Mark 10:6Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

This response, given the inadequate understanding of the permanence of the marital covenant, struck even His disciples as overly rigid. In private, they sought clarification (Mk. 10) to ensure they grasped His meaning correctly. Upon receiving confirmation that He permitted divorce only for unfaithfulness, they expressed the sentiment that, if that were the case, it might be better not to marry. The Lord responded that it is not feasible to require everyone to choose that path. However, those who, whether by natural disposition or personal choice, find themselves unable to marry or who decide to dedicate their lives to the kingdom of God, are blessed by God's grace with the gift of celibacy, and they are called to be faithful in their commitment.

5:31-32). Complicating matters further, while Christ, as the Pharisees were aware, maintained that divorce was not permissible except for adultery, the Mosaic Law indeed allowed for divorce without specifying limitations, merely instructing that a certificate of divorce should be issued (Deut. 24:1).

The responses from Christ, as conveyed by the Gospel writers, share a common essence but differ in their sequence. In Matthew’s account, Christ first refers to the divine order of creation and then addresses Mosaic Law, specifically in relation to the Pharisees' challenge. Conversely, Mark's Gospel presents Christ first prompting His challengers to cite Moses’ directive on divorce, and only then addressing the law of Eden. The foundation of Christ's argument is deeply rooted in God’s original design. He illustrates that the Creator established the marriage bond between one man and one woman (Gen. 1:27), indicating that this union is meant to be unbreakable. This teaching is further underscored by a direct decree from God: “Therefore 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.”

Additionally, it is important to note Jesus’ perspective on celibacy: He firmly opposed the common Jewish practice that allowed men to discard wives who had fallen out of favor, reinforcing the concept of the lifelong commitment of marriage and conceding to annul adulterous unions solely under those circumstances.

The ideal of a virtuous wife, as depicted in the book of Proverbs, presents an image of warmth and strength that can only emerge from a robust and honorable family life. “Who can find a virtuous woman?” asks King Lemuel, “for her price is far above rubies.” The children rise up and call her blessed; her husband also praises her, declaring that many women have done excellently, but you surpass them all. Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting, but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised (Proverbs 31:10, 28-30). Indeed, nowhere else in literature can one find such a magnificent portrayal of a wife and mother as that which sacred poetry offers, written over three millennia ago when civilized life was still in its early stages in Greece, and Rome had yet to emerge in the annals of history.

The image crafted by the divinely inspired writings maintained its importance throughout the ages. Long before the time of St. Mary, the inspiring verses about the virtuous wife were cherished by every Old Testament maiden, as the words of the sacred texts resonated with the Jewish community. The virtues depicted—loving loyalty, diligent work, wisdom, resourcefulness, honor towards her husband, reverence for God, and maternal devotion to her children—set a high standard for many women of the Old Testament. It is reasonable to believe that St. Mary exemplified this ideal in her modest home life, exhibiting it in her character and household management. This was anticipated by the Son of God, who chose a humble Mother, observing her humility and willingly embracing her nurturing guidance during His formative years.

In response, Christ addresses them by referring to the foundation of marital relations established in Paradise before engaging with the legal context set by Moses, as presented in Matthew. In contrast, Mark first mentions the law of Moses and then refers to the divine ideal found in Paradise. Thus, while Matthew presents the Pharisees questioning Christ about Moses' law, Mark emphasizes their inquiry regarding the law of Paradise. Despite these narrative variations, the substance remains unchanged.

Both Evangelists convey Christ's teachings in a summarized format, effectively capturing the essence while allowing for alterations in the details based on the storyteller's choice. Here, both Matthew and Mark faithfully reflect the essence of the Lord's message, displaying a significant level of similarity in core themes, even as non-essential particulars differ.