Commentary on 1 Corinthians 7:10-24
MATRIMONY IS INDISSOLUBLE
A Summary of 1 Cor 7:10-24
However more excellent celibacy is than the married state, it remains true that matrimony is a holy union of man and woman which has been ordained by God for high and noble purposes, and that for the proper accomplishment of these purposes the marriage bond is sacred and firm. Among the faithful it is altogether indissoluble by the ordinance of God Himself. And while some exception to this rule may be allowed, when one party is Christian and the other non-Christian, it must be remembered that the conditions of matrimonial unity which obtained before conversion remain for the most part after one has embraced the faith.
1 Cor 7:10. But to them that are married, not I, but the Lord commandeth, that the wife depart not from her husband.
1 Cor 11:11. And if she depart, that she remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband. And let not the husband put away his wife.
Fearing that some of his married readers might take too seriously the counsels he had just uttered and try to separate from their lawful partners, the Apostle now warns them of the sacred character of the marriage tie.
To them that are married, i.e., to those Christians of Corinth to whom St. Paul was writing, as to all the faithful everywhere, the Lord (Matt 5:32; 19:3 ff.; Mark 10:11, 12; Luke 16:18) has said that their marriages are indissoluble, and cannot be put asunder by any human power. This command of the Lord has been explained by the Church of Christ as pertaining to marriages that have been lawfully contracted and consummated. Of course the words of St. Paul here, as well as the command of Christ, apply also to pagan and Jewish marriages, since our Lord bases His teaching of the indissolubility of the marriage tie on the character of its primitive institution (Gen 2:24).
The Apostle here supposes that there may be just reasons which will permit two married Christians, whose matrimony has been consummated, to live apart; but it is just in such cases that the inseparable nature of their marriage bond is perceived, for they must be reconciled to each other, or remain unmarried, until one of them is dead.
It is evident that what is said of the wife in this verse applies equally to the husband, (a) because the rights and duties of married people are the same for both parties; and (b) because Christ said of the husband: “Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her” (Mark 10:11).
1 Cor 7:12. For 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.
1 Cor 7:13. And if any woman hath a husband that believeth not, and he consent to dwell with her, let her not put away her husband.
In verses 8, 9 the Apostle had spoken to the unmarried; and in verses 10, 11 he addressed directly married Christians, indirectly and implicitly touching also the marriages of Jews and pagans. Now he begins to speak to the rest, i.e., to those who were married before they knew of the Gospel, and one of whom has since embraced the faith, the other remaining in paganism or Judaism.
I speak, not the Lord, i.e., Christ had given no declaration regarding mixed marriages, but St. Paul, the inspired Apostle, who is speaking in the name and with the authority of the Holy Ghost (verses 25, 40) now says, by way of counsel, not of precept (St. Thomas), that in mixed marriages the Christian party should not depart from the non-Christian, provided the latter be willing to dwell in peace and not interfere with the other’s Christian duties.
That St. Paul is giving a counsel here and not a precept seems more probable on account of the practice of the Church, which has understood his words as a counsel and not as a command, and also on account of the mild language he uses here (εγω λεγω, I speak). Many grave authorities, however, hold that the Apostle is giving a precept in this matter, and consequently that the Christian party must not leave his or her peaceful and inoffensive non-Christian partner.
1 Cor 7:14. For 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.
A reason is now given why the Christian party ought to follow the counsel just given.
The unbelieving husband is sanctified, etc. It is plain that there can be no question here of real internal sanctification of which the unbelieving party is the recipient by reason of marriage with a Christian. The meaning is that the non-Christian party is to some extent disposed and inclined to the faith by the good life and example of the other party; or that, by virtue of the close union between husband and wife, who become one flesh, the unbelieving party participates, to some degree, in the sanctity of the Christian party, inasmuch as he begins to subject himself to the sway of Christ, withdrawing from the power of the evil one (Cornely).
Is sanctified by the believing husband. Better, “Is sanctified in the brother,” (with manuscripts B A C D E F G).
Otherwise your children should be unclean, i.e., if, as I have said, the unbelieving husband or wife, in a mixed marriage is not to some extent sanctified by the faithful party, it would follow that your children, i.e., the children of you Corinthians, would not be sanctified, which is admittedly false. It is evident that the Apostle is here speaking in general of the children of the Corinthian Christians, and not of the mixed marriages of the first part of the verse; for there he spoke in the third person singular, “the unbelieving husband,” etc., while here he uses the second person plural, “your children,” meaning the children of the Corinthian Christians to whom he was writing this letter.
Therefore just as the unbaptized children of Christians participate to some extent in the holiness of their parents, inasmuch as they are destined to receive the faith and the graces that follow upon Baptism, so in a mixed marriage the unbelieving party is sanctified by living with a partner who has embraced the faith.
From the above explanation of the final clause of this verse it would seem that the practice of baptizing infants had not been introduced in the Corinthian Church when this letter was written.
1 Cor 7:15. But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart. For a brother or sister is not under servitude in such cases. But God hath called us to peace.
This verse announces what is known as the “Pauline Privilege,” by virtue of which the Christian party of a mixed marriage that was contracted when both parties were non-Christian is not bound by the matrimonial tie and can remarry when the unbelieving party refuses cohabitation or makes this morally impossible. This privilege, however, is not recognized by modern
civil legislation.
If the unbeliever depart, i.e., if he refuses cohabitation with the Christian party, or makes their living together a moral impossibility.
For a brother or sister, etc. “For” is not in the Greek; and “the,” instead of “a,” should precede “brother” and “sister.” The meaning of the passage is that when one of an unbelieving couple is converted to the faith, and the other either departs, or makes cohabitation practically impossible, the Christian party is no longer under servitude, i.e., is no longer bound by the matrimonial tie, and consequently can remarry at discretion.
This doctrine is not de fide, but it is theologically certain. Evidently St. Paul is making a greater concession here than he made in verse 11, where separation was supposed as permissible. But if the right to remarry is not granted here, it is hard to see how the Christian party with an unbelieving and contumelious partner is any better off than the Christian wife of verse 11, who may separate from her Christian husband, but must remain unmarried.
The reason why a Christian is not obliged to live with an unbelieving and injurious husband or wife is because the faithful are called by God to a life of holy peace. But there can be no peace if the Christian is in constant turmoil with the unbelieving party.
1 Cor 7:16. For how knowest thou, wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
The only cause that could induce a Christian to bear with the abuse of a disagreeable and unbelieving partner is the hope of the latter’s conversion. Since, however, this is most uncertain, liberty and peace are to be preferred to such a life.
St. Chrysostom makes this verse refer to verses 12, 13, as giving a reason, namely, the hope of conversion, why the Christian party ought not to separate from his or her unbelieving partner.
1 Cor 7:17. But 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.
But as, etc., (ει μη, in an adversative sense), i.e., whatever may be said of the doctrine of the preceding verse, (Erasmus); or, aside from the case given in verse 15 (Cornely, Van Steenkiste), we must not think that conversion to the faith breaks up previous relations. Therefore let each one continue after his conversion in the same state of life and relationship to society in which he was before, provided this is not incompatible with the holiness required of every Christian.
I teach, i.e., this same doctrine St. Paul taught everywhere, namely, that it was not necessary to change one’s respectable state of life after conversion to the faith.
1 Cor 7:18. Is any man called, being circumcised? let him not procure uncircumcision. Is any man called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
1 Cor 7:19. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing: but the observance of the commandments of God.
The Apostle illustrates (in verse 19) the meaning of the previous verse. It makes no difference whether a man was circumcised or uncircumcised before his conversion to the faith. There is only one thing that counts for salvation, and that is the keeping of the commandments of God.
Is any man called in uncircumcision (verse 18). Better, “Hath any man been called,” etc.
1 Cor 7:20. Let every man abide in the same calling in which he was called.
So long as a man was leading a good respectable life before he was called by God to the faith, there is no reason for changing it after he becomes a Christian. A good natural calling in the world is also a gift of God.
Calling, i.e., the invitation to lead a certain kind of life. The word κλῆσις (klēsis), calling, used here, means everywhere in the New Testament the invitation to embrace Christianity. Thus whatever be one’s occupation in life, if it be decent, this will not interfere with his summons to lead a Christian life. Let every man abide, then, in the respectable condition of life in which God’s call to Christianity found him.
1 Cor 7:21. Wast thou called, being a bond man? care not for it; but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.
Therefore, whether one be a slave or a free man, his call to Christianity ought not to interfere with his previous respectable state.
But if thou mayest be made free, use it rather, i.e., when converted to Christianity as a slave do not change your condition, but remain faithful to your master. In this interpretation, which is that of the Fathers generally, “use it” means continue in your state as a slave. The explanation is made very probable by the fact that St. Paul would have incurred the great displeasure of Roman power had he meant to encourage slaves to become Christians as a means of getting their freedom. Moreover, St. Paul is counselling everyone to continue after his conversion in the state of life in which Christianity found him, provided that state offers no obstacles to piety. However, a Lapide, Calmet, Bisping and others think the Apostle is counselling slaves to embrace Christianity in order to gain their liberty. In either case, the Apostle is giving only a counsel and not a precept.
1 Cor 7:22. For 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.
Whatever may be their external condition of life, all Christians are equal before Christ (12:13; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11). Hence the bondman when called in the Lord, i.e., when converted to the faith, becomes the freeman of the Lord, i.e., is liberated from the slavery of sin and the evil one. In like manner, when a freeman is called to the faith he becomes the bondman of Christ, i.e., the slave of Christ, who has redeemed him from the servitude of sin.
Freeman should rather be freedman.
1 Cor 7:23. You are bought with a price; be not made the bond-slaves of men.
Addressing the Corinthians in general, the Apostle tells them that they were all, slaves and freedmen, formerly under the tyranny of sin, but now they are bought with a price (τιμης ηγορασθητε) , i.e., with the blood of Jesus Christ (6:20; 1 Peter 1:18, 19). Wherefore, since they are now the property and possession of their Redeemer, they should not permit themselves to be made the bond-slaves of men, i.e., they should not so make themselves the slaves of human masters as to neglect in any way their duties to their divine Master. As Christ is here contrasted with men, His Divinity is clearly implied.
1 Cor 7:24. Brethren, let every man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God.
Again for the third time (cf. verses 17, 20) the Apostle counsels that every convert should continue in the honest and upright state of life in which the faith found him.
Abide with God. This shows that St. Paul is presupposing that the life in which he advises to continue was good in the sight of God.
Labels: 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, Catholic, Fr. Callan, St Paul
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home