3. New-Testament View of Marriage
Christianity first brought about such a change by
applying stronger motives than philosophy furnished,
namely, such religious sentiments as reverence
for God's commandments and fear of his
punishment,
to which the power of higher morals and
the penitential discipline of the congregation contributed.
It is true, expectation of the imminent
end of the world obstructed the development of a
complete doctrinal system of marriage and hindered
appreciation of the importance which it has in
the evolution of history and in the universal
mission of Christianity. Nevertheless,
the contrast of the fundamental
conceptions of Christianity with
Jewish and pagan morals immediately
brought about great progress. Christ
condemned the laxity of
the Jewish laws of divorce;
he declared every separation as disobedience of
God's commandment (the addition "saving for the
cause of fornication,"
Matt. v. 32,
is wanting in
I Cor. vii. 10, 11,
and disagrees with the uncompromising
attitude of the Sermon on the Mount),
because a relation of communion which, on account
of its divinely created impulse,
takes precedence
even over the relationship to father and mother can
not be dissolved by the arbitrary act of man. Paul
emphasizes the unconditional objectionableness of
fornication (which among the pagans, at least
among the men, was not considered an offense) upon
the basis of the idea of holiness, of the duty of the
man who has been called to be a member of God's
people and even elevated to be a temple of God
and a member of Christ to devote even the physical
life to the honor of God and to avoid self-pollution
by indulging in the impulses of the flesh
(I Cor. vi. 13, 20;
I Thess. iv. 7, 8).
It is owing to the emphasis
upon this factor, which was derived from
later Judaism and was intensified by the Hellenistic
dualism of spirit and flesh, and also
to eschatological
expectation that for Paul virginity was the
higher ideal and that matrimony was a means
conceded for the prevention of a worse evil, fornication,
though marriage was a state which, for persons
not specially blessed with the grace of abstinence,
was not only permissible, but preferable
(I Cor. vii. 2, 36, 38).
Furthermore, celibacy
recommends itself to him as more convenient in view
of the sufferings of the last days
(ib. vii. 26
sqq.),
also because zeal for the Lord might easily be encroached
upon by worldly cares
(32-34).
The
Pauline cast of thought reappears in
Rev. xiv. 4;
I Tim. iii. 2, 12, iv. 3-5.
In view of the expectation
of the end of the world, the moral purposes
which had urged pagans and Jews to marry receded,
and the idea that the bringing
forth of children
is a means of accomplishing the purposes of
God had not yet arisen. This "low" view of matrimony,
which nevertheless in connection with the
prohibition of all fornication signifies progress, did
not, however, hinder idealization of the mutual relations
of husband and wife through the Christian
view that husband and wife are of equal value in
Christ
(Gal. iii. 28);
hence conjugal union
represented itself as an ethical union between persons of
equal position whose differences consisted only in
the distinctions of nature, although the continuation
of the legal and social subordination of the
wife to the husband was demanded, not only out
of regard to unbelievers, but as the order of God
(Col. iii. 18;
I Pet. iii. 16)
and as proved from the
history of man
(I Cor. xi. 3-15;
Eph. v. 22;
I Tim. ii. 11-14).
Man should use his superior position
not for the purpose of asserting legal claims but to
show due
respect and love to woman
(Eph. v. 25, 33).
The subordination of woman appears only as
a special act of subordination under God and Christ
and under the general duty of love
(
Col. iii. 18;
Eph. v. 22-24).
