Marriage and Virginity (continued)
11, 12. Indeed when that natural practice slips beyond the bounds of the marriage contract, that is, beyond what is needed for procreation, with a wife it is a venial sin, but with a mistress it is a mortal sin. On the other hand, that unnatural practice is deplorable when it takes place with a mistress, but more deplorable when it takes place with one's wife. So important is the Creator's plan and the order in creation, that even when moderation is exceeded with things that are allowed to be done, this is far more acceptable than even a single or isolated deviation into things that are not allowed.
Consequently, one has to put up with a spouse's lack of moderation in the thing that is allowed, lest sensuality break out to do something that is not allowed. Hence too, however frequently a man is with his wife, he sins far less than by committing adultery even though only on a very rare occasion. When, however, a man wants to use a part of the woman's body that was not given for this purpose, the wife is more shameful if she allows this to be done to herself than if she allows it to be done to some other woman. What is honorable in marriage, therefore, is chastity in having children and fidelity in performing the conjugal duty. This is what marriage is for, and this is what the apostle defends against every charge, when he says, If you have married, you have not committed a sin, and if a virgin marries, she does not commit a sin (1 Cor 7:28), and, Let him do as he chooses; if he marries, he does not commit a sin (1 Cor 7:36). For the reasons already mentioned, however, some lack of moderation in demanding the performance of the conjugal duty, by either partner, is allowed to married persons as something excusable.
13. When, therefore, he says, A woman who is not married is concerned with what has to do with the Lord, in order to be holy both in body and mind (1 Cor 7:34), we should not understand from this that a chaste Christian wife does not have a holy body. It has been said indeed to all the faithful, Do you not know that your bodies are a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have received from God? (1 Cor 6:19). Accordingly the bodies of married persons who are faithful to each other and to the Lord are also holy. The holiness of anyone like that is not hindered by having a husband or wife who does not have the faith. On the contrary, the holiness of the wife benefits the husband who does not have the faith, or the holiness of the husband benefits the wife who does not have the faith, as the same apostle testifies, when he says, An unbelieving husband is made holy in his wife, and an unbelieving wife is made holy in the husband (1 Cor 7:14). Hence that other text is referring to the greater holiness of women who are not married in comparison with the holiness of those who are married. It also deserves a greater reward because of its superior excellence in being concerned only about how to please the Lord. It is not that a woman of faith who maintains conjugal chastity does not think about how to please the Lord, but she certainly does it less, because she also thinks about the affairs of the world and how to please her husband. He wanted to say this about married women, because to a certain extent marriage can require them to be concerned about worldly affairs and how to please their husbands.
A Married Woman Entirely Devoted to God Is Rare
12, 14. It is not unreasonable to wonder whether he said this about all married women, or about a type so numerous that it can almost be thought to be all of them. What he said about the unmarried ones, A woman who is not married is concerned with what has to do with the Lord, in order to be holy both in body and mind (1 Cor 7:34), does not apply to all unmarried women, since there are certain "dead" widows who live a life of pleasure.†27 In any case, as far as concerns the distinction and essential characteristics, as it were, of unmarried and married women, just as there is the extremely despicable woman who holds back from marriage, which is something permitted, but does not hold back from the pleasures of sensuality or pride or curiosity or gossiping, so too there is the rare married woman who even in complying with the demands of marriage thinks only of how to please God, and does not adorn herself with plaits in her hair or with gold and pearls and expensive clothes, but in the manner appropriate for women who show their devotion by their good conduct (1 Tm 2:9-10).
The apostle Peter also describes and commends this kind of marriage, saying, In the same way women should be obedient to their husbands, so that someone who does not believe the word can be won by the way the woman acts without anything being said, by observing your respectful and chaste way of acting. So they will not be the ones with the external adornment of curls in their hair, or who wear gold or fashionable clothes, but the kind of person who keeps herself hidden within her own heart with the stability of a uniformly tranquil and humble soul, which is true riches even in God's eyes. This was the way some holy women, who hoped in the Lord, adorned themselves, and were obedient to their husbands, as Sarah was obedient to Abraham and called him her Lord. By doing good and not worrying about trivial things you are her daughters. Likewise you husbands must live with your wives in peace and chastity, and, while they are physically weaker and subordinate, give them the respect due to coheirs of grace, and see that your prayers do not suffer any hindrance (1 Pt
3:1-7). So then, is it true that marriages like this are not concerned about what has to do with the Lord, how to please the Lord? Who could deny, though, that they are an extremely rare occurrence? Moreover, even in these rare cases almost always people like this did not marry intending to be like this, but they became like this after they were already married.
The Old Testament Saints Married Out of Duty
13, 15. In our time when Christians who are free from the bond of marriage and strong enough to abstain from all sexual union perceive that, as it was written, it is now not the time for embracing, but the time for refraining from all embracing (Eccl 3:5), and it is no longer required as a duty to human society, who among them would not choose to keep the celibate state of virginity or widowhood rather than endure the tribulation of the flesh that is inseparable from marriage (to say nothing of other things not mentioned by the apostle)? When, however, under the influence of passion they marry, if later they overcome this, they do not then have the freedom to dissolve the bond, in the way they had freedom not to enter into it. They then become the kind of persons that marriage formally proclaims them to be. Either they climb to a higher level of sanctity by mutual consent, or if they are not both like that, the one who is will grant what the other has a right to, but will not ask for it, all the time maintaining a chaste and devout harmony. On the other hand, in the times when the mystery of our salvation was still hidden under the veil of prophetic symbols, even those who were like that before marriage entered into marriage because of the duty to continue the race. They did not do this under the domination of lust, but in response to their sense of duty. If they had been offered the same alternative as is offered now with the revelation of the New Testament, when the Lord says, Let anyone who is able to accept this accept it (Mt 19:12), they would have accepted it even with joy.
No one will doubt this who reads with care and attention how they treated their wives. Even when one man was allowed to have several wives, they behaved toward them with greater chastity than is shown now toward one wife by any of those others, when we see what the apostle allows them as something excusable.†28 They had those wives because of their task of having children, not because of unhealthy passion like the people who do not know God (1
Thes 4:5). This is such a big thing that many people today find it easier to abstain completely from sexual union for their whole lives than to observe the restriction of not having