Marriage and Virginity
produce children, there can be no comparison between the two kinds of married person. In one case, but not in the other, there is that practice that goes beyond what is needed for procreation, which is accepted as excusable, although it is not what marriage is for. On the other hand, if there happen to be persons now who do not look for or desire in marriage anything except what marriage was instituted for, even these are not to be compared with those people in the past. In their case [that is, in the present] even the desire for children is carnal in nature, whereas with those others [in the Old Testament] it was spiritual, because it accorded with the institution as it was at that time. Now no one who is perfect seeks to have children except in a spiritual way; but then it was also a work of piety to conceive children physically, because producing children for that people was a sign of what was to come and was part of the prophetic arrangement.
20. Therefore, although it was right for one man to have several wives at the one time, it was not also right for a woman to have several husbands, even for the sake of having children, if it happened that she was able to have children but he was not. By a mysterious law of nature dominant forces love singularity; but in the case of subordinate ones it is appropriate not only for each to be subject to one superior, but, if natural or social considerations allow it, even for several to be subject to the same superior. One slave does not have several masters, though one master may have several slaves. So we do not read of any holy woman ministering at the same time to two or more husbands; but we do read of several women ministering to the one man, when the social condition of the race and the nature of the times made it advisable; and this was not contrary to the nature of marriage. This is because it is possible for several women to be pregnant by one man, but it is not possible for the one woman to be pregnant by several men (this is what gives the principles their strength). In the same way, it is right for many souls to be subject to the one God, and so souls have only one true God. One soul can indeed be unfaithful with many false gods, but it cannot be made fruitful with them.
Monogamous Marriage Is a Sacrament of Unity
18, 21. Out of many souls there will arise a city of people with a single soul and single heart turned to God.†35 This perfection of our unity will come about after this pilgrimage, when no longer will anyone's thoughts be hidden from another, and no longer will anyone be in conflict with anyone about anything. For this reason in our age the sacrament of marriage has been restored to being a union between one man and one woman, so much so that no one is allowed to be ordained a minister of the Church except a man who has had only one wife.†36 This was well understood by those who held the view that even someone who had a second wife while still a catechumen or a pagan should not be ordained. What is at issue is not sinfulness, but the sacrament, as all sins are taken away in baptism. He who said, 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), made it sufficiently clear that marriage is no sin. Because of the sanctity of the sacrament, however, just as a woman who has been violated, even while she was a catechumen, cannot be consecrated as one of God's virgins after she has been baptized, so too the view has been, without any absurdity, that although he has not committed a sin, someone who has had more than one wife has lost a certain prerequisite for receiving that sacrament. It is not a requirement for obtaining the reward of a good life, but a requirement for receiving the seal of ecclesiastical ordination. For this reason, just as the several wives of the ancient fathers were a symbol of our future Churches arising from all nations though subject to the one man Christ, so too the fact that our ecclesiastical leader is a man who has had only one wife symbolizes the union of all races in submission to the one man Christ. This will be perfected when he reveals the things hidden in the dark, and makes known the secrets of the heart, and then everyone will have his praise from God (1 Cor 4:5).
At present, among those who are going to be united in the one person there are open disagreements, as well as hidden disagreements, even without any failing in charity; but then there will be none of this at all. Therefore, just as the sacrament of polygamous marriage of that age was a symbol of the plurality of people who would be subject to God in all nations of the earth, so too the sacrament of monogamous marriage of our time is a symbol that in the future we shall all be united and subject to God in the one heavenly city. Accordingly, leaving a living husband to marry someone else is like serving two or more masters. It was not allowed then, it is not allowed now, and it never will be allowed. To renounce the one God and go over to the adulterous superstition of another god is always wrong. Hence our saints did not do what the Roman Cato is said to have done, handed over his wife during his own lifetime so that she could fill someone else's house with children.†37 In the marriages of our women the sanctity of the sacrament is worth more than the fecundity of the womb.