What Does 1 Corinthians 7:32 Mean?

(32) **But I would have you.**—These words seem to take up again the form of expression in 1Corinthians 7:28. I would spare you trouble; I also wish to have you free from anxious care. That is my reason for so advising you. And here the Apostle returns to the subject immediately under consideration, and shows here what he has been saying bears upon it. This element of anxious care must be borne in mind in considering the desirability or otherwise of marriage. There are some important variations in the readings of these verses (1Corinthians 7:32-34) in the Greek MSS. The emendations required in the Greek text, from which the Authorised version is translated, are, I think, as follows:—Omit the full-stop after 1Corinthians 7:33, connecting it with 1Corinthians 7:34 by the insertion of the word “and.” Insert “and” in 1Corinthians 7:34 before “a wife,” and the word “unmarried” after a wife.” The whole passage will then stand thus (rendering the Greek verb as it is in 1Corinthians 1:13, “divided,” and, not, as in the English version here, “a difference between”): *The unmarried man careth for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But the married man careth for the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and is divided in his interests *(*i.e.,* distracted). *Also the wife that is unmarried *(*i.e.,* a widow, or divorced), *and the unmarried virgin *(*i.e.,* the maid who is free from any contract of marriage), *cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit. But she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.* The whole force of the passage is that married persons have, in the fulfilment of their obligations to each other, an additional interest and concern from which the unmarried are free. It must ever be distinctly borne in mind that this advice was given solely under the impression that the end of all earthly things was impending, and that the great trial and desolation was beginning to darken over the world. The Apostle who wrote these words of warning himself expressly condemns those who applied them as involving general moral obligations, and not as suited merely to temporary requirements (1Timothy 4:1; 1Timothy 4:3). He had himself at this time a strong personal inclination for a celibate life; but still he could enjoy and show a preference for the companionship of those who were evidently otherwise minded—he abode and wrought with Aquila and Priscilla his wife, at Corinth (Acts 18:3). We can still imagine circumstances arising in individual cases to which the principle enforced by the Apostle would apply. A man might feel it his duty to devote his life to some missionary enterprise, in which marriage would hamper his movements and impede his usefulness. Such an exceptional case would hence only establish the general rule. “It may not be out of place to recall” (writes Stanley, in his *Exposition of St. Paul’s View of Celibacy*) “a celebrated instance of a similarly emphatic preference for celibacy on precisely similar grounds—not of abstract right, but of special expediency—in the well-known speech of our great Protestant Queen, when she declared that England was her husband and all Englishmen her children, and that she desired no higher character or fairer remembrance of her to be transmitted to posterity than this inscription engraved upon her tombstone: ‘Here lies Elizabeth, who lived and died a maiden queen.’”