Adams' View on Remarriage After Spousal Death in Christian Counseling
Christian teaching generally permits remarriage after the death of a spouse, a view supported by various biblical interpretations and theological traditions. The apostle Paul's instruction in 1 Corinthians 7:39 is a foundational text for this understanding: "A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, only in the Lord." This passage clearly states that death annuls the marriage bond, thereby freeing the surviving spouse to remarry [4, 6].
Matthew Henry, a Nonconformist commentator, emphasizes that the marriage contract is "for life; death only can annul the bond." He concludes from 1 Corinthians 7:39 that "second marriages are not unlawful" [4]. Similarly, Adam Clarke, a Methodist commentator, interprets this verse as a direct answer to questions about remarriage after a spouse's death, affirming that the widow "is free to remarry, but only in the Lord" [6]. The phrase "only in the Lord" is understood to mean that the new spouse should be a genuine Christian and share similar religious sentiments, which Clarke suggests is important for domestic peace [6].
The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown commentary, representing a Presbyterian perspective, also affirms the permissibility of remarriage for widows. In their comments on 1 Timothy 5:14, they note that remarriage is "recommended as an antidote to sexual passion, idleness, and tattling" for younger widows [3]. They distinguish this from the specific circumstances of older widows who had taken a vow of service to the church, for whom remarriage might be seen as "casting off their first faith" pledged to Christ [7]. However, for ordinary widows, no barrier to remarriage existed [7].
The apostle Paul also uses the analogy of marriage and death in Romans 7 to explain the believer's relationship to the Law. one tradition states, "For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man" (Romans 7:2-3). Paul then applies this analogy to believers, stating, "So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God" (Romans 7:4).
Commentators interpret this analogy to mean that just as death frees a spouse from the marriage bond, so too believers are freed from the Law through Christ's death [2, 5]. John Chrysostom, an early Church Father, discusses the intricacies of this analogy, noting that Paul had to frame it with the husband dying to make the illustration work for the believer's freedom from the Law and union with Christ [1, 8]. Adam Clarke explains that believers "were once under the law of Moses, and were bound by its injunctions; but now ye are become dead to that law," meaning the law itself is "dead" or no longer in force, allowing believers to be "married to another" (Christ) [2]. The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown commentary clarifies that "ye also are become dead" means "were slain" to the law "through His slain body" [5]. This theological use of the marriage analogy further underscores the principle that death dissolves the marital bond, making remarriage permissible.
Sources
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Acts & Romans: make the illustration harmonize in form with the principle ( v. 1 ) and with the application ( v. 4 .) it would be necessary to suppose the wife as dying and then marrying again after death—which is impossible;—so that in order in any way to carry out the idea of the wife’s marrying another (as illustrating the Christian’s becoming free, as it were, from one husband—the law—and joining himself to another—Christ), he must suppose the husband as dying and not the wife. Nor can the thought which the apostle wishes to bring out (the freedom to espouse an”
- Romans (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on Romans 7:4: Wherefore, my brethren - This is a parallel case. You were once under the law of Moses, and were bound by its injunctions; but now ye are become dead to that law - a modest, inoffensive mode of speech, for, The law, which was once your husband, is dead; God has determined that it shall be no longer in force; so that now, as a woman whose husband is dead is freed from the law of that husband, or from her conjugal vow, and may legally be married to another, so God, who gave the law under which ye have hitherto lived, designed that it should be in force only till the ad”
- 1 Timothy (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Timothy 5:14: younger women--rather, as ellipsis ought to be supplied, "the younger widows," namely younger widows in general, as distinguished from the older widows taken on the roll of presbyteresses (Ti1 5:9). The "therefore" means seeing that young widows are exposed to such temptations, "I will," or "desire," &c. (Ti1 5:11-13). The precept here that they should marry again is not inconsistent with Co1 7:40; for the circumstances of the two cases were distinct (compare Co1 7:26). Here remarriage is recommended as an antidote to sexual passion, idleness, and t”
- 1 Corinthians (Nonconformist/Puritan) “Matthew Henry on 1 Corinthians 7:39: The whole is here closed up with advice to widows: As long as the husband liveth the wife is bound by the law, confined to one husband, and bound to continue and cohabit with him. Note, The marriage - contract is for life; death only can annul the bond. But, the husband being dead, she is at liberty to marry whom she will. There is no limitation by God's law to be married only for such a number of times. It is certain, from this passage, that second marriages are not unlawful; for then the widow could not be at liberty to marry whom she pleased, nor to marr”
- Romans (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Romans 7:4: Wherefore . . . ye also are become dead--rather, "were slain." to the law by the body of Christ--through His slain body. The apostle here departs from his usual word "died," using the more expressive phrase "were slain," to make it clear that he meant their being "crucified with Christ" (as expressed in Rom 6:3-6, and Gal 2:20). that ye should be married to another, even to him that is--"was." raised from the dead--to the intent. that we should bring forth fruit unto God--It has been thought that the apostle should here have said that "the law d”
- 1 Corinthians (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on 1 Corinthians 7:39: The wife is bound by the law - This seems to be spoken in answer to some other question of the Corinthians to this effect: "May a woman remarry whose husband is dead, or who has abandoned her?" To which he replies, in general, That as long as her husband is living the law binds her to him alone; but, if the husband die, she is free to remarry, but only in the Lord; that is she must not marry a heathen nor an irreligious man; and she should not only marry a genuine Christian, but one of her own religious sentiments; for, in reference to domestic peace, much de”
- 1 Timothy (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Timothy 5:12: Having--Bringing on themselves, and so having to bear as a burden (Gal 5:10) judgment from God (compare Ti1 3:6), weighing like a load on them. cast off their first faith--namely, pledged to Christ and the service of the Church. There could be no hardship at the age of sixty or upwards in not marrying again (end of Ti1 5:9), for the sake of serving better the cause of Christ as presbyteresses; though, to ordinary widows, no barrier existed against remarriage (Co1 7:39). This is altogether distinct from Rome's unnatural vows of celibacy in the case”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Acts & Romans: wife’s, (who corresponds to the “man” of v. 1 ). How can this incongruity be explained? We answer that if Paul will use the illustration from the dissolution of the marriage relation at all, he can use it only as he has done. In order to make the illustration harmonize in form with the principle ( v. 1 ) and with the application ( v. 4 .) it would be necessary to suppose the wife as dying and then marrying again after death—which is impossible;—so that in order in any way to carry out the idea of the wife’s marrying another (as illustrating the Chris”