Mark 10:3Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Such a stringent interpretation of the indissolubility of marriage seemed too severe even to His disciples, who later questioned Him privately (Mark 10) to ensure they had comprehended His meaning correctly. After receiving confirmation that the Lord allowed divorce only for the infidelity of one partner, they remarked that, under such conditions, it might be better not to marry. In response, the Lord emphasized that it wasn't feasible to expect everyone to live that way. However, anyone, whether by divine design or personal choice, who finds themselves unable to marry—in striving to live for the kingdom of God—receives the gift of celibacy through God's grace, and thus has a duty to remain faithful.

Thus, irrespective of the response they sought, the Pharisees believed any answer would place Christ in a position of contradiction (Matt. 5:31-32). Furthermore, although Christ firmly asserted that divorce was only permissible in instances of adultery, the Mosaic Law did indeed provide for divorce without stipulating any restrictions, merely mandating the issuance of a certificate (Deut. 24:1).

The Evangelists relay Christ's reply with slight variations in emphasis, with Matthew first referencing the law of Eden before addressing the Mosaic Law and the Pharisees' question. In contrast, Mark depicts Christ as inviting the Pharisees to articulate the Mosaic Law concerning divorce before He elucidates the rationale for this legislation and subsequently refers back to the divine intention established in the Garden of Eden. The crux of Christ's argument is anchored in His appeal to the primordial design of marriage. God created one man and one woman (Gen. 1:27), underscoring the inherent nature of the marriage bond as unbreakable. This principle is further affirmed by the Creator's explicit decree: “For this reason, a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Here, it is important to highlight Christ’s perspective on celibacy: He firmly disapproved of the Jewish practice that permitted husbands to dismiss their wives at their discretion and instead affirmed that marriage is intended to be enduring, granting permission only to dissolve unions marked by adultery.

In response, Christ conveys to them that the foundation of marriage was established at Creation, connecting the divine order of relationships to the Mosaic Law. While Matthew emphasizes the relationship established in Paradise before addressing the Mosaic Law, Mark approaches it in the opposite way, first referencing the Mosaic Law and then leading to the divine order of marriage. Although their approaches differ, the core message remains consistent.

Both Gospel writers present a condensed version of Christ's response, ensuring that the fundamental truth is retained while the narrative specifics may be adjusted based on the author's perspective. In essence, Matthew and Mark transmit the heart of the Lord's message with striking fidelity, despite variations in peripheral details.