{!>') The Idcit.i classirus for our subject is 1 Co 7™-^. St. Paul here discusses the question of t he marriage of virgins {i.e. maidens of marriageable age) as a specific instance of the question of marriage in general, and he does so not abstractly or exhaust- ively but in view of a definite situation. He makes it clear that marriage is no sin, not even though in his view this world-age is speedily coming to an end. lie says also that he has no command from the Lord, either directly or in- directly, on this question. What he gives is his own opinion [yvw^Tj], not, however, as an ottiter dictuiii, but as the opinion of one who knows his Lord's mind.* He recommends, however, in view of the (iresent necessity, of the shortened earthly horizon, of the straits to which Christians were put, and of the fact that marriage m.ade it more diflicult for parties to face these conditions, that they remain as they are, married and unmarried alike. He wiilens this to apply to circumstances, business, emotions even. His opinion is based, not on any idea as to the spiritual superiority of vir- ginity in itself, but on the view that the fashion of the world is passing away, and that for the nuirrie<l there might arise the fearful alternative of loyalty to Christ or loyalty to the ties of home. In 1 Timothy, where the outlook is dillerent, he advises young widows to marry, while the older ones should be loyal to their lirst faith, evidently to their resolution not to marry. The Apostle sees
* It was on this text Obligate) that the distinction between precepts of law (prfpri'plfj tr(tin) and counsels of perfection (consitin evanfifitica) wa-s founded. The former were t)iiiditi|j^ on all, the latter on a select few. and their superior excellence accumulated a store of transfemhle merit (works of supererotra- lion). according to some. Yet it is pos.sible to hold to the ,lis- tinetion without the ideas of superero^'ation and merit (see an excellent note in T. C. Kdwards, i Corinttiians-, London. ISS.*), p. 188!.).
VOL. II. 41
clearly the objections to his views, especially in the case of daughters of niarriagenbie age. Suc'li a daughter ouglit not to be kept from marrying if she had been already promised, or if her moral life was emiangereil thereby, or if it shocked public opinion. In such cases let her marry. Itiit if the father was linn in his residntioii to keep her a virgin, if his heart was convinced that this was best, and if he had come to this resolution freely without external pressure, then he is right in keep- ing her a virgin. Nothing is said of the nuiiden's own opinion, unless from v.^ we infer that the father should not put pressure on the daughter if she desired a reasimable marriage. It is eviilent that the .\posth' is face to face with a situation so dillerent from the conditions of our own time — when the end of the age is not regarded as imminent, when social conilitions are based on political and civil freedom — that we have to be very careful in drawing modern practical inferences from his words. There is also no hint of an order of virgins, and the Apostle depn.'cates ecclesiastical or even apostolicr interference with the liberty of the individual.
This passage, however, has been recently ex- plained as referring not to marriageable daughters at all but to what are known as ' virgines subintro- duct;e' (m avp(laaKToi).* In later times unmarried women and widows resided with the clergy in their honu'S — a monk in the desert might have his ' uxor si)iritualis.' Itoth parties were under vows of virginity and yet lived together and sometimes sle|)t together. Latterly the practice became a scandal. It is to this custom, according to some, that the Ajiostlc is here referring, and bis recom- mendation is that where the woman has fallen in love either with him who cohabits with her or with another then marriage should take place : where, however, lirmness of purpose in virginity exists, this c,on<lition of cohabitation should continue. The reader is referred for further information on this topic to art. ' Aga)>eta%' EHE i. , by II. Acbelis, who with hesitation explains .St. Paul as referring to this custom — an explanation which the present writer cannot accept. In 1 Co 9', where St. Paul speaks of a 'sister as wife' (ai(\ipnv ywatKa), .Jerome (c. Jov. i. 26) and others found a reference to this custom. As our Lord was ministered to bj' women of substance so were the Apostles, but this view is almost certainly wrong. The earliest Christian writer who seems to mention this form of living together is Hernias, ami all hough he writes in visions and similitudes it is quite possible that be knew the custom and approveil of it. The pas- sages are Sim. IX. ii. 3, X. iii. ; Fis. II. ii. 3 (see notes by A. Ililgenfcld, Nov. Test, extra Canonem reecptani, Leipzig, 1876, in /oris). At lirst this custom may have arisen from the highest spiritual motives amiiiig those to whom sexual intercourse even in marriage was degrading, and it may have been practiseil by married persons who resolved to live in absolute'chastity ;T but as events proved it was bound to end in disaster. It is almost certain that St. Paul does not refer to this custom in 1 Co 7-*''' or anywhere el.se, nor is there any hint of it in the NT.