Original Douay–Rheims Annotations1 Timothy 5

Widows indeed.

S. Ambrose calleth them widows and desolate indeed, that might marry, but to make themselves better and more worthy of God, refuse marriage, which they know to be but once blessed, imitating ^{[1] [2]} holy Anne, who in fasting and prayers served God night and day, never knowing but one husband. Such professed widows then are to be honoured and succoured. Neither doth he speak only of the Church's widows (of whom specially afterward) but of all that by profession kept their widowhood, exhorting them to pass their time in prayer and fasting. v. 5. Which was an honourable and holy state much written of, and commended in the primitive Church, namely by S. Ambrose and by S. Augustine, who wrote books entitled thereof, and make it next to virginity. Ambr. de viduit. August. de bono viduitatis.

• 1 Widowhood
• 2 Ambr. in hunc loc. Luc. c. 2, 37.

He hath denied.

Not that by this or by any other deadly sin (except incredulity or doubtfulness in belief) they lose their faith: but that their facts be not answerable to their faith and to Christian religion, which prescribeth all such duties.

Let a widow be chosen.

^◦ Now he speaketh more particularly and specially of such widows as were nourished and found by the oblations of the faithful & the alms of the Church, and did withal some necessary services about women that were to be professed or baptized, for their instruction and addressing to that and other Sacraments, and also about the sick and impotent: and withal sometimes they had charge of the Church goods or the disposition of them under the Deacons: in respect whereof they also and the like are called Diaconissæ. Eusebius li. 6. c. 35. reciteth out of Cornelius Epistle, that in the Church of Rome there is one Bishop, 40. Priests, six Deacons, seven Subdeacons, Acoluthi 42, Exorcists, Lectors, and Ostiarii 52, widows together with the poor 150, all which God nourisheth in his Church. See Act. Apost. c. 6. S. Chrysostom li. 3. de Sacerdotio propius finem. S. Epiphanius in hæresi 79 Collyridianorum. Now then, what manner of women should be taken into the fellowship of such as were found of the Church, he further declareth.

• ◦ Widows called Diaconissæ, & their office.

The wife of one husband.

^[1] If you would have a plain pattern of Heretical fraud, corruption, and adulteration of the native sense of God's word, and an invincible demonstration that these new Glossers have their consciences seared and hearts obdurated, willingly perverting the Scriptures against that which they know is the meaning thereof, to the maintenance of their sects: mark well their handling of this place about these widows of the Church. S. Paul prescribeth such only to be admitted as have been the wives of one husband, that is to say, once only married, not admitting any that hath been twice married. By which words the Catholics prove ^[2] first, that the like phrase ^[3] used before of Bishops and Deacons, that they should be the husbands of one wife, must needs signify that they cannot be twice married, nor admitted to these and the like functions, if they were more than once married before. ^[4] Secondly, we prove by this place against the Adversaries, that the state of widowhood is more worthy, honorable, decent, and pure in respect of the service of the Church, and more to be relieved of the revenues thereof, than the state of married folks, and that not only (as the Adversaries perhaps may answer) for their greater necessity, or more leisure, freedom, or expedition to serve, in that they be not cumbered with husband and household, but in respect of their vidual continency, chastity, and purity. For else such as were widows with intention and freedom to marry afterward, might have been admitted by the Apostle, as well as those that were never to marry again.

• 1 These widows must have had but one husband: whereof many Catholic conclusions are deduced.
• 2 1
• 3 c. 3, 2.
• 4 2

^◦

Thirdly, we prove that second marriage not only after admission to the alms or service of the Church, but before also, is disagreeable and a sign of incontinency or more lust and fleshliness than is agreeable or comely for any person belonging to the Church: and consequently, that the Apostle in the last chapter treating of the holy functions of Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and of the Church's refusing generally bigamos or twice married persons, must needs much more mean that no man twice married should be received to Holy Orders: and further, that as none were admitted to be widows of the Church, that ever intended to marry again, so none should ever be received to minister the Sacraments (which is a thing infinitely more, and requireth more purity: and continency than the office or state of the said widows,) that intended to marry again. To receive the body of Christ (saith S. Hierom in Apolog. pro lib. cont. Iovin. ep. 50. c. 6. ) is a greater and holier thing than prayer, and therefore Priests that must both continually pray and also be occupied about the receiving or ministering the holy Sacrament daily, must live continently. ^[1] Fourthly, we prove that it is not unlawful to annex, by precept or the party's promise, single life or chastity to a whole state or order of the faithful, because the Apostle & the whole Church in his time joined to this state of the Church's widows, perpetual continency. ^[2] Fifthly, we prove hereby that to refuse and not to accept the twice married or such as will not live single, into the state of widows or Holy Orders, is not to condemn or forbid second marriage, or once & often marrying, with the Manichees according to the doctrine of Devils, as the Protestants (and before them the old condemned Iovinianists) do blaspheme the Church. For then did S. Paul allow and teach doctrine of Devils, who refuseth a twice married woman, and bindeth others by their entering into this state, never to marry again: as no doubt he did the Clergy men much more in the 3. chapter before. Thus lo we Catholics confer & conster the Scriptures, & for this meaning we have all the Doctors without exception. What shift then have the Heretics here? For marry and remarry they must, let the Scriptures & all the Doctors in the world say nay to it. In truth they do not expound the word of God, but flee from the evidence of it, some one way & some another.

• 1 4
• 2 5
• ◦ 3

And of all other, their extremest and most shameful tergiversation is, that the Apostle here forbiddeth ^[1] not the admission of such widows as have been twice married, but only them that have had two husbands at once. which was a very unprobable and extorted exposition before, concerning Bishops and deacons. c. 3. and (as S. Hierom saith ep. 83.) malo nodo malus cuneus: ^[2] but here that an exception should be made only against widows that had had two husbands together (which was a thing never lawful nor never heard of) that is a most intolerable impudency, and a construction that never came to any wise man's cogitation before: and yet these their fancies must be God's word, and bigamus or bigamia must against their old natures and use of all writers, be all one with Polygamus and Polygamia. They give an example of such widows, in women divorced justly from their husbands in the old law. As though S. Paul here took order for the Jews' widows only, or that had been such a common case among the Jews also, that the Apostle needed to take so careful order for it. Finally, ^[3] they let not to say that if the Apostle should be understood to refuse a widow twice married at sundry times, it were unreasonable & injurious to second marriages, which have no more indecency or sign of incontinency (say they) than the first. Thus bold they are with the Apostle and all antiquity.

• 1 Beza upon this place.
• 2 The Calvinists' most absurd exposition of the Apostle's words.
• 3 Their blasphemy against the plain text.

Wanton in Christ.

Widows waxing warm, idle, and well fed by the Church, lust after husbands, as also Apostate-Priests and Superintendents marry, specially after they have gotten good Ecclesiastical livings. Which is to wax wanton in Christ, or against Christ, κατὰ Χριστοῦ. ^◦ The Greek word signifieth to cast off the reins or bridle, that is, the bond or promise of continency which they had put upon them.

• ◦ * καταστρηνιᾶν

They will.

^◦ In the chastity of widowhood or virginity (saith S. Augustine) the excellency of a greater gift is sought for. Which being once desired, chosen, and offered to God by vow, it is not only damnable to enter afterward into marriage, but though it come not actually to marriage, only to have the will to marry is damnable. Aug. li. de bono viduit. cap. 9.

• ◦ The very will to break the vow of chastity, is damnable.

Having damnation.

It signifieth not blame, check, or reprehension of men, as some to make the fault seem less, would have it: but ^◦ judgement or eternal damnation, which is a heavy sentence. God grant all married Priests and Religious may consider their lamentable case. What a grievous sin it is, see S. Ambrose ad virginem lapsam cap. 5. & 8.

• ◦ * κρῖμα

Their first faith.

All the ancient Fathers that ever wrote commentaries upon this Epistle, Greek and Latin, as S. Chrysostom, Theodorete, Oecumenius, Theophylactus, Primasius, S. Ambrose, Ven. Bede, Haimo, Anselm, and the rest: also all others that by occasion use this place, as the 4. Councel of Carthage ca. 104. and the 4. of Toleto c. 55. S. Athanasius li. de virginitate. S. Epiphanius hær. 48. S. Hierom cont. Iovinianum li. 1. c. 7. & in c. 44 Ezech. prope finem. S. Augustine in exceeding many places: all these expound the Apostle's words of the vow of Chastity ^◦ or the faith and promise made to Christ to live continently. What is to break their first faith? saith S. Augustine, They vowed, and performed not. In Ps. 75. prope finem. Again in another place, They break their first faith, that stand not in that which they vowed. Li. de Sancta virgin. c. 33. Again he and all the Fathers with him in Carthage Councel before named: If any widows, how young so ever they were left of their husbands deceased, have vowed themselves to God, left their laical habit, and under the testimony of the Bishop and Church have appeared in religious weed, and afterward go any more to secular marriage, according to the Apostle's sentence they shall be damned, because they were so bold to make void the faith or promise of Chastity which they vowed to our Lord. So saith he and 215 Fathers more in that Councel.

^[1]

And this promise of chastity is called, faith, because the fidelity betwixt married persons is ordinarily called of holy writers, faith: and the vow of chastity made to God, joineth him & the persons so vowing, as it were in marriage, so far, that if the said persons break promise, they are counted and called in the last alleged Councel, God's adulterers. In the 3. to the Romans also and often elsewhere, faith is taken for promise or fidelity. And that it is so taken here, the words irritum facere (to frustrate and make void) do prove. For that term is commonly used in matter of vow, promise, or compact. Gen. 17. Num. 30. ^[2] This promise is called here prima fides (the first faith) in respect of the later promise which vow-breakers make to them with whom they pretend to marry. So saith S. Augustine li. de bono viduit. c. 8. & 9. and Innocentius 1. ep. 2. cap. 13. to. 1. Conc. And this is the only native, evident, and agreeable sense to the circumstance of the letter. ^[3] And the vain evasion of the Heretics to save the Apostate-Monks, Friars, Nuns, and Priests from damnation for their pretended marriages, is frivolous: to wit, that first faith here signifieth the faith of Baptism or Christian belief, & not the promise or vow of Chastity. But we ask them if this faith of Baptism be broken by marriage or no. For the text is plain that by intending to marry, they break their faith, and by breaking their faith they be damned, if they die without repentance. In truth which way so ever they writhe themselves to defend their sacrilege or pretended marriages, they lose their labour and struggle against their own conscience and plain Scripture.

• 1 Why this vow is called faith or fidelity.
• 2 Why the first faith.
• 3 The heretics' exposition of this first faith, impossible & against the text.
• ◦ Breaking of their first faith, is (by the consent of all antiquity) when they break their vow of chastity.

I will the younger.

^[1] He speaketh of such young ones as were yet free. For such as had already made vow, neither could they without damnation marry, were they young or old, nor he without sin command or counsel them to it. Neither (as S. Hierom proveth to ^[2] Gerontia, and S. Chrysostom upon this place) doth he precisely command or counsel the young ones that were free, to marry, or absolutely forbid them to vow chastity: God forbid, say they. But his speech containeth only a wise admonition to the frailer sort, that it were far better for them not to have vowed at all, but to have married again, than to have fallen to adultery and Apostasy after profession. Which is no more but to prefer second marriage before fornication: and a good warning, that they which are to profess, look well what they do. ^[3] S. Paul's experience of the fall of some young ones to marriage, cause him to give this admonition here: as also that before, that none should be received to the Church's alms under threescore years of age. Not forbidding the Church for ever, to accept any vows of widows or virgins till that age, as the Heretics falsely affirm: but shewing what was meet for that time and the beginning of Christianity, when as yet there were no Monasteries builded, no prescript rule, no exact order of obedience to Superiors: ^[4] but the professed (as S. Paul here noteth) coursed & wandered up and down idly, as now our professed virgins or Nuns do not, neither can do. Of whom therefore, where discipline is observed, there is no cause of such danger. Besides that widows having had the use of carnal copulation before, are more dangerously tempted, than virgins that are brought up from their tender age in piety and have no experience of such pleasures. See S. Ambrose li. de vidius, proving by the example of holy Anna, who lived a widow even from her youth till 80 years of age, in fasting and praying night and day, that the Apostle doth not here without exception forbid all young widows to vow, yea he esteemeth that profession in the younger women much more laudable, glorious, and meritorious. See his book de viduis in initio.

• 1 S. Paul meaneth not that widows professed should marry.
• 2 * otherwise Ageruchia ep. 11.
• 3 It is better for the frailer sort, that are in danger of falling, to marry rather than to vow.
• 4 Young women may be professed & taken into religion.

After Satan.

^[1] We may here learn, that for those to marry which are professed, is to turn back after Satan. For he speaketh of such as were married contrary to their vow. And hereupon we call the Religious that marry (as Luther, Bucer, Peter Martyr and the rest) Apostatæs. More we learn, that such young ones have no excuse of their age, or that they be vehemently tempted and burn in their concupiscences, or that they have not the gift of Chastity. For notwithstanding all these excuses, these young professed widows if they marry, go backward after Satan, and be Apostatæs, & damned, except they repent. For as for the Apostle's words to the Corinthians, ^[2] It is better to marry than to burn, We have before declared out of the Fathers, and here we add, that it pertaineth only to persons that be free and have not vowed to the contrary. as S. Ambrose li. ad virg. laps. c. 5. S. Augustine de bono vid. c. 8. and S. Hierom li. 1. cont. Iovin. c. 7. expound it.

• 1 To marry after the vow of Chastity, is to go after Satan.
• 2 1. Cor. 7.

^◦

The Heretics of our time think there is no remedy for fornication or burning, but marriage, and so did S. Augustine when he was yet a Manichee. Putabam me miserum &c. I thought (saith he li. 6. Confes. c. 11. ) that I should be an unhappy and miserable man if I should lack the company of a woman, and the medicine of thy mercy to heal the same infirmity I thought not upon, because I had not tried it: and I imagined that continency was in a man's own power and liberty, which in myself I did not feel: being so foolish not to understand that no man can be continent unless thou give it. Verily thou wouldest give it, if with inward mourning I would knock at thy ears, and with sound faith would cast my care upon thee.

^[1]

By all which you may easily prove, that chastity is a thing that may lawfully be vowed, that it is not impossible to be fulfilled by prayer, fasting, and chastisement of men's concupiscence, that it is a thing more grateful to God than the condition of married persons: for else it should not be required either in the Clergy or in the Religious. Finally, that it is most abominable to persuade the poor virgins or other professed to such sacrilegious wedlock, which S. Augustine avoucheth to be worse than adultery. de bon. vidu. c. 4. 11. ^[2] Iovinian was the first that ever made marriage equal with virginity or chaste life, for which he was condemned of heresy. Aug. in argumento li. de bono Coniugali. De pec. merit. li. 3. c. 7. Li. de hæres. hær. 82. He was the first that persuaded professed virgins to marry, which S. Augustine saith was so clearly and without question wicked, that it could never infect any Priest, but certain miserable Nuns. Yea for this strange persuasion he calleth Iovinian a monster, saying of him thus Li. 2. Retract. cap. 22. The holy Church that is there (at Rome) most faithfully and stoutly resisted this monster. S. Hierom calleth the said Heretic and his complices, Christian epicures. li. 2. cont. Iovin. c. 19. See S. Ambrose ep. 82. ad Vercellensem episcopum in initio. But what would these holy doctors have said, if they had lived in our doleful time, when the Protestants go quite away with this wickedness, and call it God's word?

• 1 The vow of chastity lawful, possible to be kept, more grateful to God.
• 2 Iovinian's heresy in this point, condemned of old, is called of the Protestants, God's word.
• ◦ The heretics' only remedy against concupiscence is marriage.

In word and doctrine.

^◦ Such Priests specially and Prelates are worthy of double, that is, of the more ample honour, that are able to preach and teach, and do take pains therein. Where we may note, that all good Bishops or Priests in those days were not so well able to teach as some others, and yet for the ministry of the Sacraments, and for wisdom and government, were not unmeet to be Bishops and Pastors. For though it be one high commendation in a Prelate, to be able to teach, as the Apostle before noted: yet all cannot have the like grace therein, and it is often recompensed by other singular gifts no less necessary. S. Augustine laboured in word and doctrine. Alipius and Valerius were good Bishops, and yet had not the gift. Possid. in vit. Aug. c. 5. And some times and countries require preachers more than other. All which we note, to discover the pride of Heretics, that contemn some of the Catholic Priests or Bishops, pretending that they cannot preach as they do, with meretricious and painted eloquence.

• ◦ Many good & worthy Bishops, that have not the gift of preaching and teaching.

Water.

You see how lawful and how holy a thing it is, to fast from some meats or drinks, either certain days, or always, as this B. Bishop Timothee did: who was hardly induced by the Apostle to drink a little wine with his water in respect to his infirmities. And mark withal, what a calumnious and stale cavillation it is, that to abstain from certain meats and drinks for punishment of the body or devotion, is to condemn God's creatures. See an homily of S. Chrysostom upon these words. to. 5.