Women In Conjugal Life

The Role of Women in Early Christianity, pp. 23-52.
by Jean LaPorte
Published by The Edwin Mellen Press, New York, 1982.
Published on our website with the necessary permission

CHAPTER II

It seems that in this chapter we are assuming an impossible task of rehabilitation of the Fathers of the Church who criticized women and supported the ideals of vir-ginity. It has been shown that Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Augustine, and others had a pejorative view of women, and sometimes taught that marriage was just a remedy to a worse evil. (18) In order to be fair and objective in our judgment, we must represent the two sides of the question and try to discover the reasoning behind their misogenism. Once more we shall see that their positions are strongly influenced by statements found in the Bible, especially in Paul.

However, the Fathers inherited another view of woman from the Bible, which was positive. This seems to have been the common position, i.e., that of married people, who were the majority in the Church, but who remain unknown in early Christian literature because they did not write. We read in Proverbs 5:18:

Have joy of the wife of your youth, your lovely hind, your graceful doe. Her love will invigorate you always, through her love you will flourish continually, When you lie down she will watch over you, and when you wake, she will share your concerns; Wherever you turn, she will guide you Why then, my son, should you go astray for another's wife and accept the embraces of the adulteress? (19)

Similarly, Malachi 2:14-16 argues against divorce because of the unity in flesh and spirit between a man and the wife of his youth.

The most remarkable text belongs to the Pauline corpus, and is Ephesians 5:22-33. Although it is well known, we present it because every word of it is important:

Wives should be submissive to their husbands as if to the Lord because the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of his body the church, as well as its savior. As the church submits to Christ, so wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church. He gave himself up for her to make her holy, purifying her in the bath of water by the power of the word, to present to himself a glorious church, holy and immaculate, without stain or wrinkle or anything of that sort. Husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. Observe that no one ever hates his own flesh; no, he nourishes it and takes care of it as Christ cares for the church— for we are members of his body. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cling to his wife, and the two shall be made into one." (Gen. 2:23)

This is a great mystery; I mean that it refers to Christ and the Church. In any case, each one should love his wife as he loves himself, the wife for her part showing respect for her husband. (Text, ibid.)

The reference to the marriage of the forefathers which was blessed by God is made obvious in this text by the quote from Genesis. The submissiveness imposed on the woman is compensated by her husband's love: could we expect better from that culture? In Early Christianity, the blessing of marriage was not given in church, or even by a priest, until late in Patristic times. But the importance ascribed to the blessing conferred by God on marriage can be derived from the text of the blessing over the bride in the Roman ritual, a blessing, it is said, which neither the original sin, nor the Deluge, nor any other calamity could abolish.(20) Marriage, or better, first marriage, preserves something of the simplicity and holiness of paradise. Because it is blessed by God it cannot be divided by men. It cannot be condemned by men for the same reason. Paul did not condemn it, and neither did Tertullian who once said, though, that marriage is of the essence of fornication. (21) The Encratists who, like Tertullian, condemned second marriage and even tried to combine a vow of continence with baptism, never thought of condemning first marriage.(22) Such a condemnation, or the affirmation that marriage is evil, can be seen only in heterodox groups.(23)

We find new evidence for the ideals of the married woman in the requirements for the widows of the Church in I Timothy 5:1-16 and Titus 2:3-5. They are echoed by Clement of Rome in his first Epistle to the Corinthians (1,3), the Epistle of Polycarp 4-5, and the commentators on Scripture, for instance Chrysostom (24). According to I Tim. 5:1-16, to be on the Church roll a widow must be no less than 60 years of age, married only once, a good woman as attested by her good deeds, one who brought up her children, was hospitable to strangers, and helpful to those in distress. In Titus 2:35, we see how older women must themselves behave and teach younger women: they must be no slanderous gossips or slaves to drink. By their good example they must teach the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be sensible, chaste, busy at home, kindly, submissive to their husbands.

The Apologists vindicate the dignity and the virtues of Christian women against the mockery of the pagans. They indirectly praise them when they praise the high moral standards of conjugal life. (25) For instance, Christian people don't expose children, a pagan practice which condemned these children to death or to a life of prostitution, but they marry for the purpose of bringing up children. (26) In spite of their lack of education, -- among them there are many artisans and old women --, and although they are unable in words to prove the benefit of the Christian doctrine, the Christian exhibit good works, and love their neighbours as themselves.(27) Christian maidens and old women are treated with respect by their brethren, and learn the Christian philosophy;(28) many of them reach the ideals of contemplative life in continence.(29)

Very much in the same spirit as the Pastoral Epistles Didascalia Apostolorum, a Syrian Church Order of the third century, reminds men as well as women of their duties in marriage (Ch. 2 and 3). A husband should please his wife alone. He should not adorn himself and become a cause of stumbling to women. He should not bathe with women or frequent harlots, or read the books of the pagans. Let him rather read Scripture, but remember that the Gospel made us free from the ordinances of the Law of Moses. Chapter 26 further explains this last point: because of Moses' laws on purity, heretics keep themselves from prayer, receiving the Eucharist, or reading the Scriptures, thinking that because of natural issues or sexual intercourse they are void of the Holy Spirit. Through baptism Christians receive the Holy Spirit, who is ever with those who work righteousness, and does not depart from them by reason of natural issues and the intercourse of marriage, but is ever with those who possess Him, and keeps them. Those who are baptized do not need these rites of purification, and are purified once and for all.

Concerning the duties of married women, we read in Didascalia ch. 3 that a woman should be subjected to her husband. After God and Christ the Lord, she should fear her husband, reverence him, please him alone, be ready to minister to him, and perform all the duties of a good mother and housekeeper (cf. Prov. 31:10-31). She should not adorn herself to please other men. In the street she should keep her head covered in order to hide her beauty. She should not bathe together with men, or give any pretext of scandal to a pagan husband. She should not be quarrelsome (cf. Prov. 21 :9).

TERTULLIAN

Let us now come back to Tertullian, who lived at the end of the second century and beginning of the third and was deeply marked by the influence of the Montanists. He considered that Moses, Jesus, and Paul had been unable to enforce the ideals of continence when they taught, because the hearts were not ready. But he thought things were different in his time. After two centuries of active influence, the Holy Spirit was in the process of re-establishing, (as a restitutor) the ideal order of religious life broken by sin. For this reason Tertullian condemned second marriage, which Paul tolerated.

Against women, Tertullian made use of certain texts of the Pauline corpus which limited the activity of women in assemblies, or even imposed silence on them. But, going beyond interdictions in ministry, he attacked women with such a bitterness that it became anthropological aberration. In De velandis virginibus, he maintains that there are no good reasons for a virgin to keep her head uncovered.(30) In De exhortatione castitatis, the reasons for a second marriage are all rejected as unworthy.(31) In De monogamia, he uses the hope for a reunion after death to argue against a second marriage which he interprets as an adultery.(32) In De baptismo, he forbids women to baptize: what impudent boldness of women, which can be seen only in heterodox sects!(33) In De cultu feminarum, make-up is interpreted as a fault against nature, therefore against the Creator, and as a disgrace.(34) In Ad uxorem Book I, first marriage itself is no longer a good but only a relative good, i.e., a lesser evil.(35) But his most radical criticism of woman is found in De cultu feminarum I, 1 :

You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer of that (forbidden tree); you are the first deserter of the divine law; you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed God's image, man. On account of your desert -- that is, death, even the son of God had to die. Why adorn yourself? All the luxury of feminine dress is the bagage of woman in her condemned and dead estate.

We are bewildered by such statements. Of course, it is a comment on I Timothy 2:8-15. But we wonder whether the amazing rhetorical strength of Tertullian in that case should be counted as a charge against him or as an excuse.

The same Tertullian wrote what I consider to be the most beautiful page among ancient texts about marriage. From the text we cannot discern the presence of children or a reference to conjugal intercourse. But the description of the spiritual union of the couple is a marvel:

Whence are we to find words enough fully to tell the happiness of that marriage which the Church cements, and the oblation confirms and the benediction signs and seals; which angels carry back the news of (to heaven), which the Father holds for ratified? For even on the earth children do not rightly and lawfully wed without their fathers' consent. What kind of yoke is that of two believers, partakers of one hope, one desire, one discipline, one and the same service? Both are brethren, both fellow servants, no difference of spirit or flesh; nay they are truly two in one flesh- Where the flesh is one, one is the spirit too. Together they pray, together prostrate themselves, together perform their fasts; mutually teaching, mutually exhorting mutually sustaining. Equally are they both found in the Church of God; equally at the banquet of God; equally in straits, in persecutions, in refreshments. Neither hides ought from the other; neither shuns the other; neither is troublesome to the other. The sick is visited, the indigent relieved, with freedom. Alms are given without danger of ensuing torment; sacrifices attended without scruple; daily diligence (discharged) without impediment: there is no stealthy sighing, no trembling greeting, no mute benediction. Between the two echo psalms and hymns; and they mutually challenge each other which shall better chant to their Lord. Such things when Christ sees and hears, He joys. To these He sends His own peace. Where two are, there withal is He Himself. Where He is, there the Evil One is not, (36)

If now we try to think about the presence, and even the co-existence of such extreme positions in Tertullian, we must go beyond our amazement and even beyond the accusations of inconsequence and misogenism. What were the reasons of Tertulian, or better, what is the philosophy underlying both the diverse aspects of his statements? It is not Stoicism or Cynicism which, like all Antiquity, believed in the weakness of women and could exploit this theme as a rhetorical topic.(37) It is not the Bible, at least the Old Testament, which supports the idea of woman's submissiveness but is generally respectful of woman, even laudative. And the Old Testament is fully supportive of the duty and worth of marriage.

Where, then, can we find the explanation for such severity in Tertullian regarding women, marriage, and discipline? Tertullian was a Montanist. The following chapter examines this sect of spirituals founded in Phrygia by Montanus and his prophetesses in the second half of the second century. For now it is enough to know that the Montanists belonged to a broader spiritual movement in the Church, Encratism, which means the domination of the flesh by the spirit and a corresponding abstinence from the pleasures of the flesh. The idea of Encratism is inseparable from the message of the New Testament. It had its positive aspects but it seems that very early Encratism exceeded its limit, the freedom of complete dedication to God, and began to inconvenience the majority of the faithful who lived in marriage and preferred moderation to heroism in asceticism. Significantly, already in the Pastoral Epistles the faithful are warned against those "who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by believers who know the truth. (38) The same zeal for the perfection of others led many Encratists of the second and third century, bishops among them, to condemn second marriage, to refuse the reconciliation of repentant sinners, to increase fasting and vigils, to forbid wine and meat, to speak against intercourse in marriage, and even to present baptism as a vow of continence.(39) Encratism attempted to improve the law of the Gospel and of the Apostle, and thus divided communities, Finally, it failed in its main contentions, but not without leaving its marks on the Church, as we see in the later inclination to see conjugal intercourse as unclean.(40) Since Encratism was a party supporting perfection, it had more authority and appeal than the position of moderation and compromise. For this reason, it is endemic in the history of the church and has often upset the balance.

As a Montanist and by personal inclination, Tertullian was an Encratist. For this reason he condemned second marriage, and came to deny bishops the right to forbid the so-called irremissible sins.(41) God only could forgive them, or perhaps also the spirituals, since they could pass judgment on spiritual things but they would not dare to do it lest sin might increase. For this reason, Tertullian supported the vigils, fasting, and discipline of the Montanists. He wanted to impose the wearing of a veil on all women and the practice of holy widowhood on widowers and widows. For this reason he considered intercourse, even in a legitimate marriage, as of the same essence as fornication because it was indulgence in the flesh. Finally, though, he did not condemn first marriage and pronounce it evil, for, like the Montanists and all other Encratists, he believed that God had conferred upon marriage a blessing which had never been withdrawn.(42)

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA

Tertullian's contemporary Clement of Alexandria is a great figure among the theologians who considered women and marriage in Early Christianity. But unlike Tertullian who supported extreme positions, Clement was a moderate and approached the question through philosophy. Certain scholars are confused by the diversity of his teaching on woman and marriage, and either they lay the emphasis on the bourgeois ethics or his relative laxism,(43) or drop this aspect and focus on his excessive severity and puritanism.(44) We must immediately prevent this misunderstanding of Clement with the following observation. Clement indeed supported two standards of ethics, without contradicting himself because these two standards did not suit only one kind of people. Obviously there was for Clement an ideal of perfection, that of the "True Gnostic" or Christian doctor living in meditation, asceticism, continence and teaching. And there was a more common standard which we can qualify as that of the Bourgeois, which although not laxist and strongly influenced by Stoicism, permitted marriage, banquets, social life, and even the possession of wealth. Of course there could not be a clear-cut boundary between the two standards, which proceeded more from a difference of spirit than from a difference of code. This double standard of ethics understood in this sense is congenial to Christianity, and is rooted in the Gospel which both manifests a training of the disciples in perfection, and approves those who simply observe the commandments.(45)

The True Gnostic of Clement lives in a contemplative life of continence. However, he is a married man with a wife and children. His wife seems to share his ideals and to reach perfection as well as he:

He will therefore prefer neither children, nor marriage, nor parents, to love for God, and righteousness in life. To such an one, his wife, after conception, is as a sister, and is judged as if of the same father; then only recollecting her husband, when she looks on the children; as being destined to become a sister in reality after putting off the flesh, which separates and limits the knowledge of those who are spiritual by the peculiar characteristics of the sexes. For souls, themselves by themselves, are equal. Souls are neither male nor female, when they no longer marry nor are given in marriage. And is not woman translated into man, when she is become equally unfeminine, and manly, and perfect?(46)

The text continues, comparing the wife to Sarah and to Anna the mother of Samuel, figures or models of wisdom and of contemplative life.

Let us now examine the common standard, which sometimes also requires heroism. First, we find the general duties of a married woman according to the Platonic philosophy and to Scripture. Since Clement is addressing men, the rights and duties of a wife appear only indirectly. We quote a chapter on marriage, which concludes Stromaton II.

Since pleasure and lust seem to fall under marriage, it must also be treated of. Marriage is the first conjunction of man and woman for the procreation of legitimate children. Accordingly Menander the comic poet says: for the begetting of legitimate children, I give thee my daughter.

We ask if we ought to marry; which is one of the points, which are said to be relative. For some must marry, and a man must be in some condition, and he must marry someone in some condition. For every one is not to marry nor always. But there is a time in which it is suitable, and an age up to which it is suitable. Neither ought every one to take a wife, nor is it every woman one is to take, nor always, nor in every way, nor inconsiderately. But only he who is in certain circumstances, and such a one and at such time as is requisite, and for the sake of children, . and one who is in every respect similar, and who does not by force or compulsion love the husband who loves her. Hence Abraham, regarding his wife as a sister, says, she is my sister by my father, but not by my mother; and she became my wife, (Gen. 20-12) teaching us that children of the same mothers ought not to enter into matrimony. Let us briefly follow the history. Plato ranks marriage among outward good things, providing for the perpetuity of our race, and handing down as a torch a certain perpetuity to children's children. Democritus repudiates marriage and the procreation of children, on account of the many annoyances thence arising, and abstractions from more necessary things. Epicurus agrees, and those who place good in pleasure, and in the absence of trouble and pain. According to the opinion of the Stoics, marriage and the rearing of children are a thing indifferent; and according to the Peripatetics , a good. In a word, these, following out their dogmas in words, became enslaved to pleasures; some using concubines, some mistresses, and the most youths. And that wise quaternion in the garden with a mistress, honoured pleasure by their acts. Those, then, will not escape the curse of yoking an ass with an ox, who, judging certain things not to suit them, command others to do them, or the reverse. This Scripture has briefly showed, when it says, What thou hatest, thou shalt not do to another. (Tob. 4:15).

But they who approve of marriage say, Nature has adapted us for marriage, as is evident from the structure of our bodies, which are male and female. And they constantly proclaim that command: Increase and replenish, (Gen. 1:28) And though this is the case, yet it seems to them shameful that man, created by God, should be more licentious than the irrational creatures, which do not mix with many licentiously, but with one of the same species, such as pigeons and ringdoves, and creatures like them. Furthermore, they say, "The childless man fails in the perfection which is according to nature, not having substituted his proper sucessor in his place. For he is perfect that has produced from himself his like, or rather when he sees that he has produced the same; that is, when that which is begotten attains to the same nature with him who begat. Therefore we must by all means marry, both for our country's sake, for the succession of children, and as far as we are concerned, the perfection of the world; since the poets also pity a marriage half-perfect and childless, but pronounce the fruitful one happy. But it is the diseases of the body that principally show marriage to be necessary. For a wife's care and the assiduity of her constancy appear to exceed the endurance of all other relations and friends, as much as to excel them in sympathy; and most of all, she takes kindly to patient watching. And in truth, according to scripture she is a needful help. The comic poet then, Menander, while running down marriage, and yet alleging on the other side its advantages, replies to one who had said:

I am averse to the thing, For you take it awkwardly . Then he adds :

You see the hardships and the things which annoy you in it But you do not look on the advantages.

And so forth. Now marriage is a help in the case of those advanced in years, by furnishing a spouse to take care of one, and by rearing children of her to nourish one's old age.

For to a man after death his children bring renown, Just as corks bear the net, Saving the fishing line from the deep

according to the tragic poet Sophocles,

Legislators, moreover, do not allow those who are unmarried to discharge the highest magisterial offices. For instance, the legislator of the Spartans imposed a fine not on bachelorhood only, but on monogamy, and late marriage, and single life. And the renowned Plato orders the man who has not married to pay a wife's maintenance into the public treasury, and to give to the magistrates a suitable sum of money as expenses. For if they shall not beget children, not having married, they produce, as far as in them lies, a scarcity of men, and dissolve states and the world that is composed of them, impiously doing away with divine generation. It is also unmanly and weak to shun living with a wife and children. For of that of which the loss is an evil, the posession is by all means a good; and this is the case with the rest of things. But the loss of children is, they say, among the chiefest evils: the possession of children is consequently a good thing; and if it be so, so also is marriage. It is said:

Without a father there never could be a child, And without a mother conception of a child could not be. Marriage makes a father, as a husband a mother.

Accordingly Homer makes a thing to be earnestly prayed for:

A husband and a house;

yet not simply, but along with good agreement. For the marriage of other people is an agreement for indulgence; but that of philosophers leads to that agreement which is in accordance with reason, bidding wives adorn themselves not in outward appearance, but in character; and enjoining husbands not to treat their wedded wives as mistresses, making corporeal wantonness their aim; but to take advantage of marriage for help in the whole of life, and for the best self-restraint.

Far more excellent, in my opinion, than the seeds of wheat and barley that are sown at appropriate seasons, is man that is sown , for whom all things grow; and those seeds temperate husbandmen ever sow. Every foul and polluting practice must therefore be purged away from marriage; that the intercourse of the irrational animals may not be cast in our teeth, as more accordant with nature than human conjunction in procreation. Some of these, it must be granted, desist at the time in which they are directed, leaving creation to the working of Providence.

By the tragedians, Polyxena, though being murdered, is described nevertheless as having, when dying, taken great care to fall decently,

Concerning what ought to be hid from the eyes of men.

Marriage to her was a calamity. To be subjected, then, to the passions, and to yield to them, is the extremest slavery; as to keep them in subjection is the only liberty. The divine Scripture accordingly says, that those who have transgressed the commandments are sold to strangers, that is, to sins alien to nature, till they return and repent. Marriage, then, as a sacred image, must be kept pure from those things which defile it. We are to rise from our slumbers with the Lord, and retire to sleep with thanksgiving and prayer,

Both when you sleep and, when the holy light comes,

confessing the Lord in our whole life; possessing piety in the soul, and extending self-control to the body. For it is pleasing to God to lead decorum from the tongue to our actions. Filthy speech is the way to effrontery; and the end of both is filthy conduct.(47)

Clement, then, recommends that an adulterous wife who repents, be received back because "she has come again to life".

The whole of stromaton III (48) is a criticism of the opinions of the heretics (heterodox Gnostics) on marriage, which range from pure condemnation to a clear laxism. Clement states his own positions on marriage, the purity of conjugal intercourse (no need to wash as prescribed in Lev. 15:18),(49)and suggests that children be less the fruit of desire than of the will.(50)

To the description of the common standard of ethics must be added a series of texts where women seem to be treated severely or are invited to observe a very stern way of life. Actually, these sections are paralleled in the other Ethicists of the time upon whom Clement depends. They are essentially Stoic. Let us simply mention those relating to women in Instructor Book II. Women are warned against disgraceful drinking. (51) Young men are warned not to sit in banquets drinking with married women.(52) A long section on perfumes, flowers and crowns reminds us of Tertullian and Epictetus.(53) Finally, we find another long section on makeup and ornaments 104, women's clothing 111, the length of their dress 114, shoes 116, and jewelry 121. (54)

More important than the parallels between these precepts and those of the Stoics is the reasoning of Clement which, as that of Tertullian on the same topics, is essentially Stoic. (55) Clement indeed quotes Scripture, but he quotes the Greek poets as authorities as well. But finally he refers to the order of nature, which is the same as the will of the Creator. However, most of the grounds proposed by Clement are considerations of health probably coming from physicians--for instance the sections on drinking and on perfume, or from Naturalists, who say that precious pearls are the excrement of the sea, and gold no more precious in itself than iron, since barbarians who lacked iron bound their prisoners with golden chains.(56) Of course such reasoning, although relying on nature, could be very superficial and lead to a wrong conclusion as when, for instance, Tertullian said that the use of make up is sinful because it contradicts the law of God who did not create sheep with pink or sky-blue fleece, The history of ethics is full of such reasoning.

Clement's support of the equality of man and woman not only in the eyes of God but also before the responsibilities of life is clear in spite of the clumsy reservations forced by his fidelity to Scripture. The first quote shows the basic equality of men and women before virtue:

So the Church is full of those, as well chaste women as men, who all their life have contemplated the death which rouses up to Christ. For the individual whose life is framed as ours is, may philosophize without Learning, whether barbarian, whether Greek, whether slave— whether an old man, or a boy, or a woman. For self-control is common to all human beings who have made choice of it. And we admit that the same nature exists in every race, and the same virtue . As far as respects human nature, the woman does not possess one nature, and the man exhibit another, but the same: so also with virtue. If, consequently, a self-restraint and righteousness, and whatever qualities are regarded as following them, is the virtue of the male, it belongs to the male alone to be virtuous, and to the woman to be licentious and unjust. But it is offensive even to say this. Accordingly woman is to practice self-restraint and righteousness, and every other virtue, as well as man, both bond and free; since it is a fit consequence that the same nature possesses one and the same virtue. We do not say that woman's nature is the same as man's, as she is woman. For undoubtedly it stands to reason that some difference should exist between each of them, in virtue of which one is male and the other female. Pregnancy and parturition, accordingly, we say, belong to woman, as she is woman, and not as she is a human being. But if there were no difference between man and woman, both would do and suffer the

same things. As then there is sameness, as far as respects the soul, she will attain to the same virtue; but as there is difference as respects the peculiar construction of the body, she is destined for child-bearing and housekeeping. For I would have you know, says the Apostle, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man: for the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. For neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman, in the Lord." (I Cor. 11:3.8.11). For as we say that the man ought to be continent and practised in fighting against pleasures .

We do not train our women like Amazons to manliness in war, since we wish the men even to be peaceable. 1 hear that the Sarmatian women practise war no less than the men; and the women of the Sacae besides, who shoot backwards, feigning flight, as well as the men. I am aware, too, that the women near Iberia practise manly work and toil, not refraining from their tasks even though near their delivery; but even in the very struggle of her pains, the woman, on being delivered, taking up the infant, carries it home. Further, the females no less than the males manage the house, and hunt, and keep the flocks: Cressa the hound ran keenly in the stag's track. Women are therefore to philosophize equally with men, though the males are preferable at everything, unless they become effeminate. To the whole human race, then, discipline and virtue are a necessity, if they would pursue after happiness.

The free, though threatened with death at a tyrant's hands, and brought before the tribunals, and all his substances imperilled, will by no means abandon piety; nor will the wife who dwells with a wicked husband, or the son if he has a bad father, or the domestic.

if he has a bad master, ever fail in holding nobly to virtue. But as it is noble for a man to die for virtue, and for liberty, and for himself, so also is it for a woman. For this is not peculiar to the nature of males, but to the nature of the good.(57)

The second quote, after extolling such Biblical women as Judith, Suzanna, Esther, the sister of Moses, and some courageous pagan women as well, explains how a wife shares in the responsibilities of the couple and must even take more than her share if her husband is not able to fulfill his duties. She does so while keeping the sense that she is an associate and not the head of man.

The wise woman, then, will first choose to persuade her husband to be her associate in what is conducive to happiness. And should that be found impracticable , let her by herself earnestly aim at virtue, gaining her husband's consent in everything, so as never to do anything against his will, with exception of what is reckoned as contributing to virtue and salvation. But if one keeps from such a mode of life either wife or maid servant, whose heart is set on it; what such a person in that case plainly does is nothing else than determine to drive her away from righteousness and sobriety, and to choose to make his own house wicked and licentious. . .

For with perfect propriety Scripture has said that woman is given by God as a help to man. It is evident, then, in my opinion, that she will charge herself with remedying, by good sense and persuasion, each of the annoyances that originate with her husband in domestic economy. And if he does not yield, then she will endeavour, as far as possible for human nature, to lead a sinless life; whether it be necessary to die, in accordance with reason, or to live; considering that God is her helper and associate in such a course of conduct, her true defender and Saviour both for the present and for the future; making Him the leader and guide of all her actions, reckoning sobriety and righteousness her work and making the favour of God her end.(58)

AUGUSTINE

In a study of woman in marriage in Early Christianity, Augustine deserves a special section because of his importance in the development of Western thought. But it is impossible to study his thought apart from his life, and difficult to explain his life without considering the place occupied in his Confessions by his mother Monica.

It is easy to over-emphasize the importance of sex in the personality or theology of Augustine. Certain psychologists even considered him as a serious case of the mother-complex.(59) The study of Augustine, in my opinion, is more interesting if we forget contemporary questions and listen to Augustine himself. It is particularly important to do so regarding his personal relations with women, and his ideas about woman in marriage.

Monica and her son Augustine (60)

First, what kind of person was his mother Monica? Was she alone responsible for the dismissal of the concubine of her son? What was the influence of his mother in his conversion, and the importance of the sexual obstacle he had to overcome in order to reach his end?

Monica probably baptized as an infant, married a pagan husband named, Patricius. Many Christian women married pagan husbands. Monica was expected to convert her husband, who was actually baptized before his death. In this way a man did not have to break with his friends. Patricius was a good but impulsive man, and Monica knew how to handle him. She never contradicted him in his anger, but later on produced her reasons and persuaded him of her position. For a while Monica was addicted to wine, but later stopped drinking.

When Augustine was born he was not baptized, unlike most babies of African Christian families, but only made a catechumen with the sign of the cross and salt. The reason was not that his father was a pagan, but probably that his parents were planning a career for him requiring a long education and the postponement of settling down to a later period in life. While still a child, Augustine fell sick and fearing death begged the grace of baptism, but his mother preferred to wait. At the public pool, the lad manifested his virility. Upon hearing about it his father rejoiced, saying that he would soon be himself a grandfather. Monica, alarmed for the future of her son, warned him sternly: he should not have affairs with girls, especially with married women. Augustine wished he could get married early like his fellows, because he was burning with passion. But precisely an early marriage and establishment in life, as in the case of the majority who were absorbed by the care of their family, would have prevented his social promotion.

However as a student in Carthage, where he studied Rhetoric and Philosophy, Augustine took a concubine--a girl of low or average birth to whom he was faithful from 372 to 385 when she was dismissed. She gave him a son, Adeodatus, an intelligent boy who died about 390 A.D. The couple seems to have been happy and united. By that time Augustine was a Manichee, which he remained for 9 years. This fact can explain why he was faithful to her -- in addition to the genuine love he had for her and to the satisfaction of his sexual needs. The same fact can also explain why he did not have other children: the Manichees were Encratists who despised procreation.(6l)

Because he was a Manichee, i.e., a heretic of the worst kind, and a propagandist of the sect, Monica refused to let Augustine live under her roof when he came back to Thagaste and taught there for one year. A bishop whom she consulted refused to discuss with Augustine, alleging that it would only confirm him in his sophisms, and that he would discover by himself the error of Manicheism. The bishop added, seeing the poor weeping mother, that the son of so many tears would certainly be saved. Monica became the type of mothers weeping over sons who live a sinful life, praying for their salvation.

Back in Carthage, as a rhetor, Augustine seems to have had Monica living with him and his family in good harmony. Free union could not turn a man who was not baptized into a public sinner. But, disgusted by the bad behavior of the 'eversores" (students who disturbed classes and made teaching impossible), Augustine decided to leave for Rome where students were more serious and quiet. He did not know at that time that Roman students cut the last classes in order not to pay their fees.

Augustine, not wanting to take his mother with him in his new adventure, planned to leave without telling her and saw her weeping and lamenting on the beach near the shrine of the martyrs where he was supposed to meet her. How could Augustine keep his eye dry at such a pitiful sight? In Rome he taught, fell sick, and was nursed by a Manichee in whose house he was living. But one year later, through Symmachus, the great Roman rhetor and the champion of paganism against Ambrose (his cousin), Augustine won a contest and was appointed as an Imperial Rhetor in Milan, the residence of the Emperor.

Augustine was now able to support his family and let Monica join him again. A group of African friends, including Romanianus, an old benefactor of Thagaste, gathered around him. Augustine liked company and needed friendship. However after a while he was disgusted with the job of praising political men whom he despised and decided to resign, alleging his poor throat. Actually he was taking a new orientation, and preparing to enter the Imperial administration. He was well prepared for it by his literary education, and he knew how powerful even the lowest officer in the Administration could be. Dignified tax-payers like his patron, Romanianus were obliged to beg their mercy and pity with tears.

But one more step was necessary before Augustine could reach his goal. The world of the Roman Administration belonged to a higher class of society, wealthy and cultured, which was not open to common people. But these families were not unwilling to integrate through marriage a highly cultured and promising man. This way was open to Augustine.

Monica dismissed the concubine, who left for Africa swearing that she would never know a man again. She managed a marriage with an heiress for her son. But since the girl was too young, Augustine, who could not wait for two years, took a mistress. In fact he was never to marry the heiress, but converted to the life of a servant of God.

Many condemn Monica as having been hard on the concubine and imperative in the affairs of her son.(62) In their opinion, Monica saw in the dismissal of the concubine the possibility to reach all her ends: the marriage of her son allowed his baptism and the satisfaction of her old desire to get rid of the woman he loved. As evidence for Augustine's weakness toward his mother and sadness to lose his concubine, there are his tears at her dismissal.

Of course this reconstitution omits an important item. Augustine knew that he had to renounce his concubine when he decided to get married. Therefore, in spite of his tears, he was willing to accept the dismissal of the poor woman. It had always been his intention to dismiss her in the event he would find the right party. The concubine knew it, although she hoped it would never happen.

There is no better analysis of the situation than what we find in De bono conjugali concerning free union: a man and a woman who are not married live together not for the purpose of begetting children, but because they cannot practise continence. If they promise to be faithful to each other says Augustine, it is not absurd, to consider this union as a marriage. Augustine insists that their union should be accepted as lasting forever and that they should not use criminal means to prevent generation or to destroy progeny. If this union is intended to last only for awhile, until one of them finds the suitable partner with rank and wealth, it is adulterous. However, if the woman is faithful and willing to beget children she is not adulterous, but she is only the victim of hard treatment as a concubine because she is not a married woman. She may in fact be better than many married women who use marriage only for the purpose of satisfying their lust lawfully.

If our hypothesis is right, Monica acted as a good middle-class woman who was ambitious for her son, I see no evidence of hatred for the concubine, and to say more in either direction is pure invention. Further, to see in Monica a domineering woman is hazardous as long as the weakness of Augustine has not been proved. We know that Augustine resisted her in many ways as long as he was a Manichee. In addition, Augustine's weakness was not one which was related to his mother. After he had been seduced by the higher ideals of Christianity as exemplified in the Life of Anthony or as expressed by Paul, he felt very weak indeed. He felt unequal to the struggle because his conversion was not ordinary but was a conversion to the higher standards of Christian life, to the life of a servant of God living in meditation and continence. The grace of God enabled him to take this step. Between the hypothesis of the mother-complex and the reality of the conversion of Augustine, the distance is that between one made a eunuch by the hand of men and one made a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. (Mat. 19-12).

Augustine was pleased indeed to tell the good news of his conversion to Monica, and to give her the joy of his baptism. Finally, at Ostia a few days before her death, they shared in a kind of ecstasy which they considered as a foretaste of eternal life. She was a happy mother, and she did not ask for more. She did not resent leaving her body in Italy.

Augustine and Women

In later life, Augustine related to women as a servant of God and as a bishop. As bishop, he extended pastoral care to men and women with equal zeal and charity. His sister founded a convent for women at Hippo, which was a source of joy and consolation for him in his constant struggles for the Church. When a crisis of authority threatened the peace of the convent after her death, he wrote to the community and his epistle can be considered as the earliest extant rule for nuns. He wrote on virginity and on widowhood, and many(63) of his epistles are addressed to particular women in need of spiritual advice, especially to widows. One of them is addressed to the mother of Demetriades, a young Patrician virgin who renounced the world to embrace religious life. Her gesture won praise from all over the world, even from the holy man Pelagius, but Augustine exhorted her to humility.(64) The most moving epistle of all Is probably the one in which he accepts and promises to wear a dress which a woman made for her brother, a cleric who had experienced an early death.(65)

However, because he was a "servant of God" on the episcopal seat, he behaved like a monk — even as a bishop. This is particularly important for his relations with women. He made a rule for himself never to visit a convent of women unless for cogent reasons, never to accept an invitation to dinner in the town, never to attend a wedding, never to talk to a woman unless in the presence of witnesses, and never to tolerate that a woman, even a relative or a holy reputable woman live under his roof, as the canons of the Church permitted.(66) He turned the bishopric into a monastery where he lived with his priests according to the ideals of community life.(67) This innovation was destined to become an Important institution in the Western Church, All human considerations such as the fear of sex or the frustration of the mother-complex fall short in measuring Augustine's case. The proper answer is that like many others in the Early Christianity, including Pelagius, he became a "servant of God" dedicated to a life of continence and contemplation.

Augustine on Marriage

To deal with Augustine's teachings on marriage itself, grace and sin would take us too far. What is relevant here is Augustine's appreciation of marriage and his manner of dealing with married people as a pastor.

Laying aside the extraordinary situations of divorced people, or of couples in deep disagreement because of differences on continence or faith, it is still possible according to the Augustinian perspective to ask whether conjugal intercourse is perfectly pure or whether it is usually the occasion of at least a small sin. Augustine insists on the persistence after baptism of concupiscence, a disorder of the flesh inherited from Adam together with original sin. Concupiscence heavily affects the exercise of sexual life. On the other hand it seems that no human act, even virtuous deeds, can escape some measure of imperfection or of sin since our acts should be motivated by a pure love of God and of His Will. In spite of these positions, which seem to prove the radical pessimism of Augustine and even a persistence of Manicheism in him, the practical conclusions which we expect are not drawn by him.

In De bono conjugali he says that in a lawful marriage intercourse with the intention of begetting children is perfect and not sinful at all.(68) Let us presume that he means what he says, and that this also belongs to his system. Certainly Augustine knows that many couples while still young actually desire offspring. It was even more true in Antiquity with the large proportion of early deaths. The question relative to the pleasure attached to intercourse is different: according to the philosophy of his time Augustine holds that pleasure as a companion and an incentive of the good, can be desired together with the good, but should not itself become the purpose of our acts.(69)

What now about the question of excess in pleasure attached to sex, if the purpose of the couple is pleasure and not offspring? In this case, reasoning as a Stoic, Augustine sees a disorder in relation to the natural law.(70) But the same natural law suggests the answer: there is a small sin, indeed, but not a grevious one. The act occurs within the limits of lawful marriage, which sexual activity protects against dissolution.(71) Thereby conjugal fidelity is maintained, and the procreation of children encouraged. The couple assumes their responsibility as parents, a very noble task. Age, and the difficulties of life will teach them more gravity and temperance. God's providence thus takes advantage of human weakness for its own purposes.(72)

A last question: what if criminal devices are used to prevent the formation or continuance of the fetus? Augustine clearly condemns such a marriage as a prostitution, although he recognizes that the wife may not bear the same guilt as the husband. And he condemns the evil character of the device, which seems to have been brutal and often lethal for the mother as well as the fetus.(73)

In retrospect, it appears that Augustine's judgment on marriage was not so pessimistic after all and that his approach was very pastoral. He was able to understand couples who had problems, and exhort them in a way which did not condemn their sexual activity even when it was excessive or not consciously aligned with the will of God. He was aware of the importance of maintaining the unity of marriage. His doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage supported this concern, and was adamant only against criminal action. We can conclude that couples were better off going to Augustine for advice than to Pelagius, who was less understanding of human weakness.

CHRYSOSTOM

Chrysostom is comparable to Augustine in pastoral zeal, and with him we close our inquiry concerning women in conjugal life in Early Christianity. Among other interesting texts of Chrysostom, we select his Homily 20 on Ephesians 5:22-24 (74)

The origin of Eve from Adam is a figure of the bond of love between husband and wife. This love is rooted in nature, and is stronger than the link binding us to father, mother, brother and sister, since a man leaves his parents in order to join his wife and be one flesh with her (Gen. 2:24). Chysostom interprets according to the pattern of the union between Christ and the Church two complementary statements: the subjection of the wife to her husband, and the love of the husband for his wife. The subjection of the wife is her way to obey the Lord. It is also the condition of obedience and order in the house since children and servants will follow her example, and the harmony of the house will raise respect and admiration among neighbours and friends. In return, a husband must love his wife as Christ loves the Church. Love, diligent care, and devotion unto death to his wife can win her obedience but fear cannot, because fear belongs to a servant: The partner of one's life, Chrysostom says, the mother of one's children, the foundation of one's every joy, one ought never to chain down by fear and menaces, but with love and good temper. For what sort of union is that, where the wife trembles at her husband? And what sort of pleasure will the husband himself enjoy if he dwells with hie wife as with a slave, and not as with a free woman? Yea, though you should suffer anything on her account, do not upbraid her; for neither did Christ do this.

A husband should be ready to suffer from his wife because of her defects without manifesting aversion or hatred. Didn't Christ love the Church when we were sinners and far from Him? A husband should not blame or praise his wife for her ugliness or her beauty: they are not her own work, but that of God. He should appreciate the beauty of her soul, which can improve with age and endure forever, rather than physical beauty which passes away with the bloom or loses its power of seduction because of habit. And one should not marry a wife for her wealth, or the prestige of her family, but for that true nobility which belongs to the soul.

When we say "the flesh", Chrysostom adds, we actually include a third person, the child, who requires love and care, and for whose sake parents are ready to spend lavishly:-Behold again a third ground of obliga-tion; for he shows that a man leaving them that begat him, and from whom he was born, is knit to his wife; and that then the one flesh is, father, and mother, and the child, from the sub-stance of the two commingled- For indeed by the commingling of their seeds is the child produced, so that the three are one flesh.

The delicate harmony between reverence and love supposes the existence of a ruling power, which belongs to the husband, since a family is a small kingdom and not a democracy: Not for the husband's sake alone is it thus said, but for the wife's too, that "he cherish her as his own flesh," as Christ also the Church, and, "that the wife fear her husband." He is no longer setting down the duties of love only, but what? "That she fear her husband." The wife is a second authority; let not her then demand equality, for she is under the head; nor let him despise her as being in subjection, for she is the body; and if the head despise the body, it will, itself also perish. But let him bring in love on his part as a count er-poise to obedience on her part . For example, let the hands and the feet, and all the rest of the members be given up for service to the head, but let the head provide for the body, seeing it contains every sense in itself. Nothing can be better than this union. And yet how can there ever be love, one may say, where there is fear? It will exist there I say, preeminently. For she that fears and reverences, loves. also; and she that loves, fears and reverences him as being the head, and loves him as being a member, since the head is a member of the body at large. Hence the Apostle places the one in subjection, and the other in authority, that there be peace; for where there is equal authority there can never be peace; neither where a house is a democracy, nor where all are rulers; but the ruling referring to the body, inasmuch as when men are spirituaI, there will be peace...

And why so? Because the Apostle would rather that this principle prevail, this namely of love; for where this exists, everything else follows, of course, but though she be not a very obedient one, still will bear with everything. So difficult and impracticable is unanimity, where persons are not bound together by that love which is founded in supreme authority; at all events, fear will not necessarily effect this. Accordingly, the Apostle dwells the more upon lovet which is the strong tie. And the wife though seeming to be the loser in that she was charged to fear, is the gainer, because the principal duty, love, is charged upon the husband. "But what, " one may say, "if a wife reverence me not?" Never mind, you are to love, fulfil your own duty. For though that which is due from others may not follow, we ought of course to do our duty. This is an example of what I mean. The Apostle says, "submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of Christ." And what then if another submit not himself? Still obey you the law of God. Just so, I say, it is also here. Let the wife at least, though she be not loved, still reverence notwithstanding, that nothing may lie at her door; and let the husband, though his wife reverence him not, still be not want ing in any point . For each has received his own... However, when you hear of "fear", demand that fear which becomes a free woman, not as though you were exacting it of a slave. For she is your own body; and if you do this, you reproach yourself in dishonoring your own body. And of what nature is this "fear"? It is the not contradicting, the not rebelling, the not being fond of preeminence, It is enough that fear be kept within these bounds. But if you love, as you are commanded, you will make it net greater. Or rather it will not any longer be by fear that you will be doing this, but love itself will have its effect. The [female] sex is somehow weaker, and needs much support, much condescension. " A large authority, actually, belongs to the wife: the authority over children, servants, the whole house. This authority is made easier when wife and husband live in harmony. Husband and wife should trust each other, and discard jealousy and suspicion. But the husband should spend his time with his wife rather than with his friends: No, nor on any account let the husband ever render himself worthy of any suspicion whatever. For what, tell me, what if you shall devote yourself all the day to your friends, and give the evening to your wife, but not even thus be able to content her, and place her out of reach of suspicion? Though your wife complain, yet be not annoyed -- it is her love, not her folly ~- they are the complaints of fervent attachment, and burning affection, and fear. Yes, she is afraid lest any one have injured her in that which is the summit of her blessings, lest any one have taken away from her him who is her head, lest any one have broken through her marriage chamber. There is also another ground of petty jealousy. Let neither claim too much service of the servants, neither the husband from the maid-servant, nor the wife from the man-servant.

The wife, in return, should not humiliate her husband in the way she speaks to him, especially when they are poor. She should not, if they are poor, be too interested in jewelry.

Chrysostom thinks that in wedding parties decency and moderation are a better beginning for a couple than licentiousness and extravagance, which incite a young and inexperienced wife to indulge herself in disorderly thoughts and desires. She should be happy enough with a husband who loves and admires her, and is able to express these feelings: Show her that you set a high value on her company, and that you are more desirous to be at home for her sake, than in the market-place. And esteem her before all your friends, and above the children that are born. If she does any good act, praise and admire it; if any foolish one, and such as girls may chance to do , advise her and remind her.

Prayer in common, and going to church together, including afterwards talking about what was read or said, are good ways of sharing; and the consideration of the example of holy men and women of Scripture can help in times of poverty and difficulty. The husband should teach his wife not to say "mine", but "ours", holding to the consideration that he himself belongs to her, and all his possessions. He should never talk to her roughly, but with respect, kindness and love. If he honours her, she will not need honour from others. Such is the wisdom suitable to husband and wife, and their way to please

Footnotes

(17) D.S. Bailey, Sexual Relation in Christian Thought (New York, 1959); J.P.V.D. Baldson, Roman Women: Their History and Habits (London, 1962); K.E. Borresen, Subordination et equivalence. Nature et role de la femme d'apres Augustin et Thomas d'Aquin (Oslo and Paris, 1968); J.-P. Broudehoux, Mariage etfamitte chez Clement d'Alexandrie; V. L. Bullough,The Subordinate Sex: A History of Attitudes Towards Women(Urbana, 1973); J. Donaldson,Women: Her Position and Influence in Ancient Greece and Rome, and Among the Early Christians (London, 1907); L. Epstein, The Jewish Marriage: A Study in the Status of the Woman in Jewish Law(New York, 1973); L. Goodwater, Women in Antiquity: an Annotated Bibliography(Metuchen, 1975); J. Hauptman, Images of Women in the Talmud" in Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in the Jewish and Christian Traditions, edited by R.R. Ruether (New York, 1974), pp. 184-212; C. Hermann. Le rôle judiciaire de to femme sous to République Romaine (Latomus 67, Bruxelles, 1964); M. Humbert, La remariage à Rome: Etude christZichend'histoire juridique et sociale (Milano, 1972); B. Koetting, Die Beurteitung der sweiten Ehe im heidnishchen und christlichen Altertum (Bonn, 1943); P. de Labriolle, "Un épisode de l'histoire de la morale chrétienne, la lutte de Tertullien contre les secondes noces," Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne 154 (1907): 362-388; J. Leipoldt, Die Frau in der antiken welt and im Urchristentum (Leipzig, 1954); E.D. Mansfield, Legal Rights, Liabilities and Dutiesn of Woman: With an Introductory History of their Legal Condition in the Hebrew, Roman, and Feudal Civil Systems (Salem, Massachusetts, 1845); J. Marquardt, La vie privée des romains,translated by V. Henry, t. I. (Paris, 1892); J. Neussner, A History of the Mishnaic Law of women, 5 vols. (Leiden, 1980) Note particularly "Property Arrangements" (for women), pp. 204-205, 223, 262-267; S.B. Pomeroy, Goddesses, Whores, and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity (New York, 1975); S.B. Pomeroy, "Selected Bibliography of Women in Antiquity," Arethusa 6 (Spring, 1973): 125-157; C. Preaux, "Le status de la femme à l'époque hellénistique, principalement en Egypte,"Recueits de la Société Jean Bodin vol.II La femme (Paris, 1959), pp. 127-175; R.R. Ruether, ed., Religion and Sexism: Images of Women in the Jewish and Christian Traditions (New York, 1974), pp. 150-183; D. Schaps, "Women and Property Control in Classical and Hellenistic Greece " (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1972). C. Vatin, Recherches sur to mariage et la condition de la femme mariée à l'époque hellénistique (Paris, 1970); V. Zinserling, Women in Greece and Rome (New York, 1973).

(18) R.R. Ruether, Liberation Theology(New York, 1972), pp. 95-115.

(19) A New American Bible.

(20) The 1964 English Ritual (Collegeville, 1964), pp. 370 - 372 cf. K. Ritzer,Le mariage dans les Eglises chrétiennes du Ie au Xe siècles, (Paris), pp. 427-428.

(21) Tertullian, De exhortatione castitatis 9 (CCL 2, pp.1027-1029; ANF 4, p. 55); De anima 27 (ANF 4, p. 207).

(22) p. Nautin, Lettres et Ecrivains chrétiens des lie et Ille siècles (Paris, 1961), pp. 21-32.

(23) See the opinions of heterodox teachers gathered by Clement of Alexandria in Stromaton III (LCC 2, pp. 40-92).

(24) Homily on I Timothy 9. 1 (PG 62, 543C-545B; LNPF 13, series 2, p. 436).

(25) Justin, Apology I. 17. 19 (PG 6, 353-357; ANF 1, pp. 168-169).

(26) Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians 11 (PG 6,`\912; ANF 2, p. 134.

(27) lbid., 33. (PG 6, 966; ANF 2, p. 146); cf. Tertullian De cult u femznarum. II. 9 (CCL 1, p. 364; ANF 4, pp.22-23)

(28) Tatian, Address to the Greeks32, 33 (PG 6, 872-876; ANF 2, pp. 78-79); Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians. 33 (PG 6, 966; ANF 2, pp. 146-147); Tertullian De cultu feminarum 11. 9 (CCL 1, p. 364; ANF 4, pp. 22-23).

(29) Tertullian, De Monogamia 4 (CCL 2, p. 1233; ANF 4, pp. 61-62).

(30) Tertullian, De vetandis virginibus 12-14 (CCL 2, p. 1221; ANF 4, pp. 33-36).

(31) Tertullian, De exhortatione castitatis 12 (CCL 2, p. 1031; ANF 4, pp. 56-57).

(32) Tertullian, De monogamia 10 (CCL 2, p. 1242-1244; ANF 4, pp. 55-56).

(33) Tertullian, De baptismo 17 (CCL 1, pp. 291-292; ANF 3, p . 677) .

(34) Tertullian, De cuttueminarum I . 4. 8, II. 5 (CCL 1, pp. 347, 350, 358; ANF 4, pp. 16, 20-21.

(35) Tertullian, Ad uxorem I. 3 (CCL 1, p. 375; ANF 4, pp45-46).

(36) 1bid., II. 9 (CCL 1, p. 393; ANF 4, p. 48).

(37) 0epke, "Woman" (Gyne), in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. by Kittel, vol. I, pp. 776-785; J. Leípoldt,Die Frau in antiken Welt und in Urchristentum (Leipzig, 1955); L. Henrion, La conception de la nature et du role de la femme chez les philosophes cyniques et stoiciens (Ph.D. dissertation, Liege, 1942-1943); H.A. Físchel, "Studies in Cynicism and the ancient Near East: The Transformation of a Ghria," in Studies in Ancient Religion in Honour of E. R. Goodenough (Leiden, 1968), pp. 372-411.

(38) 1 Timothy 4:3.

(39) P Hautin, Lettres et Ecrivains chrétiens des lie et IIIe siêctes, op. cit., pp. 16-18.

(40) Testamentum Domini23,Latin translation by I.E. Rahmani (Mainz, 1899), p. 47. Translated by J. Cooper and A.J. Maclean, The Testament of the Lord (Edinburg 1902), p. 76; Gregory the Great, "To Augustine of Canterbury, Quaestion 10," Ep. XI. 44.

(41) Tertullian De monogamia14. 15 (CCL 2, pp. 1249-1251; ANF 4, pp. 70-72); De pudicitia2 (CCL 2, p. 1285; ANF 4, pp. 75-77).

(42) Tertullían, Ad uxorem I. 2 (CCL 1 p. 374; ANF 4, pp. 39-40); De exhortations castitatis 7(CCL 2, pp. 1024-1025; ANF 4, pp. 52-53).

(43) R.B. Tollinton, Clement of Alexandria: A Study in Christian Liberalism,2 vols. (London, 1914), especially vol. I pp. 270-302; J.P. Broudehoux Mariage et famille chez Clément d'Alexandrie (Paris, 1970),passim,especially pp. 13-14.

(44) G.W. Forell, History of Christian Ethics,vol I (Minneapolis, 1979) pp. 61-74; J.P. BVroudehoux, Marriage et famille chex Clement d'Alexandrie, op cit., pp. 112, 172-193.

(45) Matthew 19:15-22.

(46) Clement of Alexandria, St romaton VI. 12 (GCS 15, p. 482; ANF 2, p. 503).

(47) ibid., II. 23 (GCS 15, pp. 188-193; ANF2, pp. 377-378

(48) Stromata III and VII are translated by J.E.C. Oulton and H. Chadwick in LCC 2. ,

(49) Clement of Alexandria, Stromaton III. 12. 82-83 (GCS 15, pp. 233-234; LCC 2, p. 79).

(50) Clement of Alexandria, St romaton III. 7. 58 (GCS 15, p. 222; LCC 2, p. 67).

51Clement of Alexandria, Instructor II. 2. 33 (SCH 108, pp. 70-72; ANF 2, p. 246).

(52) Ibid., II 7. 53-54 (SCH 108, pp. 110-112; ANF 2. pp. 251-252

(53) Tertullian, De cuttu feminarum II. 5-8 (CCL 1, pp. 357-362; ANF 4, pp. 19-22; P. Wendland,Questiones Musonianae,PhD dissertation in philology (Berlin, 1886); m. Spanneut, Le Stoicísme des Pères de t5E?Zise de Clément de Rome à Clément d'Alexandrie(Paris, 1957, p. 107-112.

Please, credit this document
as published by www.ministryforwomen.org!