1 Corinthians 7:11Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

What, then, is this commandment proclaimed by the Lord to those joined in marriage? "A wife is not to depart from her husband, but even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband, and a husband is not to leave his wife" (1 Cor 7:10-11).

Since it happens that spouses separate either for continence, or for other reasons, or through displeasure, he says that it would be better if this did not happen at all. But if it has already happened, let the wife remain with her husband.

Let her remain, even if not for union, so that she may know no other man.

With what is it fitting to begin the discourse? With the very words of the Lord, which He utters through blessed Paul. For we must believe that the counsel of the Apostle is the counsel of the Lord.

Thus, by the words, "But to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord" (1 Cor 7:10), and again, "But to the rest I, not the Lord, say" (1 Cor 7:12), the Apostle does not mean that one command belongs to himself and the other to the Lord.

How could he dare to say, or even think, anything displeasing to Christ, and that in the form of a law? He had Christ speaking within him, and he strove to live only that Christ might live in him.

For him, kingdom and life, angels and powers, every other creature, and all things whatsoever held second place after love for Him.

What, then, do the Apostle's words "I" and "not I" mean? They mean that some laws and doctrines Christ taught us Himself, directly, and others through the Apostles.

That He did not Himself establish all laws and doctrines directly, hear what He says: "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now" (Jn 16:12).

Thus Christ had already established, "A wife is not to depart from her husband" (1 Cor 7:10), when He was on earth in the flesh. Therefore the Apostle says, "But to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord."

But concerning unbelievers He said nothing to us directly Himself. Rather, He gave the law by moving the soul of Paul.

For this reason the Apostle said, "not the Lord, but I." He did not mean that what he said was human teaching. How could that be?

He meant that the Lord did not deliver this commandment when He lived with the disciples, but later, through him.

Just as the words "the Lord, not I" do not mean that Paul disagrees with Christ's command, so the words "I, not the Lord" do not mean that the Apostle says something peculiar and displeasing to God.

They mean only that this commandment is now being delivered through him.

So also, when speaking about the widow, he says, "but she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my judgment" (1 Cor 7:40).

Then, lest you hear the words "according to my judgment" and think this a human opinion, he removes the misunderstanding and adds, "and I think I also have the Spirit of God" (1 Cor 7:40).

When he speaks from the Spirit and calls it his judgment, we do not therefore call it a human saying. So here also, when he says, "I say, not the Lord," do not suppose this is Paul's word.

He had Christ speaking within him, and he would not have dared to utter such teaching unless he had received this law from Him for us.

Otherwise someone might say to him, "I, as a believer, cannot live with an unbelieving woman, the pure with the impure. You yourself first said that you say this, not the Lord. Where shall I find a safe and firm support?"

Paul would answer him, "Do not fear. For this reason I said that I have Christ speaking in me, and that 'I think I also have the Spirit of God,' so that you may suspect nothing human in my words."

"If this were not so, I would not ascribe such force to my judgments. 'For the thoughts of mortals are uncertain, and our reasonings are prone to error'" (Wis 9:14).

And the whole catholic Church confirms the force of this law by observing it exactly. She would not observe it unless she were fully persuaded that this saying is a commandment of Christ.

Chrysostom explains it thus: "Intending to repeat a commandment clearly prescribed by the Lord, concerning the fact that one must not divorce one's wife except in the case of adultery, the Apostle says: not I, but the Lord. What was said above by the Apostle was not clearly stated by the Lord, though it agrees with His teaching. But this He set forth clearly. Such is the distinction between the expressions 'I' and 'not I.' Yet do not take the Apostle's words as human, for he says: 'I think I also have the Spirit of God'" (below, 1 Cor 7:40).

That the Apostle in no way lowers the wife before the husband is evident from his words about the unbelieving wife's consent to live with a Christian spouse. Having indicated one highest foundation for the indissolubility of Christian marriage, namely the Lord's commandment, the Apostle gives several reasons in favor of the indissolubility of a mixed marriage. The first reason lies in the sanctification of the unbelieving member of the marriage union. The second lies in the sanctification of the children. Next he speaks of the benefit of remaining in the outward condition in which one is found. Thus the general order of family life is not destroyed, but sustained. Christians are also delivered from many serious reproaches. Saint Chrysostom says of this: "The Apostle said this so that the believing wife would not fear becoming unclean through living with such a husband, an unbeliever, and conversely. On the contrary, the purity of the believing wife overcomes the uncleanness of the unbelieving husband, just as the purity of the believing husband overcomes the uncleanness of the unbelieving wife." In a similar sense, children from mixed marriages are also sanctified. Blessed Theodoret, concerning the Apostle's words, "But if the unbeliever departs," remarks: "What the Apostle said does not contradict the Lord's teaching, but explains it. For, he says, the saving preaching does not introduce confusion into life. On the contrary, it seeks rather the true and God-loving peace."

By forbidding union with another, he compels both sides to return to the former marriage." He restricts their freedom so that, even if there are reasons for separation, they may more readily use every means for reconciliation than hasten to divorce. The word concerning fornication is not excluded here, provided there is sincere repentance on the part of the one who sinned. That in the first period this matter was understood so may be concluded from the words of Hermas. In the fourth commandment he says that if a husband remains with his wife, knowing that she is unfaithful, he sins. Yet he sins equally if he does not receive her when she repents and gives her word to be faithful.