Polygamy in the early Church?

[timeandeternity]

I know Paul says that a bishop must be “the husband of one wife,” but what about other Christians? Doesn’t making this disclaimer indicate that this wasn’t required of lay Christians? Can anyone give me reputable sources showing that polygamy was not allowed in the early Church? Thanks in advance.

 

[curlycool89]

Jesus is pretty clear on a marriage being 1 man and 1 women is pretty clear in Mark 10:2-12.

 

[TimothyH]

Paul is not talking about two wives at once but of remarriage after death of a wife or the ordaination of a man who had been married, divorced, and then remarried. The NAB says that the Bishop should be “married only once.”

God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve and Jennifer and Susie. The two became one flesh and were in the garden naked and without shame. This is the perfection with which man and woman were created before sin entered the world. That is what we have been called back to - perfection - and given a way to get back there by Christ.

Husband, Wife, and the children they produce - that system is modeled on the perfect family, God the Father and God the Son, from which proceeds the Holy Spirit. That is perfection, and that is the model on which we are to build our families.

-Tim-

 

[1ke]

I know Paul says that a bishop must be “the husband of one wife,” but what about other Christians? Doesn’t making this disclaimer indicate that this wasn’t required of lay Christians? Can anyone give me reputable sources showing that polygamy was not allowed in the early Church? Thanks in advance.

the verse is not referring to polygamy.

 

[JM3]

From Canons of the Thirteen Holy Fathers (various dates)

THE THIRD CANONICAL EPISTLE OF OUR HOLY FATHER BASIL, ARCHBISHOP OF CAESAREA IN CAPPADOCIA TO AMPHILOCHIUS, BISHOP OF ICONIUM

CANON LXXX. The Fathers say nothing of polygamy as being beastly, and a thing unagreeable to human nature. To us it appears a greater sin than fornication: Let therefore such [as are guilty of it] be liable to the canons, viz.: after they have been mourners one year–let them be prostrators three years–and then be received,

 

[ConstantineTG]

I know Paul says that a bishop must be “the husband of one wife,” but what about other Christians? Doesn’t making this disclaimer indicate that this wasn’t required of lay Christians? Can anyone give me reputable sources showing that polygamy was not allowed in the early Church? Thanks in advance.

No. It doesn’t hold any implication on anyone else. St. Paul wrote about qualifications to be a Bishop without having to imply about anyone else. Its best not to read the lines and just take the statement for what it is. Yes, polygamy was rampant back then, and those who repented are part of the Church. What St. Paul is saying that Bishops must have never engaged in such sinful activity ever as a qualification.

 

[Evan]

I found it interesting that in the early church the question came up: Is digamy to be allowed to Christian believers? It was discussed by ECF’s.

If digamy (a 2nd marriage after one was widowed) was of concern, I cannot see permission for polygamy.

ccdl.libraries.claremont.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/cce&CISOPTR=737

The early church fathers expressed their qualified approval of digamy and maintained the superiority of widowhood over second marriage. Within this general framework, they had varying degrees of reservation. Tertullian (c. 160-220) addressed An Exhortation to Chastity to a friend who had been recently widowed, discouraging him from remarriage and explaining that, although second marriage was tolerated by the church, it was merely an objectionable expedient to safeguard the weak against temptation. Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386), however, shows more leniency towards digamists: “Those who are once married, let them not hold in contempt those who have accommodated themselves to a second marriage. Continence is a good and wonderful thing; but still, it is permissible to enter upon a second marriage.” (Catechetical Lectures 4.26). Saint Ambrose of Milan (c. 339-397) strikes a note of reserve in his attitude towards digamy: “What we suggest by way of counsel we do not command as a precept . . . . We do not prohibit second marriages, but neither do we recommend them” (The Widows 11.68).