Opening the library…

Search the Bible

On Monogamy

Tertullian

Chapter 11

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter XI.—Further Remarks Upon St. Paul’s Teaching.

Grant, now, that you marry “in the Lord,”

‹ Chapter 10 Chapter 12 ›

in

accordance

with

the

law

and

the

apostle

—

if

,

notwithstanding

,

you

care

even

about

this

—

with

what

face

do

you

request

(

the

solemnizing

of

)

a

matrimony

which

is

unlawful

to

those

of

whom

you

request

it

;

of

a

monogamist

bishop

,

of

presbyters

and

deacons

bound

by

the

same

solemn

engagement

,

of

widows

whose

Order

you

have

in

your

own

person

refused

?

And

they

,

plainly

,

will

give

husbands

and

wives

as

they

would

morsels

of

bread

;

for

this

is

their

rendering

of

“

To

every

one

who

asketh

thee

thou

shalt

give

!

”

And

they

will

join

you

together

in

a

virgin

church

,

the

one

betrothed

of

the

one

Christ

!

And

you

will

pray

for

your

husbands

,

the

new

and

the

old

.

Make

your

election

,

to

which

of

the

twain

you

will

play

the

adulteress

.

I

think

,

to

both

.

But

if

you

have

any

wisdom

,

be

silent

on

behalf

of

the

dead

one

.

Let

your

silence

be

to

him

a

divorce

,

already

endorsed

in

the

dotal

gifts

of

another

.

In

this

way

you

will

earn

the

new

husband’s

favour

,

if

you

forget

the

old

.

You

ought

to

take

more

pains

to

please

him

for

whose

sake

you

have

not

preferred

to

please

God

!

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

.

”

For

it

is

out

of

this

passage

that

they

draw

their

defence

of

the

licence

of

second

marriage

;

nay

,

even

of

(

marriages

)

to

any

amount

,

if

of

second

(

marriage

)

:

for

that

which

has

ceased

to

be

once

for

all

,

is

open

to

any

and

every

number

.

But

the

sense

in

which

the

apostle

did

write

will

be

apparent

,

if

first

an

agreement

be

come

to

that

he

did

not

write

it

in

the

sense

of

which

the

Psychics

avail

themselves

.

Such

an

agreement

,

moreover

,

will

be

come

to

if

one

first

recall

to

mind

those

(

passages

)

which

are

diverse

from

the

passage

in

question

,

when

tried

by

the

standard

of

doctrine

,

of

volition

,

and

of

Paul’s

own

discipline

.

For

,

if

he

permits

second

nuptials

,

which

were

not

“

from

the

beginning

,

”

how

does

he

affirm

that

all

things

are

being

recollected

to

the

beginning

in

Christ

?

If

he

wills

us

to

iterate

conjugal

connections

,

how

does

he

maintain

that

“

our

seed

is

called

”

in

the

but

once

married

Isaac

as

its

author

?

How

does

he

make

monogamy

the

base

of

his

disposition

of

the

whole

Ecclesiastical

Order

,

if

this

rule

does

not

antecedently

hold

good

in

the

case

of

laics

,

from

whose

ranks

the

Ecclesiastical

Order

proceeds

?

How

does

he

call

away

from

the

enjoyment

of

marriage

such

as

are

still

in

the

married

position

,

saying

that

“

the

time

is

wound

up

,

”

if

he

calls

back

again

into

marriage

such

as

through

death

had

escaped

from

marriage

?

If

these

(

passages

)

are

diverse

from

that

one

about

which

the

present

question

is

,

it

will

be

agreed

(

as

we

have

said

)

that

he

did

not

write

in

that

sense

of

which

the

Psychics

avail

themselves

;

inasmuch

as

it

is

easier

(

of

belief

)

that

one

passage

should

have

some

explanation

agreeable

with

the

others

,

than

that

an

apostle

should

seem

to

have

taught

(

principles

)

mutually

diverse

.

That

explanation

we

shall

be

able

to

discover

in

the

subject

-

matter

itself

.

What

was

the

subject

-

matter

which

led

the

apostle

to

write

such

(

words

)

?

The

inexperience

of

a

new

and

just

rising

Church

,

which

he

was

rearing

,

to

wit

,

“

with

milk

,

”

not

yet

with

the

“

solid

food

”

of

stronger

doctrine

;

inexperience

so

great

,

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

:

“

But

concerning

these

(

things

)

which

ye

write

;

good

it

is

for

a

man

not

to

touch

a

woman

;

but

,

on

account

of

fornications

,

let

each

one

have

his

own

wife

.

”

He

shows

that

there

were

who

,

having

been

“

apprehended

by

the

faith

”

in

(

the

state

of

)

marriage

,

were

apprehensive

that

it

might

not

be

lawful

for

them

thenceforward

to

enjoy

their

marriage

,

because

they

had

believed

on

the

holy

flesh

of

Christ

.

And

yet

it

is

“

by

way

of

allowance

”

that

he

makes

the

concession

,

“

not

by

way

of

command

;

”

that

is

,

indulging

,

not

enjoining

,

the

practice

.

On

the

other

hand

,

he

“

willed

rather

”

that

all

should

be

what

he

himself

was

.

Similarly

,

too

,

in

sending

a

rescript

on

(

the

subject

of

)

divorce

,

he

demonstrates

that

some

had

been

thinking

over

that

also

,

chiefly

because

withal

they

did

not

suppose

that

they

were

to

persevere

,

after

faith

,

in

heathen

marriages

.

They

sought

counsel

,

further

,

“

concerning

virgins

”

—

for

“

precept

of

the

Lord

”

there

was

none

—

(

and

were

told

)

that

“

it

is

good

for

a

man

if

he

so

remain

permanently

;

”

(

“

so

”

)

,

of

course

,

as

he

may

have

been

found

by

the

faith

.

“

Thou

hast

been

bound

to

a

wife

,

seek

not

loosing

;

thou

hast

been

loosed

from

a

wife

,

seek

not

a

wife

.

”

“

But

if

thou

shalt

have

taken

to

(

thyself

)

a

wife

,

thou

hast

not

sinned

;

”

because

to

one

who

,

before

believing

,

had

been

“

loosed

from

a

wife

,

”

she

will

not

be

counted

a

second

wife

who

,

subsequently

to

believing

,

is

the

first

:

for

it

is

from

(

the

time

of

our

)

believing

that

our

life

itself

dates

its

origin

.

But

here

he

says

that

he

“

is

sparing

them

;

”

else

“

pressure

of

the

flesh

”

would

shortly

follow

,

in

consequence

of

the

straits

of

the

times

,

which

shunned

the

encumbrances

of

marriage

:

yea

,

rather

solicitude

must

be

felt

about

earning

the

Lord’s

favour

than

a

husband’s

.

And

thus

he

recalls

his

permission

.

So

,

then

,

in

the

very

same

passage

in

which

he

definitely

rules

that

“

each

one

ought

permanently

to

remain

in

that

calling

in

which

he

shall

be

called

;

”

adding

,

“

A

woman

is

bound

so

long

as

her

husband

liveth

;

but

if

he

shall

have

fallen

asleep

,

she

is

free

:

whom

she

shall

wish

let

her

marry

,

only

in

the

Lord

,

”

he

hence

also

demonstrates

that

such

a

woman

is

to

be

understood

as

has

withal

herself

been

“

found

”

(

by

the

faith

)

“

loosed

from

a

husband

,

”

similarly

as

the

husband

“

loosed

from

a

wife

”

—

the

“

loosing

”

having

taken

place

through

death

,

of

course

,

not

through

divorce

;

inasmuch

as

to

the

divorced

he

would

grant

no

permission

to

marry

,

in

the

teeth

of

the

primary

precept

.

And

so

“

a

woman

,

if

she

shall

have

married

,

will

not

sin

;

”

because

he

will

not

be

reckoned

a

second

husband

who

is

,

subsequently

to

her

believing

,

the

first

,

any

more

(

than

a

wife

thus

taken

will

be

counted

a

second

wife

)

.

And

so

truly

is

this

the

case

,

that

he

therefore

adds

,

“

only

in

the

Lord

;

”

because

the

question

in

agitation

was

about

her

who

had

a

heathen

(

husband

)

,

and

had

believed

subsequently

to

losing

him

:

for

fear

,

to

wit

,

that

she

might

presume

herself

able

to

marry

a

heathen

even

after

believing

;

albeit

not

even

this

is

an

object

of

care

to

the

Psychics

.

Let

us

plainly

know

that

,

in

the

Greek

original

,

it

does

not

stand

in

the

form

which

(

through

the

either

crafty

or

simple

alteration

of

two

syllables

)

has

gone

out

into

common

use

,

“

But

if

her

husband

shall

have

fallen

asleep

,

”

as

if

it

were

speaking

of

the

future

,

and

thereby

seemed

to

pertain

to

her

who

has

lost

her

husband

when

already

in

a

believing

state

.

If

this

indeed

had

been

so

,

licence

let

loose

without

limit

would

have

granted

a

(

fresh

)

husband

as

often

as

one

had

been

lost

,

without

any

such

modesty

in

marrying

as

is

congruous

even

to

heathens

.

But

even

if

it

had

been

so

,

as

if

referring

to

future

time

,

“

If

any

(

woman’s

)

husband

shall

have

died

,

even

the

future

would

just

as

much

pertain

to

her

whose

husband

shall

die

before

she

believed

.

Take

it

which

way

you

will

,

provided

you

do

not

overturn

the

rest

.

For

since

these

(

other

passages

)

agree

to

the

sense

(

given

above

)

:

“

Thou

hast

been

called

(

as

)

a

slave

;

care

not

:

”

“

Thou

hast

been

called

in

uncircumcision

;

be

not

circumcised

:

”

“

Thou

hast

been

called

in

circumcision

;

become

not

uncircumcised

:

”

with

which

concurs

,

“

Thou

hast

been

bound

to

a

wife

;

seek

not

loosing

:

thou

hast

been

loosed

from

a

wife

;

seek

not

a

wife

,

”

—

manifest

enough

it

is

that

these

passages

pertain

to

such

as

,

finding

themselves

in

a

new

and

recent

“

calling

,

”

were

consulting

(

the

apostle

)

on

the

subject

of

those

(

circumstantial

conditions

)

in

which

they

had

been

“

apprehended

”

by

the

faith

.

This will be the interpretation of that passage, to be examined as to whether it be congruous with the time and the occasion, and with the examples and arguments preceding as well as with the sentences and senses succeeding, and primarily with the individual advice and practice of the apostle himself: for nothing is so much to be guarded as (the care) that no one be found self-contradictory.

Notes

1
See Matt. v. 42; Luke vi. 30. Comp. de Bapt., c. xviii.
2
1 Cor. vii. 39, not rendered with very strict accuracy.
3
See c. v. above.
4
See de Ex. Cast., c. vii.
5
Comp. 1 Cor. iii. 2 with Heb. v. 11–14.
6
1 Cor. vii. 1, 2.