John Calvin Commentary 1 Peter 3

He proceeds now to another instance of subjection, and instructs wives to be subject to their husbands. And as those who were united to unbelieving men seemed to have some excuse for shaking off the yoke, he expressly reminds them of their duty. He brings forward a particular reason why they should obey more carefully: that they might by their integrity draw their husbands to the faith. But if wives should obey ungodly husbands, they should obey with much more readiness those who have believing husbands.

But it may seem strange that Peter should say that a husband might be gained to the Lord without the word; for why does it say, faith cometh by hearing? (Romans 10:17). To this I reply, that Peter’s words are not to be understood as if a holy life alone could lead the unbelieving to Christ. Instead, it softens and pacifies their minds, so that they might have less aversion to religion. For just as bad examples create offenses, so good ones are a great help. Then Peter shows that wives, by a holy and pious life, could contribute significantly to preparing their husbands to embrace the faith of Christ, without speaking to them on religion.

While they behold. For minds, however alienated from the true faith, are softened when they see the good conduct of believers. For since they do not understand the doctrine of Christ, they form an opinion of it based on our lives. Consequently, they cannot help but commend Christianity, which teaches purity and fear.

Whose adorning: The other part of the exhortation is that wives are to adorn themselves sparingly and modestly, for we know that in this respect they are much more elaborate and ostentatious than they ought to be. Therefore, Peter rightly seeks to correct this vanity in them. And though he generally reproves sumptuous or costly adornment, he points out some things in particular: that they were not to artificially curl or elaborately style their hair, as was usually done with styling tools, or otherwise shape it according to the fashion; nor were they to set gold around their head, for these are the things in which excesses especially appear.

It may now be asked whether the Apostle wholly condemns the use of gold in adorning the body. If anyone were to press these words, it might be said that he prohibits precious garments no less than gold, for he immediately adds, the putting on of apparel, or, of clothes.

But it would be an immoderate strictness wholly to forbid neatness and elegance in clothing. If the material is said to be too sumptuous, the Lord has created it, and we know that skill in craftsmanship has come from Him. So, Peter did not intend to condemn every sort of ornament, but the evil of vanity, to which women are prone.

Two things should be considered in clothing: usefulness and decency. And what decency requires is moderation and modesty. So, if a woman were to go out with her hair wantonly curled and adorned, making an extravagant display, her vanity could not be excused.

Those who object and say that to clothe oneself in this or that manner is an indifferent thing, in which all are free to do as they please, may be easily refuted. For excessive elegance and superfluous display, in short, all excesses, arise from a corrupted mind. Besides, ambition, pride, affectation of display, and all things of this kind, are not indifferent things. Therefore, those whose minds are purified from all vanity will rightly order all things, so as not to exceed moderation.

But let it be the hidden, man of the heart. The contrast here should be carefully observed. Cato said that those who are anxiously engaged in adorning the body neglect the adorning of the mind. So Peter, to restrain this desire in women, introduces a remedy: that they are to devote themselves to the cultivation of their minds.

The word heart, undoubtedly means the whole soul. He at the same time shows in what the spiritual adorning of women consists: namely, in the incorruptness of a meek and quiet spirit. “Incorruptness,” as I think, is set in opposition to things that fade and vanish away—things that serve to adorn the body. Therefore, the version of Erasmus departs from the real meaning. In short, Peter means that the ornament of the soul is not like a fading flower, nor does it consist in vanishing splendor, but is incorruptible.

By mentioning quiet and a tranquil spirit, he marks out what especially belongs to women, for nothing suits them more than a placid and sedate temper of mind. For we know how outrageous an imperious and self-willed woman can be. Furthermore, nothing is more fitted to correct the vanity of which Peter speaks than a placid quietness of spirit.

What follows—that it is in the sight of God of great price,—may be referred to the whole previous sentence as well as to the word spirit; the meaning indeed will remain the same. For why do women take so much care to adorn themselves, except to turn the eyes of men on themselves? But Peter, on the contrary, bids them to be more anxious for what is before God of great price.

He sets before them the example of pious women, who sought spiritual adorning rather than outward, showy and superficial ornaments. But he mentions Sarah above all others, who, having been the mother of all the faithful, is especially worthy of honor and imitation by women.

Moreover, he returns to the topic of subjection and confirms it by the example of Sarah, who, according to the words of Moses, called her husband Lord (Genesis 18:12). God, indeed, does not regard such titles; it may sometimes happen that an especially irritable and disobedient woman might use such a word with her tongue. But Peter means that Sarah usually spoke this way because she knew the Lord had commanded her to be subject to her husband. Peter adds that those who imitated her faithfulness would be her daughters, that is, counted among the faithful.

And are not afraid: the particular frailty of their sex can cause women to be suspicious and timid, and therefore sullen, because they fear that through their subjection, they might be treated with greater disrespect.

Peter seems to have had this in mind when he forbade them to be disturbed by any fear, as if he had said, “Willingly submit to the authority of your husbands, nor let fear prevent your obedience, as if your condition would be worse if you were to obey.”

Alternatively, the words may be more general: “Let them not cause disturbances at home.” For since they are easily frightened, they often exaggerate small matters and thus disturb themselves and the family.

Others think that the timidity of women, which is contrary to faith, is generally rebuked here, as though Peter were exhorting them to perform the duties of their calling with a courageous and fearless spirit. However, the first explanation is what I prefer, though the last does not differ much from it.

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them. From husbands he requires prudence; for dominion over their wives is not given to them, except on this condition, that they exercise authority prudently. Then let husbands remember that they need prudence to perform their duty rightly.

Doubtless, many foolish things must be endured by them, and many unpleasant things must be borne with; and they must at the same time beware that their indulgence does not foster folly. Hence, Peter's admonition is not in vain, that husbands ought to cohabit with them as with a weaker vessel.

Part of the prudence which he mentions is that husbands honor their wives. For nothing destroys the friendship of life more than contempt; nor can we really love any but those whom we esteem, for love must be connected with respect.

Moreover, he employs a twofold argument to persuade husbands to treat their wives honorably and kindly. The first is derived from the weakness of the sex; the other, from the honor with which God favors them. These things indeed seem in a manner contrary—that honor ought to be given to wives because they are weak, and because they excel; but these things agree well together where love exists.

It is evident that God is despised in His gifts unless we honor those on whom He has conferred any excellence. But when we consider that we are members of the same body, we learn to bear with one another and mutually to cover our infirmities. This is what Paul means when he says that greater honor is given to the weaker members (1 Corinthians 12:23), precisely because we are more careful in protecting them from shame.

Then Peter, not without reason, commands that women should be cared for and honored with kind treatment because they are weak. And just as we more easily forgive children when they offend through inexperience of age, so the weakness of the female sex should prevent us from being too rigid and severe towards our wives.

The word vessel, as is well known, in Scripture means any sort of instrument.

Being heirs together (or co-heirs) of the grace of life. Some copies have “of manifold grace;” others, instead of “life,” have the word “living.” Some read “co-heirs” in the dative case, which makes no difference in the sense. Others insert a conjunction between manifold grace and life; this reading is the most suitable.

For since the Lord is pleased to bestow the same graces in common on husbands and wives, He invites them to seek an equality in them; and we know that those graces in which wives are partakers with their husbands are manifold. For some belong to the present life, and some to God’s spiritual kingdom. He afterwards adds that they are also co-heirs of life, which is the chief thing. And though some are strangers to the hope of salvation, yet since it is offered by the Lord to them no less than to their husbands, this is a sufficient honor to the sex.

That your prayers be not hindered. For God cannot be rightly called upon unless our minds are calm and peaceable. Among strifes and contentions, there is no place for prayer. Peter indeed addresses the husband and the wife when he bids them to be at peace with one another, so that they might pray to God with one mind.

But from this we may gather a general doctrine: that no one ought to come to God unless he is united to his brethren. Then, just as this reason ought to restrain all domestic quarrels and strifes, so that each one of the family may pray to God; so in common life it ought to be, as it were, a bridle to check all contentions. For we are more than insane if we knowingly and willfully close up the way to God’s presence by prayer, since this is the only asylum of our salvation.

Some offer this explanation: that intercourse with the wife ought to be sparing and temperate, lest too much indulgence in this respect should prevent attention to prayer, according to that saying of Paul: Defraud not one another, unless by consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer (1 Corinthians 7:5).

But Peter’s doctrine extends wider: and furthermore, Paul does not mean that prayers are interrupted by mutual cohabitation. Therefore, the explanation which I have given ought to be retained.