Marriage Issues

Their society tolerated fornication, adultery, homosexuality, polygamy, and concubinage. Juvenal (60–140 A.D.), the Roman poet, wrote about women who rejected their own sex: they wore helmets, delighted in feats of strength, and with exposed breasts hunted pigs with spears. He also said they wore out their bridal veils with so many marriages.

Under Roman law and customs of that day, four types of marriage were practiced.

The first type: Slaves generally were considered to be subhuman chattel. If a man and woman slave wanted to be married, they might be allowed to live together in what was called a contubernium, which means “tent companionship.” The arrangement lasted only as long as the owner permitted. He was perfectly free to separate them, to arrange for other partners, or to sell one or the other. Many of the early Christians were slaves, and some of them had lived—perhaps were still living—in this sort of marital relationship.

A second type: of marriage was called usus, a form of common law marriage that recognized a couple to be husband and wife after they had lived together for a year.

A third type was the coemptio in manum, in which a father would sell his daughter to a prospective husband.

The fourth type of marriage was much more elevated. The Patrician class, the nobility, were married in a service called the confarreatio, on which the modern Christian marriage ceremony is based. It was adopted by the Roman Catholic church and used with certain Christian modifications—coming, with little change, into Protestantism through the Reformation. The original ceremony involved participation by both families in the arrangements for the wedding, a matron to accompany the bride and a man to accompany the groom, exchanging of vows, the wearing of a veil by the bride, the giving of a ring (placed on the third finger of the left hand), a bridal bouquet, and a wedding cake.[1]

[1] MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1984). 1 Corinthians (p. 154). Chicago: Moody Press.

1 Corinthians 7:1–16 ESV

Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?