Against
Jovinianus.
————————————
Book I.
Jovinianus, concerning whom we know little more than is
to be found in the two following books, had published at Rome a Latin
treatise containing all, or part of the opinions here controverted,
viz. (1) “That a virgin is no better as such than a wife in the
sight of God. (2) Abstinence is no better than a thankful partaking of
food. (3) A person baptized with the Spirit as well as with water
cannot sin. (4) All sins are equal. (5) There is but one grade of
punishment and one of reward in the future state.” In addition to
this he held the birth of our Lord to have been by a “true
parturition,” and was thus at issue with the orthodoxy of the
time, according to which the infant Jesus passed through the walls of
the womb as His Resurrection body afterwards did out of the tomb or
through the closed doors. Pammachius, Jerome’s friend, brought
Jovinian’s book under the notice of Siricius, bishop of Rome, and
it was shortly afterwards condemned in synods at that city and at Milan
(about
a.d.
390). He subsequently sent
Jovinian’s books to Jerome, who answered them in the present
treatise in the year 393. Nothing more is known of Jovinian, but it has
been conjectured from Jerome’s remark in the treatise against
Vigilantius, where Jovinian is said to have “amidst pheasants and
pork rather belched out than breathed out his life,” and by a
kind of transmigration to have transmitted his opinions into
Vigilantius, that he had died before 409, the date of that work.
The first book is wholly on the first proposition of
Jovinianus, that relating to marriage and virginity. The first three
chapters are introductory. The rest may be divided into three
parts:
1 (ch. 4–13). An exposition, in Jerome’s
sense, of St. Paul’s teaching in
1 Cor. vii
.
2 (ch. 14–39). A statement of the teaching which
Jerome derives from the various books of both the Old and the New
Testaments.
3. A denunciation of Jovinianus (c. 40), and the praises
of virginity and of single marriages derived from examples in the
heathen world.
The treatise gives a remarkable specimen of
Jerome’s system of interpreting Scripture, and also of the
methods by which asceticism was introduced into the Church, and
marriage brought into disesteem.
1. Very few days have elapsed since the holy brethren of
Rome sent to me the treatises of a certain Jovinian with the request
that I would reply to the follies contained in them, and would crush
with evangelical and apostolic vigour the
4254
Epicurus of Christianity. I read but
could not in the least comprehend them. I began therefore to give them
closer attention, and to thoroughly sift not only words and sentences,
but almost every single syllable; for I wished first to ascertain his
meaning, and then to approve, or refute what he had said. But the style
is so barbarous, and the language so vile and such a heap of blunders,
that I could neither understand what he was talking about, nor by what
arguments he was trying to prove his points. At one moment he is all
bombast, at another he grovels: from time to time he lifts himself up,
and then like a wounded snake finds his own effort too much for him.
Not satisfied with the language of men, he attempts something
loftier.
4255
“The
mountains labour; a poor mouse is born.”
4256
“That
he’s gone mad ev’n mad Orestes swears.”
Moreover he involves everything in such inextricable
confusion that the saying of
4257
Plautus might
be applied to him:—“This is what none but a Sibyl will ever
read.”
To understand him we must be prophets. We read
Apollo’s
4258
raving
prophetesses. We remember, too, what
4259
Virgil says of senseless
noise.
4260
Heraclitus,
also, surnamed the Obscure, the philosophers find hard to understand
even with their utmost toil. But what are they compared with our
riddle-maker, whose books are much more difficult to comprehend than to
refute? Although (we must confess) the task of refuting them is no easy
one. For how can you overcome a man when you are quite in the dark as
to his meaning? But, not to be tedious to my reader, the introduction
to his second book, of which he has discharged himself like a sot after
a night’s debauch, will show the character of his eloquence, and
through what bright flowers of rhetoric he takes his stately
course.
2. “I respond to your invitation, not that I may
go through life with a high reputation, but may live free from idle
rumour. I beseech the ground, the young shoots of our plantations, the
plants and trees of tenderness snatched from the whirlpool of vice, to
grant me audience and the support of many listeners. We know that the
Church through hope, faith, charity, is inaccessible and impregnable.
In it no one is immature: all are apt to learn: none can force a way
into it by violence, or deceive it by craft.”
3. What, I ask, is the meaning of these portentous words
and of this grotesque description? Would you not think he was in a
feverish dream, or that he was seized with madness and ought to be put
into the strait jacket which Hippocrates prescribed? However often I
read him, even till my heart sinks within me, I am still in uncertainty
of his meaning.
4261
Everything
starts from, everything depends upon, something else. It is impossible
to make out any connection; and, excepting the proofs from Scripture
which he has not dared to exchange for his own lovely flowers of
rhetoric, his words suit all matter equally well, because they suit no
matter at all. This circumstance led me shrewdly to suspect that his
object in proclaiming the excellence of marriage was only to disparage
virginity. For when the less is put upon a level with the greater, the
lower profits by comparison, but the higher suffers wrong. For
ourselves, we do not follow the views of
4262
Marcion and Manichæus, and
disparage marriage; nor, deceived by the error of
4263
Tatian, the leader of the Encratites,
do we think all intercourse impure; he condemns and rejects not only
marriage but also food which God created for the use of man. We know
that in a great house, there are not only vessels of gold and silver,
but also of wood and earthenware. And that upon the foundation, Christ,
which Paul the master-builder laid, some build gold, silver, precious
stones: others, on the contrary, hay, wood, straw. We are not ignorant
of the words,
4264
“Marriage is honourable among
all, and the bed undefiled.” We have read God’s first
command,
4265
“Be fruitful, and multiply,
and replenish the earth”; but while we honour marriage we prefer
virginity which is the offspring of marriage. Will silver cease to be
silver, if gold is more precious than silver? Or is despite done to
tree and corn, if we prefer the fruit to root and foliage, or the grain
to stalk and ear? Virginity is to marriage what fruit is to the tree,
or grain to the straw. Although the hundred-fold, the sixty-fold, and
the thirty-fold spring from one earth and from one sowing, yet there is
a great difference in respect of number. The thirty-fold has reference
to marriage. The very way the
4266
fingers are
combined—see how they seem to embrace, tenderly kiss, and pledge
their troth either to other—is a picture of husband and wife. The
sixty-fold applies to widows, because they are placed in a position of
difficulty and distress. Hence the upper finger signifies their
depression, and the greater the difficulty in resisting the allurements
of pleasure once experienced, the greater the reward. Moreover (give
good heed, my reader), to denote a hundred, the right hand is used
instead of the left: a circle is made with the same fingers which on
the left hand represented widowhood, and thus the crown of virginity is
expressed. In saying this I have followed my own impatient spirit
rather than the course of the argument. For I had scarcely left
harbour, and had barely hoisted sail, when a swelling tide of words
suddenly swept me into the depths of the discussion. I must stay my
course, and take in canvas for a little while; nor will I indulge my
sword, anxious as it is to strike a blow for virginity. The farther
back the catapult is drawn, the greater the force of the missile. To
linger is not to lose, if by lingering victory is better assured. I
will briefly set forth our adversary’s views, and will drag them
out from
his books like snakes from
the holes where they hide, and will separate the venomous head from the
writhing body. What is baneful shall be discovered, that, when we have
the power, it may be crushed.
He says that “virgins, widows, and married women,
who have been once passed through the laver of Christ, if they are on a
par in other respects, are of equal merit.”
He endeavours to show that “they who with full
assurance of faith have been born again in baptism, cannot be
overthrown by the devil.”
His third point is “that there is no difference
between abstinence from food, and its reception with
thanksgiving.”
The fourth and last is “that there is one reward
in the kingdom of heaven for all who have kept their baptismal
vow.”
4. This is the hissing of the old serpent; by counsel
such as this the dragon drove man from Paradise. For he promised that
if they would prefer fulness to fasting they should be immortal, as
though it were an impossibility for them to fall; and while he promises
they shall be as Gods, he drives them from Paradise, with the result
that they who, while naked and unhampered, and as virgins unspotted
enjoyed the fellowship of the Lord were cast down into the vale of
tears, and sewed skins together to clothe themselves withal. But, not
to detain the reader any longer, I will keep to the division given
above and taking his propositions one by one will rely chiefly on the
evidence of Scripture to refute them, for fear he may chatter and
complain that he was overcome by rhetorical skill rather than by force
of truth. If I succeed in this and with the aid of a cloud of witnesses
from both Testaments prove too strong for him, I will then accept his
challenge, and adduce illustrations from secular literature. I will
show that even among philosophers and distinguished statesmen, the
virtuous are wont to be preferred by all to the voluptuous, that is to
say men like
4267
Pythagoras,
4268
Plato and
4269
Aristides, to
4270
Aristippus,
4271
Epicurus and
4272
Alcibiades. I entreat virgins of both
sexes and all such as are continent, the married also and the twice
married, to assist my efforts with their prayers. Jovinian is the
common enemy. For he who maintains all to be of equal merit, does no
less injury to virginity in comparing it with marriage than he does to
marriage, when he allows it to be lawful, but to the same extent as
second and third marriages. But to digamists and trigamists also he
does wrong, for he places on a level with them whoremongers and the
most licentious persons as soon as they have repented; but perhaps
those who have been married twice or thrice ought not to complain, for
the same whoremonger if penitent is made equal in the kingdom of heaven
even to virgins. I will therefore explain more clearly and in proper
sequence the arguments he employs and the illustrations he adduces
respecting marriage, and will treat them in the order in which he
states them. And I beg the reader not to be disturbed if he is
compelled to read Jovinian’s nauseating trash. He will all the
more gladly drink Christ’s antidote after the devil’s
poisonous concoction. Listen with patience, ye virgins; listen, I pray
you, to the voice of the most voluptuous of preachers; nay rather close
your ears, as you would to the Syren’s fabled songs, and pass on.
For a little while endure the wrongs you suffer: think you are
crucified with Christ, and are listening to the blasphemies of the
Pharisees.
5. First of all, he says, God declares that
4273
“therefore shall a man leave
his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they
shall be one flesh.” And lest we should say that this is a
quotation from the Old Testament, he asserts that it has been
4274
confirmed by the Lord in the
Gospel—“What God hath joined together, let not man put
asunder”: and he immediately adds,
4275
“Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth.” He next repeats the names of Seth, Enos,
Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, and tells us
that they all had wives and in accordance with the will of God begot
sons, as though there could be any table of descent or any history of
mankind without wives and children. “There,” says he,
“is Enoch, who walked with God and was carried up to heaven.
There is Noah, the only person who, except his wife, and his sons and
their wives, was saved at the deluge, although there must have been
many persons not of marriageable age, and therefore presumably virgins.
Again, after the deluge, when the human race started as it were anew,
men and women were paired together and a fresh blessing was pronounced
on procreation,
4276
“Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth.” Moreover, free permission was given to eat
flesh,
4277
“Every moving thing that
liveth shall be food for you; as the green herb have I given you
all.” He then flies off to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, of whom the
first had three wives, the second one, the third four, Leah, Rachel,
Billah, and Zilpah, and he declares that Abraham by his faith merited
the blessing which he received in begetting his son. Sarah, typifying
the Church, when it had ceased to be with her after the manner of
women, exchanged the curse of barrenness for the blessing of
child-bearing. We are informed that Rebekah went like a prophet to
inquire of the Lord, and was told,
4278
“Two nations and two peoples are in thy womb,” that Jacob
served for his wife, and that when Rachel, thinking it was in the power
of her husband to give her children, said,
4279
“Give me children, or else I
die,” he replied,
4280
“Am I
in God’s stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the
womb?” so well aware was he that the fruit of marriage cometh
from the Lord and not from the husband. We next learn that Joseph, a
holy man of spotless chastity, and all the patriarchs, had wives, and
that God blessed them all alike through the lips of Moses. Judah also
and Thamar are brought upon the scene, and he censures Onan, slain by
the Lord, because he, grudging to raise up seed to his brother, marred
the marriage rite. He refers to Moses and the leprosy of Miriam, who,
because she chided her brother on account of his wife, was stricken by
the avenging hand of God. He praises Samson, I may even say
extravagantly panegyrizes the uxorious Nazarite. Deborah also and Barak
are mentioned, because, although they had not the benefit of virginity,
they were victorious over the iron chariots of Sisera and Jabin. He
brings forward Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, and extols her for
arming herself with the
4281
stake. He
says there was no difference between Jephthah and his virgin daughter,
who was sacrificed to the Lord: nay, of the two, he prefers the faith
of the father to that of the daughter who met death with grief and
tears. He then comes to Samuel, another Nazarite of the Lord, who from
infancy was brought up in the tabernacle and was clad in a linen ephod,
or, as the words are rendered,
in linen vestments:
he, too, we
are told, begot sons without a stain upon his priestly purity. He
places Boaz and his wife Ruth side by side in his repository, and
traces the descent of Jesse and David from them. He then points out how
David himself, for the price of two hundred foreskins and at the peril
of his life, was bedded with the king’s daughter. What shall I
say of Solomon, whom he includes in the list of husbands, and
represents as a type of the Saviour, maintaining that of him it was
written,
4282
“Give the king thy
judgments, O God, and thy righteousness unto the king’s
son”? And
4283
“To
him shall be given of the gold of Sheba, and men shall pray for him
continually.” Then all at once he makes a jump to Elijah and
Elisha, and tells us as a great secret that the spirit of Elijah rested
on Elisha. Why he mentioned this he does not say. It can hardly be that
he thinks Elijah and Elisha, like the rest, were married men. The next
step is to Hezekiah, upon whose praises he dwells, and yet (I wonder
why) forgets to mention that he said,
4284
“Henceforth I will beget
children.” He relates that Josiah, a righteous man, in whose time
the book of Deuteronomy was found in the temple, was instructed by
Huldah, wife of Shallum. Daniel also and the three youths are classed
by him with the married. Suddenly he betakes himself to the Gospel, and
adduces Zachariah and Elizabeth, Peter and his father-in-law, and the
rest of the Apostles. 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,
4285
‘I desire therefore that the
younger widows marry, bear children.’ And
4286
‘Marriage is honourable and
the bed undefiled.’ And
4287
‘A
wife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth; but if the
husband be dead, she is free to be married to whom she will; only in
the Lord.’ And
4288
‘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,
4289
‘And they who have wives
as though they had them not.’ It can hardly be that you will say
the reason why he wished them to be married was that some widows had
already turned back after Satan: as though virgins never fell and their
fall was not more ruinous. All this makes it clear that in forbidding
to marry, and to eat food which God created for use, you have
consciences seared as with a hot iron, and are followers of the
Manichæans.” Then comes much more which it would be
unprofitable to discuss. At last he dashes into rhetoric and
apostrophizes virginity thus: “I do you no wrong, Virgin: you
have chosen a life of chastity on account of the present distress: you
determined on
the course in order
to be holy in body and spirit: be not proud: you and your married
sisters are members of the same Church.”
6. I have perhaps explained his position at too great a
length, and become tedious to my reader; but I thought it best to draw
up in full array against myself all his efforts, and to muster all the
forces of the enemy with their squadrons and generals, lest after an
early victory there should spring up a series of other engagements. I
will not therefore do battle with single foes, nor will I be satisfied
with skirmishes in which I meet small detachments of my opponents. The
battle must be fought with the whole army of the enemy, and the
disorderly rabble, fighting more like brigands than soldiers, must be
repulsed by the skill and method of regular warfare. In the front rank
I will set the Apostle Paul, and, since he is the bravest of generals,
will arm him with his own weapons, that is to say, his own statements.
For the Corinthians asked many questions about this matter, and the
doctor of the Gentiles and master of the Church gave full replies. What
he decreed we may regard as the law of Christ speaking in him. At the
same time, when we begin to refute the several arguments, I trust the
reader will give me his attention even before the Apostle speaks, and
will not, in his eagerness to discuss the most weighty points, neglect
the premises, and rush at once to the conclusion.
7. Among other things the Corinthians asked in their
letter whether after embracing the faith of Christ they ought to be
unmarried, and for the sake of continence put away their wives, and
whether believing virgins were at liberty to marry. 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.
4290
“Now concerning the things whereof
ye wrote: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, because of
fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have
her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife her due: and
likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power over
her own body, but the husband: And likewise also the husband hath not
power over his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other,
except it be by consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto
prayer, and may be together again, that Satan tempt you not because of
your incontinency. But this I say by way of permission not of
commandment. Yet I would that all men were even as I myself. Howbeit
each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another
after that. But I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for
them if they abide even as I. But if they have not continency, let them
marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.” Let us turn back
to the chief point of the evidence: “It is good,” he says,
“for a man not to touch a woman.” If it is good not to
touch a woman, it is bad to touch one: for there is no opposite to
goodness but badness. But if it be bad and the evil is pardoned, the
reason for the concession is to prevent worse evil. But surely a thing
which is only allowed because there may be something worse has only a
slight degree of goodness. He would never have added “let each
man have his own wife,” unless he had previously used the words
“but, because of fornications.” Do away with fornication,
and he will not say “let each man have his own wife.” Just
as though one were to lay it down: “It is good to feed on wheaten
bread, and to eat the finest wheat flour,” and yet to prevent a
person pressed by hunger from devouring cow-dung, I may allow him to
eat barley. Does it follow that the wheat will not have its peculiar
purity, because such an one prefers barley to excrement? That is
naturally good which does not admit of comparison with what is bad, and
is not eclipsed because something else is preferred. At the same time
we must notice the Apostle’s prudence. He did not say, it is good
not to have a wife: but, it is good not to touch a woman: as though
there were danger even in the touch: as though he who touched her,
would not escape from her who “hunteth for the precious
life,” who causeth the young man’s understanding to fly
away.
4291
“Can a man take fire in his
bosom, and his clothes not be burned? Or can one walk upon hot coals,
and his feet not be scorched?” As then he who touches fire is
instantly burned, so by the mere touch the peculiar nature of man and
woman is perceived, and the difference of sex is understood. Heathen
fables relate how
4292
Mithras and
4293
Ericthonius were begotten of the soil,
in stone or earth, by raging lust. Hence it was that our Joseph,
because the Egyptian woman wished to touch him, fled from her hands,
and, as if he had been bitten by a mad dog and feared the spreading
poison,
threw away the cloak which
she had touched. “But, because of fornications let each man have
his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.” He did
not say, because of fornication let each man marry a wife: otherwise by
this excuse he would have thrown the reins to lust, and whenever a
man’s wife died, he would have to marry another to prevent
fornication, but “have his own wife.” Let him he says have
and use his own wife, whom he had before he became a believer, and whom
it would have been good not to touch, and, when once he became a
follower of Christ, to know only as a sister, not as a wife unless
fornication should make it excusable to touch her. “The wife hath
not power over her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the
husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife.” The
whole question here concerns those who are married men. Is it lawful
for them to do what our Lord forbade in the Gospel, and to put away
their wives? Whence it is that the Apostle says, “It is good for
a man not to touch a woman.” But inasmuch as he who is once
married has no power to abstain except by mutual consent, and may not
reject an unoffending partner, let the husband render unto the wife her
due. He bound himself voluntarily that he might be under compulsion to
render it. “Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent
for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto prayer.” What, I
pray you, is the quality of that good thing which hinders prayer? which
does not allow the body of Christ to be received? So long as I do the
husband’s part, I fail in continency. The same Apostle in another
place commands us to pray always. If we are to pray always, it follows
that we must never be in the bondage of wedlock, for as often as I
render my wife her due, I cannot pray. The Apostle Peter had experience
of the bonds of marriage. See how he fashions the Church, and what
lesson he teaches Christians:
4294
“Ye
husbands in like manner dwell with your wives according to knowledge,
giving honour unto the woman, as unto the weaker vessel, as being also
joint-heirs of the grace of life; to the end that your prayers be not
hindered.” Observe that, as S. Paul before, because in both cases
the spirit is the same, so S. Peter now, says that prayers are hindered
by the performance of marriage duty. When he says
“likewise,” he challenges the husbands to imitate their
wives, because he has already given them commandment:
4295
“beholding your chaste
conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be the
outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing jewels of gold,
or of putting on apparel: but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in
the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the
sight of God of great price.” You see what kind of wedlock he
enjoins. Husbands and wives are to dwell together according to
knowledge, so that they may know what God wishes and desires, and give
honour to the weak vessel, woman. If we abstain from intercourse, we
give honour to our wives: if we do not abstain, it is clear that insult
is the opposite of honour. He also tells the wives to let their
husbands “see their chaste behaviour, and the hidden man of the
heart, in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit.”
Words truly worthy of an apostle, and of Christ’s rock! He lays
down the law for husbands and wives, condemns outward ornament, while
he praises continence, which is the ornament of the inner man, as seen
in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit. In effect he
says this: Since your outer man is corrupt, and you have ceased to
possess the blessing of incorruption characteristic of virgins, at
least imitate the incorruption of the spirit by subsequent abstinence,
and what you cannot show in the body exhibit in the mind. For these are
the riches, and these the ornaments of your union, which Christ
seeks.
8. The words which follow, “that ye may give
yourselves unto prayer, and may be together again,” might lead
one to suppose that the Apostle was expressing a wish and not making a
concession because of the danger of a greater fall. He therefore at
once adds, “lest Satan tempt you for your incontinency.” It
is a fine permission which is conveyed in the words “be together
again.” What it was that he blushed to call by its own name, and
thought only better than a temptation of Satan and the effect of
incontinence, we take trouble to discuss as if it were obscure,
although he has explained his meaning by saying, “this I say by
way of permission, not by way of command.” And do we still
hesitate to speak of marriage as a concession to weakness, not a thing
commanded, as though second and third marriages were not allowed on the
same ground, as though the doors of the Church were not opened by
repentance even to fornicators, and what is more, to the incestuous?
Take the case of the man who outraged his step-mother. Does not the
Apostle, after delivering him, in his first Epistle to the Corinthians,
to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit might be
saved, in the second Epistle take the offender back and strive to
prevent a brother from being swallowed up by overmuch grief. The
Apostle’s wish is one thing, his pardon another. If a wish be
ex
pressed, it confers a right; if a
thing is only called pardonable, we are wrong in using it. If you wish
to know the Apostle’s real mind, you must take in what follows:
“but I would that all men were as I am.” Happy is the man
who is like Paul! Fortunate is he who attends to the Apostle’s
command, not to his concession. This, says he, I wish, this I desire
that ye be imitators of me, as I also am of Christ, who was a Virgin
born of a Virgin, uncorrupt of her who was uncorrupt. We, because we
are men, cannot imitate our Lord’s nativity; 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
4296
“he that believeth in Christ
ought himself also to walk even as He walked.”
4297
“Howbeit each man hath his own
gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
What I wish, he says, is clear. But since in the Church there is a
diversity of gifts, I acquiesce in marriage, lest I should seem to
condemn nature. At the same time consider, that the gift of virginity
is one, that of marriage, another. For were the reward the same for the
married and for virgins, he would never after enjoining continence have
said:
4298
“Each man hath his own
gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.”
Where there is a distinction in one particular, there is a diversity
also in other points. I grant that even marriage is a gift of God, but
between gift and gift there is great diversity. In fact the Apostle
himself speaking of the same person who had repented of his incestuous
conduct, says:
4299
“so that
contrariwise ye should rather forgive him and comfort him, and to whom
ye forgive anything, I forgive also.” And that we might not think
a man’s gift contemptible, he added,
4300
“for what I also have forgiven, if I
have forgiven anything, for your sakes have I forgiven it, in the
presence of Christ.” There is diversity in the gifts of Christ.
Hence it is that by way of type Joseph has a coat of many colours. And
in the forty-fifth psalm we read,
4301
“at
thy right hand doth stand the queen in a vesture of gold wrought about
with divers colours.” And the Apostle Peter says,
4302
“as heirs together of the manifold
grace of God,” where the more expressive Greek word
ποικίλης
, i.e.,
varied
, is used.
9. Then come the words
4303
“But I say to the unmarried and
to widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they
have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to
burn.” Having conceded to married persons the enjoyment of
wedlock and pointed out his own wishes, he passes on to the unmarried
and to widows, sets before them his own practice for imitation, and
calls them happy if they so abide. “But if they have not
continency, let them marry,” just as he said before “But
because of fornications,” and “Lest Satan tempt you,
because of your incontinency.” And he gives a reason for saying
“If they have not continency, let them marry,” viz.
“It is better to marry than to burn.” The reason why it is
better to marry is that it is worse to burn. Let burning lust be
absent, and he will not say it is better to marry. The word
better
always implies a comparison with something worse, not a
thing absolutely good and incapable of comparison. It is as though he
said, it is better to have one eye than neither, it is better to stand
on one foot and to support the rest of the body with a stick, than to
crawl with broken legs. What do you say, Apostle? I do not believe you
when you say “Though I be rude in speech, yet am I not in
knowledge.” As humility is the source of the sayings “For I
am not worthy to be called an Apostle,” and “To me who am
the least of the Apostles,” and “As to one born out of due
time,” so here also we have an utterance of humility. You know
the meaning of language, or you would not quote
4304
Epimenides,
4305
Menander, and
4306
Aratus. When you are discussing
continence and virginity you say, “It is good for a man not to
touch a woman.” And, “It is good for them if they abide
even as I.” And, “I think that this is good by reason of
the present distress.” And, “That it is good for a man so
to be.” When you come to marriage, you do not say it is good to
marry, because you cannot then add “
than to burn;
”
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.
10. So far the first section has been explained. Let us
now come to those which follow.
4307
“But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord.
That the wife depart not from her husband (but and if she depart, let
her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband): and that
the husband leave not his wife. But to the rest say I, not the Lord: If
any brother hath an unbelieving wife, and she is content to dwell
with him, let him not leave her,”
and so on to the words “As God hath called each, so let him walk.
And so ordain I in all the churches.” This passage has no bearing
on our present controversy. For he ordains, according to the mind of
the Lord, that excepting the cause of fornication, a wife must not be
put away, and that a wife who has been put away, may not, so long as
her husband lives, be married to another, or at all events that her
duty is to be reconciled to her husband. But in the case of those who
are already married at the time of conversion, that is to say,
supposing one of the two were a believer, he enjoins that the believer
shall not put away the unbeliever. And after stating his reason,
viz.,
that the unbeliever who is unwilling to leave the believer
becomes thereby a candidate for the faith, he commands, on the other
hand, that if the unbeliever reject the faithful one on account of the
faith of Christ, the believer ought to depart, lest husband or wife be
preferred to Christ, in comparison with Whom we must hold even life
itself cheap. Yet at the present day many women despising the
Apostle’s command, are joined to heathen husbands, and prostitute
the temples of Christ to idols. They do not understand that they are
part of His body though indeed they are His ribs. The Apostle is
lenient to the union of unbelievers, who having (believing) husbands,
afterwards come to believe in Christ. He does not extend his indulgence
to those women who, although Christians, have been married to heathen
husbands. To these he elsewhere says,
4308
“Be not unequally yoked with
unbelievers: for what fellowship have righteousness and iniquity? or
what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ
with Belial? or what portion hath a believer with an unbeliever? And
what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? For we are a temple of
the living God.” Although I know that crowds of matrons will be
furious against me: although I know that just as they have shamelessly
despised the Lord, so they will rave at me who am but a flea and the
least of Christians: yet I will speak out what I think. I will say what
the Apostle has taught me, that they are not on the side of
righteousness, but of iniquity: 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,
4309
“A wife is bound for so long time
as her husband liveth: but if the husband be dead, she is free to be
married to whom she will; only in the Lord,” that is, to a
Christian. He who allows second and third marriages in the Lord,
forbids first marriages with a Gentile. Whence Abraham also makes his
servant swear upon his thigh, that is, on Christ, Who was to spring
from his seed, that he would not bring an alien-born as a wife for his
son Isaac. And Ezra checked an offence of this kind against God by
making his countrymen put away their wives. And the prophet Malachi
thus speaks,
4310
“Judah hath dealt
treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in
Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned the holiness of the Lord which he
loveth, and hath married the daughter of a strange god. The Lord will
cut off the man that doeth this,
4311
him that
teacheth and him that learneth, out of the tents of Jacob, and him that
offers an offering unto the Lord of hosts.” I have said this that
they who compare marriage with virginity, may at least know that such
marriages as these are on a lower level than digamy and trigamy.
11. In the above discussion the Apostle has taught that
the believer ought not to depart from the unbeliever, but remain in
marriage as the faith found them, and that each man whether married or
single should continue as he was when baptized into Christ; 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.
4312
“Was any man called being
circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. 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 bondservant? Care not for it: but even if thou
canst become free, use it rather. For he that was called in the Lord
being a bondservant, is the Lord’s freedman; likewise he that was
called, being free, is Christ’s bondservant. Ye were bought with
a price; become not bondservants of men. Brethren, let each man,
wherein he was called, therein abide with God.” Some, I suppose,
will find fault with the Apostle’s way of reasoning. I would
therefore ask first, What we are to infer from his suddenly passing in
a discussion concerning husbands and wives to a comparison of Jew and
Gentile, bond and free, and then returning, when this point is settled,
to the question about virgins, and telling us “Concerning virgins
I have no commandment from the Lord”; what has a comparison of
Jew and Gentile, bond and free, to do with wedlock and virginity? In
the next
place, how are we to
understand the words “Hath any been called in uncircumcision, let
him not be circumcised”?
4313
Can a man
who has lost his foreskin restore it again at his pleasure? Then, in
what sense are we to explain “For he that was called in the Lord,
being a bondservant, is the Lord’s freedman: likewise he that was
called, being free, is Christ’s bondservant.” Fourthly, how
is it that he who commanded servants to obey their masters according to
the flesh, now says, “Become not bondservants of men.”
Lastly, how are we to connect with slavery, or with circumcision, his
saying “Brethren, let each man, wherein he was called, therein
abide with God,” which even contradicts his previous opinion. We
heard him say “Become not bondservants of men.” How can we
then possibly abide in that vocation wherein we were called, when many
at the time they became believers had masters according to the flesh,
whose bondservants they are now forbidden to be? Moreover, what has the
argument about our abiding in the vocation wherein we were called, to
do with circumcision? for in another place the same Apostle cries aloud
“Behold I Paul tell you that, if ye be circumcised, Christ shall
profit you nothing”? We must conclude, therefore, that a higher
meaning should be given to circumcision and uncircumcision, bond and
free, and that these words must be taken in close connection with what
has gone before. “Was anyone called being circumcised? let him
not become uncircumcised.” If, he says, at the time you were
called and became a believer in Christ, if I say, you were called being
circumcised from a wife, that is, unmarried, do not marry a wife, that
is, do not become uncircumcised, lest you lay upon the freedom of
circumcision and chastity the burden of marriage. Again, if anyone was
called in uncircumcision, let him not be circumcised. You had a wife,
he says, when you believed: do not think the faith of Christ a reason
for disagreement, because God called us in peace.
4314
“Circumcision is nothing, and
uncircumcision is nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of
God.” For neither celibacy nor marriage availeth anything without
works, since even faith, which is specially characteristic of
Christians, if it have not works, is said to be dead, and vestal
virgins and Juno’s widows might upon these terms be numbered with
the saints. “Let each man in the vocation wherein he was called,
therein abide.” Whether he had, or had not, a wife when he
believed, let him remain in that condition in which he was when called.
Accordingly he does not so strongly urge virgins to be married, as
forbid divorce. And as he debars those who have wives from putting them
away, so he cuts off from virgins the power of being married.
“Thou wast called being a slave, heed it not; but even if thou
canst become free, use it rather.” Even if you have, he says, a
wife, and are bound to her, and pay her due, and have not power over
your own body; or if, to speak more clearly, you are the bondservant of
your wife, be not sad upon that account, nor sigh for the loss of your
virginity. But even if you can find some causes of discord, do not, for
the sake of thoroughly enjoying the liberty of chastity, seek your own
welfare by destroying another. Keep your wife awhile, and do not go too
fast for her lagging footsteps: wait till she follows. If you are
patient, your spouse will become a sister, “For he that was
called in the Lord, being a bondservant, is the Lord’s freedman:
likewise, he that was called being free, is Christ’s
bondservant.” He gives his reasons for not wishing wives to be
forsaken. He therefore says, I command that Gentiles who believe on
Christ do not abandon the married state in which they were before
embracing the faith: for he who had a wife when he became a believer,
is not so strictly devoted to the service of God as virgins and
unmarried persons. But, in a manner, he has more freedom, and the reins
of his bondage are relaxed; and, while he is the bondservant of a wife,
he is, so to speak, the freedman of the Lord. Moreover, he who when
called by the Lord had not a wife and was free from the bondage of
wedlock, he is truly Christ’s bondservant. What happiness to be
the bondservant, not of a wife but of Christ, to serve not the flesh,
but the spirit!
4315
“For he
who is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” There was some fear
that by saying “Wast thou called being a bondservant? Care not
for it: but, even if thou canst become free, use it rather,” he
might seem to have flouted continence, and to have given us up to the
slavery of marriage. He therefore makes a remark which removes all
cavil: “Ye were bought with a price, become not servants of
men.” We have been redeemed with the most precious blood of
Christ: the Lamb was slain for us, and having been sprinkled with
hyssop and the warm drops of His blood, we have rejected poisonous
pleasure. Why do we at whose baptism Pharaoh died and all his host was
drowned, again turn back in our hearts to Egypt, and after the manna,
angels’ food, sigh for the garlic and the onions and the
cucumbers, and Pharaoh’s meat?
12. Having discussed
marriage and continency he at length comes to virginity and says
4316
“Now concerning virgins I have no
commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgement, as one that hath
obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. 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.” Here our opponent goes utterly wild with
exultation: this is his strongest battering-ram with which he shakes
the wall of virginity. “See,” says he, “the Apostle
confesses that as regards virgins he has no commandment of the Lord,
and he who had with authority laid down the law respecting husbands and
wives, does not dare to command what the Lord has not enjoined. And
rightly too. For what is enjoined is commanded, what is commanded must
be done, and that which must be done implies punishment if it be not
done. For it is useless to order a thing to be done and yet leave the
individual free to do it or not do it. If the Lord had commanded
virginity He would have seemed to condemn marriage, and to do away with
the seed-plot of mankind, of which virginity itself is a growth. If He
had cut off the root, how was He to expect fruit? If the foundations
were not first laid, how was He to build the edifice, and put on the
roof to cover all! Excavators toil hard to remove mountains; the bowels
of the earth are pierced in the search for gold. And, when the tiny
particles, first by the blast of the furnace, then by the hand of the
cunning workman have been fashioned into an ornament, men do not call
him blessed who has separated the gold from the dross, but him who
wears the beautiful gold. Do not marvel then if, placed as we are, amid
temptations of the flesh and incentives to vice, the angelic life be
not exacted of us, but merely recommended. If advice be given, a man is
free to proffer obedience; if there be a command, he is a servant bound
to compliance. “I have no commandment,” he says, “of
the Lord: but I give my judgement, as one that hath obtained mercy of
the Lord to be faithful.” If you have no commandment of the Lord,
how dare you give judgement without orders? The Apostle will reply: Do
you wish me to give orders where the Lord has offered a favour rather
than laid down a law? 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
4317
begin with short periods of
release from the marriage bond, and give themselves unto prayer, that
when they have tasted the sweets of chastity they may desire the
perpetual possession of that wherewith they were temporarily delighted.
The Lord, when tempted by the Pharisees, and asked whether according to
the law of Moses it was permitted to put away a wife, forbade the
practice altogether. After weighing His words the disciples said to
Him:
4318
“If the case of the man is so
with his wife, it is not expedient to marry. But He said unto them, all
men cannot receive this saying, but they to whom it is given. For there
are eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and
there are eunuchs, which were made eunuchs by men: and there are
eunuchs, which made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of
heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive
it.” The reason is plain why the Apostle said, “concerning
virgins I have no commandment of the Lord.” Surely; because the
Lord had previously said “All men cannot receive the word, but
they to whom it is given,” and “He that is able to receive
it, let him receive it.”
4319
The
Master of the Christian race offers the reward, invites candidates to
the course, holds in His hand the prize of virginity, points to the
fountain of purity, and cries aloud
4320
“If
any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.” “He that
is able to receive it, let him receive it.” He does not say, you
must drink, you must run, willing or unwilling: but whoever is willing
and able to run and to drink, he shall conquer, he shall be satisfied.
And therefore Christ loves virgins more than others, because they
willingly give what was not commanded them. And it indicates greater
grace to offer what you are not bound to give, than to render what is
exacted of you. The apostles, contemplating the burden of a wife,
exclaimed, “If the case of the man is so with his wife, it is not
expedient to marry.” Our Lord thought well of their view. You
rightly think, said He, that it is not expedient for a man who is
hastening to the kingdom of heaven to take a wife: but it is a hard
matter, and all men do not receive the saying, but they to whom it has
been given. Some are eunuchs by nature, others by the violence of men.
Those eunuchs please Me who are such not of necessity, but of free
choice. Willingly do I take them into my bosom who have made themselves
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake, and in order to worship
Me
have renounced the condition of
their birth. We must now explain the words, “Those who have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” If
they who have made themselves eunuchs have the reward of the kingdom of
heaven, it follows that they who have not made themselves such cannot
be placed with those who have. He who is able, he says, to receive it,
let him receive it. It is a mark of great faith and of great virtue, to
be the pure temple of God, to offer oneself a whole burnt-offering,
and, according to the same apostle, to be holy both in body and in
spirit. These are the eunuchs, who thinking themselves dry trees
because of their impotence, hear by the mouth of
4321
Isaiah that they have a place prepared
in heaven for sons and daughters. Their type is
4322
Ebed-melech the eunuch in Jeremiah,
and the eunuch of Queen Candace in the
4323
Acts of the Apostles, who on account
of the strength of his faith gained the name of a
man.
These are
they to whom Clement, who was the successor of the Apostle Peter, and
of whom the Apostle Paul makes mention, wrote letters, directing almost
the whole of his discourse to the subject of virgin purity. 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.
4324
“I think, therefore,” he
says, “that this is good for the present distress.” What is
this distress which, in contempt of the marriage tie, longs for the
liberty of virginity?
4325
“Woe
unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those
days.” We have not here a condemnation of harlots and brothels,
of whose damnation there is no doubt, but of the swelling womb, and
wailing infancy, the fruit as well as the work of marriage. “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.
4326
“Art thou bound unto a wife?
Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a
wife.” Each one of us has his appointed bounds; let me have what
is mine, and keep your own. If thou art bound to a wife, give her not a
bill of divorce. If I am loosed from a wife, I will not seek a wife. As
I do not dissolve marriages once contracted: so you should not bind
what is loosed. And at the same time the meaning of the words must be
taken into account. He who has a wife is regarded as a debtor, and is
said to be uncircumcised, to be the servant of his wife, and like bad
servants to be
bound.
But he who has no wife, in the first place
owes no man anything, then is circumcised, thirdly is free, lastly, is
loosed.
13. Let us run through the remaining points, for our
author is so voluminous that we cannot linger over every detail.
“But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned.” It is one
thing not to sin, another to do good. “And if a virgin marry, she
hath not sinned.” Not that virgin who has once for all dedicated
herself to the service of God: for, should one of these marry, she will
have damnation, because she has made of no account her first faith.
But, if our adversary objects that this saying relates to widows, we
reply that it applies with still greater force to virgins, since
marriage is forbidden even to widows whose previous marriage had been
lawful. For virgins who marry after consecration are rather incestuous
than adulterous. And, for fear he should by saying, “And if a
virgin marry, she hath not sinned,” again stimulate the unmarried
to be married, he immediately checks himself, and by introducing
another consideration, invalidates his previous concession.
“Yet,” says he, “such shall have tribulation in the
flesh.” Who are they who shall have tribulation in the flesh?
They to whom he had before indulgently said “But and if thou
marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not
sinned. Yet such shall have tribulation in the flesh.” We in our
inexperience thought that marriage had at least the joys of the flesh.
But if they who are married have tribulation even in the flesh, which
is imagined to be the sole source of their pleasure, what else is there
to marry for, when in the spirit, and in the mind, and in the flesh
itself there is tribulation. “But I would spare you.” Thus,
he says, I allege tribulation as a motive, as though there were not
greater obligations to refrain. “But this I say, brethren, the
time is shortened, that henceforth both those that have wives may be as
though they had none.” I am by no means now discussing virgins,
of whose happiness no one entertains a doubt. I am coming to the
married. 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?
4327
“And those that weep, and those
that rejoice, and those that buy, and those that use the world, as
though they wept not, as though they rejoiced not, as though they
bought not, as though they did not use the world: for the fashion of
this world passeth
away.” If
the world, which comprehends all things, passes away, yea if the
fashion and intercourse of the world vanishes like the clouds, amongst
the other works of the world, marriage too will vanish away. For after
the resurrection there will be no wedlock. But if death be the end of
marriage, why do we not voluntarily embrace the inevitable? And why do
we not, encouraged by the hope of the reward, offer to God that which
must be wrung from us against our will. “He that is unmarried is
careful for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord: but he
that is married is careful for the things of the world, how he may
please his wife, and is
4328
divided.” Let us look at the difference between the cares of the
virgin, and those of the married man. The virgin longs to please the
Lord, the husband to please his wife, and that he may please her he is
careful for the things of the world, which will of course pass away
with the world. “And he is divided,” that is to say, is
distracted with manifold cares and miseries. This is not the place to
describe the difficulties of marriage, and to revel in rhetorical
commonplaces. I think I delivered myself fully as regards this point in
my argument against
4329
Helvidius,
and in the book which I addressed to
4330
Eustochium. At all events
4331
Tertullian, while still a young man,
gave himself full play with this subject. And my teacher,
4332
Gregory of Nazianzus, discussed
virginity and marriage in some Greek verses. I now briefly beg my
reader to note that in the Latin manuscripts we have the reading
“there is a difference also between the virgin and the
wife.” The words, it is true, have a meaning of their own, and
have by me, as well as by others, been so explained as showing the
bearing of the passage. Yet they lack apostolic authority, since the
Apostle’s words are as we have translated them—“He is
careful for the things of the world, how he may please his wife,
4333
and he is divided.” Having
laid down this, he passes to the virgins and the continent, and says
“The woman that is unmarried and a virgin thinks of the things of
the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit.” Not every
unmarried woman is also a virgin. But every virgin is of course
unmarried. It may be, that regard for elegance of expression led him to
repeat the same idea by means of another word and speak of “a
woman unmarried and a virgin”; or at least he may have wished to
give to “unmarried” the definite meaning of
“virgin,” so that we might not suppose him to include
harlots, united to no one by the fixed bonds of wedlock, among the
“unmarried.” Of what, then, does she that is unmarried and
a virgin think? “The things of the Lord, that she may be holy
both in body and in spirit.” Supposing there were nothing else,
and that no greater reward followed virginity, this would be motive
enough for her choice, to think of the things of the Lord. But he
immediately points out the contents of her thought—that she may
be holy both in body and spirit. For there are virgins in the flesh,
not in the spirit, whose body is intact, their soul corrupt. But that
virgin is a sacrifice to Christ, whose mind has not been defiled by
thought, nor her flesh by lust. On the other hand, she who is married
thinks of the things of the world, how she may please her husband. Just
as the man who has a wife is anxious for the things of the world, how
he may please his wife, so the married woman thinks of the things of
the world, how she may please her husband. But we are not of this
world, which lieth in wickedness, the fashion of which passeth away,
and concerning which the Lord said to the Apostles,
4334
“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:
4335
“And this I say for your profit;
not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is seemly, and
that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.” The Latin
words do not convey the meaning of the Greek. What words shall we use
to render
Πρὸς τὸ
εὔσχημον κὰι
εὐπρόσεδρον
τῷ Κυρί& 251·
ἀπερισπάστως́̈
The difficulty of translation accounts
for the fact that the clause is completely wanting in Latin
manuscripts. Let us, however, use the passage as we have translated it.
The Apostle does not lay a snare upon us, nor does he compel us to be
what we do not wish to be; but he gives his advice as to what is fair
and seemly, he would have us attend upon the Lord and ever be anxious
about that service, and await the Lord’s will, so that like
active and well-armed soldiers we may obey orders, and may do so
without distraction, which, according to
4336
Ecclesiastes, is given to the men of
this world that they may be exercised thereby. 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:
4337
“But
he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath
power as touching his own will, and hath determined this in his own
heart, to keep his own virgin, shall do well. So then both he that
giveth his own virgin in marriage doeth well; and he that giveth her
not in marriage shall do better.” With marked propriety he had
previously said “He who marries a wife does not sin”: here
he tells us “He that keepeth his own virgin doeth well.”
But it is one thing not to sin, another to do well.
4338
“Depart from evil,” he
says, “and do good.” The former we forsake, the latter we
follow. In this last lies perfection. But whereas he says “and he
that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well,” it might be
supposed that our remark does not hold good; he therefore forthwith
detracts from this seeming good and puts it in the shade by comparing
it with another, and saying, “and he that giveth her not in
marriage shall do better.” If he had not intended to draw the
inference of doing better, he would never have previously referred to
doing well. But where there is something good and something better, the
reward is not in both cases the same, and where the reward is not one
and the same, there of course the gifts are different. The difference,
then, between marriage and virginity is as great as that between not
sinning and doing well; nay rather, to speak less harshly, as great as
between good and better.
14. He has ended his discussion of wedlock and
virginity, and has carefully steered between the two precepts without
turning to the right hand or to the left. He has followed the royal
road and fulfilled the command
4339
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,
4340
“A wife
is bound for so long time as her husband liveth; but if the husband be
dead, she is free to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord. But
she is happier if she abide as she is, after my judgement: 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,
4341
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.
4342
“But,” says he,
“they will be happier if they abide as they are,” and he
immediately adds the weight of Apostolic authority, “after my
judgement.” And that an Apostle’s authority might not, like
that of an ordinary man, be without weight, he added, “and I
think that I also have the Spirit of God.” When he incites to
continence, it is not by the judgement or spirit of man, but by the
judgement and Spirit of God; when, however, he grants the indulgence of
marriage, he does not mention the Spirit of God, but weighs his
judgement with wisdom, and adapts the severity of the strain to the
weakness of the individual. In this sense we must take the whole of the
following passage:
4343
“For
the woman that hath a husband is bound by law to the husband while he
liveth; but if the husband die, she is discharged from the law of the
husband. So then if, while the husband liveth, she be joined to another
man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if the husband die, she is
free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she be joined
to another man.” And similarly the words to Timothy,
4344
“I desire therefore that the
younger widows marry, bear children, rule the household, give none
occasion to the adversary for reviling: for already some are turned
aside after Satan,” and so on. For as on account of the danger of
fornication he allows virgins to marry, and makes that excusable which
in itself is not desirable, so to avoid this same fornication, he
allows second marriages to widows. For it is better to know a single
husband, though he be a second or third, than to have many paramours:
that is, it is more tolerable for a woman to prostitute herself to one
man than to many. At all events this is so if the Samaritan woman in
John’s Gospel who said she had her sixth husband was reproved by
the Lord because he was not her husband. For where there are more
husbands than one the proper idea of a husband, who is a single person,
is destroyed. At the beginning one rib was turned into one wife.
“And they two,” he says, “shall be one flesh”:
not three, or four; otherwise, how can they be any longer two, if they
are several. Lamech, a man of blood and a murderer, was the first who
divided one flesh between two wives. Fratricide and digamy were
abolished by the same punishment—that of the deluge. The one was
avenged seven times, the other seventy times seven. The guilt is as
widely different as are the numbers. What the holiness of second
marriage is, appears from this—that
a person twice married
4345
cannot be enrolled in the ranks of the
clergy, and so the Apostle tells Timothy,
4346
“Let none be enrolled as a
widow under threescore years old, having been the wife of one
man.” The whole command concerns those widows who are supported
on the alms of the Church. The age is therefore limited, so that those
only may receive the food of the poor who can no longer work. And at
the same time, consider that she who has had two husbands, even though
she be a widow, decrepit, and in want, is not a worthy recipient of the
Church’s funds. But if she be deprived of the bread of charity,
how much more is she deprived of that bread which cometh down from
heaven, and of which if a man eat unworthily, he shall be guilty of
outrage offered to the body and the blood of Christ?
15. The passages, however, which I have adduced in
support of my position and in which it is permitted to widows, if they
so desire, to marry again, are interpreted by some concerning those
widows who had lost their husbands and were found in that condition
when they became Christians. For, supposing a person baptized and her
husband dead, it would not be consistent if the Apostle were to bid her
marry another, when he enjoins even those who have wives to be as
though they had them not. And this is why the number of wives which a
man may take is not defined, because when Christian baptism has been
received, even though a third or a fourth wife has been taken, she is
reckoned as the first. Otherwise, if, after baptism and after the death
of a first husband, a second is taken why should not a sixth after the
death of the second, third, fourth, and fifth, and so on? For it is
possible, that through some strange misfortune, or by the judgement of
God cutting short repeated marriages, a young woman may have several
husbands, while an old woman may be left a widow by her first husband
in extreme age. The first Adam was married once: the second was
unmarried. Let the supporters of second marriages shew us as their
leader a third Adam who was twice married. But granted that Paul
allowed second marriages: upon the same grounds it follows that he
allows even third and fourth marriages, or a woman may marry as often
as her husband dies. The Apostle was forced to choose many things which
he did not like. He circumcised Timothy, and shaved his own head,
practised going barefoot, let his hair grow long, and cut it at
Cenchrea. And he had certainly chastised the Galatians, and blamed
Peter because for the sake of Jewish observances he separated himself
from the Gentiles. As then in other points connected with the
discipline of the Church he was a Jew to Jews, a Gentile to Gentiles,
and was made all things to all men, that he might gain all: so too he
allowed second marriages to incontinent persons, and did not limit the
number of marriages, in order that women, although they saw themselves
permitted to take a second husband, in the same way as a third or a
fourth was allowed, might blush to take a second, lest they should be
compared to those who were three or four times married. If more than
one husband be allowed, it makes no difference whether he be a second
or a third, because there is no longer a question of single marriage.
4347
“All things are lawful, but not
all things are expedient.” I do not condemn second, nor third,
nor, pardon the expression, eighth marriages: I will go still further
and say that I welcome even a penitent whoremonger. Things that are
equally lawful must be weighed in an even balance.
16. But he takes us to the Old Testament, and beginning
with Adam goes on to Zacharias and Elizabeth. He next confronts us with
Peter and the rest of the Apostles. We are therefore bound to traverse
the same course of argument and show that chastity was always preferred
to the condition of marriage. And as regards Adam and Eve we must
maintain that before the fall they were virgins in Paradise: but after
they sinned, and were cast out of Paradise, they were immediately
married. Then we have the passage,
4348
“For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and
shall cleave to his wife, and the twain shall become one flesh,”
in explanation of which the Apostle straightway adds,
4349
“This mystery is great, but I
speak in regard of Christ, and of the Church.” Christ in the
flesh is a virgin, in the spirit he is once married. For he has one
Church, concerning which the same Apostle says,
4350
“Husbands, love your wives, even
as Christ also loved the Church.” If Christ loves the Church
holily, chastely, and without spot, let husbands also love their wives
in chastity. And let everyone know how to possess his vessel in
sanctification and honour, not in the lust of concupiscence, as the
Gentiles who know not God:
4351
“For God
called us not for uncleanness, but in sanctification: seeing that ye
have put off the old man with his doings, and have
put on the new man, which is being renewed unto
knowledge after the image of him that created him: where there cannot
be male and female, Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision,
barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman: but Christ is all, and in
all.” The link of marriage is not found in the image of the
Creator. When difference of sex is done away, and we are putting off
the old man, and putting on the new, then we are being born again into
Christ a virgin, who was both born of a virgin, and is born again
through
4352
virginity. And whereas he says
“Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,” it
was necessary first to plant the wood and to let it grow, so that there
might be an after-growth for cutting down. And at the same time we must
bear in mind the meaning of the phrase, “replenish the
earth.” Marriage replenishes the earth, virginity fills Paradise.
This too we must observe, at least if we would faithfully follow the
Hebrew, that while Scripture on the first, third, fourth, fifth, and
sixth days relates that, having finished the works of each, “God
saw that it was good,” on the second day it omitted this
altogether, leaving us to understand that two is not a good number
because it destroys unity, and prefigures the marriage compact. Hence
it was that all the animals which Noah took into the ark by pairs were
unclean. Odd numbers denote cleanness. And yet by the double number is
represented another mystery: that not even in beasts and unclean birds
is second marriage approved. For unclean animals went in two and two,
and clean ones by sevens, so that Noah after the flood might be able to
immediately offer to God sacrifices from the latter.
17. But if Enoch was translated, and Noah was preserved
at the deluge, I do not think that Enoch was translated because he had
a wife, but because he was
4353
the first to
call upon God and to believe in the Creator; and the Apostle Paul fully
instructs us concerning him in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Noah,
moreover, who was preserved as a kind of second root for the human
race, must of course be preserved together with his wife and sons,
although in this there is a Scripture mystery. The ark,
4354
according to the Apostle Peter, was a
type of the Church, in which eight souls were saved. When Noah entered
into it, both he and his sons were separated from their wives; but when
he landed from it, they united in pairs, and what had been separated in
the ark, that is, in the Church, was joined together in the intercourse
of the world. And at the same time if the ark had many compartments and
little chambers, and was made with second and third stories, and was
filled with different beasts, and was furnished with dwellings, great
or small, according to the kind of animal, I think all this diversity
in the compartments was a figure of the manifold character of the
Church.
18. He raises the objection that when God gave his
second blessing, permission was granted to eat flesh, which had not in
the first benediction been allowed. He should know that just as divorce
according to the Saviour’s word was not permitted from the
beginning, but on account of the hardness of our heart was a concession
of Moses to the human race, so too the eating of flesh was unknown
until the deluge. But after the deluge, like the quails given in the
desert to the murmuring people, the poison of flesh-meat was offered to
our teeth. The Apostle writing to the Ephesians
4355
teaches that God had purposed in the
fulness of time to sum up and renew in Christ Jesus all things which
are in heaven and in earth. Whence also the Saviour himself in the
Revelation of John says,
4356
“I am
Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending.” At the beginning
of the human race we neither ate flesh, nor gave bills of divorce, nor
suffered circumcision for a sign. Thus we reached the deluge. But after
the deluge, together with the giving of the law which no one could
fulfil, flesh was given for food, and divorce was allowed to
hard-hearted men, and the knife of circumcision was applied, as though
the hand of God had fashioned us with something superfluous. But once
Christ has come in the end of time, and Omega passed into Alpha and
turned the end into the beginning, we are no longer allowed divorce,
nor are we circumcised, nor do we eat flesh, for the Apostle says,
4357
“It is good not to eat flesh,
nor to drink wine.” For wine as well as flesh was consecrated
after the deluge.
19. What shall I say of Abraham who had three wives, as
Jovinianus says, and received circumcision as a sign of his faith? If
we follow him in the number of his wives, let us also follow him in
circumcision. We must not partly follow, partly reject him. Isaac,
moreover, the husband of one wife, Rebecca, prefigures the Church of
Christ, and reproves the wantonness of second marriage. And if Jacob
had two pairs of wives and concubines, and our opponent will not admit
that blear-eyed Leah, ugly and prolific, was a type of the synagogue,
but that Rachel, beautiful and long barren, indicated the mystery of
the Church, let me remind him that when Jacob did this
thing he was among the Assyrians, and in
Mesopotamia in bondage to a hard master. But when he wished to enter
the holy land, he raised on Mount Galeed
4358
the heap of witness, in token that
the lord of Mesopotamia had failed to find anything among his baggage,
and there swore that he would never return to the place of his bondage;
and when,
4359
after wrestling with the angel at
the brook Jabbok, he began to limp, because the great muscle of his
thigh was withered, he at once gained the name of Israel.
4360
Then the wife whom he once loved, and
for whom he had served, was slain by the son of sorrow near Bethlehem
which was destined to be the birthplace of our Lord, the herald of
virginity: and the intimacies of Mesopotamia died in the land of the
Gospel.
20. But I wonder why he set
4361
Judah and Tamar before us for an
example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or
4362
Onan who was slain because he grudged
his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual
intercourse except for the procreation of children? As regards Moses,
it is clear that he would have been in peril at the inn, if
4363
Sephora which is by interpretation
a bird,
had not circumcised her son, and cut off the foreskin of
marriage with the knife which prefigured the Gospel. This is that Moses
who when he saw a great vision and heard an angel, or the Lord speaking
in the bush,
4364
could not by any means approach
to him without first loosing the latchet of his shoe, that is, putting
off the bonds of marriage. And we need not be surprised at this in the
case of one who was a prophet, lawgiver, and the friend of God, seeing
that all the people when about to draw nigh to Mount Sinai, and to hear
the voice speaking to them, were commanded to sanctify themselves in
three days, and keep themselves from their wives. I am out of order in
violating historical sequence, but I may point out that the same thing
was said by
4365
Ahimelech the priest to David
when he fled to Nob: “If only the young men have kept themselves
from women.” And David answered, “of a truth about these
three days.” For the shew-bread, like the body of Christ, might
not be eaten by those who rose from the marriage bed. And in passing we
ought to consider the words “if only the young men have kept
themselves from women.” The truth is that, in view of the purity
of the body of Christ, all sexual intercourse is unclean. In the law
also it is enjoined that the
4366
high priest
must not marry any but a virgin, nor must he take to wife a widow. If a
virgin and a widow are on the same level, how is it that one is taken,
the other rejected?
4367
And the
widow of a priest is bidden abide in the house of her father, and not
to contract a second marriage.
4368
If the
sister of a priest dies in virginity, just as the priest is commanded
to go to the funeral of his father and mother, so must he go to hers.
But if she be married, she is despised as though she belonged not to
him. He who has
4369
married a
wife, and he who has planted a vineyard, an image of the propagation of
children, is forbidden to go to the battle. For he who is the slave of
his wife cannot be the Lord’s soldier. And the laver in the
tabernacle was cast from the mirrors of the women who
4370
fasted, signifying the bodies of pure
virgins: And within,
4371
in the
sanctuary, both cherubim, and mercy-seat, and the ark of the covenant,
and the table of shew-bread, and the candle-stick, and the censer, were
made of the purest gold. For silver might not be brought into the holy
of holies.
21. I must not linger over Moses when my purpose is at
full speed to lightly touch on each topic and to sketch the outline of
a proper knowledge of my subject. I will pass to Joshua the son of Nun,
who was previously called
Ause,
or better, as in the Hebrew,
Osee,
that is,
Saviour
. For he,
4372
according to the epistle of Jude,
saved the people of Israel and led them forth out of Egypt, and brought
them into the land of promise. As soon as this Joshua
4373
reached the Jordan, the waters of
marriage, which had ever flowed in the land, dried up and stood in one
heap; and the whole people, barefooted and on dry ground, crossed over,
and came to Gilgal, and there was a second time circumcised. If we take
this literally, it cannot possibly stand. For if we had two foreskins,
or if another could grow after the first was cut off, there would be
room for speaking of a second circumcision. But the meaning is that
Joshua circumcised the people who had crossed the desert, with the
Gospel knife, and he circumcised them with a stone
knife, that what in the case of Moses’
son was prefigured in a few might under Joshua be fulfilled in all.
Moreover, the very foreskins were heaped together and buried, and
covered with earth, and the fact that the reproach of Egypt was taken
away, and the name of the place,
Gilgal,
which is by
interpretation
4374
revelation,
show that while
the people wandered in the desert uncircumcised their eyes were
blinded. Let us see what follows. After this Gospel circumcision and
the consecration of twelve stones at the place of revelation, the
Passover was immediately celebrated, a lamb was slain for them, and
they ate the food of the Holy Land. Joshua went forth, and was met by
the Prince of the host, sword in hand, that is either to shew that he
was ready to fight for the circumcised people, or to sever the tie of
marriage. And in the same way that Moses was commanded, so was he:
4375
“loose thy shoe, for the place
whereon thou standest is holy ground.” For if the armed host of
the Lord was represented by the trumpets of the priests, we may see in
Jericho a type of the overthrow of the world by the preaching of the
Gospel. And to pass over endless details (for it is not my purpose now
to unfold all the mysteries of the Old Testament),
4376
five kings who previously reigned in
the land of promise, and opposed the Gospel army, were overcome in
battle with Joshua. I think it is clearly to be understood that before
the Lord led his people from Egypt and circumcised them, sight, smell,
taste, hearing, and touch had the dominion, and that to these, as to
five princes, everything was subject. And when they
4377
took refuge in the cave of the body
and in a place of darkness, Jesus entered the body itself and slew
them, that the source of their power might be the instrument of their
death.
22. But it is now time for us to raise the standard of
Joshua’s chastity. It is written that Moses had a wife. Now Moses
is interpreted both by our Lord and by the Apostle to mean the law:
4378
“They have Moses and the
prophets.” And
4379
“Death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over them that had not
sinned after the likeness of Adam’s transgression.” And no
one doubts that in both passages Moses signifies the law. We read that
Moses, that is the law, had a wife: shew me then in the same way that
Joshua the son of Nun had either wife or children, and if you can do
so, I will confess that I am beaten. He certainly received the fairest
spot in the division of the land of Judah, and died, not in the
twenties
, which are ever unlucky in Scripture—by them are
reckoned the years of
4380
Jacob’s
service,
4381
the price of Joseph, and
4382
sundry presents which Esau who was
fond of them received—but in the
4383
tens,
whose praises we have
often sung; and he was buried in
4384
Thamnath Sare,
that is,
most perfect sovereignty,
or among those
of a new
covering,
to signify the crowds of virgins, covered by the
Saviour’s aid on Mount Ephraim, that is, the
fruitful
mountain;
on the north of the Mountain of Gaash, which is, being
interpreted,
disturbance:
for
4385
“Mount Sion is on the sides of
the north, the city of the Great King,” is ever exposed to
hatred, and in every trial says
4386
“But my feet had well nigh slipped.” The book which bears
the name of Joshua ends with his burial. Again in the book of Judges we
read of him as though he had risen and come to life again, and by way
of summary his works are extolled. We read too
4387
“So Joshua sent the people
away, every man unto his inheritance, that they might possess the
land.” And “Israel served the Lord all the days of
Joshua,” and so on. There immediately follows: “And Joshua
the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, being an hundred and ten
years old.” Moses, moreover, only saw the land of promise; he
could not enter: and
4388
“he died in the land of Moab, and the Lord buried him in the
valley in the land of Moab over against Beth-peor: but no man knoweth
of his sepulchre unto this day.” Let us compare the burial of the
two: Moses died in the land of Moab, Joshua in the land of Judæa.
The former was buried in a valley over against the house of Phogor,
which is, being interpreted,
reproach
(for the Hebrew Phogor
corresponds to Priapus
4389
); the
latter in Mount Ephraim on the north of Mount Gaash. And in the simple
expressions of the sacred Scriptures there is always a more subtle
meaning. The Jews gloried in children and child-bearing; and the barren
woman, who had not offspring in Israel, was accursed; but blessed was
he whose seed was in Sion, and his family in Jerusalem; and part of the
highest blessing was,
4390
“Thy
wife shall be as a fruitful vine,
in the innermost parts of thy house, thy
children like olive plants, round about thy table.” Therefore his
grave is described as placed in a valley over against the house of an
idol which was in a special sense consecrated to lust. But we who fight
under Joshua our leader, even to the present day know not where Moses
was buried. For we despise Phogor, and all his shame, knowing that they
who are in the flesh cannot please God. And the Lord before the flood
had said
4391
“My spirit shall not abide
in man for ever, for that he also is flesh.” Wherefore, when
Moses died, the people of Israel mourned for him; but Joshua like one
on his way to victory was unmourned. For marriage ends at death;
virginity thereafter begins to wear the crown.
23. Next he brings forward Samson, and does not consider
that the Lord’s Nazarite was once shaven bald by a woman. And
although Samson continues to be a type of the Saviour because he loved
a harlot from among the Gentiles, which harlot corresponds to the
Church, and because he slew more enemies in his death than he did in
his life, yet he does not set an example of conjugal chastity. And he
surely reminds us
4392
of
Jacob’s prophecy—he was shaken by his runaway steed, bitten
by an adder and fell backwards. But why he enumerated Deborah, and
Barak, and the wife of Heber the Kenite, I am at a loss to understand.
For it is one thing to draw up a list of military commanders in
historical sequence, another to indicate certain figures of marriage
which cannot be found in them. And whereas he prefers the fidelity of
the father Jephthah to the tears of the virgin daughter, that makes for
us. For we are not commending virgins of the world so much as those who
are virgins for Christ’s sake, and most Hebrews blame the father
for the rash vow he made,
4393
“If
thou wilt indeed deliver the children of Ammon into mine hand, then it
shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet
me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, it shall be for
the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.”
Supposing (they say) a dog or an ass had met him, what would he have
done? Their meaning is that God so ordered events that he who had
improvidently made a vow, should learn his error by the death of his
daughter. And if Samuel who was brought up in the tabernacle married a
wife, how does that prejudice virginity? As if at the present day also
there were not many married priests, and as though the Apostle did
not
4394
describe a bishop as the husband of
one wife, having children with all purity. At the same time we must not
forget that Samuel was a Levite, not a priest or high-priest. Hence it
was that his mother made for him a linen ephod, that is, a linen
garment to go over the shoulders, which was the proper dress of the
Levites and of the inferior order. And so he is not named in the Psalms
among the priests, but among those who call upon the name of the
Lord:
4395
“Moses and Aaron among his
priests, and Samuel among those who call upon his name.” For
4396
Levi begat Kohath, Kohath begat
Amminadab, Amminadab begat Korah, Korah begat Assir, Assir begat
Elkanah, Elkanah begat Zuph, Zuph begat Tahath, Tahath begat Eliel,
Eliel begat Jeroham, Jeroham begat Elkanah, Elkanah begat Samuel. And
no one doubts that the priests sprang from the stock of Aaron, Eleazar,
and Phinees. And seeing that they had wives, they would be rightly
brought against us, if, led away by the error of the Encratites, we
were to maintain that marriage deserved censure, and our high priest
were not after the order of Melchizedek, without father, without
mother,
4397
Α᾽γενεαλόγητος
, that is, unmarried. And much fruit truly did Samuel reap from his
children! he himself pleased God, but
4398
begat such children as displeased
the Lord. But if in support of second marriage, he urges the instance
of Boaz and Ruth, let him know that in the Gospel (S.
Matt. i. 6
) to typify the Church even Rahab the
harlot is reckoned among our Lord’s ancestors.
24. He boasts that David bought his wife for two hundred
foreskins. But he should remember that David had numerous other wives,
and afterwards received Michal, Saul’s daughter, whom her father
had delivered to another, and when he was old got heat from the embrace
of the Shunammite maiden. And I do not say this because I am bold
enough to disparage holy men, but because it is one thing to live under
the law, another to live under the Gospel. David slew Uriah the Hittite
and committed adultery with Bathsheba. And because he was a man of
blood—the reference is not, as some think, to his wars, but to
the
4399
murder—he was not permitted to
build a temple of the Lord. But as for us,
4400
if we cause one of the least to stumble, and if we say to a brother
4401
Raca,
or
4402
use our eyes improperly, it were good
that a millstone
were hanged about
our neck, we shall be in danger of Gehenna, and a mere glance will be
reckoned to us for adultery. He passes on to Solomon, through whom
wisdom itself sang its own praises. Seeing that not content with
dwelling upon his praises, he calls him uxorious, I am surprised that
he did not add the words of the Canticles:
4403
“There are threescore queens, and
fourscore concubines, and maidens without number,” and those of
the First Book of Kings;
4404
And he had
seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines, and
others without number.” These are they who turned away his heart
from the Lord: and yet before he had many wives, and fell into sins of
the flesh, at the beginning of his reign and in his early years he
built a temple to the Lord. For every one is judged not for what he
will be, but for what he is. But if Jovinianus approves the example of
Solomon, he will no longer be in favour of second and third marriages
only, but unless he has seven hundred wives and three hundred
concubines, he cannot be the king’s antitype or attain to his
merit. I earnestly again and again remind you, my reader, that I am
compelled to speak as I do, and that I do not disparage our
predecessors under the law, but am well aware that they served their
generation according to their circumstances, and fulfilled the
Lord’s command to increase, and multiply, and replenish the
earth. And what is more they were figures of those that were to come.
But we to whom it is said,
4405
“The time
is shortened, that henceforth those that have wives may be as though
they had none,” have a different command, and for us virginity is
consecrated by the Virgin Saviour.
25. What folly it was to include Elijah and Elisha in a
list of married men, is plain without a word from me. For, since John
Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah, and John was a virgin,
it is clear that he came not only in Elijah’s spirit, but also in
his bodily chastity. Then the passage relating to Hezekiah might be
adduced (though Jovinianus with his wonted stupidity did not notice
it), in which after his recovery and the addition of fifteen years to
his life he said, “Now will I beget children.” It must be
remembered, however, that in the Hebrew texts the passage is not so,
but runs thus:
4406
“The
father to the children shall make known thy faithfulness.” Nor
need we wonder that Huldah, the prophetess, and wife of Shallum, was
4407
consulted by Josiah, King of Judah,
when the captivity was approaching and the wrath of the Lord was
falling upon Jerusalem: since it is the rule of Scripture when holy men
fail, to praise women to the reproach of men. And it is superfluous to
speak of Daniel, for the Hebrews to the present day affirm that the
three youths were eunuchs, in accordance with the declaration of God
which Isaiah utters to Hezekiah:
4408
“And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt
beget, shall they take away: and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of
the King of Babylon.” And again in Daniel we read:
4409
“And the king spake unto Ashpenaz
the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring in certain of the
children of Israel, even of the seed royal and of the nobles: youth in
whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and
cunning in knowledge, and understanding science.” The conclusion
is that if Daniel and the three youths were chosen from the seed royal,
and if Scripture foretold that that there should be eunuchs of the seed
royal, these men were those who were made eunuchs. If he meets us with
the argument that in Ezekiel
4410
it is said that
Noah, Daniel and Job in a sinful land could not free their sons and
daughters, we reply that the words are used hypothetically. Noah and
Job were not in existence at that time: we know that they lived many
ages before. And the meaning is this: if there were such and such men
in a sinful land, they shall not be able to save their own sons and
daughters: because the righteousness of the father shall not save the
son, nor shall the sin of one be imputed to another.
4411
“For the soul that sinneth, it
shall die.” This, too, must be said, that Daniel, as the history
of his book shows, was taken captive with King Jehoiakim at the same
time that Ezekiel was also led into captivity. How then could he have
sons who was still a youth? And only three years had elapsed when he
was brought in to wait upon the king. Let no one suppose that Ezekiel
at this time remembers Daniel as a man, not as a youth; for “It
came to pass,” he says,
4412
“in the
sixth year,” that is of King Jehoiakim, “in the sixth
month, in the fifth day of the month:” and, “as I sat in my
house, and the elders of Judah sat before me.” Yet on that same
day it was said to him,
4413
“Though
these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it.” Daniel was
therefore a youth, and known to the people, either on account of his
interpretation of the king’s dreams,
4414
or on account of the release of
Susannah, and the slaying of the elders. And it is clearly proved that
at the time these
things were
spoken of Noah, Daniel, and Job, Daniel was still a youth and could not
have had sons and daughters, whom he might save by his righteousness.
So far concerning the Law.
26. Coming to the Gospel he sets before us Zacharias and
Elizabeth, Peter and his mother-in-law, and, with a shamelessness to
which we have now grown accustomed, fails to understand that they, too,
ought to have been reckoned among those who served the Law. For the
Gospel had no being before the crucifixion of Christ—it was
consecrated by His passion and by His blood. In accordance with this
rule Peter and the other Apostles (I must give Jovinianus something now
and then out of my abundance) had indeed wives, but those which they
had taken before they knew the Gospel. But once they were received into
the Apostolate, they forsook the offices of marriage. For when Peter,
representing the Apostles, says to the Lord:
4415
“Lo we have left all and followed
thee,” the Lord answered him,
4416
“Verily I say unto you, there is no man that hath left house or
wife, or brethren, or parents, or children for the kingdom of
God’s sake, who shall not receive manifold more in this time, and
in the world to come eternal life.” But if, in order to show that
all the Apostles had wives, he meets us with the words
4417
“Have we no right to lead about
women or wives” (for
γυνή
in Greek has both meanings)
“even as the rest of the apostles, and Cephas, and the brethren
of the Lord?” let him add what is found in the Greek copies,
“Have we no right to lead about women that are sisters, or
wives?” This makes it clear that the writer referred to other
holy women, who, in accordance with Jewish custom, ministered to their
teachers of their substance, as we read was the practice with even our
Lord himself. Where there is a previous reference to eating and
drinking, and the outlay of money, and mention is afterwards made of
women that are sisters, it is quite clear, as we have said, that we
must understand, not wives, but those women who ministered of their
substance. And we read the same account in the Old Testament of the
Shunammite who was wont to welcome Elisha, and to put for him a table,
and bread, and a candlestick, and the rest. At all events if we take
γυναίκας
to mean
wives
, not
women
, the addition of the word
sisters
destroys the effect of the word
wives
, and shews that they were
related in spirit, not by wedlock. Nevertheless, with the exception of
the Apostle Peter, it is not openly stated that the Apostles had wives;
and since the statement is made of one while nothing is said about the
rest, we must understand that those of whom Scripture gives no such
description had no wives. Yet Jovinianus, who has arrayed against us
Zacharias and Elizabeth, Peter and his wife’s mother, should
know, that John was the son of Zacharias and Elizabeth, that is, a
virgin was the offspring of marriage, the Gospel of the law, chastity
of matrimony; so that by a virgin prophet the virgin Lord might be both
announced and baptized. But we might say concerning Peter, that he had
a mother-in-law when he believed, and no longer had a wife, although in
the
4418
“Sentences” we read of
both his wife and daughter. But for the present our argument must be
based wholly on Scripture. He has made his appeal to the Apostles,
because he thinks that they, who hold the chief authority in our moral
system and are the typical Christian teachers, were not virgins. If,
then, we allow that they were not virgins (and, with the exception of
Peter, the point cannot be proved), yet I must tell him that it is to
the Apostles that the words of Isaiah relate:
4419
“Except the Lord of hosts had
left unto us a small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, we should
have been like unto Gomorrah.” So, then, they who were by birth
Jews could not under the Gospel recover the virginity which they had
lost in Judaism. And yet John, one of the disciples, who is related to
have been the youngest of the Apostles, and who was a virgin when he
embraced Christianity, remained a virgin, and on that account was more
beloved by our Lord, and lay upon the breast of Jesus. And what Peter,
who had had a wife, did not dare ask,
4420
he requested John to ask. And after the
resurrection, when Mary Magdalene told them that the Lord had risen,
4421
they both ran to the sepulchre, but
John outran Peter. And when they were fishing in the ship on the lake
of Gennesaret, Jesus stood upon the shore, and the Apostles knew not
who it was they saw;
4422
the virgin
alone recognized a virgin, and said to Peter, “It is the
Lord.” Again, after hearing the prediction that he must be bound
by another, and led whither he would not, and must suffer on the cross,
Peter said, “Lord what shall this man do?” being unwilling
to desert John, with whom he had always been
united. Our Lord said to him, “What is
that to thee if I wish him so to be?” Whence the saying went
abroad among the brethren that that disciple should not die. Here we
have a proof that virginity does not die, and that the defilement of
marriage is not washed away by the blood of martyrdom, but virginity
abides with Christ, and its sleep is not death but a passing to another
state. If, however, Jovinianus should obstinately contend that John was
not a virgin, (whereas we have maintained that his virginity was the
cause of the special love our Lord bore to him), let him explain, if he
was not a virgin, why it was that he was loved more than the other
Apostles. But you say,
4423
the Church
was founded upon Peter: although
4424
elsewhere
the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the
keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends
upon them all alike, yet one among the twelve is chosen so that when a
head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism. But why
was not John chosen, who was a virgin? Deference was paid to age,
because Peter was the elder: one who was a youth, I may say almost a
boy, could not be set over men of advanced age; and a good master who
was bound to remove every occasion of strife among his disciples, and
who had said to them,
4425
“Peace I
leave with you, my peace I give unto you,” and,
4426
“He that is the greater among
you, let him be the least of all,” would not be thought to afford
cause of envy against the youth whom he had loved. We maybe sure that
John was then a boy because ecclesiastical history most clearly proves
that he lived to the reign of Trajan, that is, he fell asleep in the
sixty-eighth year after our Lord’s passion, as I have briefly
noted in my treatise on
Illustrious Men
.
4427
Peter is an Apostle, and John is an
Apostle—the one a married man, the other a virgin; but Peter is
an Apostle only, John is both an Apostle and an Evangelist, and a
prophet. An Apostle, because he wrote to the Churches as a master; an
Evangelist, because he composed a Gospel, a thing which no other of the
Apostles, excepting Matthew, did; a prophet, for he saw in the island
of Patmos, to which he had been banished by the Emperor Domitian as a
martyr for the Lord, an Apocalypse containing the boundless mysteries
of the future. Tertullian, more over, relates that he was sent to Rome,
and that having been plunged into a jar of boiling oil he came out
fresher and more active than when he went in. But his very Gospel is
widely different from the rest. Matthew as though he were writing of a
man begins thus: “The book of the Generation of Jesus Christ, the
son of David, the son of Abraham;” Luke begins with the
priesthood of Zacharias; Mark with a prophecy of the prophets Malachi
and Isaiah. The first has the face of a man, on account of the
genealogical table; the second, the face of a calf, on account of the
priesthood; the third, the face of a lion, on account of the voice of
one crying in the desert,
4428
“Prepare ye the way of the
Lord, make His paths straight.” But John like an eagle soars
aloft, and reaches the Father Himself, and says,
4429
“In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the
beginning with God,” and so on. The virgin writer expounded
mysteries which the married could not, and to briefly sum up all and
show how great was the privilege of John, or rather of virginity in
John, the Virgin Mother
4430
was entrusted
by the Virgin Lord to the Virgin disciple.
27. But we toil to no purpose. For our opponent urges
against us the Apostolic sentence and says,
4431
“Adam was first formed, then
Eve; 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.” Let us consider what led the Apostle to make this
declaration:
4432
“I
desire therefore that the men pray in every place, lifting up holy
hands, without wrath and disputing.” So in due course he lays
down rules of life for the women and says “In like manner that
women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and
sobriety; not with braided hair, and gold or pearls or costly raiment;
but (which becometh women professing godliness) through good works. Let
a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a
woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in
quietness.” And that the lot of a woman might not seem a hard
one, reducing her to the condition of a slave to her husband, the
Apostle recalls the ancient law and goes back to the first example:
that Adam was first made, then the woman out of his rib; and that the
Devil could not seduce Adam, but did seduce Eve; and that after
displeasing God she was immediately subjected to the man, and began to
turn to her husband; and he points out that she who was once tied with
the bonds of marriage and was reduced to the condition of Eve, might
blot out the
4433
old transgression
by the
4434
procreation
of children: provided, however, that she bring up the children
themselves in the faith and love of Christ, and in sanctification and
chastity; for we must not adopt the faulty reading of the Latin texts,
sobrietas
, but
castitas
, that is,
4435
σωφροσύνη
.
You see how you are mastered by the witness of this passage also, and
cannot but be driven to admit that what you thought was on the side of
marriage tells in favour of virginity. For if the woman is saved in
child-bearing, and the more the children the greater the safety of the
mothers, why did he add “if they continue in faith and love and
sanctification with chastity”? The woman will then be saved, if
she bear not children who will remain virgins: if what she has herself
lost, she attains in her children, and makes up for the loss and decay,
of the root by the excellence of the flower and fruit.
28. Above, in passing, when our opponent adduced
Solomon, who, although he had many wives, nevertheless built the
temple, I briefly replied that it was my intention to run over the
remaining points. Now that he may not cry out that both Solomon and
others under the law, prophets and holy men, have been dishonoured by
us, let us show what this very man with his many wives and concubines
thought of marriage. For no one can know better than he who suffered
through them, what a wife or woman is. Well then, he says in the
Proverbs:
4436
“The foolish and bold
woman comes to want bread.” What bread? Surely that bread which
cometh down from heaven: and he immediately adds
4437
“The earth-born perish in her
house, rush into the depths of hell.” Who are the earth-born that
perish in her house? They of course who follow the first Adam, who is
of the earth, and not the second, who is from heaven. And again in
another place: “Like a worm in wood, so a wicked woman destroyeth
her husband.” But if you assert that this was spoken of bad
wives, I shall briefly answer: What necessity rests upon me to run the
risk of the wife I marry proving good or bad?
4438
“It is better,” he says,
“to dwell in a desert land, than with a contentious and
passionate woman in a wide house.” How seldom we find a wife
without these faults, he knows who is married. Hence that sublime
orator, Varius Geminus
4439
says well
“The man who does not quarrel is a bachelor.”
4440
“It is better to dwell in the
corner of the housetop, than with a contentious woman in a house in
common.” If a house common to husband and wife makes a wife proud
and breeds contempt for the husband: how much more if the wife be the
richer of the two, and the husband but a lodger in her house! She
begins to be not a wife, but mistress of the house; and if she offend
her husband, they must part.
4441
“A
continual dropping on a wintry day” turns a man out of doors, and
so will a contentious woman drive a man from his own house. She floods
his house with her constant nagging and daily chatter, and ousts him
from his own home, that is the Church. Hence the same Solomon
previously commands:
4442
“My son
flows forth beyond.” And the Apostle, writing to the Hebrews,
says “Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the
things spoken, lest haply we flow forth beyond.” But who can hide
from himself what is thus enigmatically expressed?
4443
“The horseleech had three
daughters, dearly loved, but they satisfied her not, and a fourth is
not satisfied when you say Enough; the grave, and woman’s love,
and the earth that is not satisfied with water, and the fire that saith
not, Enough.” The horse-leech is the devil, the daughters of the
devil are dearly loved, and they cannot be satisfied with the blood of
the slain:
the grave, and woman’s love, and the earth dry and
scorched with heat
. It is not the harlot, or the adulteress who is
spoken of; but woman’s love in general is accused of ever being
insatiable; put it out, it bursts into flame; give it plenty, it is
again in need; it enervates a man’s mind, and engrosses all
thought except for the passion which it feeds. What we read in the
parable which follows is to the same effect: “For three things
the earth doth tremble, and for four which it cannot bear: for a
servant when he is king: and a fool when he is filled with meat: for an
odious woman when she is married to a good husband: and an handmaid
that is heir to her mistress.” See how a wife is classed with the
greatest evils. But if you reply that it is an
odious
wife, I
will give you the same answer as before—the mere possibility of
such danger is in itself no light matter. For he who marries a wife is
uncertain whether he is marrying an odious woman or one worthy of his
love. If she be odious, she is intolerable. If worthy of love, her love
is compared to the grave, to the
parched earth, and to fire.
29. Let us come to Ecclesiastes and adduce a few
corroborative passages from him also.
4444
“To everything there is a season,
and a time to every purpose under the heaven: a time to be born, and a
time to die: a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is
planted.” We brought forth young under the law with Moses, let us
die under the Gospel with Christ. We planted in marriage, let us by
chastity pluck up that which was planted. “A time to embrace, and
a time to refrain from embracing: a time to love, and a time to hate: a
time for war, and a time for peace.” And at the same time he
warns us not to prefer the law to the Gospel; nor to think that virgin
purity is to be placed on a level with marriage:
4445
“Better,” he says, “is
the end of a thing than the beginning thereof.” And he
immediately adds: “Say not thou, what is the cause that the
former days were better than these? for thou dost not inquire wisely
concerning this.” And he gives the reason why the latter days are
better than the former:
4446
“For
wisdom with an inheritance is good.” Under the law carnal wisdom
was followed by the sword of death; under the Gospel an eternal
inheritance awaits spiritual wisdom. “Behold, this have I found,
4447
saith the Preacher, one man among a
thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.
Behold this only have I found, that God made man upright; but they have
sought out many inventions.” He says that he had found man
upright. Consider the force of the words. The word
man
comprehends both male and female. “But a woman,” he says,
“among all these have I not found.” Let us read the
beginning of Genesis, and we shall find Adam, that is
man,
called both male and female. Having then been created by God good and
upright, by our own fault we have fallen to a worse condition; and that
which in Paradise had been upright, when we left Paradise was corrupt.
If you object that before they sinned there was a distinction in sex
between male and female, and that they could without sin have come
together, it is uncertain what might have happened. For we cannot know
the judgements of God, and anticipate his sentence as we choose. What
really happened is plain enough,—that they who in Paradise
remained in perpetual virginity, when they were expelled from Paradise
were joined together. Or if Paradise admits of marriage, and there is
no difference between marriage and virginity, what prevented their
previous intercourse even in Paradise? They are driven out of Paradise;
and what they did not there, they do on earth; so that from the very
earliest days of humanity virginity was consecrated by Paradise, and
marriage by earth.
4448
“Let
thy garments be always white.” The eternal whiteness of our
garments is the purity of virginity. In the morning we sowed our seed,
and in the evening let us not cease. Let us who served marriage under
the law, serve virginity under the Gospel.
30. I pass to the Song of Songs, and whereas our
opponent thinks it makes altogether for marriage, I shall show that it
contains the mysteries of virginity. Let us hear what the bride says
before that the bridegroom comes to earth, suffers, descends to the
lower world, and rises again.
4449
“We will
make for thee likenesses of gold with ornaments of silver while the
king sits at his table.” Before the Lord rose again, and the
Gospel shone, the bride had not gold, but likenesses of gold. As for
the silver, however, which she professes to have at the marriage, she
not only had silver ornaments, but she had them in variety—in
widows, in the continent, and in the married. Then the bridegroom makes
answer to the bride, and teaches her that the shadow of the old law has
passed away, and the truth of the Gospel has come.
4450
“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:
4451
“The time is shortened that
henceforth both those that have wives may be as though they had
none”? And more plainly does he herald chastity:
4452
“The voice,” he says,
“of the turtle is heard in our land.” The turtle, the
chastest of birds, always dwelling in lofty places, is a type of the
Saviour. Let us read the works of naturalists and we shall find that it
is the nature of the turtle-dove, if it lose its mate, not to take
another; and we shall understand that second marriage is repudiated
even by dumb birds. And immediately the turtle says to its fellow:
4453
“The fig tree hath put forth its
green figs,” that is, the commandments of the old law have
fallen, and the blossoming vines of the Gospel give forth their
fra
grance. Whence the Apostle also
says,
4454
“We are a sweet savour of
Christ.”
4455
“Arise, my
love, my fair one, and come away. O my dove, thou art in the clefts of
the rock, in the covert of the steep place. Let me see thy countenance,
let me hear thy voice; for sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is
comely.”
4456
Whilst thou
coveredst thy countenance like Moses and the veil of the law remained,
I neither saw thy face, nor did I condescend to hear thy voice. I said,
4457
“Yea, when ye make many prayers,
I will not hear.” But now with unveiled face behold my glory, and
shelter thyself in the cleft and steep places of the solid rock. On
hearing this the bride disclosed the mysteries of chastity:
4458
“My beloved is mine, and I am
his: he feedeth his flock among the lilies,” that is among the
pure virgin bands. Would you know what sort of a throne our true
Solomon, the Prince of Peace, has, and what his attendants are like?
4459
“Behold,” he says, “it
is the litter of Solomon: threescore mighty men are about it, of the
mighty men of Israel. They all handle the sword, and are expert in war:
every man hath his sword upon his thigh.” They who are about
Solomon have their sword upon their thigh, like Ehud, the left-handed
judge, who slew the fattest of foes, a man devoted to the flesh, and
cut short all his pleasures.
4460
“I will
get me,” he says, “to the mountain of myrrh;” to
those, that is, who have mortified their bodies; “and to the hill
of frankincense,” to the crowds of pure virgins; “and I
will say to my bride, thou art all fair, my love, and there is no spot
in thee.” Whence too the Apostle:
4461
“That he might present the church
to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such
thing.”
4462
“Come
with me from Lebanon, my bride, with me from Lebanon. Thou shalt come
4463
and pass on from the beginning of
faith, from the top of Sanir and Hermon, from the lions’ dens,
from the mountains of the leopards.” Lebanon is, being
interpreted,
whiteness
. Come then, fairest bride, concerning
whom it is elsewhere said
4464
“Who is
she that cometh up, all in white?” and pass on by way of this
world, from the beginning of faith, and from Sanir, which is by
interpretation,
God of light
, as we read in the psalm:
4465
“Thy word is a lantern unto my
feet, and light unto my path;” and “from Hermon,”
that is,
consecration
: and “flee from the lions’
dens, and the mountains of the leopards who cannot change their
spots.” Flee, he says, from the lions’ dens, flee from the
pride of devils, that when thou hast been consecrated to me, I may be
able to say unto thee:
4466
“Thou
hast ravished my heart, my sister, my bride, thou hast ravished mine
heart with one of thine eyes, with one chain of thy neck.” What
he says is something like this—I do not reject marriage: you have
a second eye, the left, which I have given to you on account of the
weakness of those who cannot see the right. But I am pleased with the
right eye of virginity, and if it be blinded the whole body is in
darkness. And that we might not think he had in view carnal love and
bodily marriage, he at once excludes this meaning by saying
4467
“Thou hast ravished my heart, my
bride, my sister.” The name sister excludes all suspicion of
unhallowed love. “How fair are thy breasts with wine,”
those breasts concerning which he had said above, My beloved is mine,
and I am his: “betwixt my breasts shall he lie,” that is in
the princely portion of the heart where the Word of God has its
lodging. What wine is that which gives beauty to the breasts of the
bride, and fills them with the milk of chastity? That, forsooth, of
which the bridegroom goes on to speak:
4468
“I have drunk my wine with my
milk. Eat, O friends: yea, drink and be drunken, my brethren.”
Hence the Apostles also were said to be filled with new wine; with
new
, he says, not with
old
wine; because
4469
new wine is put into fresh wine-skins,
and they
4470
did not walk in oldness of the
letter, but in newness of the Spirit. This is wine wherewith when
youths and maidens are intoxicated, they at once thirst for virginity;
they are filled with the spirit of chastity, and the prophecy of
Zechariah comes to pass, at least if we follow the Hebrew literally,
for he prophesied concerning virgins:
4471
“And the streets of the city
shall be full of boys and girls playing in the streets thereof. For
what is his goodness, and what is his beauty, but the corn of the
elect, and wine that giveth birth to virgins?” They are virgins
of whom it is written in the forty-fifth psalm:
4472
“The virgins her companions
that follow her shall be brought unto thee. With gladness and rejoicing
shall they be led: they shall enter into the King’s
palace.”
31. Then follows:
4473
“A garden shut up is my
sister, my bride: a garden shut up, a fountain
sealed.” That which is shut up and sealed reminds us of the
mother of our Lord who was a mother and a Virgin. Hence it was that no
one before or after our Saviour was laid in his new tomb, hewn in the
solid rock. And yet she that was ever a Virgin is the mother of many
virgins. For next we read: “Thy shoots are an orchard of
pomegranates with precious fruits.” By pomegranates and fruits is
signified the blending of all virtues in virginity.
4474
“My beloved is white and
ruddy”; white in virginity, ruddy in martyrdom. And because He is
white and ruddy, therefore it is immediately added
4475
“His mouth is most sweet, yea, he
is altogether lovely.” The virgin bridegroom having been praised
by the virgin bride, in turn praises the virgin bride, and says to her:
4476
“How beautiful are thy feet in
sandals,
4477
O daughter of Aminadab,”
which is, being interpreted,
a people that offereth itself
willingly.
For virginity is voluntary, and therefore the steps of
the Church in the beauty of chastity are praised. This is not the time
for me like a commentator to explain all the mysteries of virginity
from the Song of Songs; I have no doubt that the fastidious reader will
turn up his nose at what has already been said.
32. Isaiah tells of the mystery of our faith and hope:
4478
“Behold a virgin shall
conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel.” I
know that the Jews are accustomed to meet us with the objection that in
Hebrew the word
Almah
does not mean a virgin, but
a young
woman.
And, to speak truth, a virgin is properly called
Bethulah,
but a young woman, or a girl, is not
Almah
, but
Naarah!
4479
What then is
the meaning of
Almah?
A hidden virgin, that is, not merely
virgin, but a virgin and something more, because not every virgin is
hidden, shut off from the occasional sight of men. Then again, Rebecca,
on account of her extreme purity, and because she was a type of the
Church which she represented in her own virginity, is described in
Genesis as
Almah
, not
Bethulah
, as may clearly be proved
from the words of Abraham’s servant, spoken by him in
Mesopotamia:
4480
“And he
said, O Lord, the God of my master Abraham, if now thou do prosper my
way which I go: behold I stand by the fountain of water; and let it
come to pass, that the maiden which cometh forth to draw, to whom I
shall say, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of this pitcher to
drink; and she shall say to me, Both drink thou, and I will also draw
for thy camels: let the same be the woman whom the Lord hath appointed
for my master’s son.” Where he speaks of the maiden coming
forth to draw water, the Hebrew word is
Almah
, that is, a
virgin secluded
, and guarded by her parents with extreme care.
Or, if this be not so, let them at least show me where the word is
applied to married women as well, and I will confess my ignorance.
“Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son.” If
virginity be not preferred to marriage, why did not the Holy Spirit
choose a married woman, or a widow? For at that time Anna the daughter
of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser, was alive, distinguished for purity,
and always free to devote herself to prayers and fasting in the temple
of God. If the life, and good works, and fasting without virginity can
merit the advent of the Holy Spirit, she might well have been the
mother of our Lord. Let us hasten to the rest:
4481
“The virgin daughter of Zion
hath despised thee and laughed thee to scorn.” To her whom he
called daughter the prophet also gave the title virgin, for fear that
if he spoke only of a daughter, it might be supposed that she was
married. This is the virgin daughter whom elsewhere he thus addresses:
4482
“Sing, O barren, thou that dost
not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not
travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate, than the
children of the married wife, saith the Lord.” This is she of
whom God by the mouth of Jeremiah speaks, saying:
4483
“Can a maid forget her
ornaments, or a bride her attire.” Concerning her we read of a
great miracle in the same prophecy
4484
—that a woman should compass a
man, and that the Father of all things should be contained in a
virgin’s womb.
33. “Granted,” says Jovinianus, “that
there is a difference between marriage and virginity, what have you to
say to this,—Suppose a virgin and a widow were baptized, and
continued as they were, what difference will there be between
them?” What we have already said concerning Peter and John, Anna
and Mary, may be of service here. For if there is no difference between
a virgin and a widow, both being baptized, because baptism makes a new
man, upon the same principle harlots and prostitutes, if they are
baptized, will be equal to virgins. If previous marriage is no
prejudice to a baptized widow, and past pleas
ures and the exposure of their bodies to public
lust are no detriment in the case of harlots, once they have approached
the laver they will gain the rewards of virginity. It is one thing to
unite with God a mind pure and free from any stain of memory, another
to remember the foul and forced embraces of a man, and in recollection
to act a part which you do not in person. Jeremiah, who was
4485
sanctified in the womb, and was known
in his mother’s belly, enjoyed the high privilege because he was
predestined to the blessing of virginity. And when all were captured,
and even the vessels of the temple were plundered by the King of
Babylon, he alone was
4486
liberated by
the enemy, knew not the insults of captivity, and was supported by the
conquerors; and Nebuchadnezzar, though he gave Nebuzaradan no charge
concerning the Holy of Holies, did give him charge concerning Jeremiah.
For that is the true temple of God, and that is the Holy of Holies,
which is consecrated to the Lord by pure virginity. On the other hand,
Ezekiel, who was kept captive in Babylon, who saw the
4487
storm approaching from the north,
and the whirlwind sweeping all before it, says,
4488
“My wife died in the evening
and I did in the morning as I was commanded.” For the Lord had
previously told him that in that day he should open his mouth, and
speak, and no longer keep silence. Mark well, that while his wife was
living he was not at liberty to admonish the people. His wife died, the
bond of wedlock was broken, and without the least hesitation he
constantly devoted himself to the prophetic office. For he who was
called being free, is truly the Lord’s bondservant. I do not deny
the blessedness of widows who remain such after their baptism; nor do I
disparage those wives who maintain their chastity in wedlock; but as
they attain a greater reward with God than married women who pay the
marriage due, let widows themselves be content to give the preference
to virginity. For if a chastity which comes too late, when the glow of
bodily pleasure is no longer felt, makes them feel superior to married
women, why should they not acknowledge themselves inferior to perpetual
virginity.
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
4489
says he has no commandment
respecting virgins, and yet gives his advice, as one who had obtained
mercy from the Lord, and is anxious throughout the whole discussion to
give virginity the preference over marriage, and advises what he does
not venture to command, lest he seem to lay a snare, and to put a
heavier burden upon man’s nature than it can bear; so also in
establishing the constitution of the Church, inasmuch as the elements
of the early Church were drawn from the Gentiles, he made the rules for
fresh believers somewhat lighter that they might not in alarm shrink
from keeping them. Then, again, the Apostles and elders wrote
4490
letters from Jerusalem that no heavier
burden should be laid on Gentile believers than that they should keep
themselves from idolatry, and from fornication, and from things
strangled. As though they were providing for infant children, they gave
them milk to drink, not solid food. Nor did they lay down rules for
continence, nor hint at virginity, nor urge to fasting, nor repeat the
directions
4491
given in the Gospel to the
Apostles, not to have two tunics, nor scrip, nor money in their
girdles, nor staff in their hand, nor shoes on their feet. And they
certainly did not bid them,
4492
if they
wished to be perfect, go and sell all that they had and give to the
poor, and “come follow me.” For if the young man who
boasted of having done all that the law enjoins, when he heard this
went away sorrowful, because he had great possessions, and the
Pharisees derided an utterance such as this from our Lord’s lips:
how much more would the vast multitude of Gentiles, whose highest
virtue consisted in not plundering another’s goods, have
repudiated the obligation of perpetual chastity and continence, when
they were told in the letter to keep themselves from idols, and from
fornication, seeing that fornication was heard of among them, and such
fornication as was not “even among the Gentiles.” But the
very choice of a bishop makes for me. For he does not say: Let a bishop
be chosen who marries one wife and begets children; but who marries one
wife, and
4493
has his children in subjection
and well disciplined. You surely admit that he is no bishop who during
his episcopate begets children. The reverse is the case—if he be
discovered, he will not be bound by the ordinary obligations of a
husband, but will be condemned as an adulterer. Either permit
4494
priests to perform the work of
marriage with the result that virginity and marriage are on a par: or
if it is unlawful for priests to touch their wives, they are so far
holy in that they imitate virgin chastity. But something more follows.
A layman, or any believer, cannot pray unless he abstain from sexual
intercourse. Now a
priest must
always offer sacrifices for the people: he must therefore always pray.
And if he must always pray, he must always be released from the duties
of marriage. For even under the old law they who used to offer
sacrifices for the people not only remained in their houses, but
purified themselves for the occasion by separating from their wives,
nor would they drink wine or strong drink which are wont to stimulate
lust. That married men are elected to the priesthood, I do not deny:
the number of virgins is not so great as that of the priests required.
Does it follow that because all the strongest men are chosen for the
army, weaker men should not be taken as well? All cannot be strong. If
an army were constituted of strength only, and numbers went for
nothing, the feebler men might be rejected. As it is, men of second or
third-rate strength are chosen, that the army may have its full
numerical complement. How is it, then, you will say, that frequently at
the ordination of priests a virgin is passed over, and a married man
taken? Perhaps because he lacks other qualifications in keeping with
virginity, or it may be that he is thought a virgin, and is not: or
there may be a stigma on his virginity, or at all events virginity
itself makes him proud, and while he plumes himself on mere bodily
chastity, he neglects other virtues; he does not cherish the poor: he
is too fond of money. It sometimes happens that a man has a gloomy
visage, a frowning brow, a walk as though he were in a solemn
procession, and so offends the people, who, because they have no fault
to find with his life, hate his mere dress and gait. Many are chosen
not out of affection for themselves, but out of hatred for another. In
most cases the election is won by mere simplicity, while the shrewdness
and discretion of another candidate elicit opposition as though they
were evils. Sometimes the judgement of the commoner people is at fault,
and in testing the qualities of the priesthood, the individual inclines
to his own character, with the result that he looks not so much for a
good candidate as for one like himself. Not unfrequently it happens
that married men, who form the larger portion of the people, in
approving married candidates seem to approve themselves, and it does
not occur to them that the mere fact that they prefer a married person
to a virgin is evidence of their inferiority to virgins. What I am
going to say will perhaps offend many. Yet I will say it, and good men
will not be angry with me, because they will not feel the sting of
conscience. Sometimes it is the fault of the bishops, who choose into
the ranks of the clergy not the best, but the cleverest, men, and think
the more simple as well as innocent ones incapable; or, as though they
were distributing the offices of an earthly service, they give posts to
their kindred and relations; 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,
4495
“Yet I would that all men were
even as I myself.” And John will be thought unworthy of this
rank, and all the virgins, and the continent, the fairest gems that
give grace and ornament to the Church. Bishop, priest, and deacon, are
not honourable distinctions, but names of offices. And we do not read:
4496
“If a man seeketh the office of a
bishop, he desireth a good degree,” but, “he desireth a
good work,” because by being placed in the higher order an
opportunity is afforded him, if he choose to avail himself of it, for
the practice of virtue.
35. “The bishop, then, must be without reproach,
so that he is the slave of no vice: “the husband of one
wife,” that is, in the past, not in the present;
“sober,” or
4497
better, as it
is in the Greek, “vigilant,” that is
νηφάλεον
;
“chaste,” for that is the
4498
meaning of
σὼφρονα
;
4499
“distinguished,” both by
chastity and conduct: “hospitable,” so that he imitates
Abraham, and with strangers, nay rather
in
strangers, entertains
Christ; “apt to teach,” for it profits nothing to enjoy the
consciousness of virtue, unless a man be able to instruct the people
intrusted to him, so that he can exhort in doctrine, and refute the
gainsayers;
4500
“not a drunkard,” for he
who is constantly in the Holy of Holies and offers sacrifices, will not
drink wine and strong drink, since wine is a luxury. If a bishop drink
at all, let it be in such a way that no one will know whether he has
drunk or not. “No striker,” that is,
4501
a striker of men’s consciences, for
the Apostle is not pointing out what a boxer, but a pontiff ought not
to do. He directly teaches what he ought to do: “but gentle, not
contentious, no lover of money, one that ruleth well his own house,
having his children in
subjection
with all chastity.” See what chastity is required in a bishop! If
his child be unchaste, he himself cannot be a bishop, and he offends
God in the same way as did
4502
Eli the priest,
who had indeed rebuked his sons, but because he had not put away the
offenders, fell backwards and died before the lamp of God went out.
4503
“Women in like manner must be
chaste,” and so on. In every grade, and in both sexes, chastity
has the chief place. You see then that the blessedness of a bishop,
priest, or deacon, does not lie in the fact that they are bishops,
priests, or deacons, but in their having the virtues which their names
and offices imply. Otherwise, if a deacon be holier than his bishop,
his lower grade will not give him a worse standing with Christ. If it
were so, Stephen the deacon, the first to wear the martyr’s
crown, would be less in the kingdom of heaven than many bishops, and
than Timothy and Titus, whom I venture to make neither inferior nor yet
superior to him. Just as in the legions of the army there are generals,
tribunes, centurions, javelin-men, and light-armed troops, common
soldiers, and companies, but once the battle begins, all distinctions
of rank are dropped, and the one thing looked for is valour: so too in
this camp and in this battle, in which we contend against devils, not
names but deeds are needed: and under the true commander, Christ, not
the man who has the highest title has the greatest fame, but he who is
the bravest warrior.
36. But you will say: “If everybody were a virgin,
what would become of the human race”? Like shall here beget like.
If everyone were a widow, or continent in marriage, how will mortal men
be propagated? Upon this principle there will be nothing at all for
fear that something else may cease to exist. To put a case: if all men
were philosophers, there would be no husbandmen. Why speak of
husbandmen? there would be no orators, no lawyers, no teachers of the
other professions. If all men were leaders, what would become of the
soldiers? If all were the head, whose head would they be called, when
there were no other members? You are afraid that if the desire for
virginity were general there would be no prostitutes, no adulteresses,
no wailing infants in town or country. Every day the blood of
adulterers
4504
is shed, adulterers are condemned,
and lust is raging and rampant in the very presence of the laws and the
symbols of authority and the courts of justice. Be not afraid that all
will become virgins: virginity is a hard matter, and therefore rare,
because it is hard: “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:
4505
“He that is able to receive it,
let him receive it:” and the Apostle would not have hesitated to
give his advice,—
4506
“Now
concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord.” Why then,
you will say, were the organs of generation created, and why were we so
fashioned by the all-wise creator, that we burn for one another, and
long for natural intercourse? To reply is to endanger our modesty: we
are, as it were, between two rocks, the
4507
Symplegades of necessity and virtue, on
either side; and must make shipwreck of either our sense of shame, or
of the cause we defend: If we reply to your suggestions, shame covers
our face. If shame secures silence, in a manner we seem to desert our
post, and to leave the ground clear to the raging foe. Yet it is
better, as the story goes, to shut our eyes and fight like the
4508
blindfold gladiators, than not to repel
with the shield of truth the darts aimed at us. I can indeed say:
“Our hinder parts which are banished from sight, and the lower
portions of the abdomen, which perform the functions of nature, are the
Creator’s work.” But inasmuch as the physical conformation
of the organs of generation testifies to difference of sex, I shall
briefly reply: Are we never then to forego lust, for fear that we may
have members of this kind for nothing? Why then should a husband keep
himself from his wife? Why should a widow persevere in chastity, if we
were only born to live like beasts? Or what harm does it do me if
another man lies with my wife? For as the teeth were made for chewing,
and the food masticated passes into the stomach, and a man is not
blamed for giving my wife bread: similarly if it was intended that the
organs of generation should always be performing their office, when my
vigour is spent let another take my place, and, if I may so speak, let
my wife quench her burning lust where she can. 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.
4509
Surely
4510
the Apostle who bids us emulate his own
chastity, must be asked, if we are to be consistent, Why are you like
other men, Paul? Why are
you
distinguished from the female sex by a beard, hair, and other
peculiarities of person? How is it that you have not swelling bosoms,
and are not broad at the hips, narrow at the chest? Your voice is
rugged, your speech rough, your eyebrows more shaggy. To no purpose you
have all these manly qualities, if you forego the embraces of women. I
am compelled to say something and become a fool: but you have forced me
to dare to speak. Our Lord and Saviour,
4511
Who though He was in the form of God, condescended to take the form of
a servant, and became obedient to the Father even unto death, yea the
death of the cross—what necessity was there for Him to be born
with members which He was not going to use? He certainly was
circumcised to manifest His sex. Why did he cause John the Apostle and
John the Baptist to make themselves eunuchs through love of Him, after
causing them to be born men? Let us then who believe in Christ follow
His example. And if we knew Him after the flesh, let us no longer know
Him according to the flesh. The substance of our resurrection bodies
will certainly be the same as now, though of higher glory. For the
Saviour after His descent into hell had so far the selfsame body in
which He was crucified, that
4512
He showed the
disciples the marks of the nails in His hands and the wound in His
side. Moreover, if we deny the identity of His body because
4513
He entered though the doors were shut,
and this is not a property of human bodies, we must deny also that
Peter and the Lord had real bodies because they
4514
walked upon the water, which is contrary
to nature.
4515
“In the resurrection of the
dead they will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will be like
the angels.” What others will hereafter be in heaven, that
virgins begin to be on earth. If likeness to the angels is promised us
(and there is no difference of sex among the angels), we shall either
be of no sex as are the angels, or at all events which is clearly
proved, though we rise from the dead in our own sex, we shall not
perform the functions of sex.
37. But why do we argue, and why are we eager to frame a
clever and victorious reply to our opponent?
4516
“Old things have passed away,
behold all things have become new.” I will run through the
utterances of the Apostles, and as to the instances afforded by Solomon
I added short expositions to facilitate their being understood, so now
I will go over the passages bearing on Christian purity and continence,
and will make of many proofs a connected series. By this method I shall
succeed in omitting nothing relating to chastity, and shall avoid being
tediously long. Amongst other passages, Paul the Apostle writes to the
Romans:
4517
“What fruit then had ye at
that time in the things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of
those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become
servants to God, ye have your fruit unto sanctification, and the end
eternal life.” I suppose too that the end of marriage is death.
But the compensating fruit of sanctification, fruit belonging either to
virginity or to continence, is eternal life. And afterwards:
4518
“Wherefore, my brethren, ye also
were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that ye should be
joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we
might bring forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the
sinful passions, which were through the law, wrought in our members to
bring forth fruit unto death. But now we have been discharged from the
law, having died to that wherein we were holden; so that we serve in
newness of the Spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.”
“When,” he says, “we were in the flesh, and not in
the newness of the Spirit but in the oldness of the letter,” we
did those things which pertained to the flesh, and bore fruit unto
death. But now because we are dead to the law, through the body of
Christ, let us bear fruit to God, that we may belong to Him who rose
from the dead. And elsewhere, having previously said,
4519
“I know that the law is
spiritual,” and having discussed at some length the violence of
the flesh which frequently drives us to do what we would not, he at
last continues: “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me
out of the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our
Lord.” And again, “So then I myself with the mind serve the
law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” And,
4520
“There is therefore now no
condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the
flesh. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free
from the law of sin and death.” And more clearly in what follows
he teaches that Christians do not walk according to the flesh but
according to the Spirit:
4521
“For they
that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that
are after the spirit the things of the spirit. For the mind of the
flesh is death; but the mind of the spirit is life and peace: because
the mind of the flesh is enmity against
God; for it is not subject to the law of God,
neither indeed can it be: and they that are in the flesh cannot please
God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the
Spirit of God dwelleth in you,” and so on to where he says,
4522
“So then, brethren, we are
debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh: for if ye live
after the flesh, ye must die; but if by the spirit ye mortify the deeds
of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of
God, these are sons of God.” If the
4523
wisdom of the flesh is enmity against
God, and they who are in the flesh cannot please God, I think that they
who perform the functions of marriage love the wisdom of the flesh, and
therefore are in the flesh. The Apostle being desirous to withdraw us
from the flesh and to join us to the Spirit, says afterwards:
4524
“I beseech you therefore,
brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living
sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.
And be not fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed by
the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and
acceptable and perfect will of God. For I say, through the grace that
was given me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself
more highly than he ought to think; but to think according to
chastity”
4525
(not
soberly
as the Latin versions badly render), but
“think,” he says, “according to chastity,” for
the Greek words are
ἐις τὸ
σωφρονεὶν
. Let us
consider what the Apostle says: “Be ye transformed by the
renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and
acceptable and perfect will of God.” What he says is something
like this—God indeed permits marriage, He permits second
marriages, and if necessary, prefers even third marriages to
fornication and adultery. But we who ought to present our bodies a
living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is our reasonable
service, should consider, not what God permits, but what He wishes:
that we may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of
God. It follows that what He merely permits is neither good, nor
acceptable, nor perfect. And he gives his reasons for this advice:
4526
“Knowing the season, that now it
is high time for you to awake out of sleep: for now is salvation nearer
to us than when we first believed. The night is far spent, and the day
is at hand.” And lastly: “Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ,
and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts
thereof.” God’s will is one thing, His indulgence another.
Whence, writing to the Corinthians, he says,
4527
“I, brethren, could not speak
unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in
Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye
were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet
carnal.” He who
4528
is in the
merely animal state, and does not receive the things pertaining to the
Spirit of God (for he is foolish, and cannot understand them, because
they are spiritually discerned), he is not fed with the food of perfect
chastity, but with the coarse milk of marriage. As through man came
death, so also through man came the resurrection of the dead. As in
Adam we all die, so in Christ we shall all be made alive. Under the law
we served the old Adam, under the Gospel let us serve the new Adam. For
the first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a
quickening spirit.
4529
“The
first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is of heaven. As is
the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly,
such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of
the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I
say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God;
neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” This is so clear
that no explanation can make it clearer: “Flesh and blood,”
he says, “cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, neither doth
corruption inherit incorruption.” If corruption attaches to all
intercourse, and incorruption is characteristic of chastity, the
rewards of chastity cannot belong to marriage.
4530
“For we know that if the earthly
house of this tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from God, a
house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens. For verily in this
we groan, longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from
heaven. We are willing to be absent from the body, and to be at home
with the Lord. Wherefore also we make it our aim, whether in the body,
or out of the body, to be well-pleasing unto God.” And by way of
more fully explaining what he did not wish them to be he says
elsewhere:
4531
“I espoused you to one
husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ.”
But if you choose to apply the words to the whole Assembly of
believers, and in this betrothal to Christ include both married women,
and the twice-
married, and widows,
and virgins, that also makes for us. For whilst he invites all to
chastity and to the reward of virginity, he shows that virginity is
more excellent than all these conditions. And again writing to the
Galatians he says:
4532
“Because by the works of the law shall no flesh be
justified.” Among the works of the law is marriage, and
accordingly under it they are cursed who have no children. And if under
the Gospel it is permitted to have children, it is one thing to make a
concession to weakness, another to hold out rewards to virtue.
38. Something else I will say to my friends who marry
and after long chastity and continence begin to burn and are as wanton
as the brutes:
4533
“Are
ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now perfected in the
flesh? Did ye suffer so many things in vain?” If the Apostle in
the case of some persons loosens the cords of continence, and lets them
have a slack rein, he does so on account of the infirmity of the flesh.
This is the enemy he has in view when he once more says:
4534
“Walk by the Spirit, and ye
shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against
the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.” It is unnecessary
now to speak of the works of the flesh: it would be tedious, and he who
chooses can easily gather them from the letter of the Apostle. I will
only speak of the Spirit and its fruits, love, joy, peace, long
suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness,
4535
continence. All the virtues of the
Spirit are supported and protected by continence, which is as it were
their solid foundation and crowning point. Against such there is no
law.
4536
“And they that are of Christ have
crucified their flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof. If we
live by the Spirit, by the Spirit let us also walk.” Why do we
who with Christ have crucified our flesh and its passions and desires
again desire to do the things of the flesh?
4537
“Whatsoever a man soweth, that
shall he also reap. For he that soweth unto his own flesh, shall of the
flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the
Spirit reap eternal life.” I think that he who has a wife, so
long as he reverts to the practice in question, that Satan may not
tempt him, is sowing to the flesh and not to the Spirit. And he who
sows to the flesh (the words are not mine, but the Apostle’s)
reaps corruption. God the Father chose us in Christ before the
foundation of the world, that we might be holy and without spot before
Him.
4538
We walked in the lusts of the flesh,
doing the desires of the flesh and of the thoughts, and were children
of wrath, even as the rest. But now He has raised us up with Him, and
made us to sit with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
4539
that we may put away according to our
former manner of life the old man, which is corrupt according to the
lusts of deceit, and that blessing may be applied to us which so finely
concludes the mystical Epistle to the Ephesians:
4540
“Grace be with all them that love
our Lord Jesus Christ in uncorruptness.”
4541
“For our citizenship is in heaven;
from whence also we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who
shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be
conformed to the body of his glory.
4542
Whatsoever
things then are true, whatsoever are chaste, whatsoever things are
just, whatsoever things pertain to purity, let us join ourselves to
these, let us follow these.
4543
Christ hath
reconciled us in his body to God the Father through his death, and has
presented us holy and without spot, and without blame before himself:
in whom we have been also circumcised, not with the circumcision made
with hands, to the spoiling of the body of the flesh, but with the
circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, wherein
also we rose with him. If then we have risen with Christ, let us seek
those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of
God; let us set our affections on things above, not upon the things
that are upon the earth. For we are dead, and our life is hid with
Christ in God. When Christ our life shall appear, then we also shall
appear with him in glory.
4544
No soldier on
service entangleth himself in the affairs of this life; that he may
please him who enrolled him as a soldier.
4545
For the grace of God hath appeared,
bringing salvation to all men, instructing us, to the intent that,
denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live purely and
righteously and godly in this present world.”
39. The day would not be long enough were I to attempt
to relate all that the Apostle enjoins concerning purity. These things
are those concerning which our Lord said to the Apostles:
4546
“I have yet many things to say
unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit, when he, the Spirit of
truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth.” After the
crucifixion of Christ, we find in the
4547
Acts of the Apostles that one house,
that of Philip
the Evangelist,
produced four virgin daughters, to the end that Cæsarea, where the
Gentile Church had been consecrated in the person of Cornelius the
centurion, might afford an illustration of virginity. And whereas our
Lord said in the Gospel:
4548
“The
law and the prophets were until John,” they because they were
virgins are related to have prophesied even after John. For they could
not be bound by the law of the Old Testament, who had shone with the
brightness of virginity. Let us pass on to James, who was called the
brother of the Lord, a man of such sanctity and righteousness, and
distinguished by so rigid and perpetual a virginity, that even
4549
Josephus, the Jewish historian, relates
that the overthrow of Jerusalem was due to his death. He, the first
bishop of the Church at Jerusalem, which was composed of Jewish
believers, to whom Paul went, accompanied by Titus and Barnabas, says
in his Epistle:
4550
“Be not
deceived, my beloved brethren. Every good gift and every perfect boon
is from above, coming down from the Father of lights,
4551
with whom there is no difference, neither
shadow that is cast by turning. Of his own will he brought us forth by
the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first-fruits of his
creatures.” Himself a virgin, he teaches virginity in a mystery.
Every perfect gift cometh down from above, where marriage is unknown;
and it cometh down, not from any one you please, but from the Father of
lights, Who says to the apostles, “Ye are the light of the
world;” with Whom there is no difference of Jew, or Gentile, nor
does that shadow which was the companion of the law, trouble those who
have believed from among the nations; but with His word He begat us,
and with the word of truth, because some shadow, image, and likeness of
truth went before in the law, that we might be the first-fruits of His
creatures. And as He who was Himself the
4552
first begotten from the dead has raised
all that have died in Him: so He who was a virgin, consecrated the
first-fruits of His virgins in His own virgin self. Let us also
consider what Peter thinks of the calling of the Gentiles:
4553
“Blessed be the God and Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy begat us again
unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not
away, reserved in heaven for you, who by the power of God are guarded
through faith unto a salvation ready to be revealed in the last
time.” Where we read of an inheritance incorruptible, and
undefiled, and that fadeth not away, prepared in heaven and reserved
for the last time, and of the hope of eternal life when they will
neither marry, nor be given in marriage, there, in other words, the
privileges of virginity are described. For he shows as much in what
follows:
4554
“Wherefore girding up the
loins of your mind, be sober and set your hope perfectly on the grace
that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; as
children of obedience, not fashioning yourselves according to your
former lusts in the time of your ignorance; but like as he which called
you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living;
because it is written, ye shall be holy; for I am holy.
4555
For we were not redeemed with
contemptible things, with silver or gold; but with the precious blood
of a lamb without spot, Jesus Christ,
4556
that we might purify our souls in
obedience to the truth, having been begotten again not of corruptible
seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God,
4557
who liveth and abideth. And as living
stones let us be built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood
offering up spiritual sacrifices through Christ our Lord.
4558
For we are an elect race, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession.
4559
Christ died for us in the flesh. Let us
arm ourselves with the same conversation as did Christ; for he that
hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin; that we should no
longer live the rest of our time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but
to the will of God. For the time past is sufficient for us when we
walked in lasciviousness, lusts, and other vices. Great and precious
are the promises attaching to virginity which He has given us,
4560
that through it we may become partakers of
the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the
world through lust.
4561
The Lord knoweth
how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous
under punishment unto the day of judgement, but chiefly them that walk
after the flesh in the lust of defilement, and despise dominion,
daring, self-willed. For they, as beasts of burden, without reason,
think only of their belly and their lusts, railers who shall in their
corruption be destroyed, and shall receive the reward of iniquity: men
that count unrighteousness delight, spots and blemishes, think
ing of nothing but their pleasures;
having eyes full of adultery and insatiable lust, deceiving souls not
yet strengthened by the love of Christ. For they utter swelling words
and easily snare the unlearned with the seduction of the flesh;
promising them liberty while they themselves are the slaves of vice,
luxury, and corruption. For of what a man is overcome, of the same is
he also brought into bondage. But if, after they had escaped the
defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Saviour Jesus
Christ, they are again overcome by that which they before overcame, the
last state is become worse with them than the first. And it were better
for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after
knowing it, to turn back and forsake the holy commandment delivered
unto them. And it has happened unto them according to the true proverb,
the dog hath turned to his own vomit again, and the sow that had washed
to wallowing in the mire.” I have hesitated, for fear of being
tedious, to quote the whole passage of the second Epistle of Peter, and
have merely shown that the Holy Spirit in prophecy foretold the
teachers of this time and their heresy. Lastly, he more clearly denotes
them, saying,
4562
“In the
last days seducing mockers shall come, walking after their own
lusts.”
40. The Apostle has described Jovinianus speaking with
swelling cheeks and nicely balancing his inflated utterances, promising
heavenly liberty, when he himself is the slave of vice and
self-indulgence, a dog returning to his vomit. For although he boasts
of being a monk, he has exchanged his dirty tunic, bare feet, common
bread, and drink of water, for a snowy dress, sleek skin, honey-wine
and dainty dishes, for the sauces of
4563
Apicius and
4564
Paxamus, for baths and rubbings, and for
the cook-shops. Is it not clear that he prefers his belly to Christ,
and thinks his ruddy complexion worth the kingdom of heaven? And yet
that handsome monk so fat and sleek, and of bright appearance, who
always walks with the air of a bridegroom, must either marry a wife if
he is to show that virginity and marriage are equal: or if he does not
marry one, it is useless for him to bandy words with us when his acts
are on our side. And John agrees with this almost to the letter:
4565
“Love not the world, neither the
things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of
the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world is the lust of
the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of this life, which
is not of the Father, but is of the world.” And, “The world
passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God
abideth for ever. A new commandment have I written unto you, which
thing is true both in Christ and in you; because the darkness is
passing away, and the true light already shineth.” And again,
4566
“Beloved, now are we the children
of God, and it is not yet made manifest what we shall be. But we know
that, if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him: for we shall see
him even as he is. And every one that hath this hope purifieth himself,
even as he is pure.
4567
Herein is our
love made perfect, if we have boldness in the day of judgement: that as
he is, even so may we be in this world.” The Epistle of Jude also
expresses nearly the same:
4568
“Hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.” Let us read
the Apocalypse of John, and we shall there find the Lamb upon Mount
Sion,
4569
and with Him “a hundred and
forty-four thousand of them that were sealed, having His name and the
name of His Father written in their foreheads, who sing a new song, and
no one can sing that song save they who have been redeemed out of the
earth. These are they who have not defiled themselves with women, for
they continued virgins. These follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth:
for they were redeemed from among men, first-fruits to God and to the
Lamb, and in their mouth was found no guile, and they are without
spot.”
4570
Out of each
tribe, the tribe of Dan excepted, the place of which is taken by the
tribe of Levi, twelve thousand virgins who have been sealed are spoken
of as future believers, who have not defiled themselves with women. And
that we may not suppose the reference to be to those who know not
harlots, he immediately added: “For they continued
virgins.” Whereby he shows that all who have not preserved their
virginity, in comparison of pure and angelic chastity and of our Lord
Jesus Christ Himself, are defiled.
4571
“These are they who sing a new
song which no man can sing except him that is a virgin. These are
first-fruits unto God and unto the Lamb, and are without
blemish.” If virgins are first-fruits, it follows that widows and
the continent in marriage, come after the first-fruits, that is, are in
the second and third rank: nor can a lost people be saved unless it
offer such sacrifices of chastity to God, and with pure victims
reconcile the spotless Lamb.
It
would be endless work to explain the Gospel mystery of the ten virgins,
five of whom were wise and five foolish. All I say now is, that as mere
virginity without other works does not save, so all works without
virginity, purity, continence, chastity, are imperfect. And we shall
not be hindered in the least from taking this view by the objection of
our opponent that our Lord was at Cana of Galilee, and joined in the
marriage festivities when He turned water into wine. I shall very
briefly reply, that He Who was circumcised on the eighth day, and for
Whom a pair of turtle-doves and two young pigeons were offered on the
day of purification, like others before He suffered, shewed His
approval of Jewish custom, that He might not seem to give His enemies
just cause for putting Him to death on the pretext that He destroyed
the law and condemned nature. And even this was done for our sakes. For
by going once to a marriage, He taught that men should marry only once.
Moreover, at that time it was possible to injure virginity if marriage
were not placed next to it, and the purity of widowhood in the third
rank. But now when heretics are condemning wedlock, and despise the
ordinance of God, we gladly hear anything he
4572
may say in praise of marriage. For the
Church does not condemn marriage, but makes it subordinate; nor does
she reject it, but regulates it; for she knows, as was said before,
that
4573
in a great house there are not only
vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and earthenware; and that
some are to honour, some to dishonour; and that whoever cleanses
himself will be a vessel of honour, necessary, prepared for every good
work.
41. I have given enough and more than enough
illustrations from the divine writings of Christian chastity and
angelic virginity. But as I understand that our opponent in his
commentaries summons us to the tribunal of worldly wisdom, and we are
told that views of this kind are never accepted in the world, and that
our religion has invented a dogma against nature, I will quickly run
through Greek and Roman and Foreign History, and will show that
virginity ever took the lead of chastity. Fable relates that Atalanta,
the virgin of Calydonian fame, lived for the chase and dwelt always in
the woods; in other words that she did not set her heart on marriage
with its troubles of pregnancy and of sickness, but upon the nobler
life of freedom and chastity.
4574
Harpalyce too,
a Thracian virgin, is described by the famous poet; and so is
4575
Camilia, queen of the Volsci, on whom,
when she came to his assistance, Turnus had no higher praise which he
could bestow than to call her a virgin. “O Virgin, Glory of
Italy!” And that famous daughter of
4576
Leos, the lady of the brazen house,
ever a virgin, is related to have freed her country from pestilence by
her voluntary death: and the blood of the virgin
4577
Iphigenia is said to have calmed the
stormy winds. What need to tell of the Sibyls of Erythræ and
Cumæ, and the eight others? for Varro asserts there were ten whose
ornament was virginity, and divination the reward of their virginity.
But if in the Æolian dialect “Sibyl” is represented by
Θεοβούλη
, we must
understand that a knowledge of the
Counsel of God
is rightly
attributed to virginity alone. We read, too, that Cassandra and
Chryseis, prophetesses of Apollo and Juno, were virgins. And there were
innumerable priestesses of the Taurian Diana, and of Vesta. One of
these, Munitia, being suspected of unchastily was
4578
buried alive, which would be in my
opinion an unjust punishment, unless the violation of virginity were
considered a serious crime. At all events how highly the Romans always
esteemed virgins is clear from the fact that consuls and generals even
in their triumphal chariots and bringing home the spoils of conquered
nations, were wont to make way for them to pass. And so did men of all
ranks. When
4579
Claudia, a Vestal Virgin, was
suspected of unchastily, and a vessel containing the image of Cybele
was aground in the Tiber, it is related that she, to prove her
chastity, with her girdle drew the ship which a thousand men could not
move. Yet, as
4580
the uncle of
Lucan the poet says, it would have been better if this circumstance had
decorated a chastity tried and proved, and had not pleaded in defence
of a chastity equivocal. No wonder that we read such things of human
beings, when heathen error also invented the virgin goddesses Minerva
and Diana, and placed the Virgin among the twelve signs of the Zodiac,
by means of which, as they suppose, the world
revolves. It is a proof of the little esteem in
which they held marriage that they did not even among the scorpions,
centaurs, crabs, fishes, and capricorn, thrust in a husband and wife.
When the thirty tyrants of Athens had slain Phidon at the banquet, they
commanded his virgin daughters to come to them, naked like harlots, and
there upon the ground, red with their father’s blood, to act the
wanton. For a little while they hid their grief, and then when they saw
the revellers were intoxicated, going out on the plea of easing nature,
they embraced one another and threw themselves into a well, that by
death they might save their virginity. The virgin daughter of Demotion,
chief of the Areopagites, having heard of the death of her betrothed,
4581
Leosthenes, who had originated the
Lamian war, slew herself, for she declared that although in body she
was a virgin, yet if she were compelled to accept another, she should
regard him as her second husband, when she had given her heart to
Leosthenes. So close a friendship long existed between Sparta and
Messene that for the furtherance of certain religious rites they even
exchanged virgins. Well, on one occasion when the men of Messene
attempted to outrage fifty Lacedæmonian virgins, out of so many
not one consented, but they all most gladly died in defence of their
chastity. Whence there arose a long and grievous war, and in the long
run
4582
Mamertina was destroyed. Aristoclides,
tyrant of Orchomenos, fell in love with a virgin of Stymphalus, and
when after the death of her father she took refuge in the temple of
Diana, and embraced the image of the goddess and could not be dragged
thence by force, she was slain on the spot. Her death caused such
intense grief throughout Arcadia that the people took up arms and
avenged the virgin’s death.
4583
Aristomenes of Messene, a just man,
at a time when the Lacedæmonians, whom he had conquered, were
celebrating by night the festival called the
4584
Hyacinthia, carried off from the
sportive bands fifteen virgins, and fleeing all night at full speed got
away from the Spartan territory. His companions wished to outrage them,
but he admonished them to the best of his power not to do so, and when
certain refused to obey, he slew them, and restrained the rest by fear.
The maidens were afterwards ransomed by their kinsmen, and on seeing
Aristomenes condemned for murder would not return to their country
until clasping the knees of the judges they beheld the protector of
their chastity acquitted. How shall we sufficiently praise the
daughters of Scedasus at Leuctra in Bœotia? It is related that in
the absence of their father they hospitably entertained two youths who
were passing by, and who having drunk to excess violated the virgins in
the course of the night. Being unwilling to survive the loss of their
virginity, the maidens inflicted deadly wounds on one another. Nor
would it be right to omit mention of the Locrian virgins. They were
sent to Ilium according to custom which had lasted for nearly a
thousand years, and yet not one gave occasion to any idle tale or
filthy rumour of virginity defiled. Could any one pass over in silence
the seven virgins of Miletus who, when the Gauls spread desolation far
and wide, that they might suffer no indignity at the hands of the
enemy, escaped disgrace by death, and left to all virgins the lesson of
their example—that noble minds care more for chastity than life?
Nicanor having conquered and overthrown Thebes was himself overcome by
a passion for one captive virgin, whose voluntary self-surrender he
longed for. A captive maid, he thought, must be only too glad. But he
found that virginity is dearer to the pure in heart than a kingdom,
when with tears and grief he held her in his arms slain by her own
hand. Greek writers tell also of another Theban virgin who had been
deflowered by a Macedonian foe, and who, hiding her grief for a while,
slew the violator of her virginity as he slept, and then killed herself
with the sword, so that she would neither live when her chastity was
lost, nor die before she had avenged herself.
42. To come to the Gymnosophists of India, the opinion
is authoritatively handed down that Budda, the founder of their
religion, had his birth through the side of a virgin. And we need not
wonder at this in the case of Barbarians when cultured Greece supposed
that Minerva at her birth sprang from the head of Jove, and Father
Bacchus from his thigh.
4585
Speusippus
also, Plato’s nephew, and
4586
Clearchus in his eulogy of Plato, and
4587
Anaxelides in the second book of his
philosophy, relates that
Perictione, the mother of Plato, was violated by an apparition of
Apollo, and they agree in thinking that the prince of wisdom was born
of a virgin.
4588
Timæus
writes that the
4589
virgin
daughter of
4590
Pythagoras was at the head of a band
of virgins, and instructed them in chastity.
4591
Diodorus, the disciple of Socrates, is
said to have had five daughters skilled in dialectics and distinguished
for chastity, of whom a full account is given by Philo the master of
4592
Carneades. And mighty Rome cannot taunt
us as though we had invented the story of the birth of our Lord and
Saviour from a virgin; for the Romans believe that the founders of
their city and race were the offspring of the virgin
4593
Ilia and of Mars.
43. Let these allusions to the virgins of the world,
brief and hastily gathered from many histories, now suffice. I will
proceed to married women who were reluctant to survive the decease or
violent death of their husbands for fear they might be forced into a
second marriage, and who entertained a marvellous affection for the
only husbands they had. This may teach us that second marriage was
repudiated among the heathen. Dido, the sister of Pygmalion, having
collected a vast amount of gold and silver, sailed to Africa, and there
built Carthage. And when her hand was sought in marriage by Iarbas,
king of Libya, she deferred the marriage for a while until her country
was settled. Not long after, having raised a
4594
funeral pyre to the memory of her former
husband Sichæus, she preferred to “burn rather than to
marry.” Carthage was built by a woman of chastity, and its end
was a tribute to the excellence of the virtue. For the
4595
wife of Hasdrubal, when the city was
captured and set on fire, and she saw that she could not herself escape
capture by the Romans, took her little children in either hand and
leaped into the burning ruins of her house.
44. What need to tell of the wife of
4596
Niceratus, who, not enduring to wrong
her husband, inflicted death upon herself rather than subject herself
to the lust of the thirty tyrants whom Lysander had set over conquered
Athens?
4597
Artemisia, also, wife of
Mausolus, is related to have been distinguished for chastity. Though
she was queen of Caria, and is extolled by great poets and historians,
no higher praise is bestowed upon her than that when her husband was
dead she loved him as much as when he was alive, and built a tomb so
great that even to the present day all costly sepulchres are called
after his name,
mausoleums
.
4598
Teuta,
queen of the Illyrians, owed her long sway over brave warriors, and her
frequent victories over Rome, to her marvellous chastity. The Indians
and almost all the Barbarians have a plurality of wives. It is a law
with them that the favourite wife must be burned with her dead husband.
The wives therefore vie with one another for the husband’s love,
and the highest ambition of the rivals, and the proof of chastity, is
to be considered worthy of death. So then she that is victorious,
having put on her former dress and ornaments, lies down beside the
corpse, embracing and kissing it, and to the glory of chastity despises
the flames which are burning beneath her. I suppose that she who dies
thus, wants no second marriage. The famous Alcibiades, the friend of
Socrates, when Athens was conquered, fled to Pharnabazus, who took a
bribe from Lysander the Lacedæmonian leader and ordered him to be
slain. He was strangled, and when his head had been cut off it was sent
to Lysander as proof of the murder, but the rest of his body lay
unburied. His concubine, therefore, all alone, in defiance of the
command of the cruel enemy, in the midst of strangers, and in the face
of peril, gave him due burial, for she was ready to die for the dead
man whom she had loved when living. Let matrons, Christian matrons at
all events, imitate the fidelity of concubines, and
exhibit in their freedom what she in her
captivity preserved.
45. Strato, ruler of Sidon, thought of dying by his own
hand, that he might not be the sport of the Persians, who were close by
and whose alliance he had discarded for the friendship of the king of
Egypt. But he drew back in terror, and eying the sword which he had
seized, awaited in alarm the approach of the enemy. His wife, knowing
that he must be immediately taken, wrested the weapon from his hand,
and pierced his side. When the body was properly laid out she lay down
upon it in the agony of death, that she might not violate her virgin
troth in the embraces of another.
4599
Xenophon,
in describing the early years of the elder Cyrus, relates that when her
husband Abradatas was slain, Panthea who had loved him intensely,
placed herself beside the mangled body, then stabbed herself, and let
her blood run into her husband’s wounds. The
4600
queen whom the king her husband had shewn
naked and without her knowledge to his friend, thought she had good
cause for slaying the king. She judged that she was not beloved if it
was possible for her to be exhibited to another. Rhodogune, daughter of
Darius, after the death of her husband, put to death the nurse who was
trying to persuade her to marry again.
4601
Alcestis is related in story to have
voluntarily died for Admetus, and Penelope’s chastity is the
theme of Homer’s song. Laodamia’s praises are also sung by
the poets, because, when
4602
Protesilaus was
slain at Troy, she refused to survive him.
46. I may pass on to Roman women; and the first that I
shall mention is
4603
Lucretia, who
would not survive her violated chastity, but blotted out the stain upon
her person with her own blood. Duilius, the first Roman who won a
4604
naval triumph, took to wife a virgin,
Bilia, of such extraordinary chastity that she was an example even to
an age which held unchastity to be not merely vicious but monstrous.
When he was grown old and feeble he was once in the course of a quarrel
taunted with having bad breath. In dudgeon he betook himself home, and
on complaining to his wife that she had never told him of it so that he
might remedy the fault, he received the reply that she would have done
so, but she thought that all men had foul breath as he had. In either
case this chaste and noble woman deserves praise, whether she was not
aware there was anything wrong with her husband, or if she patiently
endured, and her husband discovered his unfortunate condition not by
the disgust of a wife, but by the abuse of an enemy. At all events the
woman who marries a second time cannot say this. Marcia, Cato’s
younger daughter, on being asked after the loss of her husband why she
did not marry again, replied that she could not find a man who wanted
her more than her money. Her words teach us that men in choosing their
wives look for riches rather than for chastity, and that many in
marrying use not their eyes but their fingers. That
must
be an
excellent thing which is won by avarice! When the same lady was
mourning the loss of her husband, and the matrons asked what day would
terminate her grief, she replied, “The same that terminates my
life.” I imagine that a woman who thus followed her husband in
heart and mind had no thought of marrying again. Porcia, whom
4605
Brutus took to wife, was a virgin;
Cato’s wife,
4606
Marcia, was not
a virgin; but Marcia went to and fro between Hortensius and Cato, and
was quite content to live without Cato; while
4607
Porcia could not live without Brutus;
for women attach themselves closely to particular men, and to keep to
one is a strong link in the chain of affection. When a relative urged
Annia to marry again (she was of full age and a goodly person), she
answered, “I shall certainly not do so. For, if I find a good
man, I have no wish to be in fear of losing him: if a bad one, why must
I put up with a bad husband after having had a good one?”
4608
Porcia the younger, on hearing a
certain lady of good character, who had a second husband, praised in
her house, replied, “A chaste and happy matron never marries more
than once.” Marcella the elder, on being asked by her mother if
she was glad she was married, answered, “So much so that I want
nothing more.”
4609
Valeria, sister
of the Messalas, when she lost her husband Servius, would marry no one
else.
On being asked why not, she
said that to her, her husband Servius was ever alive.
47. I feel that in giving this list of women I have said
far more than is customary in illustrating a point, and that I might be
justly censured by my learned reader. But what am I to do when the
women of our time press me with apostolic authority, and before the
first husband is buried, repeat from morning to night the precepts
which allow a second marriage? Seeing they despise the fidelity which
Christian purity dictates, let them at least learn chastity from the
heathen. A book
On Marriage
, worth its weight in gold, passes
under the name of
4610
Theophrastus. In
it the author asks whether a wise man marries. And after laying down
the conditions—that the wife must be fair, of good character, and
honest parentage, the husband in good health and of ample means, and
after saying that under these circumstances a wise man sometimes enters
the state of matrimony, he immediately proceeds thus: “But all
these conditions are seldom satisfied in marriage. A wise man therefore
must not take a wife. For in the first place his study of philosophy
will be hindered, and it is impossible for anyone to attend to his
books and his wife. Matrons want many things, costly dresses, gold,
jewels, great outlay, maid-servants, all kinds of furniture, litters
and gilded coaches. Then come curtain-lectures the livelong night: she
complains that one lady goes out better dressed than she: that another
is looked up to by all: ‘I am a poor despised nobody at the
ladies’ assemblies.’ ‘Why did you ogle that creature
next door?’ ‘Why were you talking to the maid?’
‘What did you bring from the market?’ ‘I am not
allowed to have a single friend, or companion.’ She suspects that
her husband’s love goes the same way as her hate. There may be in
some neighbouring city the wisest of teachers; but if we have a wife we
can neither leave her behind, nor take the burden with us. To support a
poor wife, is hard: to put up with a rich one, is torture. Notice, too,
that in the case of a wife you cannot pick and choose: you must take
her as you find her. If she has a bad temper, or is a fool, if she has
a blemish, or is proud, or has bad breath, whatever her fault may
be—all this we learn after marriage. Horses, asses, cattle, even
slaves of the smallest worth, clothes, kettles, wooden seats, cups, and
earthenware pitchers, are first tried and then bought: a wife is the
only thing that is not shown before she is married, for fear she may
not give satisfaction. Our gaze must always be directed to her face,
and we must always praise her beauty: if you look at another woman, she
thinks that she is out of favour. She must be called my lady, her
birth-day must be kept, we must swear by her health and wish that she
may survive us, respect must be paid to the nurse, to the nursemaid, to
the father’s slave, to the foster-child, to the handsome
hanger-on, to the curled darling who manages her affairs, and to the
eunuch who ministers to the safe indulgence of her lust: names which
are only a cloak for adultery. Upon whomsoever she sets her heart, they
must have her love though they want her not. If you give her the
management of the whole house, you must yourself be her slave. If you
reserve something for yourself, she will not think you are loyal to
her; but she will turn to strife and hatred, and unless you quickly
take care, she will have the poison ready. If you introduce old women,
and soothsayers, and prophets, and vendors of jewels and silken
clothing, you imperil her chastity; if you shut the door upon them, she
is injured and fancies you suspect her. But what is the good of even a
careful guardian, when an unchaste wife cannot be watched, and a chaste
one ought not to be? For necessity is but a faithless keeper of
chastity, and she alone really deserves to be called pure, who is free
to sin if she chooses. If a woman be fair, she soon finds lovers; if
she be ugly, it is easy to be wanton. It is difficult to guard what
many long for. It is annoying to have what no one thinks worth
possessing. But the misery of having an ugly wife is less than that of
watching a comely one. Nothing is safe, for which a whole people sighs
and longs. One man entices with his figure, another with his brains,
another with his wit, another with his open hand. Somehow, or sometime,
the fortress is captured which is attacked on all sides. Men marry,
indeed, so as to get a manager for the house, to solace weariness, to
banish solitude; but a faithful slave is a far better manager, more
submissive to the master, more observant of his ways, than a wife who
thinks she proves herself mistress if she acts in opposition to her
husband, that is, if she does what pleases her, not what she is
commanded. But friends, and servants who are under the obligation of
benefits received, are better able to wait upon us in sickness than a
wife who makes us responsible for her tears (she will sell you enough
to make a deluge for the hope of a legacy), boasts of her anxiety, but
drives her sick husband to the distraction of despair. But if she
herself is poorly, we must fall sick with her and never leave her
bedside. Or if she be a good and agreeable wife (how rare a bird she
is!), we have to share
her groans
in childbirth, and suffer torture when she is in danger. A wise man can
never be alone. He has with him the good men of all time, and turns his
mind freely wherever he chooses. What is inaccessible to him in person
he can embrace in thought. And, if men are scarce, he converses with
God.
4611
He is never less alone than when alone.
Then again, to marry for the sake of children, so that our name may not
perish, or that we may have support in old age, and leave our property
without dispute, is the height of stupidity. For what is it to us when
we are leaving the world if another bears our name, when even a son
does not all at once take his father’s title, and there are
countless others who are called by the same name. Or what support in
old age is he whom you bring up, and who may die before you, or turn
out a reprobate? Or at all events when he reaches mature age, you may
seem to him long in dying. Friends and relatives whom you can
judiciously love are better and safer heirs than those whom you must
make your heirs whether you like it or not. Indeed, the surest way of
having a good heir is to ruin your fortune in a good cause while you
live, not to leave the fruit of your labour to be used you know not
how.”
48. When Theophrastus thus discourses, are there any of
us, Christians, whose conversation is in heaven and who daily say
4612
“I long to be dissolved, and to
be with Christ,” whom he does not put to the blush? Shall a
joint-heir of Christ really long for human heirs? And shall he desire
children and delight himself in a long line of descendants, who will
perhaps fall into the clutches of Antichrist, when we read that
4613
Moses and
4614
Samuel preferred other men to their own
sons, and did not count as their children those whom they saw to be
displeasing to God? When Cicero after
4615
divorcing Terentia was requested by
4616
Hirtius to marry his sister, he
4617
set the matter altogether on one side,
and said that he could not possibly devote himself to a wife and to
philosophy. Meanwhile that excellent partner, who had herself drunk
wisdom at Tully’s fountains, married
4618
Sallust his enemy, and took for her
third husband Messala Corvinus, and thus, as it were, passed through
three degrees of eloquence. Socrates had two wives, Xantippe and Myron,
grand-daughter of Aristides. They frequently quarrelled, and he was
accustomed to banter them for disagreeing about him, he being the
ugliest of men, with snub nose, bald forehead, rough-haired, and
bandy-legged. At last they planned an attack upon him, and having
punished him severely, and put him to flight, vexed him for a long
time. On one occasion when he opposed Xantippe; who from above was
heaping abuse upon him, the termagant soused him with dirty water, but
he only wiped his head and said, “I knew that a shower must
follow such thunder as that.”
4619
Metella,
consort of L. Sulla the
4620
Fortunate
(except in the matter of his wife) was
4621
openly unchaste. It was the common talk
of Athens, as I learnt in my youthful years when we soon pick up what
is bad, and yet Sulla was in the dark, and first got to know the
secrets of his household through the abuse of his enemies. Cn. Pompey
had an impure wife
4622
Mucia, who
was surrounded by eunuchs from Pontus and troops of the countrymen of
Mithridates. Others thought that he knew all and submitted to it; but a
comrade told him during the campaign, and the conqueror of the whole
world was dismayed at the sad intelligence.
4623
M. Cato, the Censor, had a wife
Actoria Paula, a woman of low origin, fond of drink, violent, and (who
would believe it?) haughty to Cato. I say this for fear anyone may
suppose that in marrying a poor woman he has secured peace. When
4624
Philip king of Macedon, against whom
4625
Demosthenes thundered in his Philippics,
was entering his bed-room as usual, his wife
in a passion shut him out. Finding himself
excluded he held his tongue, and consoled himself for the insult by
reading a tragic poem.
4626
Gorgias the
Rhetorician recited his excellent treatise on Concord to the Greeks,
then at variance among themselves, at Olympia. Whereupon
4627
Melanthius his enemy observed:
“Here is a man who teaches us concord, and yet could not make
concord between himself his wife, and maid-servant, three persons in
one house.” The truth was that his wife envied the beauty of the
girl, and drove the purest of men wild with daily quarrels. Whole
tragedies of Euripides are censures on women. Hence Hermione says,
4628
“The counsels of evil women
have beguiled me.” In the semi-barbarous and remote city
4629
Leptis it is the custom for a
daughter-in-law on
4630
the second day
to beg the loan of a jar from her mother-in-law. The latter at once
denies the request, and we see how true was the remark of
4631
Terence, ambiguously expressed on
purpose—“How is this? do all mothers-in-law hate their
daughters-in-law?” We read of a certain Roman noble who, when his
friends found fault with him for having divorced a wife, beautiful,
chaste, and rich, put out his foot and said to them, “And the
shoe before you looks new and elegant, yet no one but myself knows
where it pinches.” Herodotus
4632
tells
us that a woman puts off her modesty with her clothes. And our own
comic poet
4633
thinks the man fortunate who
has never been married. Why should I refer to Pasiphaë,
4634
Clytemnestra, and Eriphyle, the first
of whom, the wife of a king and swimming in pleasure, is said to have
lusted for a bull, the second to have killed her: husband for the sake
of an adulterer, the third to have betrayed Amphiaraus, and to have
preferred a gold necklace to the welfare of her husband. In all the
bombast of tragedy and the overthrow of houses, cities, and kingdoms,
it is the wives and concubines who stir up strife. Parents take up arms
against their children: unspeakable banquets are served: and on account
of the rape of one wretched woman Europe and Asia are involved in a ten
years’ war. We read of some who were divorced the day after they
were married, and immediately married again. Both husbands are to
blame, both he who was so soon dissatisfied, and he who was so soon
pleased. Epicurus the patron of pleasure (though
4635
Metrodorus his disciple married
Leontia) says that a wise man can seldom marry, because marriage has
many drawbacks. And as riches, honours, bodily health, and other things
which we call indifferent, are neither good nor bad, but stand as it
were midway, and become good and bad according to the use and issue, so
wives stand on the border line of good and ill. It is, moreover, a
serious matter for a wise man to be in doubt whether he is going to
marry a good or a bad woman.
4636
Chrysippus
ridiculously maintains that a wise man should marry, that he may not
outrage Jupiter
4637
Gamelius
and Genethlius. For upon that principle the Latins would not marry at
all, since they have no Jupiter who presides over marriage. But if, as
he thinks, the life of men is determined by the names of gods, whoever
chooses to sit will offend Jupiter
4638
Stator.
49. Aristotle and Plutarch and our Seneca have written
treatises on matrimony, out of which we have already made some extracts
and now add a few more. “The love of beauty is the forgetting of
reason and the near neighbour of madness; a foul blot little in keeping
with a sound mind. It confuses counsel, breaks high and generous
spirits, draws away men from great thoughts to mean ones; it makes men
querulous, ill-tempered, foolhardy, cruelly imperious, servile
flatterers, good for nothing, at last not even for love itself. For
although in the intensity of passion it burns like a raging fire, it
wastes much time through suspicions, tears, and complaints: it begets
hatred of itself, and at last hates itself.” The course of love
is laid bare in Plato’s Phædrus from beginning to end, and
Lysias explains all its drawbacks—how it is led not by reason,
but by frenzy, and in particular is a harsh gaoler over lovely wives.
Seneca, too, relates that he knew an accomplished man who before going
out used to tie
his wife’s
garter upon his breast, and could not bear to be absent from her for a
quarter of an hour; and this pair would never take a drink unless
husband and wife alternately put their lips to the cup; and they did
other things just as absurd in the extravagant outbursts of their warm
but blind affection. Their love was of honourable birth, but it grew
out of all proportion. And it makes no difference how honourable may be
the cause of a man’s insanity. Hence
4639
Xystus in his Sentences tells us that
“He who too ardently loves his own wife is an adulterer.”
It is disgraceful to love another man’s wife at all, or
one’s own too much. A wise man ought to love his wife with
judgment, not with passion. Let a man govern his voluptuous impulses,
and not rush headlong into intercourse. There is nothing blacker than
to love a wife as if she were an adulteress. Men who say they have
contracted marriage and are bringing up children, for the good of their
country and of the race, should at least imitate the brutes, and not
destroy their offspring in the womb; nor should they appear in the
character of lovers, but of husbands. In some cases marriage has grown
out of adultery: and, shameful to relate! men have tried to teach their
wives chastity after having taken their chastity away. Marriages of
that sort are quickly dissolved when lust is satiated. The first
allurement gone, the charm is lost. What shall I say, says Seneca, of
the poor men who in numbers are bribed to take the name of husband in
order to evade the laws promulgated against bachelors? How can he who
is married under such conditions be a guide to morality, teach
chastity, and maintain the authority of a husband? It is the saying of
a very learned man, that chastity must be preserved at all costs, and
that when it is lost all virtue falls to the ground. This holds the
primacy of all virtues in woman. This it is that makes up for a
wife’s poverty, enhances her riches, redeems her deformity, gives
grace to her beauty; it makes her act in a way worthy of her
forefathers whose blood it does not taint with bastard offspring; of
her children, who through it have no need to blush for their mother, or
to be in doubt about their father; and above all, of herself, since it
defends her from external violation. There is no greater calamity
connected with captivity than to be the victim of another’s lust.
The consulship sheds lustre upon men; eloquence gives eternal renown;
military glory and a triumph immortalise an obscure family. Many are
the spheres ennobled by splendid ability. The virtue of woman is, in a
special sense, purity. It was this that made
4640
Lucretia the equal of Brutus, if it did
not make her his superior, since Brutus learnt from a woman the
impossibility of being a slave. It was this that made
4641
Cornelia a fit match for Gracchus, and
4642
Porcia for a second Brutus.
4643
Tanaquil is better known than her
husband. His name, like the names of many other kings, is lost in the
mists of antiquity. She, through a virtue rare among women, is too
deeply rooted in the hearts of all ages for her memory ever to perish.
Let my married sisters copy the examples of
4644
Theano,
4645
Cleobuline, Gorgente,
4646
Timoclia, the
4647
Claudias and Cornelias; and when they
find the Apostle conceding second marriage to depraved women, they will
read that before the light of our religion shone upon the world wives
of one husband ever held high rank among matrons, that by their hands
the sacred rites of Fortuna
4648
Muliebris
were performed, that a priest or
4649
Flamen
twice
4650
married was unknown, that the
high-priests of Athens to this day
4651
emasculate
themselves by drinking hemlock, and once they have been drawn in to the
pontificate, cease to be men.
4254
From this
expression and that quoted in the notice above, it would be supposed
that Jerome knew Jovinianus and his mode of life. But there is no
reason to think that he had this knowledge; and his imputations against
his adversary must be taken as the inferences which he draws from his
opinions.
4255
Hor. Ars Poet.
139.
4256
Pers. Sat. iii.
118.
4257
Plautus,
Pseudolus, i. 1. 23.
Has quidem, pol, credo, nisi Sibylla legerit,
Interpretari alium potesse neminem.
4258
The allusion is
probably to the Sybilline books.
4259
Æn x.
640.
4260
The philosopher of
Ephesus. Flourished about
b.c.
513.
4261
Ibi est
distinctio. Instead of clearness we have to make a choice between
possible meanings.
4262
Marcion lived
about
a.d.
150, and was co-temporary with
Polycarp, who is said to have had a personal encounter with him at
Rome. Unlike other Gnostics he professed to be purely Christian in his
doctrines. He is specially noted for his violent treatment of
Scripture: he rejected the whole of the Old Testament, while of the New
he acknowledged only the Gospel of S. Luke and ten of S. Paul’s
Epistles, and from these he expunged whatever he did not approve of.
His sect lasted until the sixth century.
4263
By birth an
Assyrian, and a pupil of Justin Martyr. His followers were called
Encratites,
or
Temperates,
from their great austerity.
They also bore the names
Water-drinkers
and
Renouncers.
4264
Heb. xiii
. The Revised Ver. translates “let
marriage be, etc.” There is no verb in the original, the sentence
being probably designed to be a Christian proverb, and capable of
serving either as an
assertion
or as a precept. The revised
rendering is preferred by the chief modern commentators.
4265
Gen. i. 28
.
4266
For much
interesting information relating to counting on the fingers, and for
authorities on the subject, see Mayor’s note on Juvenal x.
249.
4267
The philosopher
of Crotona, in Italy,
b.c.
580–510. See
some of his sayings in Jerome’s Apology, iii. 39–40.
4268
The great
teacher of the Academy at Athens; lived
b.c.
428–389.
4269
Surnamed the
“Just.” He was the opponent of Themistocles. He fought at
Marathon (490), and although in exile did good service at Salamis
(480). He was now recalled, and after commanding the Athenians at
Platæa (479) died, probably in 468, so poor that he did not leave
enough to pay for his funeral.
4270
Flourished about
b.c.
370. A disciple of Socrates, and founder
of the Cyrenaic School of Philosophy; he was luxurious in his life, and
held pleasure to be the highest good.
4271
Epicurus (
b.c.
342–270), though a disciple of
Aristippus, does not appear to have deserved the odium attached to his
name by Jerome and many others. “Pleasure with him was not a mere
momentary and transitory sensation, but something lasting and
imperishable, consisting in pure and noble enjoyments, that is, in
ἀταραξία
and
ἀπονία
, or the freedom from pain
and from all influences which disturb the peace of our mind, and
thereby our happiness which is the result of it.” See
Zeller’s Socrates and the Socratic Schools (Reichel’s
translation), second ed., p. 337 sq.
4272
The famous
Athenian, talented, reckless and unscrupulous; born about
b.c.
450, assassinated 404.
4273
Gen. ii. 24
.
4274
Matt. xix. 5
.
4275
Gen. i. 28; ix. 1
.
4276
Gen. ix. 1
.
4277
Gen. ix. 3
.
4278
Gen. xxv. 23
.
4279
Gen. xxx. 1
.
4280
Gen. xxx. 2
.
4281
Palo.
Rev. Vers.
tent-pin.
4282
Ps. lxxii. 1
.
4283
Ps. lxxii. 15
.
4284
Is. xxxviii. 19
. Sept.
4285
1 Tim. v. 14
.
4286
Hebr. xiii. 4
. See note on sec. 3.
4287
1 Cor. vii. 39
.
4288
1 Tim. ii. 14
.
4289
1 Cor. vii. 29
.
4290
1 Cor. vii. 1
sq.
4291
Prov. vi. 27, 28
.
4292
Mithras was the
God of the Sun among the Persians. His worship was introduced at Rome
under the Emperors, and thence spread over the empire.
4293
Son of Vulcan,
king of Athens, and the first to drive a four-in-hand, Virg. G. iii.
113: “First to the chariot, Ericthonius dared four steeds to
join, and o’er the rapid wheels victorious hang.”
4294
1 Pet. iii. 7
.
4295
1 Pet. iii. 2, 3
.
4296
1 John ii. 6
.
4297
1 Cor. vii. 7
.
4298
2 Cor. ii. 7
.
4299
2 Cor. ii. 7
.
4300
2 Cor. ii. 10
. Margin.
4301
Ps. xlv. 9, 13, 14
.
4302
1
Peter iii. 7, joined with 1 Peter iv. 10
.
4303
1 Cor. vii. 8
.
4304
Tit. i. 12
.
4305
1 Cor. xv. 33
.
4306
Acts xvii. 28
.
4307
1 Cor. vii. 10
sq.
4308
2 Cor. vi. 14
sq.
4309
1 Cor. vii. 39
.
4310
Mal. ii. 11, 12
.
4311
R.V. “To
the man that doeth this, him that waketh and him that
answereth.”
4312
1 Cor. vii. 18
sq.
4313
But S. Paul
hints at a surgical operation. See Josephus,
Antiq.
Bk. xii. c.
v. sec. 1, where certain apostates from Judaism are said “to have
hid their circumcision that even when they were naked [in the
gymnasium] they might appear to be Greeks.” See also Celsus, Bk.
vii. c. xxv.
4314
Gal. v. 19
.
4315
1 Cor. vi. 17
.
4316
1 Cor. vii. 25, 26
.
4317
Ferias
nuptiarum. The reference is to
1 Cor. vii. 5
.
4318
Matt. xix. 10
sq.
4319
Jerome uses the
Greek word
ἀγωνοθέτης
—President of the Games.
4320
S.
John vii. 37
.
4321
Is. lvi. 3
.
4322
Jer. xxxviii. 7
.
4323
Acts viii. 27
.
4324
1 Cor. vii. 26
.
4325
Matt. xxiv. 19
, &c.
4326
1 Cor. vii. 27
.
4327
1 Cor. vii. 30
sqq.
4328
See Rev. Ver.
Margin.
4329
See the
treatise on the Perp. Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Rome,
384.
4330
Ep. xxii. on the
guarding of virginity. Rome, 384.
4331
Jerome
apparently, here, alludes to some early work of Tertullian not now
extant.
4332
Jerome often
alludes to his relation to Gregory, in the year 381; he was present at
the council of Constantinople, of which Gregory was then the
bishop.
4333
This
rendering supposes
κὰι
μεμερίσται
to
be joined to the preceding sentence. The Vulgate has
et divisus
est,
and so also the Æthiopic Version.
4334
S.
John xv. 19
.
4335
1 Cor. vii. 35
.
4336
1 Cor. iii. 10
.
4337
1 Cor. vii. 37, 38
.
4338
Ps. xxxvi. 27
.
4339
Eccles. vii. 16
.
4340
1 Cor. vii. 39, 40
.
4341
1 Tim. v. 11, 15
.
4342
1 Cor. vii. 40
.
4343
Rom vii. 2, 3
.
4344
1 Tim. v. 14, 15
.
4345
See
1 Tim. iii. 12
. Most ancient writers interpreted S.
Paul’s words as referring to second marriages after loss of first
wife, however happening. And certain Councils decided in the same
sense, e.g. Neocæsarea (
a.d.
314).
Ellicott’s Pastoral Ep., fifth ed., p. 41.
4346
1 Tim. v. 9
. Other authorities, however, suppose the
words to refer to an order of widows, and pertinently ask, would the
Church thus limit her alms.
4347
1 Cor. vi. 12
.
4348
Eph. v. 31; Gen. ii
.
4349
Eph. v. 32
.
4350
Eph. v. 25; Col. iii. 9–11
.
4351
1 Thess. iv. 7
.
4352
Lit. through a
virgin. The allusion is, probably, to his baptism by a virgin,
i.e.,
John Baptist.
4353
But see
Gen. iv. 26
.
4354
1 Pet. iii. 20
.
4355
Eph. i. 10
.
4356
Rev. i. 8; xxii. 13
.
4357
Rom. xiv. 21
.
4358
Gen. xxxi. 46–49
, where the heap itself is called
Galeed.
4359
Gen. xxxii. 25, 28, 31
.
4360
Gen. xxxv. 16, 20
.
4361
Gen. xxxviii
.
4362
Gen. xxxviii. 9
.
4363
Ex. iv. 24–26
.
4364
Ex. iii. 5
.
4365
1 Sam. xxi. 4
.
4366
Levit. xxi. 13, 14
.
4367
The reference
is, probably, to
Levit. xxii.
13
. But the second marriage
is not there prohibited, and in the ideal polity of
Ezekiel
(xliv. 22)
a priest might
marry the widow of a priest.
4368
Levit. xxi. 3
.
4369
Deut. xx. 6, 7
, where an indulgence, not a prohibition,
is clearly indicated.
4370
Ex. xxxviii. 8
. Sept. Vulg. “who watched;”
Onkelos’ Targum “who assembled to pray,” and so the
Syriac Version. The Hebrew word signifies “to go forth to
war,” but is applied to the temple service, a sort of militia
sacra (Gesenius). Hence Rev. Version, “the serving women which
served at the door of the tent of meeting;” and Margin,
“the women which assembled to minister.” Comp.
Numb. iv. 3, 23, 30, 35, 39; and 1 Sam. ii.
22
.
4371
Ex. xxxvii
.
4372
In
Jude 5
, instead of “the Lord,” A.
B. read
Jesus,
and this is accepted by many ancient,
authorities. Farrar observes (“Early Days of Christianity,”
pop. ed., p, 128) “Jesus” is the more difficult, and
therefore more probable reading of A. B. It is explained by
1 Cor. x. 4
, and the identification of the Messiah
with the “Angel of the Lord” (
Ex. xiv. 19; xxiii. 20
, &c.) and with the Pillar of Fire in
Philo.
4373
Josh. iii
.
4374
Jerome derives
Gilgal
from
נָּלהָ
to uncover: the
accepted derivation is from
נָּלָל
to roll.
4375
Ex. iii. 5; Jos. v. 15
.
4376
Josh. x. 3
.
4377
Josh. x. 16
.
4378
S.
Luke xvi. 29
.
4379
Rom. v. 14
.
4380
Gen. xxxi. 41
.
4381
Gen. xxxvii. 28
.
4382
Gen. xxxii. 14
.
4383
Joshua died
at the age of 110 years.
Josh.
xxiv. 29
.
4384
Timnath-Serah
was the original name of Joshua’s inheritance (
Josh. xix. 50
), but in
Judges ii. 9
, we find the name changed to
Timnath-Heres. Timnath-Serah and the tomb of its illustrious owner were
shown in the time of Jerome (Letter cviii. 13). “Paula wondered
greatly that he who assigned men their possessions had chosen for
himself a rough and rocky spot.” Jerome is looking at the
inheritance with the eyes of an ardent controversialist when he
describes it as “the fairest spot in the land of
Judah.”
4385
Ps. xlviii. 2
. The correct rendering of the Hebrew is
much disputed.
4386
Ps. lxxiii. 2
.
4387
Josh. xxiv. 28
.
4388
Deut. xxxiv. 6
.
4389
Worshipped
more especially at Lampsacus on the Hellespont. He was regarded as the
promoter of fertility in vegetables and animals.
4390
Ps. cxxviii. 3
.
4391
Gen. vi. 3
. R.V.
Strive
or
rule
in.
4392
Gen. xlix. 17
. Samson was of the tribe of Dan.
4393
Judg. xi. 30, 31
.
4394
1 Tim. iii. 2
.
4395
Ps. xcix. 6
.
4396
See
1 Chron. vi. 34–38
.
4397
Heb. vii. 3
. The Greek word in the text
(“without genealogy”) is unknown to secular writers, and
occurs here only in the New Test. It cannot mean
without descent
(see verse 6).
Unmarried
appears to be a false inference from
this supposed meaning. Ignatius also (Ep. ad. Philad.) reckoned
Melchizedek among celibates. Rev. Version translates, “without
genealogy,”
i.e.,
his ancestry was
unrecorded.
See
Farrar’s “Early Days of Christianity,” pop. ed., p.
221.
4398
1 Sam. ii. 22
.
4399
See, however,
1 Chron. xxii. 8
.
4400
S.
Matt. xviii. 6
.
4401
S.
Matt. v. 22
.
4402
S.
Matt. v. 27
.
4403
Cant. vi. 8
.
4404
1 Kings xi. 3
.
4405
1 Cor. vii. 29
.
4406
Is. xxxviii. 19
.
4407
2 Kings xxii. 14
.
4408
2 Kings xx. 18
.
4409
Dan. i. 3, 4
.
4410
Ezek. xiv. 14, 20
.
4411
Ezek. xviii. 4
.
4412
Ezek. viii. 1
.
4413
Ezek. xiv. 14
.
4414
Apocryphal
additions to Daniel.
4415
Matt. xix. 27
.
4416
Luke xviii. 29, 30
.
4417
1 Cor. ix. 5
. The text has been much tampered with by
the advocates or opponents of celibacy. The reading first quoted by
Jerome is that of F, a manuscript of the eighth or ninth century, and
is found in Tertullian; the other chief readings introduce the Greek
equivalent for
sister,
either in the sing. or plural. The Rev.
Version renders, “have we no right to lead about a
wife
that is a believer” (or sister). Augustine, Tertullian,
Theodoret, &c., together with Cornelius-a-Lapide and Estius among
the moderns, agree with Jerome in referring the passage to holy women
who ministered to the Apostles as they did to the Lord Himself. The
third canon of Nicæa is supposed to be directed against the
practice encouraged by this interpretation of the Apostle’s
words.
4418
Attributed to
Clement by Jerome.
4419
Isa. i. 9
.
4420
S.
John xiii. 25
.
4421
S.
John xx. 4
.
4422
S.
John xxi. 7
sq.
4423
S.
Matt. xvi. 18
.
4424
S. Matt. xviii. 18: S. John xx. 22, 23
.
4425
S.
John xiv. 27
.
4426
S. Matt. xx. 27: S. Luke xxii. 26
.
4427
See this book
in Vol. III. of this series.
4428
Is. xl. 3
.
4429
S.
John i. 1
.
4430
S.
John xix. 26, 27
.
4431
1 Tim. ii. 13, 15
.
4432
1 Tim. ii. 8
sqq.
4433
Apparently,
Eve’s transgression imputed to her descendants.
4434
The original
admits of the rendering “by means of her child-bearing.”
But Ellicott and others interpret of the Incarnation.
4435
Rev. Version,
“sobriety.”
Sobermindedness
or
discretion
are
given by Ellicott (Notes on translation) as alternative renderings. The
word cannot mean chastity, but rather “the well-balanced state of
mind resulting from habitual self-restraint” in general.
4436
Prov. vi. 26
?
4437
Prov. vii. 27; ix. 18
.
4438
Prov. xxi. 19
.
4439
Often mentioned
by Seneca. A saying is reported of him: “Ho, traveller, stop.
There is a miracle here: a man and his wife not at strife.”
4440
Prov. xxi. 9; xxv. 24
.
4441
Prov. xxvii. 15
.
4442
Supereffluas.
Prov. iii. 21 Sept., Heb. ii. 1
. The Greek word signifies to fall away
like flowing water. See Schleusner on
παραρρύομαι
. In
Heb. ii. 1
, Rev. V. translates “We drift
away:” Vaughan, “We be found to have leaked, or ebbed
away.”
4443
Prov. xxx. 15, 16
.
4444
Eccles. iii. 1, 2
, sqq.
4445
Eccles. vii. 10
.
4446
R.V. “Good
as an inheritance.”
4447
Eccles. vii. 28, 29
.
4448
Eccles. ix. 8
.
4449
Cant. i. 10, 11
. “Plaits of gold with studs of
silver.” R.V.
4450
Cant. ii. 1, 10–12
.
4451
1 Cor. vii. 29
.
4452
Cant. ii. 12
.
4453
Verse 13
.
4454
2 Cor. ii. 15
.
4455
Cant. ii. 13, 14
.
4456
Ex. xxxiv. 33, 35; 2 Cor. iii. 7
sq.
4457
Is. i. 15
.
4458
Cant. ii. 16
.
4459
Cant. iii. 7, 8
.
4460
Cant. iv. 6
.
4461
Eph. v. 27
.
4462
Cant. iv. 8
.
4463
Sept. R.V.
“Look from the top of Amana.”
4464
Cant. viii. 5
.
4465
Ps. cxix. 105
.
4466
Cant. iv. 9
.
4467
Cant. iv. 9, 10
.
4468
Cant. v. 1
.
4469
S.
Matt. ix. 17
.
4470
Rom. vii. 6
.
4471
Zech. viii. 5; ix. 17
, R.V. “How great is his goodness,
and how great is his beauty! Corn shall make the young men flourish,
and new wine the maids.”
4472
Ps. xlv. 16, 17
.
4473
Cant. iv. 12, 13
.
4474
Cant. v. 10
.
4475
Cant. v. 16
.
4476
Cant. vii. 1
.
4477
R.V.
“
O Prince’s daughter!
” Sept., also
“
daughter of Nadab.
”
4478
Is. vii. 14
.
4479
Delitzsch
remarks, “The assertion of Jerome is untenable.” See
Cheyne, critical note on
Is.
vii. 14
. The word probably
denotes a female, married or unmarried, just attaining maturity. But in
every other passage, the context shows that the word is used of an
unmarried woman.
4480
Gen. xxiv. 42
sq.
4481
Is. xxxvii. 22
.
4482
Is. liv. 1
.
4483
Jerem. ii. 32
.
4484
Jer. xxxi. 22
.
4485
Jer. i. 5
.
4486
Jer. xxxix. 11; xl. i
.
4487
Ezek. i. 4
.
4488
Ezek. xxiv. 18
.
4489
1 Cor. vii. 25
.
4490
Acts xv. 28, 29
.
4491
S. Matt. x. 10: S. Luke x. 5
.
4492
S.
Matt. xix. 21
.
4493
1 Tim. iii. 2, 4; Tit. i. 6
.
4494
Sacerdotes: that
is, bishops.
4495
1 Cor. vii. 7
.
4496
1 Tim. iii. 1
.
4497
V. supra, c.
27. R.V. “temperate.” Ellicott observes, “under any
circumstances the derivative translation
Vigilant,
Auth., though
possibly defensible in the verb, is a needless and doubtful extension
of the primary meaning.”
4498
R.V.
“orderly.” V. above, c. 27.
4499
κόσμιον
. R.V.
“orderly.”
4500
Non vinolentum. R.V.
“no brawler,”
i.e.,
as the Margin explains,
“not quarrelsome over wine.” The original is not thus a
mere synonym for
νηφάλιος
in v.
2.
4501
So Chrysostom and
Theodoret. The simple meaning appears to suit the context better.
4502
1 Sam.
ii. and iv
.
4503
1 Tim. iii. 11
.
4504
The Code of
Constantine, following the Mosaic law, imposed the penalty of death for
adultery. See Gibbon, ch. xliv.
4505
S.
Matt. xix. 12
.
4506
1 Cor. vii. 25
.
4507
Two rocky islands
in the Euxine, that, according to the fable, floated about, dashing
against and rebounding from each other, until at length they became
fixed on the passage of the Argo between them.”
4508
Andabatæ.
4509
Matt. xix. 12
.
4510
1 Cor. vii. 7
.
4511
Phil. ii. 6–8
.
4512
S.
John xx. 20
.
4513
S.
John xx. 19
.
4514
S.
Matt. xiv. 28
.
4515
S.
Matt. xxii. 30
.
4516
2 Cor. v. 17
.
4517
Rom. vi. 21, 22
.
4518
Rom. vii. 4
sq.
4519
Rom. vii. 14, 24, 25
.
4520
Rom. viii. 1, 2
.
4521
Rom. viii. 5
sq.
4522
Rom. viii. 11, 14
.
4523
R.V.
“mind.”
4524
Rom. xii. 1–3
.
4525
See ch. 27.
4526
Rom. xiii. 11, 12, 14
.
4527
1 Cor. iii. 1, 2, 3
.
4528
That is, under
the dominion of the
psyche
, or principle of life common to man
and the beasts, hence,
natural
. Opposed to the psyche is the
pneuma
, capable of being influenced by the Spirit of God. A man
thus influenced is pneumatikos or spiritual. See also
1 Cor. xv. 44
.
4529
1 Cor. xv. 47
sq.
4530
2 Cor. v. 1
sq.
4531
2 Cor. xi. 2
.
4532
Gal. ii. 16
.
4533
Gal. iii. 3, 4
.
4534
Gal. v. 16, 17
.
4535
Properly,
self-control
in the wide sense.
4536
Gal. v. 24, 25
.
4537
Gal. vi. 7, 8
.
4538
Eph. ii. 3, 4
.
4539
Eph. iv. 22
.
4540
Eph. vi. 24
.
4541
Phil. iii. 20, 21
.
4542
Phil. iv. 8
.
4543
Coloss. ii. 11; iii. 1
sq.
4544
2 Tim. ii. 4
.
4545
Titus ii. 11, 12
.
4546
S.
John xvi. 12, 13
.
4547
xxi.
9
.
4548
Matt. xi. 13
.
4549
The passage is
not found in existing copies of Josephus.
4550
S.
James i. 16–18
.
4551
R.V. “can be
no variation.” The word “difference,” as used by
Jerome, is explained by the context.
4552
Rev. i. 5
.
4553
1 Pet. i. 3–5
.
4554
1 Pet. i. 13–16
.
4555
1 Pet. i. 18, 19
.
4556
1 Pet. i. 22, 23
.
4557
In Jerome’s
rendering ‘living and abiding,’ are attributes of
God.
But in the original the participles may be taken as
predicates of either
word
or
God.
The R.V. refers them to
the former.
4558
1 Pet. ii. 9
.
4559
1 Pet. iv. 1
sq.
4560
2 Pet. i. 4
.
4561
2 Pet. ii. 9
sq.
4562
2 Pet. iii. 3
.
4563
The notorious
epicure of the time of Augustus and Tiberius.
4564
Paxamus wrote a
treatise on cooking, which, Suidas states, was arranged in alphabetical
order.
4565
1 John ii. 15
sq.
4566
1 John iii. 2, 3
.
4567
1 John iv. 7
. R.V. “that we may
have.”
4568
Jude 23
.
4569
xiv.
1
sq.
4570
Rev. vii. 5
sq.
4571
Apoc.
xiv. 3, 4
.
4572
or they may
say.
4573
2 Tim. ii. 20, 21
.
4574
Virg. Æn i.
317.
4575
Virg. Æn.
vii. 803: id. xi. 535.
4576
Leos was the
hero from whom the tribe Leontis derived its name. Once when Athens was
suffering from famine or plague, the oracle at Delphi demanded that his
daughters should be sacrificed. The father complied. The shrine called
Leocorium
was erected by the Athenians to their honour.
4577
Jerome’s
memory appears to be at fault. When the Greek fleet was on its way to
Troy, it was detained by a
calm
at Aulis. The seer Calchas
advised that Iphigenia, daughter of Agamemnon should be sacrificed. See
Dict. of Ant.
4578
According to
the law of Numa, the punishment of a Vestal Virgin for violating the
vow of chastity was stoning to death. Tarquinius Priscus first enacted
that the offender should be buried alive, after being stripped of her
badges of office, scourged and attired like a corpse. “From the
time of the triumvirs each [Vestal] was preceded by a lictor when she
went abroad; consuls and prætors made way for them, and lowered
their fasces; even the tribunes of the plebs respected their holy
character, and if any one passed under their litter, he was put to
death.”
4579
It is said,
however, that Claudia (Quinta) was a Roman matron, not a Vestal Virgin.
The soothsayers announced that only a chaste woman could move the
vessel referred to. Claudia, who had been accused of incontinency, took
hold of the rope, and the vessel forthwith followed her.
b.c.
204.
4580
Seneca.
4581
In the year
after the death of Alexander (
b.c.
323),
Leosthenes defeated Alexander’s general Antipater, near
Thermopylæ. Antipater then threw himself into the town of Lamia
(in Phthiotis in Thessaly) which thus gave its name to the war.
Leosthenes pressed the siege with great vigour, but was killed by a
blow from a stone.
4582
Another name
for Messana (or Messene), derived from the Mamertini, a people of
Campania, some of whom were mercenaries in the army of the tyrant
Agathocles, and were quartered in the town. At his death (
b.c.
282) they rose and gained possession of it.
4583
The
semi-legendary hero of the second war between Sparta and Messene. He
lived about
b.c.
270.
4584
The spring
festival held in honour of Hyacinthus, the beautiful youth accidentally
slain by Apollo, and from whose blood was said to have sprung the
flower of the same name.
4585
He succeeded
Plato as president of the Academy (
b.c.
347–339). His works are all lost.
4586
One of
Aristotle’s pupils, and author of a number of works, none of
which are extant.
4587
Diogenes
Laërtius (so named from Laërte in Cilicia), who probably
lived in the 2nd century after Christ, in the Third Book of his
“Lives of the Philosophers” refers to a treatise by
Anaxelides on the same subject. It has therefore been conjectured that
Jerome may have written
Philosophica Historia
for
philosophiae.
4588
Timæus
of Locri, in Italy, a Pythagorean philosopher, is said to have been a
teacher of Plato. There is an extant work bearing his name; but its
genuineness is considered doubtful, and it is in all probability only
an abridgment of Plato’s dialogue of
Timæus.
4589
Damo.
Pythagoras is said to have entrusted his writings to her, and to have
forbidden her to give them to any one. She strictly observed the
command, although she was in extreme poverty, and received many
requests to sell them. According to some accounts Pythagoras had
another daughter, Myia.
4590
Flourished about
b.c.
540–510.
4591
Clement of
Alexandria (died about
a.d.
220) in his
Stromata
(
i.e.
literally,
patchwork
) or
Miscellanies,
Bk. iv., relates the same story and gives the
names of the daughters. The Diodorus referred to in the text lived at
Alexandria in the reign of Ptolemy Sorer (
b.c.
323–285), by whom he was said to have been surnamed
Cronos
or
Saturn
, on account of his inability to solve
at once
some dialectic problem when dining with the king, perhaps with a play
upon the word
chronos
(time), or with a sarcastic allusion to
Cronos as the introducer of the arts of civilized life. The philosopher
is said to have taken the disgrace so much to heart, that he wrote a
treatise on the problem, and then died in despair. Another account
derives his name from his teacher Apollonius Cronus.
4592
Born about
b.c.
213, died
b.c.
129. He
was the determined opponent of the Stoics, and maintained that neither
our senses nor our understanding gives us a safe criterion of
truth.
4593
The poetical
name of Rhea Silvia, daughter of Numitor and mother of Romulus and
Remus.
4594
According to the
legend she stabbed herself on the funeral pyre. Jerome ignores the
modifications introduced into the legend by Virgil, who, in defiance of
the common chronology, makes Dido a contemporary of Æneas, and
represents her as destroying herself when forsaken by the hero.
4595
Hasdrubal and his
family, with 900 deserters and desperadoes, retired into the temple of
Æsculapius, as if to make a brave defence. But the
commandant’s heart failed him; and, slipping out alone, he threw
himself at the feet of Scipio, and craved for pardon. His wife,
standing on the base of the temple, was near enough to witness the
sight, and reproaching her husband with cowardice, cast herself with
her children into the flames which were now wrapping the Citadel round
on all sides.
b.c.
146.
4596
Son of Nicias the
celebrated Athenian general.
4597
She succeeded
Mausolus and reigned
b.c.
352–350.
4598
She was the
wife of Agron, and assumed the sovereign power on the death of her
husband,
b.c.
231. War was declared against
her by Rome in consequence of her having caused the assassination of an
ambassador, and in 228 she obtained peace at the cost of the greater
part of her dominions.
4599
Cyropædeia,
Book vii.
4600
The wife of
Candaules, also called Myrsilus. She was exhibited to Gyges, who, after
the murder of her husband, married her. Herod. B. i.
4601
The story, as is
well known, formed the subject of the play by Euripides bearing the
heroine’s name, which was brought out about
b.c.
438.
4602
Protesilaus was
the first of the Greeks to fall at Troy. According to some accounts he
was slain by Hector. When her husband was slain Laodamia begged the
gods to allow her to converse with him for only 3 hours. The request
having been granted, Hermes led Protesilaus back to the upper world,
and when he died a second time, Laodamia died with him.
4603
The wife of L.
Tarquinius Collatinus, whose rape by Sextus led to the dethronement of
Tarquinius Superbus and the establishment of the republic.
4604
Over the
Carthaginian fleet near Mylæ, 260
b.c.
4605
One of the
assassins of Julius Cæsar. Jerome appears to be at fault here.
Porcia,
the daughter of Cato by his first wife Atilia, before
marrying Brutus in 45
b.c.
, had been married
to M. Bibulus and had borne him three children. He died in 48. After
the death of Brutus in 42 she put an end to her own life, probably by
the fumes of a charcoal fire.
4606
Marcia is related
to have been ceded by Cato to his friend Hortensius. She continued to
live with the latter until his death, when she returned to Cato.
4607
It has been
conjectured that instead of “Marcia, Cato’s younger
daughter,” a few lines above, we should read
Porcia.
4608
Probably the
daughter of Cato by his second wife Marcia.
4609
Jerome,
apparently, makes a mistake here. Valeria, sister of the Messalas,
married Sulla towards the end of his life. Valeria, the widow of
Galerius, after the death of her husband in 311, rejected the proposals
of Maximinus. Her consequent sufferings are related by Gibbon in his
fourteenth chapter.
4610
The Greek
philosopher to whom Aristotle bequeathed his library and the originals
of his own writings. He died
b.c.
287, after
being President of the Academy for 35 years. If he were the author of
the book here referred to, it is not to be found among his extant
writings.
4611
Cicero at the
beginning of the third book of the
De Officiis,
makes Cato quote
this saying as one frequently in the mouth of Publius Scipio.
4612
Phil. i. 23
.
4613
We hear very
little of the two sons of Moses, Gershom and Eliezer. See
Ex. iv. 20, xviii. 3, 1 Chron. xxiii.
14
. Their promotion is
nowhere recorded, and Moses appointed a person of another tribe to be
his successor.
4614
See
1
Sam. viii. 1–4 and ch. ix
.
4615
b.c.
46. “What grounds for displeasure she had given
him besides her alleged extravagance it is hard to say. His letters to
her during the previous year had been short and rather cold.”
Watson, Select Letters of Cicero, third ed. p. 397.
4616
Hirtius was the
friend personal and political of Julius Cæsar, and during
Cæsar’s absence in Africa he lived principally at his
Tusculan estate which adjoined Cicero’s villa. Hirtius and Cicero
though opposed to each other in politics were on good terms, and the
former is said to have received lessons in oratory from the latter.
4617
But not long
after divorcing Terentia he married Publilia, a young girl of whose
property he had the management, in order to relieve himself from
pecuniary difficulties. She seems to have received little affection
from her husband. Watson, p. 397.
4618
This statement
is without authority. See Long’s Article on Sallust in
Smith’s Dict. of Classical Biography.
4619
Cæcilia
Metella, the third of Sulla’s five wives, had previously been
married to M. Æmilius Scaurus, consul
b.c.
115. She fell ill during the celebration of
Sulla’s triumph on account of his victory over Mithridates in 81;
and as her recovery was hopeless, Sulla for religious reasons divorced
her. She soon afterwards died, and Sulla honoured her memory with a
splendid funeral.
4620
The famous
dictator claimed the name
Felix
for himself in a speech which he
delivered to the people at the close of the celebration of his triumph,
because he attributed his success in life to the favour of the
gods.
4621
But Sulla’s
youth and manhood were disgraced by the most sensual vices. He was
indebted for a considerable portion of his wealth to a courtesan
Nicopolis, and his death in
b.c.
78 at the age
of 60 was hastened by his dissolute mode of life.
4622
Pompey, like
Sulla, was married five times. Mucia, his third wife, daughter of Q.
Mucius Scævola, the augur, consul
b.c.
95, was divorced by Pompey in 62, and afterwards married M.
Æmilius Scaurus, son of the consul by Cæcilia and thus
stepson of Sulla.
4623
Born
b.c.
234, died
b.c.
149. He
was the great-grandfather of Cato of Utica.
4624
b.c.
382–336.
4625
b.c.
385–322.
4626
Born about
b.c.
480 at Leontini in Sicily. He is said to have
lived 105, or even 109 years. He was held in high esteem at Athens,
where he had numerous distinguished pupils and imitators.
4627
An Athenian
tragic poet, celebrated for his wit.
4628
See the
Andromache.
4629
There were two
cities of this name, Leptis
Magna
and
Parva,
in N.
Africa.
4630
Or “on
another day,” that is, than the marriage day implied in the
context.
4631
Terence, Hecyra
II. i. 4.
4632
Bk. I. ch. 8.
“Candaules addressed Gyges as follows: ‘Gyges, as I think
you do not believe me when I speak of my wife’s beauty (for the
ears of men are naturally more incredulous than their eyes), you must
contrive to see her naked.’ But he, exclaiming loudly, answered:
‘Sire, what a shocking proposal do you make, bidding me behold my
queen naked! With her clothes a woman puts off her
modesty,’” etc.
4633
Perhaps
Terence, Phormio I. iii. 21.
4634
For these
legends, see Classical Dict.
4635
The most
distinguished disciple and the intimate friend of Epicurus. His
philosophy appears to have been of a more sensual kind than that of his
master. He made perfect happiness to consist in having a
well-constituted body. He died
b.c.
277 in the
53rd year of his age, 7 years before Epicurus.
4636
Chrysippus
(
b.c.
280–207) the Stoic philosopher,
born at Soli in Cilicia. He opposed the prevailing scepticism and
maintained the possibility of attaining certain knowledge. It was said
of him “that if Chrysippus had not existed the Porch
(
i.e.,
Stoicism) could not have been.” He is reported to
have seldom written less than 500 lines a-day, and to have left behind
him 705 works.
4637
That is Zeus,
regarded as presiding over marriages and the tutelary god of races or
families.
4638
Literally,
“Jupiter who causes to stand”: hence Jerome’s play
upon the word. Jupiter Stator was the god regarded as supporting,
preserving, etc. Cic., Cat. I. 13, 31—“quem (sc. Jovem)
statorem hujus urbis atque imperii vere nominamus.”
4639
The greater
number of manuscripts read
Sextus
, an alternative name for the
same person. Jerome in his version of the
Chronicon
of Eusebius
speaks of “Xystus a Pythagorean philosopher” who flourished
at the time of Christ’s birth; but there is great difficulty in
establishing the identity of the author of the “Sentences.”
See also the Prolegomena to Rufinus who translated the Sentences of
Xystus, in Vol. III. of this Series.
4640
See note above, p.
382.
4641
Daughter of P.
Scipio Africanus, and wife of Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, censor
b.c.
169. The people erected a statue to her with
the inscription “Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi.”
4642
See note p.
376.
4643
Wife of
Tarquinius Priscus.
4644
Theano was the
most celebrated of the female philosophers of the Pythagorean school.
According to some authorities she was the wife of Pythagoras.
4645
Cleobuline, or
Cleobule, was celebrated for her riddles in hexameter verse. One on the
subject of the year runs thus—“A father has 12 children,
and each of these 30 daughters, on one side white, and on the other
side black, and though immortal they all die.”
4646
Timoclia was a
woman of Thebes, whose house at the capture of the city in
b.c.
335 was broken into and pillaged by the soldiery. She
was herself violated by the commander, whom she afterwards contrived to
push into a well.
4647
A vestal virgin
who proved her innocence of the unchastity imputed to her by setting
free a stranded ship with her girdle.
4648
The epithet is
said to have been given to the goddess at the time when Coriolanus was
prevented by the entreaties of the
women
from destroying
Rome.
4649
The name for any
Roman priest devoted to the service of one particular god. He took his
distinguishing title from the deity to whom he ministered,
e.g.
Flamen Martialis.
4650
Comp. Tertullian
De Monogamia,
last chapter—“Fortunæ, inquit,
muliebri coronam non imponit, nisi univira…Pontifex Maximus et
Flaminica (the wife of a Flamen) nubunt semel.”
4651
See Origen,
Contra Celsum,
Bk. VII. The water hemlock, or cowbane, is the
variety referred to.