Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 23

Since marriage appears to be driven by pleasure and desire, we must examine it. Marriage is, in fact, the first lawful union of a man and a woman for the sake of legitimate children. The comic poet Menander says, 'I give you my own daughter for the plow, that she may bear you legitimate children.' We are asking whether one ought to marry, a question that belongs among things named according to their purpose. For to whom should one marry, and in what condition, and what kind of woman, and in what state? One should not marry just anyone, nor at all times; there is a proper time, a proper person, and an age up to which it is fitting. Therefore, one should neither marry everyone at all times, nor marry completely without restraint, but rather the suitable person, in the suitable way, at the suitable time, for the sake of children, with complete similarity in all things, and not by force or necessity, but with love. Hence Abraham, speaking of his wife as if she were his sister, says, 'She is my sister, the daughter of my father but not of my mother, and she became my wife' (Leviticus 18:9), teaching that those born of the same mother should not be taken in marriage. Let us now briefly review the history of thought on this. Plato ranks marriage among external goods, having secured the immortality of our race and a kind of continuity passed down like a torch from children to grandchildren. Democritus, on the other hand, rejects marriage and childbearing because of the many vexations and distractions they bring, which pull one away from more necessary matters. Epicurus and all who place the good in pleasure, freedom from trouble, and absence of pain agree with him. According to the Stoics, both marriage and childrearing are indifferent; according to the Peripatetics, they are good. These thinkers, having carried their doctrines to excess, became slaves to pleasures: some used concubines, others courtesans, and most used young men. The wise Theano, in her garden with her courtesan, rivaled her in deeds, not in pleasure. Therefore, those who do not test for themselves what benefits them, but command others to do these things—or the reverse—cannot escape the curse of Buzugius. Scripture has briefly indicated this, saying, 'Do not do to another what you hate.' Yet those who approve of marriage argue that nature has made us well-suited for it, as is evident from the construction of our bodies, male and female, and from the continual command to 'increase and multiply' (Genesis 1:28). But if this is so, it should seem shameful to them that the human being, created by God, is more lacking in self-control than irrational animals, which do not mate with many or without restraint, but with one of their own kind—like doves, swallows, turtledoves, and similar species. Furthermore, they say the childless person falls short of natural perfection, having not replaced themselves with a successor in their place; for one who has produced a being like themselves is perfect, especially when they see that being do the same—that is, when the child born is established in the same nature as the parent. Therefore, one must marry for the sake of one's country, for the succession of children, and for the completion of the world insofar as it depends on us. Even the poets pity a marriage that is incomplete and childless, but they bless the one who has children on both sides. Bodily illnesses also demonstrate that marriage is necessary; for the care of a wife and the devotion of her companionship seem to surpass the attentions of other relatives and friends, since she chooses to sympathize and attend more than anyone else, and according to Scripture she is a necessary helper. The comic poet Menander, though he fled from marriage, also sets forth its benefits, answering the one who says, 'I am doing badly in this matter.'