Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Further Remarks Upon the Apostle's Language.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter IV.—Further
Remarks Upon the Apostle’s Language.
However, touching second marriage, we know plainly
that the apostle has pronounced: “Thou hast been loosed
from a wife; seek not a wife. But if thou shalt marry, thou wilt
not sin.”524
Still, as in
the former case, he has introduced the order of this discourse too from
his personal suggestion, not from a divine precept. But there is
a wide difference between a precept of God and a suggestion of
man. “Precept of the Lord,” says he, “I have
not; but I give advice, as having obtained mercy of the Lord to be
faithful.”525
In fact,
neither in the Gospel nor in Paul’s own Epistles will you find a
precept of God as the source whence repetition of marriage is
permitted. Whence the doctrine that unity (of marriage) must be
observed derives confirmation; inasmuch as that which is not found to
be permitted by the Lord is acknowledged to be
forbidden. Add (to this consideration) the fact, that even
this very introduction of human advice, as if already beginning to
reflect upon its own extravagance, immediately restrains and recalls
itself, while it subjoins, “However, such shall have pressure of
the flesh;” while he says that he “spares them;”
while he adds that “the time is wound up,” so that
“it behoves even such as have wives to act as if they had
not;” while he compares the solicitude of the wedded and of the
unwedded: for, in teaching, by means of these considerations, the
reasons why marrying is not expedient, he dissuades from that to which
he had above granted indulgence. And this is the case with regard
to first marriage: how much more with regard to second!
When, however, he exhorts us to the imitation of his own example, of
course, in showing what he does wish us to be; that is,
continent; he equally declares what he does not wish us to be,
that is, incontinent. Thus he, too, while he wills
one thing, gives no spontaneous or true permission to that which he
nills. For had he willed, he would not have permitted;
nay, rather, he would have commanded. “But see
again: a woman when her husband is dead, he says, can marry, if
she wish to marry any
one, only ‘in the Lord.’” Ah! but
“happier will she be,” he says, “if she shall remain
permanently as she is, according to my opinion. I think,
moreover, I too have the Spirit of God.” We see two
advices: that whereby, above, he grants the indulgence of
marrying; and that whereby, just afterwards, he teaches continence with
regard to marrying. “To which, then,” you say,
“shall we assent?” Look at them carefully, and
choose. In granting indulgence, he alleges the advice of a
prudent man; in enjoining continence, he affirms the advice of
the Holy Spirit. Follow the admonition
which has divinity for its patron. It is true that believers
likewise “have the Spirit of God;” but not all believers
are apostles. When then, he who had called himself a
“believer,” added thereafter that he “had the Spirit
of God,” which no one would doubt even in the case of an
(ordinary) believer; his reason for saying so was, that he might
reassert for himself apostolic dignity. For apostles have the
Holy Spirit properly, who have Him fully, in the operations of
prophecy, and the efficacy of (healing) virtues, and the evidences of
tongues; not partially, as all others have. Thus he attached the
Holy Spirit’s authority to that form (of advice) to which he
willed us rather to attend; and forthwith it became not an
advice of the Holy Spirit, but, in consideration of His majesty,
a precept.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
