti erant Christiani neque tamen ideo boni erant consiliarii. Inepte God. asserit, Apostolum hic inter inspirationem, quae solis Apostolis competat, ct inspirationem, quac omnibus Christianis sit communis, accurate ideo distinguere, ut consilium suum non ex priore, sed ex altera derivari ostendat. Eiusmodi enim distinctionis nullum hic invenitur vestigium ; praecepto quidem consilium opponit, at nequaquam apostolicae inspirationi nescio quam inspirationem christianam. Conqueruntur acath. omnes (cfr Mey. IHleinr. God. etc.), quod catholici interpretcs hac sententia abutantur, ut praccepta divina a consiliis evangelicis distinguant: at, ni fallor, distinctio haec tam clare a Paulo est expressa, ut quomodo clarius exprimi possit, non apparcat : virginitas a Domino non est praecepta (cfr v. 28.), ah Apostolo tamen, qui divinitus illustratus se fide dignum esse proclamat, velut status maioris perfectionis (cfr «v. 32-35) suadcetur; itaque aliud est divinum praeceptum, «quod sine peccato violari nequit, aliud vero consilium, quod nemo per se sequi tenetur, sed illi, quibus datum est, liberi sequuntur, vcl ut habet Aug. (1. c.) « quod non cst criminis non vovisse, sed vovissc ac rcddidisse est laudis » !. Nonne eadcm rationc Dominus ipse perpetuam virginitatem commendat atque voluntariam paupertatem tamquam consilium praeceptis opponit (Matth. 19,12. 21)?
7:26
χαλόν quoniam bonum est) omissis ita solvit, ut hic exoriatur sensus : « existimo ergo hoc bonum esse homini propter instantem necessitatem, sic esse », seu aliis verbis : iuxta Apostoli sententiam hoc, sc. τὸ οὕτως εἶναι (sic esse i. e. virginem esse), homini propter instantem necessitatem praeferendum est. (juam explicationem veram esse arbitror, licet omissio duorum vocabulorum approbari nullo modo possit, quum prorsus sit arbitraria atque idem sensus illis retentis obtineatur. Revera alterum membrum (quoniam bonum est etc.) non est nisi explicatio pronominis Aoc; particula enim ὅτι (quoniam , vel melius quod) hic est epexegetica, ut haec sit phraseos constructio : « existimo ergo, hoc, sc. quod bonum sit homini sic (i. 6. virginem) esse, bonum esse propter instantem necessitatem »; intimam igitur rationem Apostolus adiungit, cur virginitatem bonam, i. e. perfect«n atque matrimonio praeferendam , esse existimet. Quae ratio sita est in necessitate enslante, qua expressione iuxta omnium fere antiquorum interpretum explicationem multae magnaeque tribulationes et molestiae designantur, quas praesens vita secum aífert quibusque illi, qui matrimonio ligati sunt, multo magis, quam coelibes, sunt expositi, quur non sibi solis tantum sed etiam suis omnia, quae ad vitam honeste degendam requiruntur, providere et procurare teneantur. Instans vevo vel praesens (ἐνεστῶσα) angustia et necessitas vocatur, quia hominem continuo premit atque cum matrimonio ita est coniuncta, ut coniuges, etsi voluerint, ab illa liberare se nequeant!. Porro animadverte, instantem necessitatem velut rationem , quae virginitatem matrimonio praestare oslendat, non ideo ab Apostolo afferri, quia eam in se aliquid mali esse censeat, sed quia homines plerumque impediat, quominus sese totos servitio divino consecrent; ita enim ipse sententiam suam explicat (v. 32 sqq.). Antiqui interpretes de phraseos constructione vix loquuntur; cam tamen, quam indicavimus, innuunt Gagn. Est. etc. (ct cx modcrnis acath. Holst.); a qua haud longe dissentit alia à nonnullis acath. (Heyd. Ileinr.) proposita, qui pro ὅτι pronomen 6, τι legunt (existimo, propter instantem necessitatem hoc bonum csse [virgini], quod homini [i. e. viro] bonum eost, [sc.] sic essc). Longius disscntiunt, qui eandem phrasin bis repeti censent (Lap. Men. Mai. — Mey. Schn. ctc.) ; ila cnim Lap. : « exi- 1. "AváTqxn (necessitas) ab Alexandrinis pro hebr. puo, 3$, ΤῊ etc. frequenter adhi- stimo hoc, bonum cssc (manero virginem) propter instantem necessitatem, (exislimo, inquam), quod bonum sit homini sic esse sc. in virginitate »; at quis in tam brevi phrasi anacoluthum admittere velit? Alii sccundum membrum pro causali habont, ut hic sit sensus : « oxistimo, hoc (sc. virginom manere) bonum esse (virginibus) propter instantem necessitatem , quia homini (in gonerc) bonum est sic (i. e. non ligatum) csse » (Bisp. LR etc. — De W. ctc.); at in priore membro ratio iam est indicata nec ullo modo Apostolus oppositionem virgines inter et homines in genere innuit. Quod si quis alterum membrum pro causali habcre velit, cum paucis acath. (Ew. Ho[fin. Goeb.) expressionem propter instantem necessitatem per hyperbaton cum illo coniungat oportet hac rationc: « existimo hoc bonum esse, quia propter instantem necessitatem bonum est homini sic csso »; sed haec constructio est violenta. Itaque constructionem nostram, qua velut totius huius pcricopac thesis proponitur, utpote faciliorem et probabiliorem pracferimus. Necessitatem instantem moderni interpretes acath. longe plerique atque cum eis pauci catholici (Mai. Bisp.) illas intelligunt tribulationes, quae secundum Christi adventum sint praccessurae (neun in dolores, vcl potius «eive, Mossiae; cfr Luc. 21,23 ἀνάγχη μεγάλη pressura magna) et a Paulo ἐνεστῶσαι (imminentes) vocentur, quia Dominum ipsum iam mox ad iudicium venturum esse putaverit; quam explicationem confirmant ex v. 29, in quo tempus usque ad iudicium fore breve dicatur. Quodsi ita explicanda csset oxproessio, virginitas matrimonio non simpliciter praeferretur, sed ob erroncam Apostoli de propinquitate iudicii sententiam commendaretur; parum recto enim aliqui (Disp. — 60d.) omnes tribulaliones, quae post prinum adventum Christi in mundo crunt, velut proximam secundi adventus praeparationem considerant; quin enim ultima tempora futura sint difficillima, non est dubium (ofr Matth. 24,4 sqq.; Luc. 21,23 sqq.; 2 Thess. 2,3 sqq. otce.). Attamen falsissimum est, Apostolum ullibi erroneam sententiam de die iudicii immediato instante aut docuisso aut in suis monitis supposuisso; quin ctiam paucissimis annis, antequam hano epistolam scriberct, Thossalonicenses discrle monuorat, ne dicm Domini iam imininere sibi persuaderent, perversasquoe sequelas ex illo errore exortas studiose ropresserat (2 Thess. 2,2 sqq.; 3,6 sqq.). Quandonam δὰ iudicium agendum adventurus essct, Dominus Apostolis non rovclaverat (Matth. 21,36), sed ad continuam vigilantiam cos excitavcrat; fieri igitur potuit, ut Paulus eum mox adventurum sperarct aut desideraret (cfr 2 Cor. 5,1 sqq.); at si Inter cos, quos Dominus advoenturus vivos sit reperturus, sose ipsc connuinerare vidoatur (1 Thess. 4,11), alibi seso ox hoc numcro polius excludit (cfr ad 6,14; 10,11; 2 Tim. 4,60), ct ncophytos eadem ratione, qua Dominus ipsc, ad continuam vigilantiam ita exhortatur, ut semper se paratos esse debere sciant, sed ἃ consuota vivendi rationc non recedant (1 Thess. 5,1 sqq.). Porro v. 29. do tempore, quod ultimum iudicium praecedat, non loquitur, sed de brevi vitac tempore, atque satis clare iam rv. 28. explicat, quac sit necessitas praesens. — Oecum. porsecutioncs, quibus tum tcmporis ncophyti corinthii afflicti sint, intelligcndas censet; at istarum pcersccutionum in nostra epistola non invenitur vestigium ; gratuito igitur ct temere supponuntur. — Pauci antiquiores (fferr. etc.) molcstias, quae ex matrimonio ipso exoriantur (uxoris graviditas, dolores partus eto.) maximc intelligunt; quam sententiam Chrys. (de virginit. 43) recte iam repudiavit; generalin enim intelliguntur vitae huius tribulationcs, « quac multum possunt obesse servitio divino et quibus praccipuc iuncti matrimonio implicantur » (Pel.). Ne quis vero virginitatis commendatione matrimonium ita deprimi ct damnari putet, ut contractum nunc iam sit solvendum atque novum sine peccato contrahi nequeat, Paulus verba sua eos solos, qui ligati nondum sunt, respicere (v. 27) atque consilium dumtaxat, non praeceptum, continere (v. 28) explicat. 297. A/Zigatus es wrori? noli quaerere solutionem ; coniugibus enim illa sunt observanda praecepta et consilia, quae in superioribus iam tradita sunt (vv. 10 sqq.). De coniugibus autem Apostolum loqui, communissima est antiquorum et modernorum interpretum sententia, quam immerito pauci moderni acath. (Ho/fm. Ew. Heinr.) reiiciunt de sponsis sermonem fieri contendentes; neque enim usquam in Novo Test. verba δέειν et λύειν (ligare et solvere) de sponsalibus adhibentur. Soju£us es ab uzore? noli quaerere uxorem. Expressio solutum esse improprie hic de eo usurpatur, qui ligatus nonduin est; « dupliciter quidem de illo, «ui ligatus numquam fuerit, et de illo, qui antea ligatus nunc sit liber, eam intelligi posse », monet Oecum., atque cum Tert, (Exhort. cast. 4) aliqui acath. (Mosh. Semi.) alterum sensum pracferentes viduo secundas nuptias dissuaderi putant. Sed inde ab Origenis aetate reliqui interpretes priorem sensum, utpote contextui magis consonum, praetulerunt; nam de secundis nuptiis Paulus infra (vv. 39. 40) aget. De reliquo nihil interest, utrum cum plerisque interpretibus iuvenibus virginitatem, an cum Oecum. et iuvenibus virginitatem et viris viduis coelibatum commendari dixeris; certum enim semper erit, de solis feminis Apostolum in hac pericopa non agere. Deinde, inquit CÀrys., ne hoc (sc. noli quaerere uxorem) lex esse videatur, subiungit :
7:28
28. Sz autem. acceperis uxorem, non peccasti, el si nupserit virgo , non peccavit. Praeprimis animadverte, Apostolum non tam de iis, qui iam matrimonio sint ligati, loqui, id quod latina perfecta (peccastt, peccavit) videntur insinuare, quam de iis, qui matrimonium sint contracturi; ea enim esl graeci aorisi, quo Paulus hie utitur (ἥμαρτες, Zpapvsv) vis, ut certo quodam modo pro futuro usurpetur, si dno eventus futuri ita inter se sunt connexi, ut priore posito alter eveniat necesse sit; quare etiam aliquoties Vulgata aoristum futuro apte reddit!. Sensus igitur sententiae est : verba mea (noli quaereve uxorem) non ita sunt intelligenda, ut uxor duci sine peccato non possit; matrimonium enim res bona cst, utpote a Deo ipso in paradiso iam institutum ; atque virginem viro nubere (dummodo, uti post CA/ys. diligenter addunt graeci et latini interpretes?, voto versus membro secundo A»niat. legit : « si nupserit virgo, non peccabit ». 2. Theodor. « Sciendum est, Apostolum non de jis, qui saeculo semcl renuntiarunt, sese Christo ne mancipaverit) peccatum non est; tribulationem tamen carnis habebunt huiusmodi (οἱ τοιοῦτοι i. e. sive vir sive virgo matrimonium contrahentes). Carnem aliqui ita interpretantur, ut idem fere sit quod concupiscentia atque Apostolus incontinentiae periculum, cui coniuges sint expositi, significet; quae explicatio, si v. 9. confertur, merito inepta dicitur. Tribulationem carnis (θλῖψιν τῇ σαρκί tribulationem carni) cum plerisque eodem sensu intelligimus, quo v. 26 praesentem necessitatem, ut omnes molestias et aerumnas complectatur, quas hac in terra in parte nostra sensitiva experimur, et quas multo plures et maiores experiatur necesse est coniux, quam virgo, quum non tantum in se ipso eas patiatur sed eliam in uxore sua liberisque suis, atque matrimonium ipsum multas secum afferat : « gemitum ventris (famem et sitim), nutrimenta filiorum, victus, tegumenta , dotes, aegritudines, apparatum domus, uxoris necessitatem, mariti dominationem » (A'*"). Plenissime et uberrime hos « coniugii moerores » (Oecum.) exponunt CAÀrys. (De virginit. 57), S. Heron. (c. lovin. l. 41 sqq.) aliique Patres; Paulus autem, qui Corinthios velut filios suos in Christo amat, eos ab his aerumnis inimunes esse desiderat ideoque addit : Ego autem vobis parco , i. e. vobis parcens suadeo, ut virginitatem matrimonio praeferentes oinnia illa incommoda, quae ex matrimonio exoriuntur, evitetlis; etenim « parcit, quando ad haec magis provocat, quae tribulationes carnis et sollicitudines memoratas excludunt » (44). Cur vero eos ab illis aerumnis liberatos manere velit, statim exponet. rent, a matrimonio absterreret. Quae explicatio, licet etiam ab haud paucis iunioribus Latinis una cuin priore afferatur, nec verbis tamen nec contextui satis convenit, quum Apostolus statim graviore argumento, quam molcstiarum matrimonii enumcratione, virginitatem commendet. Multo minus nobis probatur tertia explicatio a Tertull. (De pudic. 16) invecta et a nonnullis egregiis interpretibus (Thom.«ctc. Cai. otc. , Lap. otc.) adoptata, iuxta quam Paulus his verbis Corinthiis matrimonium propter eorum infirmitatem indulgeat ac perinittat (« consulo evitare coniugium, quod tamen concedo parcendo infirmitati vestrae « 7Àom.). Quomodo enim haec interpretatio contextui accommodetur, non apparet. 2.) Ratio, propter quam virginitas matrimonio praestat , accuratius explicatur (1,99-35). Mirantur nonnulli (cfr Chrys. de virginit. 49. etc.), quod B. Paulus ad praesentem necessitatem et tribulationes carnis vitandas virginitatem commendaverit altioribus eius praemiis et efficacioribus argumentis praetermissis, eumque ita egisse censent, quia Corinthii, carnales et parvuli in Christo, spiritualia argumenta ferre non potuerint; « probe enim sciebat , inquit CArys., eos utpote viles et humi repentes et terrae addictos rebus terrenis magis attrahi et allici ». Quae haud recte esse dicta apparet, si ad sententiarum ordinem nexumque et totius pericopae structuram attenditur; nam hucusque thesin dumtaxat suam proposuit, sed quo sensu necessitas praesens et tribulatio carnis intelligantur oporteat, nunc explicare incipit docens necessitatem praesentem ideo esse vitandam virginitate servata, quia « aliquid bonorum impediat futurorum » (S. Aug. de s. virginit. 14). Quam explicationem completo quodam syllogismo tradit : Ob temporis brevitatem consultius est, ut omnes, quantum eius fieri potest, ab omni sollicitudine, quam res terrenae afferunt, immunes sint (29-31); atqui coelibes facilius, quam coniuges, ab huius terrae curis immunes soli Deo servire possunt (32-34); ergo coelibatus, quamvis lege non sit praescriptus, matrimonio tamen praestat (v. 35). Verba sua superiora sese velle exponere indicat formula :
7:29
29. Hoc uaque dico, fratres, vel potius iuxta graecum : hoc autem dico, τοῦτο δέ φημι. Sunt quidem, qui inter τοῦτο δέ φημι et τοῦτο δὲ λέγω ita distinguant, ut prior formula sententiam novam afferat et τοῦτο ea, quae sequuntur, designet, altera praecedentem explicet sententiam et τοῦτο superiora designet; quae distinctio temere conficta est, siquidem in unico altero loco, in quo Paulus priore utitur, eadem ra- Lione, qua hic, praecedentem sententiam explicat (15,50). Iamvero argumentationis fundamentum ei praebet brevitas temporis, quod homo servitio divino impendere potest : Tempus Óreve est (ὁ καιρὸς συνε- σταλμένος ἐστίν); quae verba versio antiqua significantius reddidit : tempus tn collecto est (Tert.) vel collectum est (Cypr.), à. e. secundum divinam ordinationem contractum vel breve est, ut maiore cum diligentia ad eum finem adhibeatur, ad quem concessum est!. Tempus 1. Moderni aliqui interpretes acath. (Rück. Olsh. Neand.) participium συνεσταλμένος cenGraeci (CArys. de virginit. 73; Theodor. Oec. etc.), uti A'*" et pauci moderni cath. (Bisp. Mai. L R.) sed plerique acath., integrum illud intelligunt, quod usque ad secundum Christi adventum et mundi finem decurret; plerique autem Latini antiquiores (Hier. c. lovin. 1. 13; Pel. Prim. Herv. Thom. etc.) et recentiores (Ca:. Est. Lap. Men. Calm. Nat. M Ev. Dr.) vitae nostrae spatium interpretantur : « etiamsi nongentis, inquit Hier., viverémus annis, ut antiqui homines, tamen breve putandum esset, quod haberet aliquando finem et esse cessaret ». Utra ex his sententiis praeferatur, per se haud inultum interest, dummodo acatholicorum illorum error arceatur, qui Apostolum iterum propinquitatem secundi adventus Domini docerc asserunt. Ceterum Latinorum interpretatio merito praefertur, quia vocabulum καιρός, etsi praesens tempus in oppositione ad futuram aeternitatem aliquoties designat, per se tamen nihil nisi certum temporis spatium indicat et solo contextu definitam istam significationem accipit; atqui in hoc loco nihil adest, quo totam huius mundi aetatem intelligere cogamur; ea vero, quae sequuntur, aplius explicantur, si de vitac tempore, quod singulis hominibus concessum est, vocabulum χαιρός intelligitur. Etenim quia vita nostra brevis est, reliquum est, ut et qui habent urores, tamquam non habentes sint; cohabitare quidem matrimoniique iuribus uti coniuges non prohibentur (v. 5), cavere tamen debent, ne eius sive voluptatibus sive molestiis ἃ praecipuo suo munere, quod in divino servitio situm est, sese abripi aut retineri sinant. Atque eadem prorsus ratione cavendum est, ne aliis sive gaudiis sive tribulationibus homo ab uno illo, quod solum est necessarium, obripiatur; itaque
7:30
30. e/ qui flent, tamquam non flentes sint, et qui gaudent, tamquam non gaudentes , et qui emunt, tamquam non possidentes (χατέ- γχόντες, avide vel tenaciter retinentes),
7:31
31. et qui utuntur (hoc) mundo, tamquam non utantur, vel rectius iuxta Graecum : /amquam non abutentes (ὡς μὴ καταχρώμενοι). Καταχρῆσθαι, quod Tert. (de cultu fem. II. 9) reddidit abii, ἃ Graecis quidem (TAeodor. Oecum. etc.) et nonnullis Latinis (Ca4.) ita exponitur, ut hoc membro explicatio quaedam superiorum parudoxorum exprimatur : « qui utuntur mundo, eo ne utantur praeter iustitiam »; at χαταχρῆσθαι, sicuti latinum abuti, non tantum de malo alicuius rei usu usurpatur, sed etiam de pleno usu, quo res quasi consumitur; atque hoc sensu vocabulum hic videtur esse sumendum : « Qui rebus (huius) mundi utuntur, utantur iis obiter et velut in transcursu, quantum fert necessitas » (Est.). Ratio vero, cur ita adhibendae sint res omnes, quae nomine mund comprehenduntur, est earum fragilitas, qua indignae reddantur, quibus nostras curas sollicitudinesque impendamus : praeterit enim figura hutus mundi;
7:32
39. volo autem vos sine sollicitudine esse. Figura, σχῆμα, est externus rei habitus (cfr PA:/. 2,8), unde S. Hier. « figura praeterit, non substantia ». Omnes huius mundi res, quae in nostrum usum sunt conditae, caducae sunt et transitoriae; « quid igitur, inquit Chrys. (de virginit. 73), te de mundi rebus non perennibus, sed caducis, perennium et aeternarum oblitus, crucias? Non iam matrimonium, non dolores partus, non voluptas et concubitus, non divitiarum copia, non possessionum cura, non cibus nec tegumenta, non agricultura nec navigatio, non opera arte facta nec aedificia, non urbes nec aedes, sed alius quidam status aliaque vitae conditio succedent; illa omnia brevi interibunt. Quid igitur velut in omnia saecula hic mansuri illis omnem diligenüam impendimus, de rebus solliciti, a quibus saepe ante vesperam separabimur? Quid aerumnosam vitam eligimus, quum ad vitam molestiarum expertem (ἀπράγμονα βίον) Christus nos invitat? Volo enim, inquit, sine sollicitudine vos esse ». Atque simili modo TAeodor. : « Non amplius agricultura vel navigatio, non amplius regna vel imperia, non amplius servitus vel dominium, non amplius artes vel disciplinae, non amplius paupertas vel opulentia, neque similia erunt, quibus haec vita continetur. Futura autem vita aliam habebit rerum differentiam », de qua sola nos sollicitos esse vult Apostolus. Summa igitur horum versuum est, nec temporis, quod degimus, brevitatem nec rerum, quibus hic utimur, fragilitatem permittere, ut totos nos brevi isti tempori et caducis illis rebus devoveamus aut curis et sollicitudinibus non necessariis nos torqueamus, quum una sola sollicitudo, id quod in sequentibus accuratius explicatur, animos nostros occupare debeat. Parum vero Graecorum (Chrys. Theodor. ctc.) lectio ct interpretatio nobis probatur, quam aliqui moderni (Mui. — Heinr. God.) praefcrunt : ὃ χαιρὸς συνεσταλμένος ἐστὶν τὸ λοιπόν, ἵνα χτλ. « tempus abbreviatum est in posterum cum in finem, ut » etc. Sivo enim tempus vitae sive totum tempus usque ad adventum Christi intelligimus, illud « in posterum » suporfluum est nec satis aptum. Nequo rectius alii acath. legunt ct interpungunt : χαιρὸς συνεσταλμένος ἐστί, τὸ λοιπὸν ἵνα χτλ (Lachm. Hoffm. Holst. Goeb.) « tempus eum in finem cst abbreviatum, ut in posterum ctc. »; cur enim illud τὸ λοιπὸν summa cum emphasi ipsi particulae finali anteponatur, nulla prorsus cst ratio. — Nimis arcte cum .'ro multi primum membrum (ut et qui habent uxores ctc.) de solo matrimonii usu intclligunt (« Notandum cst, inquit Thom., quod tamquam non habens uxorem est, qui vel uxori debitum reddit nec exigit, vel propter infirmitatem uxorem ducit dolens «quod sine ea esse nequit, vcl pari nffoctu continentiam custodit, vel prolis ad cultum Dei generandae causa uxorem propriam cognoscit »; sim. Cai. Est. Lap. etc.); « neque enim haec referuntur ad usum coniugii, quasi Apostolus iubeat eos uxoris complexu abstinere, sed quod ex soquentibus planius constat, indicat non csse his rebus caducis οἱ terrenis voluptatibus [addo : molestiisque] penitus adhaerendum... Atque ita recte Primasius haec omnia, quao infra lunam sunt, immortalium bonorum comparationo flocci esse facienda docet, idque ait Pauli verbis significari » (Iust.). Posita Maiore ad syllogismi Minorem transiens coelibes (32. 33) et virgines (35) curarum terrenarum magis immunes esse, ut liberius et facilius Deo serviant, ostendit. Qui sine wzrore est (ὃ ἀγχμης) solltcitus est, quae Domini sunt, quomodo placeat Deo (lege : Domino),
7:33
33. qui autem. cum uzore cst (ὁ γαμιήσας) sollicitus est, quae sunt mundi, quomodo placeat uxori, et divisus est. (uia de omnibus virginibus, sive viris sive feminis, loquitur, Apostolus eodem modo, sicut v. 27., de viris incipit agere, neque hos versus, uti aliqui acath. volunt (God.), velut introductionem praemittit. Iam vero viro coelibi illud unum curae est, ut Domino placeat, aique nullo impediente ea omnia peragere polest, quae ad maiorem Domini gloriam ct suum ipsius profectum spiritualem pertinere censet. Verum aliter se habet ille, qui matrimonio lizatus est; plenam enim sui ipsius potestatem non habet (cfr v. ^), sed ad uxoris iura attendat oportet (v. 5) atque, id quod per se patet, filiorum suorum necessitatibus providere tenetur ; itaque « in multas sollicitudinum partes distractus et miseriarum » (S. Hier.) soli divino servitio vacare nequit, atque una ex parte Deo servire debens, alia ex parte ea quae mun«di sunt cogitare coactus contrariis quasi curis divisus est (usuéowevos cfr ud 1,129), quum eadem eum diligentia officia implere teneatur, quae inter se quasi pugnare videntur. Porro eadem, quae mariti et coelibis, etiam est uxoris et virginis ratio.
7:34
34. Et mulier innupta et virgo cogitat, quae Domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu. Quae autem nupla est, cogitat quae sunt mundi, quomodo placeat viro. luxta S. Hier. Paulus duplici nomine mulieris innuptae et virginis aut « ob clegantiam sermonis » usus est, aut « ut definiret, quid esset innupta, sc. virgo, ne meretrix putaretur innupta utpote nulli certo matrimonio ligata »; Est. mulierem innuptam intelligit viduam, de qua verba apostolica non minus, quam de virgine, valeant; at de merctricibus nemo hoc in loco cogitare potuit, de viduis autem infra (v. 39 sq.) Apostolus disseret, atque hic eas potius excluderc videtur. Quoniam enim de viris loquens appellatione : ὁ ἄγαιλος usus erat, eandem hic de feminis adhibere voluit : ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἄγαμος, sed explicationis gratia, ne viduae simul intelligerentur, addidit : ἡ παρθένος. Atqui virgo, sicut coelebs, omnium aliarum curarum soluta cogitat ca, quae Domini sunt, ut placeat Domino sancta corpore et spiritu, corpus scilicet suum mundum ub omni libidinis foeditate conservans atque a spiritu suo omnes impuras cogitationes arcens, ut iis, quae Domini sunt, meditandis et intelligendis vacet : nam « beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt ». Contra vero mulier, quae matrimonio ligata est, cogitat quae sunt mundi, atque viro suo placere studens a servitio divino retrahitur neque eadem cum perfectione ea, quae Domini sunt, curare potest. huitur : « differunt inter se » (Chrys.), nam ad hanc significationem illi quoque rcvertuntur, qui cum Theodor. ctc. explicant : « studiis suis divisae sunt, quum altcra his, altera aliis curam suam impendant »; acutius vero, quam verius et aptius, alii interprotantur : « divisus est studiis suis sexus femineus, uxore aliud, virgine aliud cogitantibus », — De reliquo integer huius loci sensus variis illis lectionibus non mutatur; priorem tainen lectionem cum $. Hier. mcrito praeferunt moderni plerique (etiam acath. Lachm. WH. Ew. Ileinr. Edw. Goeb. cic.). — Omni probabilitatc lectio caret S. Aug. (de s. virgin. 22.; de bono coni. 10; de bono vid. 2.) : Et divisa est mulier innupta et virgo; hacc cnim aptum sensum vix praebet nec contextu i consonat. Ex argumentatione sua Apostolus conclusionem ita colligit, ut Corinthii praeceptum sibi non imponi admoniti simul ad consilium apostolicum sequendum efficaciter stimulentur :
7:35
35. Porro hoc (vel iuxta graecum τοῦτο δέ : hoc autem) ad utilitatem vestram (adde cum A'r^ ex graeco : 2psorum) dico , non ut laqueum vobis inticiam. « Non violenter, inquit, velut laqueo iniecto vos ad has divitias rapio, sed magnum, quod exorietur, lucrum vobis ostendo » (TAeod.). Diligenter iterum Apostolus inter illud, quod utile est, interque illud, quod est necessarium, i. e. inter res, quae sunt de consilio, et illas, quae sunt de praecepto, distinguit. Laqueo iniecto venatores feras capiunt et libertate privant, atque positivis legibus hominis quoque libertas restringitur; at libertatem, quam Dominus fidelibus concesserat, Apostolus restringere noluit; velut bonus tamen pater, qui filiorum utilitatem promovere studet, magnum illud privilegium, quo coelibes ct virgines, quum divino soli servitio vacare possint, fruuntur, identidem eis ob oculos ponit. Tota enim eius argumentatio non eo tendit, ut praecepti laqueum fidelibus iniiciat, sed ad τὰ (promovendum), quod honestum est et quod facultatem praebeat sine mpedimento Dominum oósecrandi (ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ εὔσχημον καὶ ἐυπάρεδρον [vel εὐπρόσεδρον] τῷ Κυρίῳ ἀπερισπάστως). Ultimorum verborum graecorum proprietatem latino sermone non posse explicari ideoque ob translationis difficultatem ea in latinis codicibus penitus non inveniri, monet S. Hier. (c. lovin. I. 13); revera nec A'**, Pel. Sed. illa in commentariis suis explicant , nec August. aut alius ex PP. latinis Hieronymo antiquioribus illa allegant!. S. Hier. (l. c.) eodem fere modo, quo hodie in Vulg. leguntur, ea expressit : « sed ut ad id quod honestum est et intente facit servire Domino absque ulla distractione » vos exhorter. lam vero εὐσχήμων proprie est pulcher; quare ad mores translata vox non tam significat, aliquid simpliciter bonum vel Aonestum esse, quam illud splendore quodam esse insigne, ita ut perfectionem polius quam ordinarium honestatis gradum exprimat; quapropter S. Aug. (l. c.) rectissime : « non quia innuptarum bonum, inquit, honestum dixit, ideo putare debemus, turpe esse vinculum coniugale,... sed quod honesto erat honestius generali honesti nomine commendavit ». Porro εὐπάρεδρος (vel εὐπρόσεδρος, utraque lectio in bonis codd. legitur, sensu autem vocabula non distinguuntur) est is, qui bene assidet, s. assiduus; εὐπάρεδρος τῷ Κυρίῳ igitur ille est, qui Domino bene assidens in eius servitio vel in conversatione cum co assiduus est. Demum ἀπερισπάστως, quo adverbio gradus assiduitatis definitur, est i. q. noa distracte ac. proin illam assiduitatem indicat, quae variis curis aut laboribus non distenditur aut impeditur. In eo igitur est utilitas, quam iuxta Apostolum virginitas et coelibatus affert, ut homo pe?- fecta (decora) vita splendeat et alüis curis non. distractus assiduus sit in servitio Domini , aul si mavis : in conversatione cum Deo. Hinc clarissime elucet, quam longe a vero aberrent acatholici inlerpretes moderni, qui l'aulum virginitatem ob sui temporis angustias et ob erroneam, quam ei affingunt, opinionem de Domini adventu immediate instante commendasse censent. Omnino generali modo síatum virginalem cum statu coniugali comparat; atque iuxta eius doctrinam, quia virgines perfectius, quam coniuges, Domino servire pos sunt, status virginalis coniugali perfectior est. luvenibus, qui sui iuris erant, consilium v. 97. sq. traditum omnino sufficiebat; sed quia virgines a parentibus magis dependebant, Apostolus pauca addidit, quibus parentes edoceret, quomodo in hac re erga eas sese gerere deberent. Itaque eos non peccare monet, qui debitis conditionibus servatis filiam suam nuptum dent (r. 36), eos vero bene agere, qui eam illibatam servent (v. 37), bonum esse mairimonium, praeferendam esse virginitatem (v. 38). Transitum ad has regulas versu superiore iam praeparaverat dicens, virginitatem πρὸ; τὸ εὔσχημον (i. e. ad honestum vel potius ad virtutis decorem et perfectionem) conducere; ad haec enim alludens ait :
7:36
36. δὲ quis autem turpem se videri (ἀ σγἡμονεῖν) existimet super rüryine. sua , quod (rectius : si) sit superadulta, et τία oportet. fieri : quod vult, faciat ; non peccat , (s?) nubat. Quoniam verbum ἀσχημονεῖν duplicem (activam et passivam) significationem admittit (ignominiam inferre. cfr 13,5, ignominiam pati cfr. Deut. 25,3), duplex prioris membri versio tradi potest : « si quis indecore erga filiam sese agere existimat » aut « si quis iznominiam relate ad filiam suam se pati existimat ». Priorem versionem moderni pauci cath. (Met. LR.j. multi acath. (Mey. God. Heinr. Schn. etc.) praeferunt, atquc ad eundem sensum antiquiores aliqui latini interpretes ( Lyr. Dion.) pervenerunt. qui latino vocabulo turpis sensum « malc' gratiosus et inhoneste se habens » attribuerunt ; alteram tamen cum Graecis (CÀrys. de virg. 78., Theod. etc.) et antiquis verss. (12. Syr. Vulg.) antiquiores fere omnes (cath. et acath.) et moderni plerique cath. (M Ev. Bsp. Dr. etc.), pauci acath. (Gocb.) retinent, idque recte. Nam in priore sententia phrasis hypothetica (s? sit superadulta) difficile explicatur atque verbum ἀσχημονεῖν ipsum, si active sumitur, praecedenti πρὸς τὸ εὔσχημον, quod passivo sensu explicandum est (decorum esse vel haberi), parum apte opponitur. Haec igitur Apostoli videtur esse sententia : « Quamquam virginitas per se et ipsi virgini et eius parentibus decori et honori est, non omnes tamen hoc intelligunt (qw? potest capere , capiat); neque desunt parentes, qui filiam virginem, si superadulta sit, sibi ignominiae esse ct fore existiment ». De quanam autem ignominia Apostolus loquitur? 7/Aeodor., quem Est. Iust. Lap. etc. sequuntur, illam intelligit, quae ex erronea multorum opinione cum coelibatu coniuncta est; solet enim vulgus virgines superadultas velut a procis spretas irridere atque detrectare parentes, quod ob avaritiam aliamve causam minus honestam filias suas nuptui non tradiderint. Rectius tamen alii Graeci (TÀeopA. Oec.) atque Latini (A7, Pe/. Przm. etc. ; Thom. eic.), quibuscum iuniores et moderni plerique consentiunt (Nat. Mai. Bisp. ekc. — Mey. God. etc.) de illo dedecore agi censent. quod ex filiae innuptae corruptione in totam familiam redundat; puella enim, si florem aetatis (τὴν ἀχμήν) supergressa (ὑπέραχμος superadulta) minorem lhonestarum nuptiarum spem habet, maiori seductionis periculo est exposita. Itaque si quis sibi suaeque familiae hoc dedecus a filia sua, si fuerit superadulta , illatum iri existimat e£ ita oportet fieri, i. e. si ideo eam nuptui tradi oportct, quia patris opinio non est levis quaedam suspicio, sed firmum animi iudicium. «quatenus filiam castitatem servare nolle (TÀon. etc.) nec donum conünentiae possidere pro certo habet, quod vut, faciat. Quae ultima verba TÀom. cum aliis haud recte explicat : « quod vult filia, faciat pater »; plane crronee autem alii antiquiores eadem ita interpretantur, ut patri, etiamsi duae conditiones adsint, « liberum sit filiam nuptui tradere aut non » (Est. Iust. Lap. etc.); genuinus enim sensus est : quod ad vitandam iguominiam, quam propter filiae incontinentium sibi imminere iure existimat, facere vult pater, faciat. [Idque patri licere ostendit Apostolus addens : non peccat sc. pater, si filia nubat, nut accuratius iuxta graecum οὐχ ἄμχρτάνει, γαμείτωσαν « non peccat pater, nubant (virgines) », si illae nimirum adsunt conditiones, quas dixit !. Negative tantum Apostolus de eo, qui filiam suam nuptui dat, sententiam suam expressit : 10A peccat ; iuvenis, qui uxorcm ducit, ct virgo, Consilio suo de virginibus Apostolus appendicis gratia verba pauca de secundis nuptiis addit, quas licitas (v. 39) sed viduitate minus perfectas esse (v. 80) docet. Virgini igitur mueren, 1. e. uxorem, opponit, quae, quamdiu vir eius vivit, ligata manct, mortuo autem viro ad secundas (vel etiam tertias etc.) nuptias transire potest :
7:39
39. Mulier alligata est (legi), quanto tempore (ἐφ᾽ ὅσον) vir eius vivit. Vocabulum /egi rectius quidem omittitur (cfr VV. LL.), sed eius insertione sensus non mutatur; lex enim matrimonialis intelligitur, cui uxor vivo marito ita alligatur, ut cum altero esse nequeat, quin sit adultera (Hom. 1,29 sqq.). Neque sensus mntatur, si ἃ S. Hier. vocabulum viro inseritur; viro enim uxor lege matrimoniali alligatur, ut sint una caro. Animadvertatur oportet, Apostolum hoc loco non magis, quam supra (v. 10 sq.), ullam agnoscere vinculi coniugalis solutionem; sine ulla exceptione mulierem toto tempore (ἐφ᾽ ὅσον), quo vir eius vivit, ligatam esse asserit atque idem de viro, quo tempore uxor eius vivit, valere clarum est : si viri adulterio uxorem liberari putasset, id hoc loco praetermittere nec potuisset nec debuisset. Attamen iis, quae de matrimonii mixti solutione dixerat (v. 12 sqq.), contraria non statuit, quia de solis matrimoniis christianis loquitur. Id enim evidenter ex verbis additis elucet : quodsi dormiertt vir. etus, liberata est (vel melius iuxta graecum et latinos PP. : /:5era est). Nam verbum χοιμᾶσθαι (dormire), ubi translato moriendi sensu adhibetur, de iis solis usurpatur, qui gloriosae resurrectionis habent spem, i. e. de iustis, qui ante Domini mortem diem suum obierunt (MattÀ. 91,95; Ioan. 11,11 sq.; Act. 13,36; 2 Petr. 3,4), aut. de 115, qui in Christo moriuntur (cfr ad 11,30). Porro morte viri uxor vere liberatur a lege matrimoniali, « ut non sit adultera, si fuerit cum alio viro » (Rom. 7,5); quare cui vult, nubat, tantum in. Domino. Quod dictum apostolicum iuxta S. Aug. (de adult. coniug. 25) « duobus modis accipi potest : aut Christiana permanens, aut Christiano nubens »; quas duas explicationes clarius exprimunt et coniungendas censent A'*" (« tantum in Domino, hoc est, ut sine suspicione turpitudinis nubat el religionis suae viro nubat ») et Theodor. (« tantum in Domino, hoc est : pio fideli honeste et legitime »). Priorem tamen solam tradit S. CArys. (de lib. rep. 1I. 3 « tantum in Domino, hoc est : cum continentia et honestate »), cuius verba Oec. et TheopA. vepetunt , atque in eandem sententiam S. Aug. videtur inclinare, siquidem quidquam de mixtis matrimoniis in Novo Test. praeceptum esse negat (De fide et oper. 19; de adult. coniug. 25). At alteram acriter tenent Tert. (ad uxor. 11. 1. 2. etc.), qui istis verbis « indubitate » Christianum designari ait, S. Cypr. (c. Iud. test. III. 62), qui eo usque progreditur, ut « iungere cum infidelibus vinculum matrimonii dicat idem esse, quod prostituere gentilibus membra Christi » (de laps. 6. cfr S. Awg. 1. c.), S. Hier. (c. lovin. 1. ᾿ 9; ad Ageruch. ep. 123,5 etc.); eandem quoque solam tradunt Pe/. Sed. Prim., quos plerique quum mediae aetatis (Herv. H Car. Thom. Lyr. etc.), tum recentiores (Est. Iust. Lap. etc.) οἱ moderni fere omnes cath. et acath. sequuntur; revera verbis fantum zn Domino non tam modus , quo matrimonium contrahendum sit, quam persona, quacum contrahatur, definiri videtur (cu? veit). Neque tamen ita hanc explicationem tenendam esse patet, ut prior excludatur; inter Christianos enim non nisi « honeste et legitime » e£ « cum continentia et honestate » matrimonium contrahi Apostolus supponit. Licitae igitur sunt secundae nuptiae, at nequaquam sunt praeceptae :
7:40
40. Beatior autem. erit (vidua), s? stc. (libera sc. solutaque a lege matrimoniali) permanserit secundum meum consilium. Cur beatior (μαχαριωτέρα) sit, diserte quidem non docet, sed ex iis, quae de virginibus dixerat, colligendum relinquit; beatior igitur erit non tantum ob evitatas vitae molestias, «uas matrimonium secum affert, sed praesertim ob maiorem coelibatus perfectionem ; uti virgo enim, ita etiam vidua non cogitat, quae mundi sunt, sed ea, quae sunt Domini, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu. Quam maiorem perfectionem spiritualem ab Apostolo praesertim intelligi, ipsa vox 5eattor (μακχα- ο'ωτέρα) innuit, quippe quae unico loco (Act. 26,2) excepto semper de felicitate adhibetur, quae bonis spiritualibus et ad salutem spectantibus obtinetur. Beatior igitur erit vidua, si ἃ secundis nuptiis abstinuerit, quia in perfectiore statu deget secundwmn Apostoli consilium, vel potius sententiam (χατὰ τὴν ἐμὴν γνώμην), quae sententia tamen hoc in loco consitum vocari potest, quatenus eam a viduis teneri et observari desiderat. Cui sententiae vel consilio maiorem conciliaturus auctoritatem demum addit : Puto autem, quod οί ego Spiritum Dei habeam. Per litoten Apostolum illud puto (90x) adhibere, plerique interpretes inde ἃ CAÀrys. tempore recte tenent (« minus dicit plus volens intelligi » Es£.). Sicut in principio huius tractatus de coelibatu magna cum modestia misericordiae divinae inspirationem suam attribuit, qua fidelis consiliarius factus est (v. 25), ita eadem cum modestia hic sibi eandem quam reliquis Apostolis (« e£ ego » sicut alii) divinam inspirationem asserit (cfr Oec. Theoph. etc., A'*" ctc.). Minus recte Gl ord., quam cum Tom. alii sequuntur, Apostolum « hoc puto non dubitando, sed quasi increpando » dicere asserit; nec rectius moderni nonnulli acatholici in illo verbo ironiam detegunt sive contra illos, qui apostolicam eius auctoritatem negabant (Mey. ctc.), sive contra Petri- . nosaut nescio quam factionem ( Neand. Naeb.); nam contentionis vel ironiae quodnam adest vestigium ? Longius iterum God. aberrat, qui hie quoque ab Apostolo eaim solam inspirationem asseri tenet, quae omnibus Christianis competat (e£ ego, sicut Christianus quicumque); hac nimirum rationc co pervenire vult, ut Apostoli seutentiam de virginitatis et viduitatis praestantia velut privatam iudicio omnium Christianorum subiectam esse nobis persuadeat. Nusquam autem, uti supra iam monuimus (ad v. 25). Paulus omnibus Christianis inspirationem aliquam attribuit atque multo minus doctrinam suam iudicio fidelium subiicit. l'er gratiam potius, quac ei data est, omnibus (non tantum Romanis, sed etiam Corinthiis etc.) dicit : non plus sapere quam oportet sapere, sed sapere ad sobrietatem, sicut unicuique Dcus divisit mensuram fidei (Rom. 12,3); atque tantum abest, ut omnes Corinthios sententiarum ct consiliorum suorum constituat iudices, ut illos ipsos, qui Corinthi dono prophetico aut alia gratia spirituali sese instructos arbitrabantur, ex eorum consensu cum suis doctrinis diiudicaudos esse doccat (44,37. 38). Quaestionem de idolothytis eadem ratione, qua superiorem de matrimonio et coelibatu, Apostolo ab ipsis Corinthiis esse propositam, interpretes aliqui antiqui. (Przm. οἷς.) iam innuunt recentioresque (efr Est. Iust. Lap. etc.) e& moderni fere omnes recte censent; etsi enim idolothytorum quaestio apostolico decreto (Act. 15,23 sqq.) antea iam definita esse videbatur, de illa tamen Corinthi dubitationes esse exortas, quae l'auli iudicio erant subiiciendae, facile concipitur. Namque Apostolorum decretum solos Antiochiae, Syriae, Ciliciac Etbnicochristianos proxime spectavit (Act. 15,93) atque in illis solis ecclesiis, ut videtur, est promulgatum (Act. 15,30. ^1; 16,4; cfr βαron. Ànn. ad a. 51. n. 58 etc.); maior enim ibi erat illius necessitas faciliorque observatio, quia magnus ibi degebat Iudaeorum numerus, quorum scandalum erat vitandum et quibuscum Ethnicochristiani commercio et consuetudine coniungebantur. Aliter autem in ecclesiis, quas in secunda sua expeditione Paulus in Macedonia et Graecia fundavit, ves sese habebant; tam pauci enim ibi degebant ludaei, ut ne synagogas quidem omnibus in civitatibus maioribus possiderent ; levius igitur rariusque erat periculum scandali , sed multo - difficilior decreti, si in toto suo rigore totaque sua extensione urgebatur, observatio, quia primi neophyti cum ethnicis suis propinquis el amicis veterem consuetudinem usumque retinere debebant, nisi ex mundo exire vellent (5,10). Vix minus frequentia autem ab ethnicis, quam a Iudaeis, quum ob publicas tum ob privatas causas sacrificia offerebantur, quorum ca erat ratio, ut solis extis in altari concrematis aut alio modo destructis integrae quidem victimae diis censerentur consecratae , earum tamen carnes usui profano fere inservirent. Postquam enim sacerdotes pavtem, quae eis competebat, acceperant atque epulae sacrificales, ad quas etiam propinqui et amici invitabantur, in templorum lucis aut in domibus privatis erant celebratae, residuae victimarum carnes sacrificantibus reddebantur, qui eas aut ad quotidianum victum adhibebant aut pauperibus dividebant aut publice divendebant. Frequentissimae igitur neoph ytis sese offerebant idoloth ytorum manducandorum .OCcasiones , sive a consauguineis vel amicis ad epulas sacrificales invitabantur, sive ad familiaria convivia vocatis carnes immolatae una cum aliis apponebantur, sive res victui quotidiano necessarias conquirentibus in macello publico idolothyta vendebantur. Unde necessario quaestio exoriebatur, qnid singulis in casibus esset agendum; ad eam vero solvendam decretum apostolicum, si Corinthi esset promulgatum, sufficiens non fuisset; omnino enim generale crat neque ad casuum qui sese offerebant varietatem neque ad magnam , quae inter ecclesias ethnicochristisnas ipsas intercedebat, differentiam attendebat; agebatur autem de re, quae non ob intrinsecam suam malitiam erat prohibita, sed cuius prohibitione Apostoli scandalum Iudaeorum evitare atque iudaicos et ethnicos neophytos facilius intimiusque unirc voluerant. Hinc mirum non est, quod quaestio haec a corinthiis neophytis non eadem ratioue sit soluta. Alii enim omnia sibi licere rati (6,12; 10,93) non tantum ad familiaria convivia vocati carnibus, quas diis oblatas esse sciebant, sine scrupulo vescebantur, sed in ipsis idolorum fanis epulis sacrificalibus interdum videntur accubuisse (8, 10; 10,14 sqq.); alii scrupulosiores ab eiusmodi quidem dapibus sese abstinebant, communibus vero in conviviis omnia, quae apponebantur, manducabant non solliciti, num idolothyta essent; utrique ethnicorum deos mera esse figmenta asserebant ac proinde carnes oblatas inquinare non posse. ἃ quibus alii superstitiosiores, quia idolis potestatem aliquam erronec attribuebant, dissentientes diligenter inquirebant, num forte carnes, quae in privata mensa apponebantur aut in publicis macellis vaenibant, ex victimis essent desumtac. Ad quasnam factiones auctores et fautores variarum sententiarum pertinuerint, frustra et temere moderni interpretes multi inquirunt ; quia enim hac de re nihil traditum est, pro suo quisque arbitratu ludaeochristianis aut Ethnicocbristianis, Paulinis aut Petrinis aut Apollonianis etc. laxiorem vel severiorem quaestionis solutionem attribuit. Id unum ex epistola nostra elucet, tantam fuisse opinionum diversitatem, ut Pauli auctoritas ad unitatem bac quoque in re restituendam esset necessaria. Summa igitur cum providentia cavens, ne infirmorum superstitionem augeat neve libertatem christianam ultra iustos limites extendat, totam quaestionem ita solvit, ut in hoc tractatu decreti apostolici, licet illud non nominet, habeamus authenticam explicationem. Uti suffocatum etsanguinem, ita idolothyta quoque ad ludaeorum proxime scandalum vitandum prohibuerant Apostoli; quibuscum plane consentiens Paulus 1. in theoretica quaestionis solulione (8,1-13) idolothytorum usum per se quidem licitum esse sed ob proximi scandalum interdum illicitum fieri ostendit; 2. in longa deinde digressione /9,1-10.1*4) suo exemplo proposito ad maius bonum assequendum ab iis, quae per se sunt licita, saepe melius abstineri docet fidelesque exhortatur, ut suum exemplum secuti tutiore hac via salutem aeternam quaerant; 3. ad praxiu demum veniens regulas tradit (10,15-11,1), quae de idolothytorum usu singulis in occasionibus sint observandae. Tres igitur sunt huius tractatus sectiones. Qui veram sapientiam possident, idola nihil esse ac proin carnes oblatas inquinare non posse sciunt ; illis ergo idolothytorum usus licitus est, aliis vero, qui hoc ignorant, illicitus (8,1-7); at quia eorum usus ad salutem obtinendam non confert, etiam illi, qui meliorem scientiam babent, ab eo sesc abstineant oportet, quotiescumque iure timetur, ne infirmioribus fratribus scandalum detur (8,8-13). 1. Idolothyta per se non sunt inquinata (8, 1-7).
7:1
1 and 2 Corinthians, Epistles to the
… The rest seems to be an answer to the questions put to Paul in a letter from the community (1 Cor. 7:1); but it is natural that the envoys should have helped to clarify the meaning and the scope of the questions and doubts that agitated their Church.
Achaicus ('Αγαχός; Latin Achaicus)
… (I Cor. 16:17). But it does not appear that the three brought him the news (they were "those of Chloe," I Cor. 1:11), nor — though this could nevertheless be maintained — the letter in which the community of Corinth proposed cases to be resolved (ibid. 7:1), news and letter that led the Apostle to write the 1st letter to the Corinthians.
Apocryphal Epistles to the Corinthians
APOCRYPHAL EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. - A brief letter of the Corinthians and a somewhat longer reply of Paul (III Cor.), suggested, it seems, respectively by I Cor. 7:1 and 5:9.
7:2
… Already St. Paul alludes to the negative effect of the moderation of concupiscence: "To avoid immorality, let each man have his own wife, and each woman have her own husband" (1 Cor. 7:2; cf. 1 Thess. 4:4-5). The Council of Trent further recalls, among the effects wrought by the sacrament, the perfecting of natural love and the consolidation of the indissoluble unity, …
… Christian Marriage, which represents the intimate union between Christ and his Church (cf. Eph. 5, 32); and he descends to practical cases to regulate the use of Marriage, declaring its lawfulness but subordinating it to the more esteemed state of virginity (I Cor. 7, 2-40).
… For St. Clement of Rome (ca. 101) the preaching of the Apostles and of the bishops appointed by them is the "rule of our tradition (τῆς παραδόσεως ἡμῶν κανών: I Cor. 7, 2). According to St. Irenaeus (d. 202), the Church "preaches, teaches and transmits the same things as though she had but one mouth. …
7:3
2. Some applications. - At the request of the other spouse, one is obliged to render the conjugal debt under pain of grave sin (I Cor. 7:3); refusal is only a venial sin (unless the other spouse is exposed to the danger of incontinence), when the requesting party easily renounces his or her request, or the rendering is …
This last duty, grave by its nature, is correlative to the right that with marriage each of the two contracting parties acquires over the body of the other precisely in relation to the conjugal act and to the other acts connected with it (cf. I Cor. 7, 3-4). Such right and corresponding duty is perpetual and exclusive (cf. can. 1111): perpetual inasmuch as it arises as soon as the marriage has been celebrated, and is never extinguished …
7:4
Adultery (from Latin adulterium, i.e., according to a probable etymology, ad alterum torum accessus)
… primitive conception of adultery, not only in the sense of a milder repression in view of a possible efficacious repentance (John 8:3-11), but also and above all in the sense of an absolute equalization of mutual rights and duties between man and woman (I Cor. 7:4). The adultery of the husband was therefore held by the Church to be just as sinful as that of the wife, since eadem a viro quae ab uxore debetur castimonia (c. 4, C. XXXII, q. 4), …
c) the duty of fidelity (cf. I Cor. 7, 4), from which it follows that every act of lust, whether external or merely internal, committed by one of the spouses (even if there were the consent of the other) with a third per-
7:5
… who do not believe, so that they cannot be enlightened by the gospel of the glory of Christ" (II Cor. 4:41), by means of the captious "wisdom of this world" (I Cor. 2:6) and the "depths of S." (Apoc. 2:24). "The tempter" (ὁ παρᾶς ἄννε: I Thess. 3:5; I Cor. 7:5; cf. Mt. 4:1-3) induces men to lie to God (Act. 5:3); his method is falsehood (Io. 8:44) and to seduce he "transfigures himself into an angel of light" (II Cor. 11:14). Against his …
… He certainly wrote another work, this one heretical, on perfection according to the Savior, to which Clement of Alexandria, who combated it, refers and of which he has preserved a passage that represents a rigorist and encratite exegesis of 1 Cor. 7:5, from which to deduce the diabolical origin of marriage. …
7:7
… This second interpretation would moreover be in opposition to what the same Apostle writes elsewhere (I Cor. 7:7; 32-34), when he formulates the wish to see others as himself (that is, not married: I Cor. 7:7), or when he explains the dispositions favorable to a soul giving itself to the service …
… you will have treasure in heaven; then come and follow me" (Mt. 19, 16-21; Mc. 10, 17-22; Lc. 18, 18-23); perpetual chastity (v.) in the answer given to the disciples concerning the renunciation of marriage for the Kingdom of heaven (Mt. 19, 10-12; cf. I Cor. 7, 7 ff., 25-40); perfect obedience (v.), or the spontaneous subordination of one's will to that of others, in the words that express self-denial (v.): "If anyone wishes to come after me, let …
7:8
… apostle Paul is explicit on the lawfulness of second marriages, since the marriage bond is dissolved by the death of the spouse (Rom. 7:3; 1 Cor. 7:39). Therefore, while praising chaste widowhood as a more perfect state of life, he does not impose it (1 Cor. 7:8); indeed, to young widows he advises marriage again (1 Tim. 5:14). And only in the candidate for the episcopate does he require, for various reasons, that he be "unius uxoris vir" …
… They are already spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles, but they were numerous in the following times (Acts 21:8-9; 1 Cor. 7:8-9; Rev. 14:4; Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III, 31: PG 21, 279; Clement of Alexandria, Strom., II, 18: PG 8, 1040). Later they received the name of "ascetics," from the comparison that …
… permission to the widow before the lapse of ten months unless he has sufficient certainty that those inconveniences which the legislator intends to obviate are excluded." Therefore, according to the teaching of the Church, although a chaste v. is preferable (I Cor. 7, 8 ff., 39 ff.), second and further marriages are not forbidden to the widow (v. MATRIMONIO, IV. Diritto e teologia morale, Seconde nozze). …
7:9
… there can be particular cases in which the warning of St. Paul is to be applied: "I say to the unmarried and to the widows: it is good if they remain as I am; but if they cannot contain themselves, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn" (I Cor. 7, 9); but one can never advise yielding to the sexual impulse, just as one does not advise killing oneself to one who feels driven to suicide, because impulses must be corrected and not indulged.
Usually, however, by continence is meant only complete abstinence from carnal pleasures, as in St. Paul (I Cor. 7, 9). Understood thus, continence is confounded with chastity and finds its most perfect expression in the state of one who irrevocably vows himself to interior and exterior chastity.
7:10
Indissolubility of Marriage and Divorce
… "Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another committeth adultery, and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" (ibid. 19:6; cf. Mk. 10:11-12; Lk. 16:18). The apostle Paul inculcates the same truth, almost in the same words (I Cor. 7:10-11, 39). Only death can break the bond (Rom. 7:2-3) of the two who have become one flesh (Eph. 5:31). Jesus Christ has only one spouse, which is the Church, and the Church has only one spouse, …
… Jesus Christ brings marriage back to its original unity: « Quicunque dimiserit uxorem suam... et alium duxerit moechatur, et qui dimissum duxerit, moechatur » (Mt. 19, 9), as is also confirmed by St. Paul (I Cor. 7, 10-11).
… certain knowledge of what he receives from God and distinguish it from his own personal reflections, and the very experience of the recipients of revelation assures us of this: it is enough to recall the way in which Paul speaks of virginity and marriage (1 Cor 7:10-12). Moreover, it must be remembered that we are not here dealing with phenomena explicable by purely natural causes; if God willed that the truth revealed by him should reach all men …
7:11
In the Gospel, separation for adultery is contemplated (Mt. 5:31-32; 19:9); St. Paul permits it for a legitimate cause (1 Cor. 7:11-12), and the Council of Trent confirmed its lawfulness (sess. …
7:12
The legislative power was clearly exercised at the Council of Jerusalem, when the abolition of the Mosaic observances was at issue, as is narrated in Acts 15. St. Paul, in 1 Cor. 7:12, promulgates that law which goes under the name of the "Pauline privilege."
II. FOUNDATION OF THE PAULINE PRIVILEGE. - The foundation lies in the scriptural text of 1 Cor. 7:12: "To the rest I say, not the Lord: if a brother (that is, a Christian) has an unbelieving wife and she is willing to live with him, he should not divorce her. And if a believing wife …
7:14
… solidarity in the Church are not few: he becomes weak if anyone is weak and burns with anger and grief if anyone is scandalized (II Cor. 11, 29); the Christian husband sanctifies his unbelieving wife and the believing wife sanctifies her pagan husband (I Cor. 7, 14); almsgiving in some way eliminates the inequality existing among the disciples, with the rich giving the poor the surplus of their temporal goods and the poor repaying the rich in …
7:20
… to fear this "day of the Lord," this "coming" of his (v. FABUSIA) which for us is sudden inasmuch as it is absolutely unknown (Matt. 24:37-51; 25:1-30; Mark 13:32-37; Luke 12:16-21, 35-46; 17:26-35; 21:24-36; Rom. 13:11-14; 14:10 f.; 1 Cor. 3:10-15; 7:20-32; 10:1-12; Phil. 2:15 f.; etc.) and the desire of the just man to "die to be with Christ" (2 Cor. 5:1-10; Phil. 1:21-26, etc.; cf. Bonsirven, pp. 311-15).
St. Paul makes known in I Cor. 7, 20 ff. his ideas concerning slaves and free men: it is not the seventh year or the J. that makes man free, but the call of the Lord.
7:22
… He does not condemn slavery, but dwells with satisfaction on the duty of "charity" and presents analogies suited to directing the thoughts of Christian masters toward other ideas (common slavery with regard to Christ, 1 Cor. 7:22; danger of a slavery of sin, Rom. 6:6, 16). In politics, a subject constantly avoided, P. does not appear at all the "revolutionary" identified by some contemporary Jews (cf. Acts …
7:25
… So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better" (I Cor. 7:25 and 35). This explains how virginity has been held in the greatest honor since Christian antiquity and how the holy Fathers consecrated particular works and praises to it, for example: …
7:29
All the faithful are called to holiness, at least in a general way. This truth is established by Sacred Scripture (Mt. 5:48; Lk. 14:25; Phil. 4:8; I Cor. 7:29-31; Eph. 1:4; II Tim. 3:10; I Pt. 1:15; I Io. 2:15; Apoc. 22:11), by the holy Fathers (St. Augustine, Sermo 96, 7; PL. 38, 588; St. Basil, Sermo de renunciatione saeculi; PG 31, 628), …
… things, so as to will them only insofar as they are the object of God's will (v. INDIFFERENCE). c) To embrace voluntarily for the love of God things contrary to one's own tastes, to renounce even lawful pleasures, to enjoy them as if not enjoying them (1 Cor. 7:29 ff.) with an interior renunciation, so as to render oneself thus more like Christ suffering, victims with the Victim of Expiation par excellence (cf. B. Rogacci, Dell'uno necessario, …
… In this mystical perspective time does not count: Paul and the "perfect," immersed in the absolute, saw on earth only the precariousness (I Cor. 7:29-31; I Pet. 4:7; I John 2:15-18) of men and of events (B. Allo [v. bibl.], pp. 180-83). And Christians are united from now on, living with Christ, to his p. which will also be the p. of …
7:31
… in support of the internal enemy, of two other terrible external enemies: the world (that is, the aggregate of those who oppose Christ, with their doctrine and form of life, to which the Christian must be "crucified" and vice versa: Gal. 6:14; cf. I Cor. 7:31); the devil, through whose envy sin, death and unbridled concupiscence entered the world, and against whom one must perpetually struggle (Eph. 6:12).
7:32
… what the same Apostle writes elsewhere (I Cor. 7:7; 32-34), when he formulates the wish to see others as himself (that is, not married: I Cor. 7:7), or when he explains the dispositions favorable to a soul giving itself to the service of the Lord (I Cor. 7:32-34).
7:34
The term spirit is used 145 times by St. Paul; although the general sense is undoubted, the precise sense of spirit is debatable in about 70 instances, there being an intimate interpenetration between the thinking principle of man (called spirit in I Cor. 2:11; 5:3; 7:34; etc.) or his way of thinking (ibid. 2:12 "spirit of the world"; etc.), and the activity of the Holy Spirit in man (ibid. 14:12, 32; I Thess. 5:16; II Thess. 2:2: the charisms) or …
7:36
I Cor. 7:36 = Eccl. 42:9; etc. (Spicq, p. 546); likewise also in the Epistola Barnabae or Didache (cf. S.-M. …
7:38
… For this reason a vow is not valid concerning an action whose omission is in itself morally better than its performance, and in this sense a vow to contract marriage is in itself not valid, because, as St. Paul says (1 Cor. 7:38): « Qui matrimonio iungit virginem suam, bene facit: et qui non iungit, melius facit ».
7:39
the body falls asleep, not the soul (cf. Deut. 31:16; Jn. 11:11-12; I Cor. 7:39; 11:30; 15:18; I Thess. 4:12 ff.; II Pt. 3:4).
1. Historical notes. - The teaching of Jesus is silent on this point, but the apostle Paul is explicit on the lawfulness of second marriages, since the marriage bond is dissolved by the death of the spouse (Rom. 7:3; 1 Cor. 7:39). Therefore, while praising chaste widowhood as a more perfect state of life, he does not impose it (1 Cor. 7:8); indeed, to young widows he advises marriage again (1 Tim. 5:14). And …
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Rheims 1582), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.