John Calvin Commentary 1 Corinthians 7:2

"But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband." — 1 Corinthians 7:2 (ASV)

As he had spoken of fornication, he now appropriately proceeds to speak of marriage, which is the remedy for avoiding fornication. Now it appears that, notwithstanding the greatly scattered state of the Corinthian Church, they still retained some respect for Paul, since they consulted him on doubtful points. What their questions had been is uncertain, except insofar as we may infer them from his reply.

However, it is perfectly well known that immediately after the first rise of the Church, there crept into it, through Satan’s artifice, a superstition of such a kind that a large proportion of them, through a foolish admiration of celibacy, despised the sacred connection of marriage; indeed, many regarded it with abhorrence, as a profane thing. This contagion had perhaps spread among the Corinthians also; or at least there were people with idle inclinations who, by immoderately extolling celibacy, endeavored to alienate the minds of the pious from marriage. At the same time, as the Apostle treats of many other subjects, he intimates that he had been consulted on a variety of points. What is chiefly important is that we listen to his doctrine regarding each of them.

1. It is good for a man. The answer consists of two parts. In the first, he teaches that it would be good for everyone to abstain from connection with a woman, provided it was in his power to do so. In the second, he adds a correction to the effect that, as many cannot do this because of the weakness of their flesh, these individuals must not neglect the remedy that they have available, as appointed for them by the Lord.

Now we must observe what he means by the word good when he declares that it is good to abstain from marriage, so that we do not conclude, on the other hand, that the marriage connection is therefore evil—a mistake which Jerome made, not so much from ignorance, in my opinion, as from the heat of controversy.

For though that great man was endowed with distinguished qualities, he had, at the same time, one serious flaw: when disputing, he allowed himself to be carried away into great exaggerations, so that he did not remain within the bounds of truth. The inference he then draws is this: “It is good not to touch a woman; it is therefore wrong to do so.” Paul, however, does not use the word good here with a meaning that is opposed to what is evil or vicious, but simply points out what is expedient because of the many troubles, vexations, and anxieties that accompany married life.

Besides, we must always keep in view the limitation which he adds. Nothing further, therefore, can be drawn from Paul’s words than this—that it is indeed expedient and profitable for a man not to be bound to a wife, provided he is able to do otherwise.

Let us explain this by a comparison. If anyone were to say: “It would be good for a man not to eat, or to drink, or to sleep”—he would not by that condemn eating, or drinking, or sleeping, as things that were wrong. Rather, because the time devoted to these things is simply time taken from the soul, his meaning would be that we would be happier if we could be free from these hindrances and devote ourselves entirely to meditation on heavenly things. Hence, as there are in married life many impediments which keep a man entangled, it would for that reason be good not to be connected in marriage.

But here another question arises, for these words of Paul have some appearance of inconsistency with the words of the Lord in Genesis 2:18, where He declares that it is not good for a man to be without a wife. What the Lord there pronounces to be evil, Paul here declares to be good. I answer that insofar as a wife is a help to her husband, so as to make his life happy, that is in accordance with God’s institution; for in the beginning God appointed it so that the man without the woman was, as it were, but half a man and felt himself lacking special and necessary assistance, and the wife is, as it were, the completion of the man.

Sin afterwards entered to corrupt that institution of God; for instead of such a great blessing, a grievous punishment has been substituted, so that marriage is the source and cause of many miseries. Hence, whatever evil or inconvenience there is in marriage arises from the corruption of the divine institution.

Now, although meanwhile some remains of the original blessing still exist, so that a single life is often much more unhappy than married life, yet, as married persons are involved in many inconveniences, it is with good reason that Paul teaches that it would be good for a man to abstain.

In this way, the troubles that accompany marriage are not concealed; yet, at the same time, no support is given to those profane jests commonly popular and intended to discredit it, such as the following: that a wife is a necessary evil, and that a wife is one of the greatest evils.

For such sayings as these have come from Satan’s workshop and have a direct tendency to disgrace God’s holy institution, and further, to lead men to regard marriage with abhorrence, as if it were a deadly evil and pest.

The sum is this: that we must remember to distinguish between the pure ordinance of God and the punishment of sin, which came later. According to this distinction, it was in the beginning good for a man, without any exception, to be joined to a wife; and even now, it is good in such a way that there is meanwhile a mixture of bitter and sweet, because of the curse of God. To those, however, who do not have the gift of continence, it is a necessary and beneficial remedy according to what follows.

But to avoid fornication. He now commands that those who are liable to the vice of incontinence should resort to the remedy. For though it may seem that the statement is universal, it should, nevertheless, be restricted to those who feel themselves compelled by necessity. Regarding this, everyone must judge for himself.

Whatever difficulty, therefore, is perceived to be in marriage, let all who cannot resist the promptings of their flesh know that this commandment has been prescribed for them by the Lord. But it is asked—“Is this the only reason for entering into matrimony, so that we may cure incontinence?” I answer that this is not Paul’s meaning; for as for those who have the gift of abstinence from marriage, he leaves them at liberty, while he commands others to guard against their weakness by marrying.

The sum is this: that the question is not about the reasons for which marriage has been instituted, but about the persons for whom it is necessary. For if we look to the first institution, it could not be a remedy for a disease which did not yet exist, but was appointed for begetting offspring; but after the fall, this second purpose was added.

This passage is also opposed to (τολυγαμία) polygamy. For the Apostle desires that every woman have her own husband (1 Corinthians 7:2), implying that the obligation is mutual. The man, therefore, who has once pledged his faithfulness to a woman as his wife, must not separate from her, as is clearly done in the case of taking an additional wife.