Church Fathers Commentary Mark 10:1-12

"And he arose from thence and cometh into the borders of Judaea and beyond the Jordan: and multitudes come together unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again. And there came unto him Pharisees, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away [his] wife? trying him. And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. But Jesus said unto them, For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of the creation, Male and female made he them. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh: so that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. And in the house the disciples asked him again of this matter. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her: and if she herself shall put away her husband, and marry another, she committeth adultery." — Mark 10:1-12 (ASV)

The Venerable Bede: Until now, Mark has related what our Lord said and did in Galilee. Here he begins to relate what He did, taught, or suffered in Judea, beginning first across the Jordan to the east. This is what is said in these words: And He arose from there and came into the region of Judea by the other side of the Jordan. He then continues on this side of the Jordan when He came to Jericho, Bethany, and Jerusalem.¹

Although the entire province of the Jews is generally called Judea to distinguish it from other nations, its southern portion was more specifically called Judea to distinguish it from Samaria, Galilee, Decapolis, and the other regions in the same province.

Theophylact of Ohrid: He enters the region of Judea, which the envy of the Jews had often caused Him to leave, because His Passion was to take place there. He did not, however, go up to Jerusalem at that time, but to the borders of Judea, so that He might do good to the multitudes, who were not evil; for Jerusalem, due to the malice of the Jews, was the source of all wickedness.

Therefore, it continues: And the people gathered to Him again; and, as was His custom, He taught them again.

The Venerable Bede: Mark the difference in temperament between the multitude and the Pharisees. The former gather to be taught and to have their sick healed, as Matthew relates (Matthew 19:2); the latter come to Him to try to deceive their Savior by testing Him.

Therefore, the text continues: And the Pharisees came to Him and asked Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” testing Him.

Theophylact of Ohrid: They came to Him and did not leave Him, so that the multitudes would not believe in Him. By continually coming to Him, they thought they could ensnare Him and confuse Him with their questions. They proposed a question that presented a dilemma, so that whether He said it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife or that it was not lawful, they could accuse Him and contradict Him using the doctrines of Moses. Christ, therefore, being Wisdom itself, avoids their snares in answering their question.

St. John Chrysostomⁱ: When asked whether it is lawful, He does not immediately reply, “It is not lawful,” lest they raise an outcry. Instead, He first wanted them to answer Him regarding the sentence of the law, so that by their answer they might provide Him with the grounds for His own reply.²

Therefore, it continues: And He answered and said to them, “What did Moses command you?”

And afterwards, And they said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to dismiss her.”

They brought up what Moses had said either because of our Savior’s question or because they wished to incite the crowds against Him. For divorce was a matter of indifference among the Jews, and everyone practiced it, as if it were permitted by the law.

St. Augustine of Hippo: It does not affect the truth of the matter, however, whether, as Matthew says, they themselves asked the Lord about the bill of divorcement after our Lord forbade separation, or whether, as Mark says, they said this in answer to His own question. For Christ’s intention was not to give the reason for Moses’s permission until they had mentioned the fact themselves. Since the intention of the speakers—which is what the words ought to express—is shown in either account, there is no discrepancy, even if there is a difference in the telling.³

It may also be that, as Mark relates, the Lord's question, What did Moses command you?, was a response to their initial question about divorce. After they replied that Moses permitted a bill of divorcement, Christ then answered concerning the original law of marriage that God instituted, saying what Matthew relates (Matthew 19:4). Upon hearing this, they would have repeated their earlier point in a new question: “Why then did Moses command this?”

Moses, however, was actually against a man dismissing his wife. He imposed the delay of writing a bill of divorcement so that a person intent on separation might be deterred and reconsider. This was especially true since, as it is told, only scribes were allowed to write Hebrew characters. The law, therefore, intended to send the man who was ordered to provide a bill of divorcement to these scribes before he dismissed his wife. These scribes were meant to be wise interpreters of the law and just mediators in quarrels.⁴

A bill could only be written for him by men who might overrule him with good advice, since his situation had placed him in their hands. By mediating between the husband and wife, they might persuade them to love and concord.

But if a hatred so great had arisen that it could not be extinguished and corrected, then a bill was to be written. This was so that he might not lightly divorce the wife he hated and thus prevent him from being recalled to the love he owed her by marriage through the persuasion of the wise. For this reason it is added, “For your hardness of heart he wrote you this precept.” For great was the hardness of heart that could not be melted or bent to take back and restore the love of marriage, even with the intervention of the bill, which created an opportunity for the just and wise to offer counsel.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: Or else, it is said, “For the hardness of your hearts,” because it is possible for a soul purged of sinful desires and anger to bear the worst of women; but if those passions have a powerful hold over the mind, many evils will arise from hatred in marriage.⁵

St. John Chrysostom: In this way, He saves Moses, who had given the law, from their accusation and turns the charge back on them. But since what He had said was difficult for them to accept, He at once returns the discussion to the original law, saying, “But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.”

The Venerable Bede: He does not say “male and females,” which the sense would have required if it referred to the divorce of former wives, but male and female, so that they would be bound to one wife.

St. John Chrysostom: If, however, God had wished one wife to be divorced and another to be taken, He would have created several women. Nor did God only join one woman to one man, but He also commanded a man to leave his parents and cleave to his wife.

Therefore, it continues: “And he said,” (that is, God, speaking through Adam) “‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife.’”

From the very choice of words, He shows the impossibility of breaking the marriage bond, because He said, “He shall cleave.”

The Venerable Bede: And similarly, because He says, he shall cleave to his wife, not wives.

It goes on: “And the two shall become one flesh.”

St. John Chrysostom: Being formed from one root, they will join into one body.

It goes on: “So then they are no longer two, but one flesh.”

The Venerable Bede: The reward of marriage, then, is for two to become one flesh. Virginity, being joined to the Spirit, becomes one spirit.

St. John Chrysostom: After this, bringing forward a solemn argument, He did not say, “Do not divide,” but He concluded, “What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

St. Augustine of Hippo: See how the Jews are convicted by the books of Moses that a wife should not be divorced, while they thought that in divorcing her, they were doing the will of Moses. Similarly, from this passage, from the witness of Christ Himself, we know that God made and joined male and female. The Manichees are condemned for denying this truth, and in doing so they resist not the books of Moses, but the Gospel of Christ itself.⁶

The Venerable Bede: What God has joined by making one flesh of a man and a woman, man cannot separate, but God alone. Man separates when we divorce the first wife because we desire a second; but it is God who separates when, by common consent (1 Corinthians 7:5), for the sake of serving God, we have wives as though we had none (1 Corinthians 7:29).

St. John Chrysostom: But if two persons, whom God has joined together, are not to be separated, much more is it wrong to separate from Christ the Church, which God has joined to Him.

Theophylact of Ohrid: But the disciples were troubled, because they were not fully satisfied with what had been said; for this reason they question Him again.

Therefore, there follows: And in the house His disciples asked Him again about the same matter.

Pseudo-Jerome: This second question is said to be asked “again” by the Apostles because it is on the same subject that the Pharisees had asked Him, that is, concerning the state of marriage; and this is said by Mark in his own voice.

Glossa Ordinaria: For repeating a saying of the Word does not produce weariness, but rather thirst and hunger.

Therefore it is said, “Those who eat me shall yet be hungry, and those who drink me shall yet be thirsty”; for tasting the honeyed words of wisdom yields every kind of flavor to those who love her.

Therefore the Lord instructs His disciples again, for it goes on, And He says to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her.”

Pseudo-Chrysostom: The Lord calls cohabitation with a woman who is not a man’s wife “adultery.” A woman whom a man has taken after leaving the first is not his wife, and for this reason he commits adultery against her—that is, against the second wife whom he takes. The same thing is true for the woman.⁷

Therefore, it goes on, “And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” For she cannot be joined to another as her own husband if she leaves him who is really her own husband. The law indeed forbade obvious adultery, but the Savior forbids this form of it, which was not obvious or known to all, though it was contrary to nature.

The Venerable Bede: In Matthew it is more fully expressed, “Whoever shall put away his wife, except for sexual immorality” (Matthew 19:9). The only carnal cause, then, is sexual immorality; the only spiritual cause is the fear of God, that a person should put away his or her spouse to enter a religious order, as we read that many have done. But there is no cause allowed by the law of God for marrying another during the lifetime of the one who was left.ⁱ

Pseudo-Chrysostom: There is no contradiction in Matthew’s relating that He spoke these words to the Pharisees, though Mark says that they were spoken to the disciples, for it is possible that He may have spoken them to both.⁸

1. In Marcum, 3, 40
2. Vict. Ant., Cat. in Marc., and see Chrys. Hom. 62
3. de Con. Evan., ii, 62
4. cont. Faust, XIX, 26
5. Cat. in Marc. Oxon
6. cont. Faust, XIX, 29
7. Vict. Ant., e Cat. in Marc.
8. Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.