On Widows

[7] So a widow is defined not by bodily abstinence only, but is marked out by virtue; and it is not I who give her precepts, but the Apostle who bestows them. Nor am I alone in paying her honour; the Teacher of the Gentiles first gave it, saying: “Honour widows who are true widows. But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let her learn first to rule her own house and to make a return to her parents.” From this we notice that both affections of piety ought to be in a widow, that she should love her children and show deference to her parents. So, while she repays obedience to her parents, she exercises a teacher's office toward her children, and is rewarded by her own dutifulness, since what she offers to others profits herself. [8] “For this,” he says, “is acceptable before God.” Therefore, widow, if you think on the things that are God's, you ought to follow what you have learned pleases God. And earlier indeed the holy Apostle, exhorting widows to the pursuit of continence, said that they think on the things that are the Lord's. But elsewhere, where a widow who has been proved is chosen, she is bidden not only to think on but also to hope in the Lord: “For she who is truly a widow,” he says, “and left alone, let her hope in God, and continue in supplications and prayers day and night.” And not without reason did he show that they must be irreproachable, on whom, as a work of virtue is enjoined, so also abundant honour is conferred, so that they are honoured even by bishops. [9] And what sort of woman ought to be chosen is described in the words of the Teacher himself: “Not less than sixty years old, who has been the wife of one husband.” Not that old age alone makes a widow, but that the merits of widowhood are the wages of old age. For certainly she is more illustrious who tames the heat of youth and the glowing ardour of a younger age, desiring neither a husband's favour nor the richer delights of children, than she who, already worn out in body, in cold old age, ripe in years, can neither glow with pleasures nor hope for childbirth. [10] Nor, indeed, if a woman has fallen into a second marriage, which the apostolic precepts certainly do not condemn, is she kept away from the devotion of widowhood, as though the fruit of modesty had been lost, if she is again released from her husband. She will indeed have the merit of chastity, though late; but she will be more approved who has not experienced marriage with another; for in her the pursuit of chastity stands out, while for the other either old age or shame seems to have set a limit to marrying. [11] Yet bodily chastity alone is not the strength of a widow, but a great and most fruitful discipline of virtue: “who has testimony for good works, if she has brought up children, if she has received strangers, if she has washed the feet of the saints, if she has ministered to those who suffer tribulation, if, finally, she has followed every good work.” You see how many disciplines of virtue he has included: first, the duty of piety; second, the pursuit of hospitality and the service of humility; third, the ministry of mercy and the help of liberality; in sum, he required the performance of every good work. [12] And therefore he thinks younger widows are to be avoided, because they cannot fulfil the work of so great a virtue. For youth is near to falls, because it is inflamed by the heat of various desires in the fervour of a glowing age; and it belongs to a good teacher to keep away the material of sin. For the first discipline of instruction is to turn away fault, the second to pour in virtue. Yet since the Apostle knew that Anna, a widow from her youth to the age of eighty, had become a herald of the Lord's works, I do not think he meant that younger women should be called back from the devotion of widowhood, especially since he said: “It is better to marry than to burn.” For he urged marriage as a remedy, so that the woman about to perish might be healed; he did not prescribe it as a choice, so that the continent woman should not follow chastity; for it is one thing to help one who is falling, another to urge virtue. [13] And why should I speak of human judgments, when by the divine judgments the Jews are said to have offended the Lord in nothing more gravely than in violating the favour due to widows and the rights of minors? This cause is condemned by the voices of the prophets as having brought upon the Jews the desert of rejection. This alone is mentioned as a cause that will soften the odium of their offence, if the widow is honoured, and the justice of fair judgment is rendered to minors; for so you have it: “Judge for the orphan and justify the widow; and come, let us reason together, says the Lord.” And elsewhere: “He will take up the orphan and the widow.” And elsewhere: “Blessing I will bless her widow,” in which the figure of the Church too is foreshadowed. You see, then, holy widows, that the office which is honoured with the support of divine blessing must by no means be deserted through slippery desire.

[67] We say, then, that widows do not lack means, being accustomed to give, nor help, since by them the resources of men have often been defended in the greatest dangers; that the duties of a husband are also easily made up to them by sons-in-law or by relatives; that the divine mercy too is readier toward them; and therefore, since no cause for marrying appears, the desire should be absent. [68] This, however, we say as counsel; we do not command it as a precept, encouraging the widow rather than binding her; for we do not forbid second marriages, but we do not advise them. For the consideration of weakness is one thing, the grace of chastity another. I say more: we do not forbid second marriages, but we do not approve marriages often repeated; for not everything that is lawful is expedient: “All things are lawful for me,” says the Apostle, “but not all things are helpful.” It is lawful to drink wine, but to drink much is not seemly. [69] It is lawful, then, to marry, but it is more beautiful to abstain; for there are bonds in marriage. Do you wish to know what bonds? “The woman who is under a husband is bound to the law while her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of the husband.” It is proved, then, that marriage is a bond, by which the woman is bound and loosed. The grace of mutual love is good, but the servitude is greater. “For the woman does not have power over her own body, but the husband.” And lest this servitude perhaps seem to you to belong not to marriage but to sex: “Likewise the husband does not have power over his own body, but the wife.” How great, then, is the constraint of marriage, which subjects even the stronger to the other! For each serves the other by mutual constraint. Nor may the temperate withdraw his head from the yoke, since he must serve the other's intemperance. “You were bought with a price,” he says; “do not become slaves of men.” You see how plain is the definition of servitude for the married. It is not I who say this, but the Apostle; nor he, but Christ who spoke in him. And he defined this servitude in the case of good spouses. For above you have this: “The unbelieving husband is sanctified through the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through the believing husband.” And below: “But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart. A brother or sister is not given over to servitude in such cases.” If, then, a good marriage is servitude, what is a bad marriage, when they cannot sanctify but destroy each other? [70] But as we exhort widows to the grace of virtue, so too we call women to the discipline of the Church; for the Church consists of all. Though it is Christ's flock, some in it are fed with pasture, others are still nourished with milk; and these must beware of those wolves who hide in sheep's clothing, putting forward a show of abstinence but provoking to the foulness of incontinence. For since they know how heavy the burdens of chastity are, though they themselves cannot touch them with their little fingers, they exact them from others beyond measure, while they themselves cannot keep even a measure, but sink under an unjust burden. For the measure of the load ought to follow the measure of the bearer; otherwise the load imposed falls where the bearer is weak; for even stronger food chokes the throats of infants. [71] And therefore, as the strength of a multitude of carriers is not estimated by the strength of a few, nor yet is a limit set for the stronger on account of the weakness of others, but each is left free to take up as much load as he desires, the abundance of the reward growing with the increase of virtue, so too a noose is not to be thrown on women, nor is the burden of a heavier abstinence beyond their strength to be laid on them; but it is to be left to each to weigh herself, not compelled by any authority of precept, but called forth by the increase of grace. And therefore different rewards are set before different virtues. Nor is one thing censured so that another may be praised; but all are praised, so that the better may be preferred.

[86] But perhaps to some it may seem that marriages should be repeated for the sake of having children. But if the desire for children is the cause of marrying, certainly where there is the fruit of children the cause is lacking. And yet what sort of counsel is it to wish to try again a fertility tried in vain, or to undergo the childlessness you have already borne? For this is the cause of repeating marriage for those who have no children. [87] Then she who had children and lost them (for her the striving is greater, since she has the hope of bearing), does she not seem to herself, amid the very covenants of the repeated marriage, to be weaving the funerals of the children she lost? Will she not suffer again what she seeks again, and does she not shudder at the very tombs of her hopes, the images of the bereavements she received, the noise of lamentations? Or when the night is led in with lighted torches, does she not think that the obsequies of a funeral procession, rather than a bridal chamber, are being prepared? Why then, daughter, do you seek again the sorrows you fear, rather than look for the children you no longer hope for? If the grief is heavy, its cause should be avoided, not sought. [88] For what counsel shall I give you who have children? What cause have you for marrying? Perhaps the error of levity, and the habit of intemperance, and the consciousness of a wounded heart compels you. But counsel is given to the sober, not to the drunk; and therefore my word is addressed to the free conscience, in which both are sound. Let the wounded woman have a remedy, the honourable one counsel. You, I say, daughter, what are you attempting? Why do you seek heirs from outside when you have your own? You do not desire children, whom you have, but servitude, which you do not have. For this is true servitude, in which love is weaker, which is not commended by the pledge of an untouched virginity, nor by the first age full of holy modesty and grace; where offence is more grievous, insolence more suspected, concord rarer, which no love grown through time, no beauty flourishing in its years, wins. Family duty becomes a burden, so that you fear to love your children and blush to look at them; and the cause of discord arises from that which usually soothes the mutual love of parents. You wish to bear children who will not be brothers of your own children but their adversaries. What, then, is bearing other children but despoiling the children you have, from whom both the duties of piety and the gains of property are alike taken away? [89] The divine law bound spouses to each other by heavenly authority, and even so mutual love remains with difficulty. For he took a rib from the man and formed the woman, so as to join them to each other, saying: “And the two shall be in one flesh.” He said this not of second, but of first marriages; for neither did Eve receive a second husband, nor did the holy Church acknowledge a second husband: “For this is a great mystery, in Christ and in the Church”; and therefore it is to be guarded. Nor did Isaac know any wife but Rebecca, nor did he bury his father Abraham with any wife but Sarah. [90] For in holy Rachel there was rather the figure of a mystery than the order of marriage. And yet in her too we have something we can refer to the grace of the first marriage: that he loved more the one he first had as his betrothed, and neither did deceit shut out his affection, nor did the intervention of another marriage abolish his love for his betrothed. So the holy patriarch taught us how much we ought to defer to first marriages, since he himself deferred so much to his first betrothal. Beware, then, daughters, lest you be unable to keep the grace of marriage and also increase its troubles.