Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 2.pdf
Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 2.pdf Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 2.pdf
- Page 225 and 226: Commentary on Matt
- Page 227 and 228: Commentary on Matt
- Page 229 and 230: Commentary on Matt
- Page 231 and 232: Commentary on Matt
- Page 233 and 234: Commentary on Matt
- Page 235 and 236: Commentary on Matt
- Page 237 and 238: Commentary on Matt
- Page 239 and 240: Commentary on Matt
- Page 241 and 242: Commentary on Matt
- Page 243 and 244: Commentary on Matt
- Page 245 and 246: Commentary on Matt
- Page 247 and 248: Commentary on Matt
- Page 249 and 250: Commentary on Matt
- Page 251 and 252: Commentary on Matt
- Page 253 and 254: Commentary on Matt
- Page 255 and 256: Commentary on Matt
- Page 257 and 258: Commentary on Matt
- Page 259 and 260: Commentary on Matt
- Page 261 and 262: Commentary on Matt
- Page 263 and 264: Commentary on Matt
- Page 265 and 266: Commentary on Matt
- Page 267 and 268: Commentary on Matt
- Page 269 and 270: Commentary on Matt
- Page 271 and 272: Commentary on Matt
- Page 273 and 274: Commentary on Matt
- Page 275: Commentary on Matt
- Page 279 and 280: Commentary on Matt
- Page 281 and 282: Commentary on Matt
- Page 283 and 284: Commentary on Matt
- Page 285 and 286: Commentary on Matt
- Page 287 and 288: Commentary on Matt
- Page 289 and 290: Commentary on Matt
- Page 291 and 292: Commentary on Matt
- Page 293 and 294: Commentary on Matt
- Page 295 and 296: Commentary on Matt
- Page 297 and 298: Commentary on Matt
- Page 299 and 300: Commentary on Matt
- Page 301 and 302: Commentary on Matt
- Page 303 and 304: Commentary on Matt
- Page 305 and 306: Commentary on Matt
- Page 307 and 308: Commentary on Matt
- Page 309 and 310: Commentary on Matt
- Page 311 and 312: Commentary on Matt
- Page 313 and 314: Commentary on Matt
- Page 315 and 316: Commentary on Matt
- Page 317 and 318: Commentary on Matt
- Page 319 and 320: Commentary on Matt
- Page 321 and 322: Commentary on Matt
- Page 323 and 324: Commentary on Matt
- Page 325 and 326: Commentary on Matt
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Commentary</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Matthew</strong>, <strong>Mark</strong>, <strong>Luke</strong> - <strong>Volume</strong> 2<br />
to b<strong>on</strong>dage, (1 Corinthians 7:12,15,) this is not inc<strong>on</strong>sistent with Christ’s meaning. For he does not<br />
there inquire into the proper grounds of divorce, but <strong>on</strong>ly whether a woman c<strong>on</strong>tinues to be bound<br />
to an unbelieving husband, after that, through hatred of God, she has been wickedly rejected, and<br />
cannot be rec<strong>on</strong>ciled to him in any other way than by forsaking God; and therefore we need not<br />
w<strong>on</strong>der if Paul think it better that she should part with a mortal man than that she should be at<br />
variance with God.<br />
But the excepti<strong>on</strong> which Christ states appears to be superfluous. For, if the adulteress deserve<br />
to be punished with death, what purpose does it serve to talk of divorces? But as it was the duty of<br />
the husband to prosecute his wife for adultery, in order to purge his house from infamy, whatever<br />
might be the result, the husband, who c<strong>on</strong>victs his wife of uncleanness, is here freed by Christ from<br />
the b<strong>on</strong>d. It is even possible that, am<strong>on</strong>g a corrupt and degenerate people, this crime remained to<br />
a great extent unpunished; as, in our own day, the wicked forbearance of magistrates makes it<br />
necessary for husbands to put away unchaste wives, because adulterers are not punished. It must<br />
also be observed, that the right bel<strong>on</strong>gs equally and mutually to both sides, as there is a mutual and<br />
equal obligati<strong>on</strong> to fidelity. For, though in other matters the husband holds the superiority, as to<br />
the marriage bed, the wife has an equal right: for he is not the lord of his body; and therefore when,<br />
by committing adultery, he has dissolved the marriage, the wife is set at liberty.<br />
And whosoever shall marry her that is divorced. This clause has been very ill explained by<br />
many commentators; for they have thought that generally, and without excepti<strong>on</strong>, celibacy is<br />
enjoined in all cases when a divorce has taken place; and, therefore, if a husband should put away<br />
an adulteress, both would be laid under the necessity of remaining unmarried. As if this liberty of<br />
divorce meant <strong>on</strong>ly not to lie with his wife; and as if Christ did not evidently grant permissi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
this case to do what the Jews were w<strong>on</strong>t indiscriminately to do at their pleasure. It was therefore a<br />
gross error; for, though Christ c<strong>on</strong>demns as an adulterer the man who shall marry a wife that has<br />
been divorced, this is undoubtedly restricted to unlawful and frivolous divorces. In like manner,<br />
Paul enjoins those who have been so dismissed<br />
to remain unmarried, or to be rec<strong>on</strong>ciled to their husbands,<br />
(1 Corinthians 7:11;)<br />
that is, because quarrels and differences do not dissolve a marriage. This is clearly made out<br />
from the passage in <strong>Mark</strong>, where express menti<strong>on</strong> is made of the wife who has left her husband:<br />
and if the wife shall divorce her husband Not that wives were permitted to give their husbands a<br />
letter of divorcement, unless so far as the Jews had been c<strong>on</strong>taminated by foreign customs; but<br />
<strong>Mark</strong> intended to show that our Lord c<strong>on</strong>demned the corrupti<strong>on</strong> which was at that time universal,<br />
that, after voluntary divorces, they entered <strong>on</strong> both sides into new marriages; and therefore he makes<br />
no menti<strong>on</strong> of adultery.<br />
MATTHEW 19:10-12<br />
<strong>Matthew</strong> 19:10-12<br />
270<br />
John Calvin