Letter 116: Severus says a wife may seek continence only with due regard for her husband, children, and any vow already made.

Severus writes in the person of Abba, on behalf of brother Maximus, to answer a woman's question about marriage and continence. Abba's answer is clear: people once joined in marriage should not separate for the sake of religion except by mutual consent. Paul teaches that husband and wife have authority over one another's bodies and may abstain only by agreement for a time. If the husband consents, the woman may take up the yoke of piety, and no one should fault so admirable a choice. If he cannot restrain himself and does not consent, she should endure the married state. Intercourse that preserves the husband from sin is better than a private abstinence not recognized by the canons. Scripture seeks not only the good of the strong person but the healing of the weak, and it asks the strong to bend toward those lying on the ground. There is an exception if the husband lives immorally with other women and refuses chastity himself; in that case the wife is not endangered by leaving such a man and preferring the solitary life. If, however, she has already joined the order of virgins, even wrongly at the beginning, it is no longer seemly for her to leave them and cause scandal. If she has not yet lived among virgins but has only withdrawn from intercourse, she should act with her husband and return to marriage if he does not consent. If he asks only that she remain in the house with their children, even male children, that too is acceptable to God. Severus closes by saying that Abba's own words, not Severus' poorer style, have answered her question.

I have asked our holy father Abba about that question as requested in your modesty's epistle, and I have received a complete answer from him. He said that those who have once been united in marriage, seeing that marriage "is honourable and the bed unsullied,"^ ought not to desire to separate from one another by reason of religion except where there is consent. For the divine Apostle says, " Deprive not one another, except it be by consent for a time, in order that ye may give yourselves up to prayer, and again come together." For the same said above that it is the husband who has power over the wife's body, and, vice versa, that it is the wife who has power over the husband's body: saying, " The wife hath not power over the body but the husband: and in the same fashion the husband also hath not power over his body, but the wife."^ It is therefore manifest that, p 490. unless the husband consents, the wife who separates has no forgiveness, and she makes herself a cause of '^ Id. X. 12. 2 jje. xiii. 4. ^ 1 Co. vii. 4, 5. his turning aside to fornication. If then your husband consents, you are permitted to place yourself under the yoke of piety: there is no one who will find fault with so praiseworthy and admirable a choice. But, if the husband cannot restrain his body, and therefore will not permit you to do this, put up with the mar- riage-state: such intercourse that saves the husband is better than an abstinence from pleasures that is unknown to the canons. The aim of divine scripture not in this only but in everything else too regards not the person of him who has obtained mercy, but that of him who is infirm: and it especially wishes that those who are strong- shall condescend to those who lie on the earth. It does not accept the man who regards his own interest only, but the man who rather treats his neighbour's interest as if it were his own profit. So therefore in this present case also it is pleasing to God that both of you should attain and win the goal of purity consisting in continence: but, if the inclina- tions of your husband's will do not accord with your own readiness, the laws of holy scripture judge the marriage-state to be better, in order that they may gain you both. This we say on the assumption that the husband wishes to live chastely, and restricts the pleasures that cannot be restrained to intercourse with his wife only. But, if he goes beyond what is right,. with other women also after the manner of a beast, then the wife incurs no danger by neglecting such a man, and giving the preference to the excellent state,. and taking no account of the marriage, but soaring on piety's wing, and turning her eyes to the solitary life, and keeping her hoHness of mind and of body always unsullied. This also our said holy father further laid down, saying that, although the husband be living chastely, being content to have intercourse with you only, but you have already chosen for yourself to live among virgins, and have included yourself in their order, although the thing was not right in its beginning, for you ought not in fact to have left your husband while he was living chastely, yet still it is not seemly for you now to separate from the virgins, and give them also occasion for stumbling. It is to be feared lest, if you return to your husband, they also may imitate such a practice, and may defile God's bridechamber after having been once united to Christ the heavenly Bride- groom. It is impiety of a high degree that after having been set apart to God they should prefer the corruptible intercourse rather than the immortal and heavenly connexion. But, if you have not yet lived with virgins, but only withdrawn from intercourse, according to the principle stated by us above act in common with the husband, and, if he does not consent, you ought to follow his inclination, and prefer the p. 492. marriage-state to purity, because this is pleasing to God. But, if the husband does not desire intercourse with you, but wishes you to live within the house with the children who have been born to you from the common marriage even if they be males, this too is also accept- able to God. These things have been said as in a letter: but we think that in what we have written we have in no point failed to answer the question of your religiousness. This epistle has been addressed to you by our holy father himself in his own very words; for he was able to make his own spiritual mind clear without the great- ness of his divine thoughts being befouled by the squalor of my words