Dynamic Capacity Network

In the preceding sections we have considered Paul's views on the marriages of Gentiles who were already married before one of the two partners became converted to Christianity. "Mixed marriages" of this kind are, of course, inevitable in the earliest Christian period, and Paul has only good to say of them. His reaction to "mixed marriages"

contracted by those who are already baptised with non-Christians is quite different. Thus, Paul warns: Do not be mismated with unbelievers.

For what partnership have righteousness and iniquity; or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial?

... What agreement has the temple of God with idols: For we are the temple of the living God (2 Cor. 6:14-16).

You may be astonished at such stance that presents the world in black-and-white with the note of triumph at the end: Paul, however, sees things in a totally different light. For him the central fact of existence is that the mystery of Christ has appeared and that redemption has come in Jesus. The "saints" are those who have turned to Christ in faith and baptism. Everything else fades into insignificance beside the explicit

90

acknowledgement of this central fact of salvation. Christianity really appears to the Gentile world of that time as a sun in the darkness – a phenomenon that “set the world on its head,” as the Gentiles themselves put it: hoi ten oikoumenen anastatosantes (Acts 17:6), surely a remarkable definition of Christians as the people who “set the world in an uproar.” Both Gentiles and Christians themselves feel that Christianity is something quite unique. And indeed, it is unique, even today. What Paul said then is still applicable today. The church still regards a marriage with an unbaptised person as invalid in principle. It is not a marriage unless the impediment to marriage has been removed by an ecclesiastical dispensation, and even then, it is still dissoluble.

SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE

1. Do you think that marriage between a Christian and

non-Christian should be encouraged? Give reasons for your position.

2. What is the relationship between marriage and Christ’s redemptive love?

3.9 “Marriage in the Lord”

Towards the affairs of this world and human status in the world is that human should remain as they are at the point of becoming Christians and allow the things of this world to take their course (vv.17, 20). But it good for you to understand the position of Paul and his disciples, otherwise they may be falsely accused of social insensitivity towards human social structures and patterns of relation including marriage. The Pauline (Paul and his disciples) insistence is that Christian understanding of “social role” is better defined “as to the Lord” (Eph.

5:22) or “in the Lord” (Col. 3:18). Even the obedience of Christian children is placed “in the Lord,” as if they are obeying Christ (Col.

3:20). Thus, “marriage in the Lord,” is human marriage raised to sacrament. The new status allows it to operate in the sphere of salvation.

1 Cor. 7:39 carries some practical implication that the Christian marriage experience includes yet transcends secular realities. It ends in obedience “in the Lord” in a deeper sense than that of the slave to his master.

You may theologically argue that marriage is Christ’s redemptive love is symbolically represented and made actual and present in the personal relationship of marriage. That is to say, Christ’s love is made present by married Christians as married persons, in their state of being married and in their conjugal relationships as are experienced within the pattern of social behaviour prevailing at the time. Experience of marriage “in the Lord” is therefore not an addition to the structure of secular marriage but the Christianisation of its natural and human interrelationships.

91

Thus, Christian marriage is not on structure but in the intrinsic; it is something within the scope of the “new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal.

6:15). It is an inward transformation in the spirit of agape, which deriving from grace permeates the relationship of ordinary, secular marriage (1 Cor. 7:4-5; also Col. 3:19; Eph. 5:25).

Our conclusion is that:

i. “Marriage in the Lord” presupposes and emphasises the ordinary, secular reality of marriage, and at the same time explicit states that this secular reality is inwardly taken up into the sphere of salvation. So marriage cannot be seen either in Paul or in the New Testament as a necessary evil or inferior form of Christian life (contra. Preisker, 1927; Bultmann, 1958). It is an authentic form of Christian witness, and therefore must be defend against any threat.

ii. Religious celibacy in the NT does not in any way conditions the historical underrating of marriage, neither does marriage appreciate at the expense of Christian celibacy. We say the very opposite: the greater the decline in Christian celibacy, the less Christian marriage is valued. In other words, whenever the vocation of celibacy is underrated, that of marriage is underrated too (Schillebeeckx, 1965).

SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE

1. What you understand by “marriage in the Lord?”

2. Assess Paul’s claim that all should remain the way they are called in the context of marriage?

3. How is marriage authentic form of Christian witness to the gospel of Christ?

4. Discuss the relationship between celibacy and married life.

4.0 CONCLUSION

Paul establishes what he thinks is the ideal in Christian life, how he thinks things ought to be, and he depicts that as the goal or paradigm toward which people ought to aim and with regard to which people should order their lives. Yet alongside each such elevated goal-setting, Paul recognizes that, for various reasons, people may not be able to achieve the ideal. He is therefore careful to make room for full participation in the fellowship of those who, for whatever reason, may not be able to hit the heights. Thus, Paul concludes that it would be in the spirit of Jesus’ word on marriage for a Christian whose non-Christian spouse had divorced him or her to remarry (1 Cor. 7:15), but the same is not, and ought not to be for Christian spouses. In principle,

92

Paul thinks that Christians should not seek divorce or separation. But by remaining unmarried after their divorce, a Christian couple leaves open the possibility of their reconciliation (1 Cor. 7:10-11).” (Perkin, 2005).

5.0 SUMMARY

We have seen that marriage is an authentic form of Christian witness, and therefore must be defend against any threat. We also established from Paul’s teaching that celibacy is another form of authentic witness.

We argued that for us to appreciate the profound teaching of Paul on marriage, sexuality and family life, there are three principal points to be taken serious: (i) the imminent expectation of the end of the ages, (ii) the understanding of faith as a dynamic reality, and (iii) the influence cynic/stoic philosophy. It is based on the cynic/stoic principle that Paul considers married and not-married as indifferent matters. But within the world of the indifferent matters, if one much choose, Paul gives preference to not-married because it minimizes anxiety and maximizes devotion to God (7:32-35). Yet, whether married or not-married, one has not sinned. But the unanswered question is whether as we will agree with Paul that such value (married life) will be left in the list of indifferent matters.

Paul’s integral approach to the issue of marriage becomes clearer, especially in his consideration of sexuality as part of married life, and his insistence that none of the married partners should deny the other of it. He thus stresses the value of honour, respect, love and loyal between husband and wife as constituting the nutrients of marriage. In this respect both the male and female partners are considered equal. While Paul encourages married couples to live up to their marital life, he still presents celibacy as the preferred.

Paul is not hesitant to recommend to the widows and widowers to marry if they cannot keep to celibate life, bearing in mind that celibacy is the preferred. The same piece of advice goes to the unmarried and betrothed. To marry is not to sin. Paul also warns strongly against divorce based on his conviction on the teachings of Jesus. This stands as a critique against both the Roman law and orthodox Jewish practice.

Paul, however, insists that wherever divorce is accommodated as a necessary evil, then the only but bitter concession is for the Christian parties to remain single and never to remarry. At this point, he positively demonstrates his strong belief in the reconciliation and the restoration of peace. For him, in whatever life a Christian chooses, peace with the Lord and the self is of utmost importance.

Paul also recognises a mixed marriage, but treats it unpaired to the Christian marriage, yet without denying that both are real. Whereas

93

marriage is formally indissoluble as far as a baptised person is concerned, it is dissoluble as far as an unbaptized person is concerned.

In other words, divorce is allowed in mixed marriage but only on condition that it is at the instance of the unbelieving partner.

6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT

1. How does Paul’s understanding of the imminent apocalyptic eschatology influence his evaluation of marriage and sexuality in 1 Cor. 7?

2. What do you understand by the statement that marriage in Paul is only of relative but not ultimate value?

3. What is the difference between Paul and Matthew on scope of celibacy within the life of the Church? How do you interpret that reality in the light of African church?

4. Do you agree that communion in faith is very central to marriage and forms an indispensable element in its constitution? What are some of the socio-religious implications subscribing to such opinion?

5. Do you think that marriage between a Christian and non-Christian should be encouraged? Give reasons for your position.