The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: the First Epistle to the Corinthians
Likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body , but the wife. Hence it is clear that, though in the government of the family the wife should be subject and obedient to her husband, yet in the right of exacting and returning the marriage debt she is equal with her husband, has the same right over his body that he has over hers, and this from the marriage contract, in which each has given to the other the same power over the body, and received the same power over the other’s body. The husband, therefore, is as much bound to render his wife, as the wife her husband, faithfulness and the marriage debt. This is taught at length in their expositions of this passage by Chrysostom, Theophylact, Œcumenius, Primasius, Anselm, and by S. Jerome (Cit. 32, qu. 2, cap. Apostolus ), who says that husband and wife are declared to be equal in rights and duties. “When, therefore,” says S. Chrysostom (Hom. 19), “a harlot comes and tempts you, say that your body is not your own but your wife's. Similarly , let the wife say to any one who proposes to rob her of her chastity , ‘My body is not mine but my husband’s.’”
Ver. 5. — Defraud ye not one the other. By denying the marriage debt. The words and to fasting , though in the Greek, are wanting in the Latin. Hence Nicholas I., in his answers to the questions of the Bulgarians (c. 50), writes to them that, throughout the forty days of Lent, they should not come at their wives. But this is a matter of counsel.
And come together again. From this Peter Martyr and the Magdeburgians conclude that it is not lawful for married persons to vow perpetual continence by mutual consent. But the answer to this is that the Apostle is not prescribing but permitting the marriage act.
Ver. 6. — But I speak this by permission and not of commandment.
1. I permit the act of copulation by way of indulgence : I do not prescribe it. Nay, S. Augustine ( Enchirid. c. 78) takes it : “I say this by way of pardon.” The Greek word denotes forgiveness, and hence S. Augustine gathers that it is a venial sin to have sexual connection, not for the sake of children but for carnal pleasure, and to avoid the temptations of Satan ; for pardon is given to what is sinful. So too indulgence is given in what concerns sin, or at all events a lesser good, as S. Thomas has rightly observed.
2. That there is no precept given here is also evident, because the Apostle permits married people to contain for a time, that they may give themselves to fasting and to prayer ; therefore, if they agree to devote their whole life to fasting and to prayer, he permits them to contain themselves for life.
3. He says come together, and gives the reason, “that Satan
tempt you not for your incontinency;” i.e., that there may be no danger of your falling into adultery, or other acts of impurity, because of your incontinency. Therefore, when the cause does not exist, viz., the danger of incontinency, as it does not exist in those who have sufficient high-mindedness to curb it and tame it, he permits them to be continent for life.
4. He says in ver. 7, “I would that all men were even as I myself ,” i.e., not chaste in some way or other, but altogether continent, unmarried, nay, virgin souls, even as I, who am unmarried. So Ambrose, Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, Chrysostom, Œcumenius and Epiphanius (Hær. 78), S. Jerome (Ep. 22 ad Eustoch.)
5. In the early days of the Church many married persons, in obedience to this admonition of S. Paul, observed by mutual consent perpetual chastity, as Tertullian tells us (ad Uxor. lib. i. c. vi., and de Resurr. Carn. c. 8, and de Orland Virg. c. 13). The same is said by the author of commentaries de Sing. Cleric ., given by S. Cyprian.
Here are some examples of married persons, not merely of low estate, but people illustrious both for their birth and holiness and renown, who preserved their continency and chastity unimpaired in wedlock.
(1.) There are the Blessed Virgin and Joseph, who have raised the banner of chastity not only before virgins, but also before the married. (2.) We have the illustrious martyrs Cecilia and Valerian, who were of such merit that the body of S. Cecilia has been found by Clement VIII. in this age, after the lapse of so many centuries, undecayed and uninjured. (3.) There are SS. Julian and Basilissa, whose illustrious life is narrated by Surius. (4.) S. Pulcheria Augusta, sister of the Emperor Theodosius, made a vow to God of perpetual chastity, and on the death of Theodosius, married Martian, stipulating that she should keep her vow, and raised him to the Imperial throne; and this vow was faithfully kept unbroken by both, as Cedrenus and others testify. (5.) We have the Emperor Henry II. and Cunegund, the latter of whom walked over hot iron to prove her chastity. (6.) There is the example of Boleslaus V., King of the Poles, who was called the Maid, and Cunegund, daughter of Belas, King of the Hungarians. (7.) King Conrad, son of the Emperor Henry IV., with Matilda his wife. (8.) Alphonse II., King of the Asturians, who by keeping himself from his wife gained the name of “the Chaste.” (9.) Queen Richardis, who, though married to King Charles the Fat, retained her virginity. (10.) Pharaildis, niece of S. Amelberga and Pepin, was ever-virgin though married, (11.) Edward III. and
Egitha were virgin spouses. (12.) Ethelreda, Queen of the East Angles, though twice married, remained a virgin. (13.) We have two married people of Arvernum, spoken of by Gregory of Tours (de Gloria Conf. c. xxxii): “When the wife was dead, the husband raised his hands towards heaven, saying: ‘I thank Thee, Maker of all things, that as Thou didst vouchsafe to intrust her to me, so I restore her to Thee undefiled by any conjugal delight.’ But she smilingly said: ‘Peace, peace, O man of God ; it is not necessary to publish our secret.’ Shortly afterwards the husband died and was buried in another place; and, lo ! in the morning the two tombs were found together, as it is to this day : and therefore the natives there are wont to speak of them as the Two Lovers, and to pay them the highest honour.” Nowadays two examples of the same thing may be found.
Ver. 7 . — For I would that all men were even as I myself. That is so far as the single life and continency is concerned. The Apostle means that he wishes it if it could well be. I would, therefore, denotes an inchoate and imperfect act of the will. This is evident too from his subjoining,
But every man hath his proper gift of God. The word all again means each one, or all taken one by one, not collectively. For if all men in a body were to abstain, there would be no matrimony, and the human race and the world would come to an end together. In the same way we are said to be able to avoid all venial sins : that is, all taken singly, not collectively, or in other words, each one. Others take all collectively, inasmuch as if God were to inspire all men with this resolution of continency, it would be a sign that the number of the elect was completed, and that God wished to put an end to the world. But Paul was well aware that God at that time was willing the contrary, in order that the Church might increase and be multiplied through matrimony. The first explanation therefore is the sounder.
But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner and another after that. That is, he has his own gift of his own will, says the treatise de Castitate, falsely assigned to Pope Sixtus III., which is preserved in the Biblioth. SS. Patrum , vol. v. It is, however, the work of some Pelagian ; for the tenor of the whole treatise is to show that chastity is the work of free-will, and of a man’s own volition, and not of the grace of God (Cf. Bellarmine, de Monach. lib. ii. c. 31, and de Clericis, lib. i c. 21, ad. 4.) But this is the error of Pelagius ; for if you take away the grace of God from a man’s will it can no longer be called “his proper gift of God.” For the will of a man is nothing else but the free choice of his own will. For God has given to all an equal and similar gift of free-will; wherefore that one chooses chastity, another matrimony, cannot be said to be the gift of God if you take away His grace ; but it would have to be attributed to the free choice of each man, and that choice therefore in diverse things is unlike and unequal.
Proper gift then denotes the gift of conjugal, virginal, or widowed chastity. But heretics say that priests therefore, and monks, if they have not the gift of chastity, may lawfully enter on matrimony. But by parity of reason, it might be said that therefore married people, if they have not the gift of conjugal chastity, as many adulterers have not, may lawfully commit adultery, or enter upon a second marriage with one that is an adulterer. Or again that if a wife is absent, is unwilling, or is ill, the husband may go to another woman, if he alleges that he has not the gift of widowed chastity. And although the passion of Luther may admit this excuse as valid, yet all shrink from it; and the Romans and other heathen, by the instinct of nature, regarded all such tenets as monstrous.