John Calvin Commentary 1 Corinthians 7:37

"But he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power as touching in his own heart, to keep his own virgin [daughter], shall do well." — 1 Corinthians 7:37 (ASV)

But he who stands firm in his heart. Here we have the second part of the statement, in which he discusses young women who have the gift of abstaining from marriage. He therefore commends those fathers who make provision for their tranquility; but let us observe what he requires. In the first place, he mentions a steadfast purpose—If anyone has fully resolved with himself. You must not, however, understand this as the resolution formed by monks—that is, a voluntary binding to perpetual servitude—for such is the kind of vow they make. He expressly mentions this firmness of purpose because people often devise schemes that they regret the next day. As it is a matter of importance, he requires a thoroughly matured purpose.

In the second place, he speaks of the person as having no necessity; for many, when deliberating, bring obstinacy with them rather than reason. And in the present case, when they renounce marriage, they do not consider what is in their power, but reckon it enough to say, "Such is my choice." Paul requires them to have power, so that they may not decide rashly, but according to the measure of the grace that has been given them. He appropriately expresses the absence of necessity in this case in the following clause, when he says that they have power over their own will. For it is as though he had said, "I would not have them resolve before knowing that they have power to fulfill, for it is rash and ruinous to struggle against an appointment of God." But, someone will say, "according to this system, vows are not to be condemned, provided these conditions were annexed." I answer that, regarding the gift of continence, since we are uncertain about God's will for the future, we ought not to make any determination for our whole life. Let us make use of the gift as long as it is allowed to us. In the meantime, let us commit ourselves to the Lord, prepared to follow whithersoever he may call us (Revelation 14:4).

Has decreed in his heart. Paul seems to have added this to express more fully the idea that fathers ought to look carefully on all sides before giving up anxiety and intention regarding giving their daughters in marriage. For they often decline marriage, either from shame or from ignorance of themselves, while, in the meantime, they are no less wanton or prone to be led astray. Parents must here consider well what is in the interests of their daughters, so that by their prudence they may correct their ignorance or unreasonable desire.

This passage serves to establish the authority of parents, which ought to be held sacred, as it has its origin in the common rights of nature. Now, if in other actions of lesser importance no liberty is allowed to children without the authority of their parents, much less is it reasonable that they should be given liberty in contracting marriage.

And this has been carefully enacted by civil law, but more especially by the law of God. So much the more detestable, then, is the wickedness of the Pope, who, laying aside all respect for either divine or human laws, has been so daring as to free children from the yoke of subjection to their parents.

It is important, however, to note the reason. This, he says, is on account of the dignity of the sacrament. Not to speak of the ignorance of making marriage a sacrament, what honor is there, I ask you, or what dignity, when, contrary to the general feeling of propriety in all nations, and contrary to God’s eternal appointment, they remove all restraints from the lusts of young persons, so that they may, without any feeling of shame, amuse themselves, under the pretense of its being a sacrament?

Let us understand, therefore, that in arranging the marriage of children, the authority of parents is of primary importance, provided they do not tyrannically abuse it, as even civil laws restrict it. The Apostle, too, in requiring exemption from necessity, intimated that the deliberations of parents ought to be regulated with a view to the benefit of their children.

Let us bear in mind, therefore, that this limitation is the proper rule: children should allow themselves to be governed by their parents. On the other hand, parents should not drag their children by force to what is against their inclination. Furthermore, parents should have no other object in view, in the exercise of their authority, than the benefit of their children.