John Calvin Commentary Malachi 2:15

"And did he not make one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? And wherefore one? He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth." — Malachi 2:15 (ASV)

There is some obscurity in this verse, and consequently, no interpreter has arrived at the Prophet's meaning. The Rabbis almost all agree that Abraham is spoken of here. If we were to accept this view, a twofold meaning could be given. It may be an objection: “Has not one done this?” That is, has not Abraham, who is the one father of the nations, given us an example? For he married many wives. Many explain the passage this way, as if the priests raised an objection and defended the corruption just condemned by Abraham's example: “Has not one done this while an excellence of spirit was still in him?” Indeed, we know how prone men are to claim the authority of the fathers when they wish to cover their own vices.

Others prefer to regard the words as spoken by the Prophet himself. At the same time, they say that there is an anticipation of an objection here, and think that an opportunity for an excuse is cut off, as if the Prophet had said, “Did not Abraham, when he was one alone, do this?” For since the Jews might have brought up Abraham's example, the interpreters whose opinion I am now referring to think that a distinction is made here, as if he had said, “You reason badly, for every one of you is led to polygamy by the lust of your flesh; but it was very different with Abraham, for he was one, that is, alone.” And in Isaiah, Abraham is called one because he had no children.

They think the meaning, then, is this: “Was not Abraham forced by necessity to take another wife because he had no child and no hope of the promised seed? Lust, then, did not stimulate your father Abraham as it does you, but a desire to have offspring.” And they think that this view is confirmed by what follows: “And why alone seeking the seed of God?” That is, holy Abraham's objective was very different from indulging his lust; for he sought that holy seed, the hope of which was taken away from him because of his wife's barrenness and her great age. Therefore, when Abraham saw that his wife was barren and that she could no longer conceive because of her old age, he resorted to the last remedy. Thus, Abraham's mistake might have been excused, since his objective was right; for he sought the seed of God, the seed in which all nations were to be blessed. So far, I have told you what others think.

I thought twelve years ago that this passage should have been rendered differently in the French Bibles, and that אחד (ached) ought to be read in the objective case: “Has he not made one?” Jerome seems to me to have had a better idea of what the Prophet means than what others have taught; but he could not grasp the real meaning and therefore stopped, as it were, in the middle of his course.

He read the word in the nominative case, “Has not one”—that is, God—“made them?” And then he added, “And in him alone”—that is, Abraham—“was an exuberant spirit.” We see how he did not dare to assert anything, nor did he explain what was necessary. The sense is indeed suspended, and even frigid, if we say, “Has not one made them?” But if we read, “Has he not made one?” there is no ambiguity.

It is a common thing in Hebrew, we know, that the name of God is often not expressed when He is referred to; for He is so great that His name may be easily understood, though not expressed. Therefore, it should not confuse us that the Prophet does not state the name of God and mentions a verb without its subject, for this, as I have said, is a common practice in the Hebrew language.

I will now proceed to explain the Prophet's meaning. Has he not made one? That is, was God not content with one man when He instituted marriage? And yet the residue of the Spirit was in him. The Rabbis take שאר (shar) as meaning excellence. However, I do not know what reason induced them, except that they ventured to change the word's meaning because they could not otherwise free themselves from difficulty; for the mistake that Abraham is spoken of here had completely taken hold of their minds.

What then is שאר רוח (shar ruch)? Excellence of Spirit, they say. But שאר (shar), we know, is residue or remnant; whatever remains of anything is called שאר (shar), for the verb means to remain and to lean. Here then, the Prophet takes the residue of the Spirit, so to speak, to mean overflowing power. For God could have given one man two or three wives, since the Spirit did not fail Him in forming one woman. As He inspired Eve with life, so also He might have created other women and imparted His Spirit to them. He might then have given two, four, or ten women to one man, for there was a spirit remaining in Him. We now understand, then, what the Prophet means at the beginning of this verse.

But before we proceed further, we must bear in mind the Prophet's objective, which was to break down all those frivolous pretexts by which the Jews sought to cover their treachery. He says that in marriage we should recognize a divinely appointed ordinance or, to speak more distinctly, that the institution of marriage is a perpetual law, which it is not right to violate. Therefore, there is no reason for men to devise various laws for themselves, for God’s authority alone is to be regarded here.

This is more clearly explained in Matthew 19:8, where Christ, refuting the Jews' objection regarding divorce, says, From the beginning it was not so. Although the law allowed a bill of divorce to be given to wives, Christ denies this to be right. By what argument? Because the institution was not of that kind, for it was, as has been said, an inviolable bond. So now our Prophet reasons, Has not God made one? That is, “Consider within yourselves whether God, when He created man and instituted marriage, gave many wives to one man? By no means. You see then that everything that does not harmonize with its first institution is spurious and contrary to the character of a true and pure marriage.”

But someone may ask here why the Prophet says that God made one, for this seems to refer to the man and not to the woman. To this I answer that man with the woman is called one, according to what Moses says: God created man; male and female created he them (Genesis 1:17). After saying that man was created, he adds by way of explanation that man, both male and female, was created. Hence, when he speaks of man, the male makes up, as it were, one-half, and the female the other; for when we speak of the whole human race, one-half undoubtedly consists of men, and the other half of women.

So also when we come to individuals, the husband is, as it were, half of the man, and the woman is the other half. I speak of the ordinary state of things; for if anyone objects and says that bachelors are not then complete or perfect men, the objection is frivolous. But as men were created so that everyone should have his own wife, I say that husband and wife make but one whole man.

This, then, is the reason why the Prophet says that one man was made by God; for He united the man to the woman and intended that they should be partners, so to speak, under one yoke. And in this explanation, there is nothing forced, for it is evident that the Prophet here calls the Jews' attention to the true character of marriage. This could not have been known otherwise than from the very institution of God, which is, as we have said, a perpetual and inviolable law; for God created man, male and female. Christ also has repeated this sentence and carefully explained it in the passage we have quoted.

And here the Prophet sharply provokes the Jews, as if they wished to overcome God or to be wiser than Him: Had he not, he says, an exuberance of spirit? He takes spirit not to mean wisdom, but that hidden influence by which God gives life to men.

Could not God, he says, have put forth His spirit to create many wives for one man? But His purpose was to create one pair: to make man a husband and a wife. Since God, then, was not without a remaining Spirit and yet did not exceed this measure, it therefore follows that the law of marriage is violated when a man seeks many wives for himself. The Prophet's meaning is now, I think, sufficiently clear.

It follows, And why one? (ומה האחד, vame, eached). The interrogative particle מה (me) refers to the cause, end, form, or manner. We may therefore properly render it: For what, or why, has God made one? It was to seek the seed of God. The “seed of God” is to be understood as what is legitimate, for what is excellent is often called “God” in Hebrew, as is also what is free from all vice and blemish.

He sought then the seed of God; that is, He instituted marriage so that legitimate and pure offspring might be brought forth. Hence, then, the Prophet indirectly shows that all who proceed from polygamy are illegitimate because they cannot be considered legitimate children; nor should any be counted as such except those who are born according to God’s institution.

When a husband violates his pledged faith to his wife and takes another, just as he subverts the ordinance of marriage, so he cannot be a legitimate father. We now perceive why the Prophet says that it was God’s purpose to unite only one wife to one man so that they might beget legitimate offspring, for he shows by the result how frivolous were the evasions to which the Jews resorted. For however they might argue, their very offspring would prove them liars, as it would be illegitimate.

He then draws this conclusion: Therefore, watch over your spirit; that is, “Take heed that no one should deceive the wife of his covenant.” After showing how perversely those who rushed into polygamy violated the marriage vow, he counsels and exhorts them here. This is the best method of teaching: first to show what is right and lawful, and then to add exhortations.

The Prophet, then, first endeavored to convince the Jews that they were guilty of a heinous crime, for otherwise his exhortation would not have been received, as they would always have a ready objection: “It is lawful for us to do so, for we follow the example of our father Abraham. Furthermore, this has been permitted for a long time, and God would never have allowed it, if it were wrong, to prevail for so many ages among the people. It therefore follows that you condemn what is lawful.” It was necessary, in the first place, to remove all these false pretexts. Then the exhortation follows in its proper order: Watch over your spirit. For he speaks of what has been, as it were, sufficiently proved.