i-y

• THE

Dcdrine and Dirciplioe

DIVORCE;

Reftoi'd to the good of both SEX ES^

From the Bondage of CANON LAW, and

other miftakes , to the true meaning of Scripture in the LAW and GOSPEL compared.

Wherein alfo arc let down the bad confcquences of a-

bohfliing or condemning of Sin , that which the Law of God allows , and Ghrift abolilht not.

Now the feccnd time Revis'd , and much Augmented,

In Two BOOKS:

To the Parliament of England^ with the AlFembly.

The Author 7. M.

Matth. I J. 5'2. Every Scribe inflniUcd to the Kifigdom of Heavn , is like the Mifler of a Houfe which bringeth out of his Treafnrj things new and old.

Prov. 18. II. He that anfwereth a matter before he heareth it , it is folly andfuame unto him.

LONDON: Imprinted In the Year 1645,

JLj.

1

To the PARLIAMENT of ENGLAND, wfcKthe ASSEMBLY.

F it were fcrio^flv askty and it wouldbe no unt-lmcly qnefflion^ Renowned Par^ I'uzmcnt^ (eUEi yljfcmblj , who of all Teachers and Madders that ever have tanrht^ hath drawn the mofi Difciples after him^ both in Religion^ and in man- ners^ it might not be untruly anfwer'dy Cufiom. Though vertue be commended for the mofi perfwafive in her Theory ; and Coiafcience in the f lain d:monfi ration of the fpirlt, finds mofi evincing, yet whether it be the fecret of Divine will, or the O- riainal bl.ndntfs we ure born in, fj it happnsfor the mofi p.zrt^thrit Cuftomftillis phntly receiv d for the befi infiruEior.Except it be^becaufe h.r method is fo glib andeafie,in fome manner like to that Vifion of Ezekiel, rowLngf^p her ft'dd-:ji bcok^of implicit kpowledg^ for him that will, to take and fw allow down at plea- fur e 5 which proving but of bad nourijhment in the concoBion^ as it vcas heedl.fs in the devouring, puffs up unhealthily a certain big face of pretended learning, . mfiaken among credulous men, for the wholefom habit of foundnefs and good confiitution, but is indeed no other than that fwoln vifage of counterfeit know^ Icdre and literature, which not only in private mars our Edtdcation, but alfo in tublick^ is the common Climer into every Chair ^ where either Religion is preach' ty or L-1W r~ ported, filing cache fiat e of life and prof cffi on With abjtii ar.d ftrviU principles, depr effing the high and Heaven- born fpirit of man , far beneath the condition wherein either God created him, or fin hath funkjnm. To purfue the Allegory, Cufiom being but a meer face, as Eccho is a metr voice, refis not in her unacccmplfement , until by fe crct inclinationf^e accorporate her fi If with error, who being a blind and Serpentine body without ahead, wilUndy accepts what he wants^ and fupplies what her incompleatnefs went feeking. Hence it is, that Er- for fupports Cufiom, Cufiom count nances Error : And thefe two between them would perf cute and chafe away all truth and f olid wifdom out of humane life^ were it not that God, rather than man^ once in many Ages, calls together the prudent and-reiigicus counf els of men, deputed toreprcfs the incroachments, and towork^ojf the inveterate blots and obfcurities wrought upon cur minds by the fubtle infinuating of Error and Cufiom ; who with the numerous and vulgar train of their followers, make it their chief defign to envj and crj do vn the indufiry of free rerfrnin'T^ und.r the terms of humor and innovation 5 as If the Womb of TcemingTruth were to be clos'dup, ifjhe pre fume to bring forth ouqht that frts not with their unchew'd notions and fuppoftions, Againfi; which notorious injury and abufe of mans free foul, to te^tifie andopp:>fe the utmofi that fudy and true; I sib our can attain, heretofore the incitement cf men reputed grave hath led m2 among th.rs ; and now the duty and the right of an infiruMed Christian calls me-ethrough the chance of good or evil roport, to be the fie Adv.cate of a dif- c?}svt'na>w't tr^ft'.T, a high enterf rife Lords and Commons, a high entcrpnfe and a hard, and^uch as every fevcnth Son of a fcventh Son dots not venture on.^Nor

A 2 have''

A

To the Parilament of Ergland.,

havj I amldfi the cUmor offo much envy andimpirtinence^ whether to appeal, b'm

to the conccpirje offo muvhpiaj and wtfdom here affrmbt d. Bringing in mj hands an

ancient and mo fir neccjfarj^ mofl. chantabU, andyct mofl injur d St aintc .'./Mofcs :

not repeal' d tvir t?j him who had the authority, [pit thrown afidewith much ia-

confd:rat ne, Lcl-, andi-r therithhi^flj of Canonic ^A ignorance , as once the whcle

law n\is by fom- fuch I kj conveyance In J o(iah'*s ti?»e. ^htd he whoficallindjavor

thjayn.ndmtiit of iiny old neg! U.d grievance in Church or State , or in the daily

com'f of life J f he h^ -^rtedwith abjb ies of mindthdt m.iy raife him to fo high a-t

nnd.rt caking. I gr.i^i^ h^ ha^h already much )vheref not to repent him-, jetl;t me

urreedhim^not to b: i-j: / .r-m.iti of aiy Tj^if-j-jdrfd opiniofif unlef his r-.fi'iutians be

[irmly le.:red tn a [cjf/jire andconjlant mind , not confc oiu to it f If of any dfrvjd

fHame,_ a-id reg-:rdLfi of ungrounded fufpicions. For this let him be (ure he J' all be

boarded pnfentlj by the rud:rfort^but not by dfcreet and w.lln->iriurd r,:isn,\v th a

thoufaudtdle d.fcaitts and farm fes. Who when-.they cannot confut ; the Laftjoynt cr

fineiv of any pa ff age in the booh^; yet God forbid that truth f':ould be iruih^becaufs

^hey have a boftrous conceit ojfome pretences in thj Writer. But were they not mors

hufe andinqu'fitive than the y^pofi^le coyhn^ends, they would hear him at leaft, re-

joyclng,fb ^he truth be preacht,whether of envy or other pretence whatfb'

ever : For Truth is as impoffible to be foil' d by any outward touch,ayt he Sun beam.

Thomh this ill hap wait on her nativity.^ thatj}:e never comes into theworld^ bat

I ke a Bafiard^ to the ignominy of him that brought her forth : till Time the Mid-

. w ferath.r than the Another of Truth ^have wajlot and f alt ed the Infant^ declard'

her le<iitrmate,and churcht the Fath.r of his ycung Minerva , from the necdl.fs

caufclof his purjation. Tour felves can befi;witn?fs this^worthy Fatriots,andb.t-

ter willy no doubt h.reafter : for who among ye of the for emo!} that have tra-

irji^ild rajj:r behalf to the good of Church or State, hath not been oft en traduct

to be th' a rent cf his o'iVn by-ends , und.r pretext of Reformation. So much the

more Ifo/dl nyt heunjuf: to hope^that h.Wevtr Infamy or Envy may work-in ether

mm tJ d) hrr fr.tful w'dl aj^oinf this difcosirfe , yet that the experience of your-

owjt upr^'jtncfs mf interpreted, will put ye m mlndto (jive it free audience and

ocn.roHS^eonftruHion. What though the brood .of Belial^f /j^ draife of men.to wh^^m

ns l^ btrty is phafing,but unbridVd and v igabond lufi without p ile or partition, will

lauihbroad prhaps .^ to fee fo great a jlrength of Scripture mufvrii^g up infa^

voHT'-ias they f:4ppif:^ of their debaucheries; they will know b.ttcrwh.n theyfj-aH'

ijence Larn^.that honffi liberty is the great ejf foe to dijloonefi^ licence, Andwhat

thouTh others out of a watcrijh and queafeconfcience , becaufe ever ctafy and'.

never y it found, willj'ail and fancy to themfclues, that injury and licence is .the

hefi: of this Bo oJ^? Did not the difie??7pcr of their ownfi-omachs afeB'thcmwlth ^

a di^^y Ms'grim^ they wmldfoonti^ up their tong^ues, and difcern them ^rlves likj

: i.-i;/' Affvnan blafphemi r dlt.h it while reproaching not man but the Almighij- the

\0\yiQtxtQi\^X'd£i'^-'^h'jmthey dj not deny to have beUwgiv'd his oivn facrcd

peoph

With the Airemlly.

p^opU with this very allowance^whichthcj now call injury and licence^ andd^.\*^^ cry Jham^ on^ and will d) yet a while ^ till thty get a little cordtal [obrlety to [ettU their qptdmingz^cal. Bat this qH?ftion concerns not us perhaps: Indeed mans di- fpojition though prone to fearch after vain curiofties^yet when points of difjiculty are to be difcuft^ appertaining to the removal of unr^afonahle wrong and burden from the p:rplext life of our brother^ it is mcr edible how coldJoow dull, and far fr^m allf How-feeling we are, without the fpur of flf-cor;Cernmcnt,T. t if the wf- dom^the JHsilce^the purity of God be to be clear dfro?n foulefl Imputations which are ,2 it yet avoid.d-if charity be not to be degrad.d andtrodd*n diwn undr aci^ vilOr-^inancey if A<f<-itrimony be not to be advanc't like th.tt exalted perdition wrttt'n of to the Theflalonians, above all that.is called God, or ggodnefs, nay^ a^ai/ij} them both ^t hen I dare affirm there will be found in the Contents of this Book^, that which' may concern us alLTouit concerns chiefly ^Vorthies in Parlia- ment, on whom, as on cur ddiverers, all our grievances and cares,hy the merit of y:Hr eminence and fortitude are^ devolv'd. Me it concerns next^ having with much labour and faithful diligence firft found out, or at leafrwith afearl.fsand com- m.'iyncative candor fir fir pub lijht to the manfefi good of Chriftendom^that which calling to witnefs every thing mortal and immortal,! believe unfainediy to be true. Let not other menthink^their confcience bou :d to fearch continually aftyr truths to pray for enlightning from above ^to publifto what they- thmk^t hey have fo go- rain'd^ and dsbar me from conceiving my f elf tyd by the fame duties. Te have now, doubtLfs by the favour and appointment of God, ye have now in your hands a ^(Treat and popuLus Nation to r ^fyrm ; from what corruption, what blindnefs in KJi'Tion, ye kno-:K> well; tn what a de generate and fall n fpir it from the appre- heyfion of native liberty ^ and true manhncfs, I' am fure ye find : with what un- hopind:d licence rujhing to whcredoms a'dadultcries, ne^ds not long eKqairy : in- fomush that the fears which m:n have of too ftriU: a dfcipUns , perhaps- exeeid the h Vts that can be in others, of ever introducing it with any. great fuccefs. What if I JJoJuldtell ye now of difpenfatiens and indui-ences,to give a little the reins, to let them play and nibble w. th the bait a while 5 a people as hard of heart A4 th/:t Eojp^ion C lorn that went to Cin-3^3iX\.T'h! sis the com-mondoBrine that adulterous and injurious div.rces were not connivd only, but with eye open al- lowed of old for hard ^efs of heart. But that opi}iie)n^I trujj','h'y th?n this following ar eurnent hath been v;^ell. read, will be Lft for one ofthemyfierirs of an indul- gent AntL^hr-fl:,tofarmout mceft by , and thofe his other tributary p llut'^ons. What mddie way can be tak^n then^ may fome interry.pt, if we mujv neither t:<rn tO: the right ^ nor to the Lft, and that the peoplj.hate to be rformd: Aetarkjhen, fudges and La.v-giv.ers, andyewh^e Office it is to be our Teachers ^ fr I will uttyrnO'W a doBrine^ if ever any other, though ne^letled or not uud.r flood, yet cf great- and powerful iraportance to thegeverning ofmar.kindjle who wjf: h w -Kid

■eftrain the reafonable Soul of r/^an within due bounh, m^ijt firfl himfelf f-ijow prfeciiy^ h'Qwfar thsTrrritory and Dominivn extends of jujl and hon^flhbcrty.

refi

To the Parliament of EnghivJ^

\A5 Utile mn'sf he ojf^r to bind that which God hath loofn*^^ as to loopn that which h^ hath hof4nd. 'Trje ignor;ince and mifl-aks of this high point, hath heapt up on2 huge half cf all the miftry that hath been fince Adam. In the Gofpel we fioall read afuperciimas crcw of Mafters^whofe holinefs, or rather whofe evil eye^ arievinfthat God fi'culd bs^fo facil toman, was t) f t flraiter limits to obedi- ence than God hath fet^ to injiave the dignity of man^ to pnt agarrifon upon his neck^of empty and over- digmfi^d Precepts : And we /ball read onr Saviour never more griev'd andtrouhld, than to meet with [uch a pievijh madn fs among men againfi their own frsedom. How can we expeEi him to be Lfs ojfendid with p^s^ whenmUch of the fame folly frail be found yet remaining where it leayt ought .^ to the per:Jlnng of thoufands. The greatest b^ird-n in the world tsfuperjlition^ not only of Cer. monies in the Churchy but of imannary and f career ow fins at home^ What gr eat. r weaJ^ing, wh.tt more fubtle fir atagem againfl: our Chnfiian war^ fare,whenbefides thegrefs body of realtranfgrefiionsto tncounter^wejhall be ter- rific dby a vain and floadowy ?nenc:cingof fzults that are not : When things in- dijferent Jhall be fet to ov.r-front us und^r the banners of fin^ what wonder if we be routed.^and by this art of our Adverfarj^fall into the fubj.Uion of w.rB and deadliefi ojfences.The fuperflition of the Papifl ;>,t0ucji not5taft not, when God bids both : andours is, part not, feparate not, when God and charity both per- mits andcommands\.,tM2X\-^om\\\\x\%^hQ done with chanty, faith S. Paul: and his M-ifier faith She \s the fulfilling of the Law. Tct now a civilian indif- ferent,a fometime diffwaded Law of marriage, mufibeforc't upon us to fulfil, not only without charity, but againfi her. No place in Heav'n or Earth, except Hell^ where char: ty may not enter : yet marriage the Ordinance of our folace and con- tentment, the remedy of our lonelinefs will not admit now cither of charity or mercy t9 come in and mediate or pacifie the ficrcencfs of this gentle Ordinance^ the unremedied lonelinefs of this remedy. Advife ye well fupreme Senate,if charity be thpu excluded and expulfi, how ye will d fend the untainted honour of jour cwn anions and proceedinys. He who marries, intends as Ittij to corfipire his own ruine,as he that fwears Allepance.-and as awhole people is in proportion to an ill Government, fo is one man to an ill marriage. If they againfi ary Aut herity, Co- vnant, or Statute, may by the foveraign ediEi of charity , fave not only their lives, but honefi liberties from unwortkj bondage,as well fnay he aiainfi- any pri- vate Gov' n^int, which he never enter'd to his mifchi<>f,redee?n himf elf from unfup- portable difi'urbances to hone ft peace, and jufi contentment : And much the ra^ ther, for that torepfi the hi^hefi: Magiftrate though tyranniz^^ng ^ Gcd never gave us exprefs allowance, only he gave us reafon^ chanty. nature, andgood ex- ample to bear us out ', but in this Economical misfortune thus to demean our f elves, befides the warrant of thofe four great DireBors ^ which d^th as jufily belong hither, \ve have an exprefs Law of God, and [uch a Law, as wh.r.of cur Saviour With a flrm'a threat forbid the abrogating. For no tffiEh of tyran-

' nj

with the AlTen^bly. nj c4tt more hfdVj on theCommon'tvealth^tban this honfltold unhapplnefs on thefd. fmlj.JfjdfarerveiallhopeoftrfieReformatton in theStAte{ff'hiic- Imh anevH asiim lies nndifcernci or unregarded h the ho^tfe.On the redrefs whereof depends not or.if the ffintUdi ar.d order Ij life of our grown met^^hpiithe tvilimg and careful cducanon of oi-'r children. Let this therefore be ncr-^examind th}6 tenure and (lecholdof man* kwdjhis native and dcmefltck^Charurgi'v'^. hs by agr eater Lord thm tlnit .Si^xon King the Confejfor.Let theflatutes of God be tmrid ovcrbefcannd a-'^cw and con- fider'd not altogether by the narrow tnteiled;uals ofquoiathniiis andcorr^mon pfa- ces^but'as wat the ancient ri^ht of Cetinctls) by rr>en of vs>hat iiherJ projeffion fo:-* ver i of eminent fptrit and b^eedingy joyn'd wiihadtjfuje and var'iom l^ncyy edgeof divine and human thiyigs-^able to Oailance and define ggod and evU^nght & vvrongy throughout every /fate oflife*^ able tofhe^v us the ways of the Lord fir ait or faithful as they are^n:t fall of crankj andcontradtdions^and pit'fdlh^g difpenies.but wub divine infighi and benignity mcafurd out to th? proportion of each mi.ui avdfptrit^ tach temper anddifp^fttion created fo different each (ion: other^^ndyct ry the sk^fi cfwife conducting^ all to become tintform tn Vertpte, Ts expedite tk-efe krins »'fr^ Worthy a learned and memorableSynod-^while our enemies expect to fee the expeda' tion of the Church tifd out rpith dependencies & independencies h3i>rthe) will co'/n*- pound ^and in what Calends .Doubt not^rrorthy Senator s^to vindicate ihrjacrcdha- Kour andjiidgmetst of^ok^yourprrdeiepryfrom theff:-a low c^mmcnimg ofScha- iafl'ickj and Canonist, Doubt not after him to reach out to yonr fieady hji-^-ds to the mfinfertnd and wearied life ofman-^ to refiere this his loft heritage, into the hopt- (held ft ate ; tvherewithbefure that peace and /uvejbe be^ffibftjien^ce cf aChrijhan family will return home fr&m whence they are now bar,t^,t ; places of proftiiHtim will be iefs haunted , the neighbors bed lefs attempted [ the yik^ <f tr^dtnt a>>d tnanh dtfc'ipline will he generally fubmit ted to ^ fober and vo ell- ordered living rptll foonfpring up in the Co r/nnone- wealth. Te have an author gre*it beyond axceprw^^ Mofes; and one yet greater ^ bewhoheda'd'infrom abcUfhinr . every fn allefl: jot and tittle of precious eejuity contained in that Law , with a more ac< urate an. I lafiing Maforcth , than either the Synagogue of Ezra, or the G.'l!-b.:-n School At Tiberias hath left us. Whatever elfe ye can exdi , rvillfcarce concern a thi d fxrtof the Brit tifk name : but^ the benefit and good of this your magnantmcus example > will eafily fpreadfar beyond the banks of Tweed a^d the ^.n'r,]^:^ Jlcs, It would not be the fir ^, or fecond ttme^ fince our ancier^t Druides , b) nbom this Hand was the Cathedral of Ph't'ofophy to France , ieft off their Pagan Fttes, that trgland hath had this honour Vouchfaft fnm Heav'n^ togive out Reforma- tion to the world Who was it but our Engiijh Conftancine that bapitcd the Ko' man Empire ? Who was it but r^e Northumbrian Willibrodr,^KfiWi' ifrlde of Devon with their followers^ werethe flrf} JpofilesofGcrmzny} whj but Alcuin 4indWkk\e(our Ccuntreymenopen* d the eyes of Europe, the one in arts, the other in Mgligion, Let m England /or^^? her precedcn(;e of teaching nations horv to live.

r " Know

To the Parliament of EngUnid ^ 'He,

Kfiow^Worthles , l^y!o\\> an^ exer ift the priviledge ef jour honour d Cdfifitrey. A greater t tie I here hringje , iheiii6 either h the p'^iver crinth polk) of Rome to give hr Monarchs ? thuglonoHi afl: will pile ye the df finders of Charity^ JVer u this Jit the hgh fl irtfcripti'^n that ixull ad rn fo religicHS and fo holy a defence at thisf:Jould^efe the pure and fiacre d Lars of God , mid hk jet purer and more ficred name cfjrinq tkcr^fdvei tojcu firfl , of all Chriftian reformtrs to he accfMi'tedfrorv the lo*!g (i ff. r*d t xgodly attri utc of pa^remz.ir>g ndpAterj. Defer not to wipe offirf' jiaKt'y thefe imptdtative blurrs andflains cafi by rude fancies upon the thune And bsauty it [elf of inviolable hoiiy^cfs : lift fovne oih.rpecple more devout and wife than y^ejbercave ns this 'fferdimm^j-^talglorj ^r Wonted prer' gative ^of beirg thcprft af* fertors in ever j great vind cation, for rriB a^ far 06 my part leads ;??f, / have al- ready n?y great eft gain affurar.ce and inward fat i.( fa [it on to have domly. this nahiffg unworthy of an honefl lije^^.nd ft tidies w 11 efr.piofd.H'ith what event timong the wife and right underflanding handful of men ^ I am fecure. But how aynong the drove of Cuftom and Prfudice tht's will be relifht by fuch whofe capacity . Jince their yonth run ahead into the eafie creek cf ^ S)ftem or a Medulla Jai's there At Will under tho M'Wn phjfiognomy of tJo^'f ur,labourd audiments,for them^what their tafle Will hy J have aifofurety fuffcient , frc7n the entire league that hath beenever between for' mal ignorance and grave ob(linary, Tft when I remepjberthe little that &ur Saviour could prevail about this doctrine of Charity againfi the crabbedt.extuifls of his time^ J make no Wonder, hut reFl- confident that Who fo prefers either Matromcny or other Ordinance hi fore the good of man and th'> plain exigence of Charity , let him profefs Papift or Frotejla*'it or what he will, he k no better than a Pharife, and t^vdtrftandf ■ffot the Grfpcliwhom 04 a mifnterp^eter cf Chrtft J openly prcteft again ft \ and pre vokfhimto the trialof the truth before all the worldiandlet him betbinJ^him withal how he will foder up the fhif ting flaws of his ungirt perryiijpons^his venial and unvt" fiial difpences ^wherewith the Law of God pardoning Q/- unpard^ ninghath binfljam!' fully branded for want of heeding] ffng , tC' have eluded and baffi'd out all Faith mdChaflity from tbe Marriage-bed of t''^ at holy feed ^ with pJitic k^and judicial a- d^lteries. J feeJ^not to feduce the ftmplc and illiterate^ my errand is to find out the choice ft and the learned^ ^who have this high gift of mfdom to anfwerfiltdly^or to he €onviffCt, I crave it from the piety ^t he learning^andtho prudence which is hoHsdin this place. li wight perhaps mi^re fitly have been writttn in another tongue, and I had donefo, but that th efteem I have of my Countries judgment, and the love I bear to my native language to ferve it firfl with what I endeavour, made mefpeaJ^it thttf^ ^re I affay the verdifi of outiandiflj readers, j^nd perhaps alfo here I might have en- ded vamelefs.but that the addrefs ofthefe lines chiefly to the Parliament of England wight havefcem'd ingrateful not to ack>^oW/edge by whcfe Religiom care ^unwearied 'Watchfulnefs^coHragions and he^ .cickjffolutions ^lenjoy the peace andftudious lei fare tc remain Tlie Honourer and Aaenoaju cf dscir Nob e wcrch and vcrtue?,

John Milton.

i*» c*» ^t* ^fr> <yfiX . ^f% *** f^lh. *l*9 cyin> C.U *,jh .. ^%t <%j^ cyfe* c.ts9 Crfc»

DOCTRINE

AND

DISCIPLINE

OF

DIVORCE,

Rejlo/d to the good of both S e x e s*

I. BOOK.

The Preface.

That Ad an Is the occafton c.fhU oron wifeneSy In mofi of thofe evils which he imputes to Gods hflihwg. 7 he ahfurditj of our Cansnifts in their Decrees ab9Ht Divorce, The Chrifiian Imperial Laws framed vrith more EcjHity, 'the opinion of Hugo Grotias , and Paulus Fagius : And the fUrpofe in general ef this Difcotirfe,

'"% h ny men, whether it be their fate, or fond opini-

"^ on, eafily perfwade themfelves, if God would

but be pleas'd a while to withdraw his juRpu-

nifhmems from us, and to reftrain what power

e ther the Devi],orany earthly enemy hach to

Work us woe. that then itisns nature would find

iramediate r#0: and releafement from all evils.

But verily tliey who think fo, if they be fuch ag

hive a mind Isrs^e enough to take into their thoughts a general fur-

veyof humine thing', would foon prove themfelvcs in that opinion

for dcceiv'd. For though it were granted us by divir.e indulgence

li CO

2 Tij: 7)j5{nne and T>s[cif line (^/Divorce,

to be exempt from al! tint can be haraiful to us from without > yet the perve fenefs of our folly is To bene , that we (hould never iin hammering out of our own heart;, as it were out of a flmr, the feeds rindfparkles of new mifery to our felvcs , till all were in ablaze a- gain. And no marvel if out of our own hearts , for thsy are cvilj but even out of thofe things whic:i God zr.t?:nt us , either for a prin- cipal good, or a pure contentment , we are Hill h.itch.ng and contri- ving upon our felves matter of concinaal forrow and perplexity. What greater good to rasn than that revealed rule , whereby God vouchfafes to fhewu^ how he would be worfhipt ? And yet thit not righily uncierftood , became the caufe that once a famous vmn in if- raeicoM not but oblige hisconfcience t® be the facrificer ; or if nor, the jiylorofhis innocent and onely daughter. And was the caufe ofc- times thic Armies of valiant men have given up their throats to a heathenilh enemy on the Sab' ath-day : fondly thinking thdr defen- live refinance to be ss then a thing unlawful. What thing more in- ftitufed CO thefolaceand delight of man than marriage f and yet iht mif interpreting of fome Scripture diredcd mainly againft tihe abu- fers of the Law for divorce given by Mofes , hath chang d ihe blef- (Ing of Matrimony not feldom into a familiar and co inhabiting mifchief ; at leaft into a drooping and difconfolite houdiold cap' tivity , without refuge or redempnon. So ungovernM and fo wild a race doth fupcrRition run us from one extream of abufed liberty into the other of unmerciful redraint. For although God in the firft ordaining of marriage , taught us to whst end he did it,in words exprefly implying the apt and cheerful converfation of man with woman, to comtort and refrefi-i him of the evil and folitary life, not mentioning the purpofe of generation till afterwards , as being but a fecondary end indignity , though not in neceiHry ; yet now, if ?ny two be but once handed in theChDrc'^ , and have tailed in any fort the. nuptial bed , let them (and themfelves never fo miftak'n in their difpofitions through dny error, concealment, crmifidvtn- fare, thac through their d-ff-rent tempers , though:s, and conflitu- tions , they can neither be to one another a remedy ?g.inR lonelincfs, nor live in any union or contentment al! their daus , yet they (hall, f ) they be but found fuirably we:pon'J to the ieall po/libriry of fenfuJ injoyment , be made , fpighcof /imipaihj to fadge together, and combine as tliey may 'o their unfpeakab'evvearifomnefs and de- fpair of all fjci ible c'eligh: in the ordinance which God eQsb'ifhc to that very end. Whit a calimity is this ; 2nd as the wife-man if he

were

' RePor'd to J be good of both Sexes, 5'

were alive, would fighou: in his own Phrafe, what a/rf tvll U this fifider the Suk !, All which we can refer julUy to no Other authoic than the Canon Law and her adherents , not confuliing with chari- ty , the incerpreter and guid of our faich , but reHing in themeer element of the Text • doubtlefs by the policy of the devil to make th:it gracious ordinance become nnjupportable , that what with men not Itating to venrure upon wedlock, and What with men wearied outofir, all inordinate licence might abound. It was for many sges that marriage lay in difgrace with moft of the ancient Dodors, as a work of the fitfli, almoll a defilemeui: , wholly deny'd to Priefis, and the fccond time diflwaded to all , as he that reads Tertnllia'/t or lerom may fee ac large. Afterwards ic was brought fo Sacramental , that no adultery or dcfertion could difTolveit j and this is the fenfeofour Canon Courts in Ef^glnr^d to this day , but no other reforrred Church elfe : yet there remains in them alfo a burden on it as hea- vy as i\\t other two were difgraceful or fuperAitious , and of as much iniquity , croHing a Law not onely written by Afe/f/, butcha- raderM in us by nature, of more antiquity and deeper ground than marriage it felf-, which Law is to force nothing agiinft the faultlefs proprieties of nature : yet that this may be colourably done, our Sa- viours words touching divorce , are as it werecongeaTd into aflony rigor , inconfiftent both with his Dodrine and his office, and tha'c which he preacht oneiy to the confcicnce, is by Canonical tyranny fnatcht into the compulfive Cenfure of a Judicial Court , where Laws are imposed even againft the venerable and feccet power of na- tures itDpreifion, to love, what ever caufe be found to loath. Which is a hainous barbarifme both againft the honour of marriage , the dignity of man and his foul, the goodnefs of Chriftianity , and all the humane refpeds of civility. Notwithftanding that fome the wifeft and graveft among theCbriRianEmperours, who had about them, toconfult with , thofe of the Fathers then living; who for their learning and holinefs of life, are ftill with us in great renown, have made their Qatutes and edids concerning this debate far more eafieaud relenting in ma ny ncceflary cafes, wherein the Canon is inflexible. And Hf4go Grotim , a man of thefe times', one of the beft learned, fecms not obfcurely to adhere in his perfw^fion to the equity of thofe Imperial Decree?, in his Notes upon the Evangelift/'^ much alhying the outward roughnefs of the Text , which hath for the moft part been too immoderately expounded ^ and excites the diligence of others to inquire further into this queftion , as contain-

fi 2 ing

4 The 7)j^rine and T)i^ci^Une ofDWorce^

T)\ng many points that h.ive not yet been explain'd. Which ever like- ly to rem=^inintric^.te and hcpelefs Uj.-on the fuppofkiors commonly Ouck to the au:horicy of T^^.uhis 1: agius^ one fo learned and fo emi- nent in EngUndonct^ if it might perfv;,^2de, would ftrait pcqu'irt us with a fo'ution of thefe differences , no lefs prudent than compendi- ous. He in his Comment on the Pcmatcuch^ dotsbted not to m?.intain that Divorces might be as lawfully prrmitted by theMngiftrate to Chi-if[iin% as they were to the Jews. But becaufe he is but brief, and= thcfe things of great confequence nor to be kept obfcure, 1 {h:ill con- ceive it nothing above my duty , either for the difEcu'ty or the cen- fure that may pafs thereon, to communicite fuch thoughts as i alfo h:ive had, and do cff.r them now in this general labour of Reforma- tion, to the candid view of botlj Church and Mi'giilrare , especially becaufe I fee it the hope of good men , that thofe irregular and un- ipiritu.il Courts have fpun their utriioR ^Mt in this L..nJ, and fome better courfe muft now be confiituced. This therefore iliall be the- task ani period of this difcourfe to prove, firftthat other reafons of Divorce, befides Adultery , were by the Law of Mo[es^ and arc yec to be allow'd by the ChriQian M^giftrate £5 a piece of Juftice, and- that the words of Chriftare not hereby contraried. Next, that to prohibit abfolutely any Divorce whatfoever^exccptthofc which M&- ps excepted, is againO: the reafon of Law, as in due place 1 (h?\\ fhew outof Fagi us with many additions. He therefore who by adventu-- ring, (hiii be fo happy as with fuccefs to light the way of fuch an. expedient liberty and truth as this, (hall reftore the much-wrong'd and over-forrow'd (late of Matrimony, not only to thofe merciful tMd life-giving remedies of Mefts^ but, as much as may be, to that f^rene and biifsful condition it was in at the beginning, and (hull de-- ferveof alUpprehenfivc men confideringtbe troublet and dillerapers which for want of thisinfight have been fo ok in Kingdoms, in States and Families) (hall deferveto be rcckon'd among thepublick Bene- factors of civil and humane life , above the Inventors of Wine and Oyi i for this is a far dearer, far nobler, and mo;e dcfirablecherifll- ing to mans life , unworthily expos'd to fadnefs and mift.ke , which lieilnl! vindicate. Noc that licence, and levety, and unconfentcd breach of fiith fliould herein be countenanc't , but that fome conQ:i- on^We and tender pitty might be had of thofe who have unwarily in a thing they never pra'5ls'd before , made themfelves the Bondnnen of a luckLfs and helplefs Matrimony. In which Argument, he whofe- courage can fervehim to give the firft on-fet, muft look for two feve-

ral

Rcjfor'd to the good of both Sexe^. 5

rat oppofitious ; the one from chem who hav^^ fworn t';emfcives to long Cuilom , and the lecter of the Text , will not out of the road : the OLh;:r froixi thofe whofe grofs and vulgar ?pprehen(ions conccii: but low of marrinonij! purpofcs, and in the Wvrkof Male andFe- m.dethink they hive all. Neverthelefs , it fhdl be here fought by due vv.iys to be made nppe.ir, that thofe words of God in the iiiQitu. tion, promifinga meei; help agiin'l I 'nclinefs , and thofe words cf Chrilt, That his jck? is cafie^ and his (parden light ^ were not fpoken in vain, for if the knot of marriage may in no cife bcdi(ro;v'd buc for adultery, all the burd'ns nnd Services of the Law sre not fo in- tolerable. This only is defir'd of them who are minded to judge feirdly of thus m^iintaining, that they would be Hill, and h;-;ir all out, northiuK itequil to anfwer deliberate reaf-n with (udden he^?: and noife ■ reraembring this, that many truths now of Reverend elieem and credit, had their birth and beginning once from lingular and private thoughts, while the moO: of ?■ tn wereotherwife pnfTert, and had the fate at firll: to b gentraily exploded and exclr m'd on by many violent oppofers •, yet 1 may erre perhaps in fooLhirg my k\^, tiiat this pre fent truth reviv'd, will deferve on all hands to be not fi- nifterl ' received, in that ic undertakes the cure of an inveterate' difeafe crept into the beii part of humane fociety ; and to do this with nofmartingcorrofive, but with a fmooth and plea fir g lefTon, which receiv'd h rh the vertue to foften and difpel rooted an J knot- ty forrows : and without inch:^ntment if that be fear'd , or fpell Bi'djhith regard at once both to ferious pitty, and upright honefty ^ that tends to the redeeming and relloring of none but fuch as are the obje<3: of compafiion , having in an ill hour hamper'd theinfe'.ves to the utfer difpatch of ail their mo:t beloved comforis and repofe for this lives term. But ii we (hall obnin.itely d.fl ke this new over- tu^'eofunexp 6^edeafe and recovery , what remains bucto deplore the frowardnefs of our hopelef: condition, '/ hich neither cm indnre iheeftate we are ''n , nor adxit of remedy ciiher flrrp or fweet. Sh^.rpwe our felves dillail ; and fwcet, under whofe h:^nd5Weare, is fcrupl'd and fufpedcd as too 'ufhious. 'n fuch a poHure Chrilt found the Jem, who were neither won with the aufierity cf %ch4 ths ^aftifl^ and thought it too much licence to follow freely thecharm- ingpipeof him who founded and proclaimed liber-x^Tind relief to -ll dillre^es : yet Truth in fome Age or ot er will find her wicncf?, and (Ball be jufiifiM at Igft by her own children.

.'___... B3 CHAP,

6 TheT^ochine andT^i^ci^live ofT:>\vorcQj

c H ^ P. I.

Ths pcfttioffy Frovd hj the Law of Mofe^. That Latv expounded and ajfmedto a moral and charitfible ufe^firft Ij Paulus Fagius, mxt yith othsr addition!.

TO r-€move therefore if it be pofTible , tbi great and fad oppref- (lon whic h through the llriLi nefs of of a literal inCerpretirghath invaded and diflurb'd the dearefl and mod pe?ce&b!e ciiate otboof- hould fociecy, to the over burtliening, if notthe over-wbelmingof many Chniliars better, worth than to be fo dtfeitedof the Churches cor.iiderate care , this poHtion (hull be l^id down , firfl p- oving , then anfwering what niay be objec; ed either from Scripture or light of reafon.

Thiit indifp^'fitlon, M^fltnefs^ cr contr^r'tety of mmdyarijingfrem a caufe in nature ur.chiingeahle^ hindrlr.g^ and ever likdj to hinder the main he mfits of conjugal /octet y which are f&lace and peace ^ is a greater reafon of divorce than natural figiditj, efpcciall) f there be no Children^ and that there be mutual conjent.

This I gather from the Law in Dent. 24. i . IVh^n a man hath tal(n a wife and married her , and it come to pafs that Jhe fnd mfa'vcur in his ejes, becaufe he hath fbund fome uncleannefs in her ^ Let him write her A bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand^^.nd fend her out of his hofife,^c* This Law, if the words of Chrifl: may be admitted into our belief , fball never while the world flands, for him be abrogated. Firft there- fore Ihere fet down what learned Fagius bath obferv'd on this Law; The La^ ofGod^Cdth he, permnted divorce for the help of humane weak- tiefs, ¥or every one that ofn?ceJJityfeperates , cannot live Jingle, That Chrifl deny d divorce to his own, hinders net ; for what is that to the unrc generate , W'bo hath not attain d fuch ptrftUion f Let not the remedy be defpisdwhich was giv'n toweakj'iefs.And^hen Chrifl faith^'^bo marries the dtvorc't commits adultery^ it is to be underflood if he had arj plot in the divorce -1 he reft I referve until it be difputed^how the Magiftr.ite is to do herein. From hence we may plainly difcern a two- fold confidera- tion in this Law. Firft the end of the Law-giver, and the proper aft of the Law to command or to allow fomething juft and honeft or in- diflferent. Secondly, his fufferance from fome accidental refultof e- vil by this allowance, which the Law cannot remedy. Forifthis Law have no other end or ad but onely theallowance of a (in, though never to fo good intention, that Law is no Law but fin muffl'd in the ffobe of Law, cr Law difguis'd in the loofe garment of fm. Both which

are

ReJIor'd to the gcod of both Sexer. 7

are roo foul Hyj>o':hefcs to fave the PhitnomefJo-rt of our Saviours anfwer to ch-e Pharifes about this matter. Ani I trail: anon by the help of an infallible gii'de to perfcdfuch jPr/^;i»/Vj^ tables as ih ill mend the ^Jlronomjo^ our wide expofitors.

The caufe of divorce mention'd in the L<iw istranflited [omeun- eleamefs but *ia the Hebrew it founds fiakcdnejs of o^^ht cr any real nnksdnefs : which by all the learned in*erprecers is rcfer'd to the mind as well as to t'le body. And what greater nakednefs or unficnefs of mind then that which hinders ever the folace and peaceful fociety of the mirried couple, and what hinders chat niore than the unfitnefs anddefeftiv.ncfs of an unconjugil mind. The caufe therefore of divorce cxpreO: in the pofition cannot but agree wirh that defcrib'd in the befl and equalled fence of Mofa Law. Which being a matter of pare char ty , is plainly mora^ and more nowin force then ever: therefore fure'y lawful. For if under the Law fuch was Gods gra- cious indulgence , as not to fuffer the ordinance of his goodnefs and favour , through any error to be fer'd ani ftigmatiz'd upon his fcr-^ vants to their raifery and thraldome ; much lefs will he fuflfer it now under the covenant of grace , by ab^ogiting his former grant of re- medy' and relief. But the firO: iaRicucion wil! be objeded to have or- dain'd mirriage unfeperable. To that a little patience until ihs firfl: pirc have amply difcourPJ the grave and pious reafons of this divarfive Law • and then I doubt no: bat with one gentle Piroaking ro wipe av'ay ten thoufand tears oat of the life of man. Yet thus much Ifhill nowinfifton, that whatever the inftitution were, ic could not b^ fo emrmoas, nor fo reSellious agiinft both n?.ture and reafon al to exalt it felf above the end aniperfon for whom it was inftitu- ted.

C H A P. I L

The frji reafon of this Law groPind(d on the prime rf^fjff of tnifitYifKcnj , That no ccv'nt i^h^' fiever ob-ltges ^gai»JT the mdn et^d ipcth cf it felf 4iriief the farties cov'mKtlng,

F Or all fence and equity reclaims th.n any L?iV7or Ccv'nanr Ix'-w folen^ne or ftraitjoever , either hetwee n Go.l ard man, or mm gnd mm, though of Gods jTyning ^ (hnild bind p.^^iinfl n p imcand principal fcopeof its own inftiEution , and of Loih or ciiher i'arty,

CO-.

8 The "Boihine and T^i^cij^lhie (^/Divorce,

covenanting : ne'ther can ic be of force to ing^ge a blarnelefs creature to his own perperu^l forrow, mirink'nfor bisexpe^ed fol^ce, with- out fuOfering Charity to llep in and do a confeil: good work of part- inf? thofe whom noihtrtgh;>lds tog^f her » but this of Gods /oyning, fa'dy fopposM sgiind [he csprtTs end of his own Ordinance. And what this chit'f end wis or creiting Woman to be jcynd with man, 'liis own inflitiuing worJs decl.ire, nnd are infallible toinforin us what is mirri ge,,and what is no marriage-, unkfs we can think them fee thereto no purpofe .- h is rot good.^ fjich he, that manjhould he alons, ImllffJAhe him^nh Ip meet for Iv-^n. Froiii wh ch words (o plain, lefs cannot be concluded , nor is by any learned Interpreter , than chat: in Gods indention a meet and h^pp)' converfacion is the chiefcH: and the nobiefl end of marriage^ for we find here no exprefiion fo re- ceffarily imp:ying carnal know!eJg,as this p:'event:on of lonelinefs to the mind and fpir c of man. To this,F^^/«/, Cahln^ Pareus^ Rivetns, .as wilinglyand large'y ailent as canbewifhc. And indeed it is a .greater blelllrg from God , more worthy fo excellent a creature as man is, and a higher end to honour and f^ndifiethe league of marri- age , when as the folace and fati^fadion of th^ mind is r.garded aad P'ovided for before the fenGcive pleafing of the body. And with al! generous perfons married thus it is, that where the mind and perfon pleafes aptly , there fome unaccomplifhment of the bodies delight miy be better born with, than when the mind bangs off in anun- clofing difproportion, though the body be as it ought; for there all corporal delight wiil foon become unfavoury and contemptible. And thefolitarinefsof man, which God bad namely and principally ordered to prevet by marriage, hath no remedy, but lies under a worfe condition than, the ionelied Tingle life ; for in fingle life the f.bfence and remotenefs of a htlper might inure himtoexpe;^ his own comforts out of himfelf, or to fcek with hope j but here the continual fight of his deluded choughcs without cure , mud needs be to him, if erpeci:illy h's complexion incline him /o melancholy, a daily trouble and pajn of lofs, in fome degree, like that which Re- probates feel. Left therefore fo noble a creature as man fhould be ihut up incurablv under a worfe evil by an eafie miHake in that Or- dinance wbich God gave him to remedy a lefs evil, reaping to jiimfelf forrow while he went to rid away folitarinefs, it cannot a- void to be concluded , tl-at if the woman be naturally fo of difpo- ^rion, fs will not help to remo^ve , 1 ut help to increafe that fame €^i i'oibidd'niondir.efs , whic'b will in tirue draw on v^iih it a ge- ntry

Rcfxord to the gcod of both Sexes. 9

neral difcom^orc and dejedion of mind , not bcfcemirg tkherChri- {lian profeflion or mora! converfuion , nnproficr.ble abd dangeroiFs to the Commonvvealch , when the houftiolJ e^ite, out of which muRfiourifli forth the vigor -^nd fpiric of all public kenterprizes , is fo ill contented and procur'd at home, and cannot be iupporced; fuch A marriage can be no mnrriage , whereto the moil: honed end is w?.nting : and theagrieved p^rfon (hall do more manly, to be ex- traordinary andfingiilar indaiming the due right whereof he isfru- flrated , than to piece up his loO: contentment by vifiting the Scew?, or f^epping to his neighbours bed ; which is the common (liifc in this misfortune : or c!fe by fuffering his ufeful life to wadeaway , and be loft under a fecret affiidion of an unconfcionablefize to humane ftrength. Againft all whiih evils the mercy of this Mofaick Law was gracioufly exhibited.

CHAP. III. 'The igftorafice and iniquity &f Canon Law , froviding for the right of the body in marriage , ^wr nothing for the wrongs and grievances of the mind. An OtjeElion , That the mind Jhonldbe better ioo^t to before contract i anfrvcred.

pjdw vain therefore is it , and how prepoftcrous in the Canon Law, to' have made fuch careful provifion againfl the impedi- ment of carnal performance , and to have had no care about the un- converfing inability of mind, fodefedive to the pureft and mod facred end of mnrimony : and that the vefTel of voluptuous enjoy- ment mud be madegood on him that has taken it upon truft, with- 'ont any caution • when as the mind , from whence mufl flow the ads of peace and love , a far more precious mixture than the quin- tefTence of an cxcrenrent , tbe^gh it be found never fo deficient and unable to perform the bed duty of marringc in a cheerful and agree- able converfacion, fhall t)e thought good enough , however flitand melancholious it be, and mui^ ferve, though to the eternal diflur- bance and langu!(hm;» of him that complains him Yet wifdom and charity Weighing Gods own inftitution , would think that the pningoFa ^sd fpirit wedded to lonelinefs, fhould defervetobe freed, as Well as the inpatience of a fcnfual defire fo providently relieved. Tis read to us in the Liturgy, that ive mufl not marrj to fa i fie the pjhlj appetite , like brute beafis , that have no underjlandif^g ; but

C the

lO The 7)o5{rine and T)i ^ciflhie 0/ Divorce,

the Canon fo runs , as if it dreamt of no other matter than fuch an appetite to be fAtisFi'd •, for if it happen that nature hath (iopt or cx- tinguiftit the veins of fenfuality, tb-t marriage was annulled. But though all the faculties of the onderftandingand converfing part afcer trial appear Co be fo ill and fo averfly met through natures unaltera- ble working, as that neither peace, nor any fociable contentment can follow, 'tis ss noching, the contra^ (hall Hand as firm as ever, betide what will. What is this but fecretly to inQrud U5. that how- ever many grave reafons are pretended to the married life , yet that nothing indeed is thought worth reg=;rd therein , but the prefcribd fatisfadion of an irnnional heat ; which cannot be but ignominious to the Rate of marriage , didionourab'e to the undervalud foul of aTian , and even to ChriCtian Dodrine it felf. Wh le it feems mere mov'd at the difappointingof an impetuous nerve , than at the inge- nuous grievance of a mind unreafonably yo kt; and to place more of marriage in the channel ©f concupifcence, than in the pu^'e in- fluence of peace and love, whereof the fouls lawful contentment is the one oncly fountain.

But fome are ready to objed , that the difpofition ought fcrioufly to be confidcr'd before. But let them know again , that for all the warinefs can be us'd , it may yet befal a difcreet man to be mi[lak*n in his choice, and we have plenty of examples. The fobrefl: and bed govern'dmenareleaftpradiz'd in thefe affairs; and who knows not that the bafhful mutenefs of a virgin may oft-times hii/e all the un- iivelinefs and natural floth which is really unfit for convcrfation ; nor is there that freedom of accefs granted or prefumM , as may fufficeto a perfeft difccrning till too late; and where any difpofi- tion isfufpcded, what more ufual than the perfwafion of friends^ that acqnaintancc , as it incrcafes , will amend all. And lailly , it is not Orange though many who have fpent their youth chaftly , are in fome things not fo quick- fighted , while they haft fo eagerly to light the nupt al torch ^ nor i? it therefore that for a modeft error a man fhou! ] forfeit fo great a haj pi efs . and no charitable means to releafe him. Since they who h :ve liv'd moll Icpfeiy by rcafon of their bold arcnfloming , prove moR: fuccefsful in their matches., be- caufe rheir wild nffe^'ons unferjing a: will , have been as fomany divorces to te :ch them cxpericnie. Wfitn as the fobcr man honou- ring the 'i.ppe irance of modefty , and hoping well of every f(>cial vertue wnd^ax the vail, ,maye?fi y chance to meet, if not wirh a body imp?nttrable, yet often with a mind to all other due convcr- fation

Rcflord to^ the good of both Sexes. 1 1

fationinacceflible, and to all the more eftimab'e and fuperiour pnr- pofes of Matrimony ufeltfs and almoft livclcfs: and what a folace, what a fit help fuch a Conforc would be through the whole life of a man, is lefs pain to conj dure than to have experience.

CHAP. IV.

Th? fecond Re^fon of thii Z^W , ^hecapife without It ^ marriage as it hapfns eft is not a remedy of that which it from'fsy as a^'j rational' creature would expe[l. That marriage , // we pattern from the he- ginning, as our Savlo-ir bids, was not proptrljthe remedy of lufi^ but the fulfilling of conjugal Lve and helpfulnefs. ^

ANd that we may further fee what a violent cruel thing it i$ to force the continuing of thofe together, whom God and Na- ture inth- gentleftend of marriage never joyn'd, divers evils and ex- tremities that follow lipon fuch a compulfion, fball here be fet in view.Of evils, the firft and greatefl is, that hereby a mod abiurd and ra(h imputation is fixt upon God and his holy Laws, of conniving and difpencing with open and common adultery smong his chofen people ; a thing which the rankeft Politician would think it fliame and difworfhip that his Laws (hould countenance : how and in what manner that comet topafs, I ftiall referve , till the courfcof method brings on the unfolding of many Scriptures. Next the Law awdGofpcl are hereby made liable to more than one contradiftion, which 1 refer aifo thither. Lafily, the fupremedJdate of Charity is hereby m?.ny ways negleded and violated -, which I fhall forth- with addrefs to prove. Firft, we know S. Paul faith , It'n better to marry than to bum. Marriage therefore w^s giv'n as a remedy of that trouble^ but whu might this birning mean? Certainly not the meer motion of carnal luft, not the mcer goad of a fcnlitive defire, God does not principally take c^re for fuch Cattle. What is it then but that defire which God put into Jd^-m in Paradife before he knew the /in of Incontincnre ^ that defire which God faw it W3s not good that m^n fhould be left alone to burn in, the delire and longing to put off an unkindly folitarincfs by unicing anocler bo- dy, but not without a fie foul to his in thechearfu! fociety of Wed- lock : Which if it were fo netdful before the fnll, when m-^.n was much more perfect in himfcif , how much more is it needful now

C 2 againft

1 2. The T>octnne and T)i[cipline 0/ Divorce,

againd all the forrows and cafu ikies of this hfe to have an intima'te and/peakingheip, a ready and reviving aHbciue in marriage ; vvh.re* of whomilTiS, by chmcing on a muce and I'.ir.ijcfs mace , remains more alone chin before , and in a biirning lefs co becontuin'd then thic which is flcfhly and more to be confiderM ; as being m re deep- ly rooted even in thefaulciefs innocence of nature- As for that oihcr- burning, which is bat as it were the venorae of a lufty and over^ abounding concodion, flrid life and labour, with the abatement of a fulldiet, may keep thatlowand obedient enough; bat thispure and more inbr;:d deflre of joyning to it fdf in conjiigil fcllowflaip a fie converfing foal ('which defire is properly called lovej is ftrongerthan death J as the fpoufe of ChriO: thought , many waters cannot amnch ity fieither can the floods drown it. This is that rational burning that mar- riage is to remedy , not CO be allay'd with fading, nor with any pe- nance to be fubdu'd ; which ho^v can he sff^vage who by mifhap bath mec the moO: unmeetell: and unfutable mind? Who hath the power toftruggle wich an intelligible flime, not in Paradice toberelifted, become now more ardent by being fail'd of what in reafon it lookc for; and even then moLlunqucncht, when the importunity of a pro- vender burniiig is wdl enough appeas'd ; and yet the foul hath ob- tained nothing of what it jufily defire?. Certainly fuch a one forbid- den to divorce , is in effed forbidden to marry, and compeil'd to greater difficulties than in a fing!e life ; for if there be not a more hu- mane burn ng, which marriage raufl; fatisfie, or elfe may be difforvd^ rhan that of copulation, marriage cannot be honourable Tor the meet reducing and terminating luft between two : feeing many beadsin voluntary and chofen couples , live together as un?.dultcroufl/ , and are as truly married in thacrefpcd:. But all ingenious men will iec liut the dignity and bjcl!ingof marriage is plac'c rather in the mutu- al enjoyment of that which the wanting foul needfully fecks , than of that which the plenteous body would joyFulIy giveaway. Hence it h chit PLito in his reftiv?,! difcourfe brings in Socrates relating what be fain'd to have le.irnr from the Propherefs Diotima ^ how Lovt wnsthe fonne of Pemrj , bcgo: of Plenty in the Garden of Jufher. Which divinely fores with thit wh:"ch in tffe6i: Mofcs tells us , that Iv^e, was the fon of Lonelinefs^ begot in para^jcc by that fociable r.nd helpful apiKude which God implanted between man ar.d woman toward e;;ch othe-,. The Tme alfo is that burning mentioned b/ S. Pa'Al\ whereof nrrringe ought to be the remedy j the L-lefh haih o.ber, mutur.l and ealieturbs which arein the power of any tempe- rate

Reflor'd to the good of both Sexes, ii,

Tatemin. When therefore this original and finlefs Penury or LoKeliyicfs of che fou! cannoc hy ic fclr down by the fide ot fuch 2i meet and ac- cepcable union as God ordain'd in mirna^e, at le.^ft in fome propor- tion, ic cinnoc conceive and bring forth Lovi, bur remains utterly un- married under a formal Wedlock, and flill burns in the proper mean- ing of S. T^.^^'. Then enters H^te , not thu H\te that, fins, buc th.u which onely is natural difTicisfad^ion and the turning afide from a midakenubjt^ .- [^ that milUke have done injary , it fails not to difmifs with recoiipence ■ for to retain iLliand not be able to love, « to he.^pupmore injury. Thence this wif:i and pious Law of dif- miHion now defended took beginning : He therefore who lacking of his due in the mod native and humane enl of marriage , thinks it better to part than to live fadly and injurioudy to that cheerful covenant; for not to be belov'd, and yet retained is the greited injury to a geitle fpiri t}he I fay.who therefore feeks to partes one who high- ly honours the mirriediife and wouU uot ftain ic ; and the reafons which now move- him to d;vorce , are equal to the beii o^ thofe that coulcf firil warrant him to marry •, for , as was piainlr fliewn, both the hate which now diverts him and the lonelinefs which lends him {lill powerfully to feck a fi: hirlp , hi h not rhe leaflgr iin of a fjn irj ir, if he be worthy to underRand hi nfelf.

C H A P. V.

T.he third reafon of thif Larr>^lpecapfp ivUhom :'t^ he who has happnd Kvherc he y^ds nothing hut remcdilefs offences and difcontenis, is in mere and greater t mptaticns than ever hforc.

THirJ y. Yet it is next to be fear'd, u h'e nninbe riii honftd wth- out re-^Ton by a deaf rigor, that ivhen be perceives the- juR ex- pedanceof his mind c efeared , he will begin even agunft Law to ■ c\ft abou: w^ere he may fi d his fatlsfadtion mce comp'eat , unlefs he be a ihiiig heroically v rtuous , and that ore not the common lamp of men f r wh^om chiefly the L^ws ought to be made,thoU'gh notto :heirfins yetto thiir unfinni g weakntfTcs, it being above their flrengch to endure the lonely eft ate , which while they fhun'd, , they are Rfn into. And yet there follows upon this a worfe cenr;pta- tion ; for if he be fuch cis hath (pent his \outh unbb.mibly andla-d \}^ his chic'eft earthly comforts in the enfovmentj of a contented marriage, nor did negled thatfurt enncc which was tobcob:-un'u therein by conftant prayers , when he (hail find himfelf bound fall lo

an .

14 T^^ T>ociri?ie and Difcip live t^f Divorce,

3n uncomplying difcord of nature, or, as icofc h-ippcns, to an image of Earih and t ieam, with whom he lookt to be the Copartner o\ a fvveec and ghdfome foe ety, and fees withal that his bondage is now insvicibic, chough he be amiolt the ftrongefl Chriftian, he will be ready to dcfpAir in ver:ue,and mudne sgainll Divire Providence , and c isdou tleisis the reafonof thofe lapfes and chit melancholly de- ipair which we f^e in many wedded perfons, though they underfcand ic not, or pre:end other caufes, becaufc they know no remedy , and is of extream dinger^ therefore when'humane frailty furchargd, is at fuch a lofs, chancy oughc to venture much , and ufe bold Phyfitk, left an over-tol^ faith indanger to fhipwrack,

C H a P. V I. The fourth Reafon of this L vo^ thdt God regards love Andj>eace in tht family^ more than a ctrnpnlfive performance of marriage , fpkich is mare hrok^e bj agritvous continuance y than hj aneedfnl divorce.

Fourthly, Marriage is a Cov'nant , the very being whereof con- fifts not in a forc'c cohabitation , and counterfeit performance of duties, but in unf-igned love and peace : And of Matrimonial love, no doubt but that was chit fiy meant, which by the ancient Sages was thus parabrd ; That love , if he be not twin-born, yet hath a brother wondrous like him, ca rd Anteros-^ whom while he feeks all about, his chance is to meet with many falls and feigning defires that wander (irgly up and down in her likencfs : By them in their borrowed garb, Love though not wholly blind, as Poets wrong him^ yet having but one eye, as being born an Archer aiming, and thac eye not the quickeft in this dark Region here below , which is not Loves proper Sphere, partly out of the fimplicity and credulity which is native to him, often deceiv'd, imbraccs and conforms him with thefe obvious and fubborned Striplings, as if they were his Mothers own Sons ; for lo he thinks them, while they fubtly keep themfelves ffioft on his blind fide. But after a whi e, as his manner is, when foaringup into the high Tower of his Apog^um , above the fha- dow of the Earth , he darts ou: the diredi rays of his then mod piercing cy^ fight upon the Impoftures, and trim dTguizes that •wcreus'd with him, and difcerns that this is not his genuine brother, asheiiiagin'd, he has no longer the powet to hold fellowdiip wich fuch a perfonal Mate. For ftrait his arrows loofe their golden head', and Qied their purple feathers, his filk'n Breads untwine, and f].ip their knots, and that original and fiery vertue giv'n him by fate, all on a fudden goes out, and leaves him undeifi'd and dcfpoii d of

ail

Rejlord to the good of both Scxcr. i ^

all his i<>''(:t , til! finding Arteros at lafl , he kindles and repairs the al.noft faded smmunicion of his Deity by the refiedionof a coequal snd hmogenealhrc. Thus mine Author fung if tome; and by the leave of thofe who would be counted the only grave ones, this Ij no mecr am^torious novel ( though to be wife ard skilful inthefe raar- ters, men heretofore of g-eatefl name in vertue , have fflecmed ic one of the highefl: Arks that humane contemplation circ'ing up- wards, cin make from the globy Sea whereon (he ftaDd5}but this is a deep and ferious verity , fliewing us that Love in marriage cannot live nor fubfift unlefs it be mutual ; and where love cannot be, there can be left of Wedlock nothing , but the empty husk of an ourfide Matrimony, as undcirghtful and unpleafing to God, as any other kind of hypocrite So far is his command from tying men to the obfer- vanceof duic' whi.h there is no help for, but they muft be diffcm- bi*d If Sel'imons advice be noc over-frolick, Live j'jf^i^y-) faith he, 7f it h the vpife whom thou/ovcfi, all thy days ^ for that is thy portion. How then, where we find icimpoflible to rejoyce or to love, can we obey this precept? howmiferably do we defraud our fchesof that com- fortable portion <. hich God gives us , by driving vainly to glue an error together which God and nature will no: joyn, adding but more vexation and violence to that blifsfui fociety byour importunate fu- perftition, that w llnot hearken ro S. Faul, i Cor 7. who fpeaking of marriage and divorce, determines plain enough in general , that God ihtvc\nhath call* ci hs to peace ^ and not to bondage. Yea God himfelf commands in his Law more than once , and by his Prophet M^Uchy^ zsC'^lvinandt e bed tranflations read, that he tvho bates let kirn divorce^ th.u i , he who cannot love. Hence is it that the I^aif- hirts and Maimmdes , famous among the reft in a Book of his fee forth by Buxtorfii^, te Is us that Divorce wa: permitted i^y WoUs t9 preferve peace in marriage ^ and quiet in the f^wily. Surely the Jews bad cheir faving peace about them, as well as we^ yet care was tak'n that ths wholcfome provifion for houfhold peace (hould alfo be al- lowed th'-m, snd mufl this be deni'd to Chrifii'^ns? O perverfcnefs ! that the L-.w fhonld be m de more provident of peace-making than the GofpJl that the Gofpel (hoM be pur to beg a moft necef- fary help of mercy from the I aw , but mufl not have it; and that togr nd in the Mill of an undclighted and fervile copulation, mu'l be the only forc'c work of a Chrillian marrirge oft-times with fuchayok: fellow ^ from when both love and peace, both nature and Religion mourns to be fcparatcd. I cannot therefore be fo diffi- dent,

1 6 The "Dolhinc avd T:i{ciflive c/Divorce,

dent, as not fecurely to conclude, that he who can receive nothing of the moft importanc helps in marriage, being thereby difinabl'd to re= turn thatducy which 's his, with a clear and hearty countenincc •, and thus continues to grieve whom he would not , and is no lefs griev'd, that mm ought even for loves fake and peace ro move Divorce upon gooi and liberal conditions to the divorc't. And it is a lefs breach of Wedlock to part with wife and quiet conftnc betinr.es, then (1111 to foil and profane that myilery of joy and union with a polluting fidnefs and perpetual diilemper -^ for it is not the outward conrinuingof marrij?ge that keeps whole that cov'nsnt , but whatfoever does moft according to peace and love, whether in marriage or in divorce, heicis that breaks marriage iedl^ it being fo often written , that k^veomli is the. fuJfi lif^g of ev. rj Con.njandcmcyit.

CH AP. VH. The fifth Reafof^^that nothing more hinder s and di^pirhs the ^hole life </ a Chrifiian^ then a matrimony found to be Hncurahl) unfit , and doth ' the fame in (ffcd; that an Idolatrous match.

pifthly, asthofc Prieds of old were not tobe long in for row , or if they were, they could not rightly execute dieir fundion j fo eve- ry true Chriftian in a higher order of Pneflhocd b a perfon dedi- cate to ja>y and peace , offering himfejf a lively facrifice of praife ard ihankfgiving , and there is no Chriflianducy that is not to be fea- fon'd and fet off with cheerifhnefs ; which in a thoufand outward and intermitting croffes may yet be done well, as in this vale of tears, but in fuch abofomenfflidion as this, crufhing the very foundation of his inmoll nature, when he (hall be forc't to love againft a poflibili- ty , andtoufeadiflimulation againft his foul in the perpetual and ■ceafelefs duties of a husband, doubtlefs hii whole duty of ferving God muft needs be blurr'd and tainted with a fadunpreparednefs and dc- ■jedion of fpiri: , wherein God has no delight. Who kt?> not there- fore how much more Chri tianity it would be to break by divorce .that which is more broken by undue and forcible keeping , rather than ro avtr the altar of the Lord with continual tears ^ fotbat he re^ gardeth notthe offering any more ^ rather than that the whole worihip ,ofa Chriflian mans life ftwuld languifh and fadeaway beneath the weight of an immeafurablegri^fand difcouragemenr. And becaufe Tome think the children of a fecond matrimony fucceeding a di- vorce* would not be a holy itcA^ it hincler'd not the Jews from being •lb • a^d why fbouM we not think them more holy than the cfiT fprir^g

■ ■"■ 'of

Reftor'd to the good of loth Sexes, 1 7

of a former ill-twifted Wedlock, begott'n only out of a beaftial ne- cefiity , without any true love or contentment, or joy to their Pa- rents, fo that in fome fenfviwemiy call them the ChiUren of wrai^ and an^Liifli , which will as I.ttie conduce to their fandifying, as if they had been Baftards , for nothing more ihan dillurbanceof mind fufpends us from approaching to God : Such a diRurbance efpecially, as both afl'aults our faith and trufl in Gods providence, and ends, if there be not a miracle of venue on cither fi.fe, not only in bitterncfs and wrath, the Canker of Devotion, but inadefperate and vicious carelefnefs,when he fees himfelf without fault of his , train'd by a deceitful bait into a fnsreof roifery , betray'd by an alluring Ordi- nance, and then made the thrall of heavinefs and difcomfort by an undivorcing Law of God, as he erronioufly thinks, but of mans ini- quity, as the* truth is- for that God prefers the free and chearful worfhipofaChriftian, before the grievous and exad:ed obfervance of an unhappy marriage, befides that the general maximes of Reli- gion afTurcus, will be more manifeft by drawing a parallel argument from the ground of divorcing an Idolatrefs, which was, left he (hoiild alienate his heart from the true worftiipof God: and what difference is there whether (lie pervert him to fuperdition by her inticing Sorcery , or difinable him in the whole fervice of God through the diilurbance of her unhelpful and unfit fociety-, and fo drive him at laft , through murmuring and defpair, to thoughts of Atheifm; neither doth it leffen the caufe of feparating, in that the one willingly allures him from the Faith , the other perhaps unwil- lingly drives him •, for in the account oi God it comes all to one, that the Wife loofes him a fervant •, and therefore by all the united force of the Decalogue (he ought to be disbanded, unlefs we muft fet Marriage above God and Charity, which is a Doftrinc of Devils, no iefs than forbidding to marry.

CHAP. VIM.

That an Idolatrous Heretick^ ought to be divorc*t after a Convemeftt fpace gtv*» to hope of convtrfon. That place of Corinth. 7. reflord from a twofold erronious Expofition , and that the common Expcjiters fiatly covtradEi the Moral Law.

ANd here by the way, to illuftrate the whole queftien of d vorce, e're this Treatife end, I ihali not be loth to fpend a few lines in hope to give a full rcfolve of that which is yet fo much controverted, whether an Idolatrous Heretick ought to be divorcee. To the re-

D folving

I S The 7)ocfnne andT>ip:ipline of Divorce,

folving whereof we muft firft know, thatihe Jews were commanded to divorce an unbelieving Gentile for two caufes : Firfl , becaufe ali other Nation?, efpecifllly che Canaamtes^ were to them unclean. Se- condly, to avoid feducement. That other Nations were to the Jenvs im;:ure, even tothefeparsting of Marriage, will appear outof £Ar- od. 34. 16. Dent. J, 1,6. compar'd with Ezra^.z, alfoChap. 10. 10, II. NeJoem, 13. 30. This was the ground of that doubt rais'd among the CormthUyis by fome of the Circumcifion ; Whether an unbeliever were not ftill to be counted an unclean thing, fo as that they ought to divorce from fuch a perfon. This doubt of theirs S. Paul nmoves by an Evangelical reafon^ having refped to that Vi- fion of S. Peter, wherein the diftincftionof clean and unclean being aboliftic, ail living Creatures were fandified to a pureandChridian ufe, and mankind efpecially, now invited by a general call to the Co- venant of Grace. Therefore faith S Paul ^ The unbelieving wife is fmclifi'd hjthe Hmhand-, that is, made pure and lawful to his ufe, fo that, he need not put her away for fear , left her unbelief (hould de- file him •, but that if he found her love ftili towards h m , he might rather hope to win her. The fecond reafon of that divorce was to a- void feducement, as is proved by comparing thofc placesof the Law, to that which Ez^ra ard Nehemiah did by Divine Warrant in com- pelling the Jews to forgo their Wives. And this reafon is moral and perpetual in the rule of Chriftian Faith without evafion^ therefore faith the A poftle, 2 Cor 6. Af if- yoke not together mtJo Jnfldels, which 15 interpreted of Marriage in the firfl place. And although the for. mer legal pollution be now done off, yet there is a fpiritual contagion in Idolatry as much to be fhun d; and though feducement were not to be fear*d , yet where there is no hope of converting, there always ought to be a certain religious averfation and abhorring , which can noway fort with Marriage; Therefore faith S.Paul^ prhat felloyvfhlp hath right eottfnefs withnnrgkeoufyiefs f ^hat communion hdth iig^ht with darl^ffs r what concord hath Chrifl with Be/iaH what fan h^th he thathelieveth rdth an Infidel f And in the next verfe but one, he moralizes and makes us liable to that command of Ifaiah; Wherefore come out from amonji them, and be ye fefarate ^ faith the Lord , touch not the unclean thing , and I will receive Je. And this command thus Gofpelliz'd to us, hath the fame force with that whereon £^f^ grounded the pious neceflity of divorcing. Neither had be other commiffion for what he did, then fuch a general com- mand in Def^, as this, nay not fo direft; for he is bid there not to

marry.

Rejlord to iloe good of both Sexes. 1 9

marry, but not bid co divorce, and yet we fee with what a zeal and confiience he was the Author of a general divorce between the faithful and unfai.hfLil k^A. TheGofpcl is moreplanly on his fide, according to three of the Evangelil}? , then the words of the Law-, for where the cafe of divorce is hindled with fuch a feverity as was fictefl: to aggravate the fault of unbounded licence-, yet ftiilinthe fame Chapter, when it comes into queilion afterwards, whether any civil refpe^, or natural relation which is deareft, may be our plea to divide, or hinder, or but delay our duty to Religion, we heir ic de- termined that Father, and ^'other, and Wiie alfo^^is not only to be hated, but forfak'n, if we mean to inherit the great rewird there pro- mis'd. Nor will ic fuffice co be put off by faying we mull forfake then only by not confencing or not complying with thera , for that were to be done, and roundly too, though being of the fame faith they (hould but feek, out of a fl.flily tendernefs to weak'n our Chri- ftian fortitude with worldly perlwafions, or but to unfettle our con« ftancy with timorous and foftning fuggeftions: as we may read with what a vehemence 7o^,the patienteftof men, rejeded the defperate counfelsof his wife ^ and Mpfes ^ the meekeft , being throughly of- fended with theprophane fpeechesof Zifp'r^^ fent her back to hec father. But if they fhall perpetually at our Elbow feduce us from the true worfhip of God, or defile and daily fcandalize our confcience by their hopelefs continuance in misbelief, then ev'n in the due progrefs of reafon , and that ever-equal proportion which Juftice proceeds by, it cannot be imagined that this cited place commands lefs than a total and final feparation from fuch an Adherent, atleaftthat no force flioald be ns*d to keep them together; while we remember that God commanded AbrAbam to fend away his irreligious Wife and her Son for the offences which they gave in a pious family. And it may be gueft that David for the like caufe difpos'd of M'tchaet in fuch a fort, as little differ'd from a difmiffion^ Therefore againft rei- terated fcandals and feducemcnts which never ceafe, much more can no other remedy or retirement be found but abfolute departure. For what kind of Matrimony can that remain to be , what one duty be- tween fuch can be performed as ic fhould be from the heart, when their thoughts and fpirits fly afunder as far as Heaven from Hell; cfpecially i( the time that hope fhould fend forth her expecaed blof- foms be part in vain. It will eafily be true , that a Father or Brother may be hated zealoufly, and lov'd civilly or naturally 5 for thofe du- ties may be pcrform'd at diftance, and do admit of any long abfence :

D2 but

^o The T>otirine and T)i{ci^line of Divorce,

but liow the peace and perpetual cohabitation of marriage can be kept, how that benevolent and intimate communion of body can be held with one chat muft be hated with a moft operative hatred , muft be forfak'n and yet continually dwelt w th and accompanied , he who can diftinguifh, hath the gift of an aflfedion very pdly divided andcontriv'd : while others both juft and wife, and i'(?/£7Wo« among the reft, if they may not hate and forfake as M^Jes er.joyns, and the Gofpel imports, will find it inipofli olc not to love otherwife then will fore with the love of God, whole jealoufie brooks no corrival. And whether is more likely, that Chrifl bidding to forfake wife for religi- on, meant it by divorce as Mofes meant it > whofe Law grounded oa moral reafon, was both his office and his elfence to maintain, or .hac he fhould bring a new morality into religion,not only new^ but con* crary to an unchangeable command , and dangeroufiy derogating from our love and worfhip of God. As if when Mofts had bid divorce abf lutely, and Chrift had faid, hate and forfake, and his ApoQle had faid, no communication with Chrift and Be/Ui,ya that Chrift after all. this could be underftood to fay, divorce not , no not for religion, fe- duce,or feduce not. What mighty and invifible Remora is this in matrimony able todemur,and to contemneall the divorfive engines in heaven or earth. Both which may now pafTe away if this be true , for more than many joti or tittles, a whole moral Law. is abolifht. But \^ we dare believe it is not,then in the method of rel gion, and to fave the honour and dignity of our faitb,we are to retreat and gather up our felves from the obf<^rvance of an inferior and civil ordinance , totheftrid: maintaining of a general and religious command, which U militn^ThoH p-jd't wake m eovnant lorihthem^ Deut.7 2,3. and that cov'nant which cannot be lawfully made , we hav€ diredions and ex. arrp'es lawfully to diftblve. Alfo Chron.2. 19. ShonlAeftthoH love them thathAte the Lord f No doubdefs : for there is a certain fcale of duties, there is a certain Hierarchy of upper and lower commands, which for wantof ftudjing in right order, all the world is in con* fufion.

Upon thefi principles I anfwer , that a right believer ought to di- vorce an idolatrous heretick, unlefsupon better hopes ; however that it is in the believers choice to divorce or not.

The former pirt will be manifeft thus ; firft , an apoftate idolater, whether husband or wife feducing , was to die by the decree of God, Deutii 6,9 that marriage therefore God himfelfdisjoyns: for others born idolaters ^he moral reafon of their dangerous keeping , and the

incona-

Ktfiord to 'the good of both Sexes, ^ •?

incoiimunic:ib!eant3gony that is between Chrift and Belial , will b^ fufficient to inforce the commandment of thofe two infpitM Refor" mers, E<.ra and Nehemiah , to put an Idolater away as well unde^ the Gofpel.

The latter part, that although there be no feducement fear'd, yet if there bs no hope giv'n, the divorce is lawful, will appear by this, that idolatrous marriage is ftill hateful to God, therefore flill it may be divorc't by the patcrn of chat Warrant that Ezrahiid, and by the fameeverkfiingreafon : Neither c-in any man give an account wherefore, if thofs whom God joyns no man can feparate , it fliould not follow, that whom he joyns not, but hates to joyn , thofc men ought to feparate : But faith the Lawyer, that which ought not have been done, once done , avails. I anfwer, this is but a Crot- chet of the Law, but thar brought againft it isplain Scripture, As for what ChriH: fp ike concerning divorce, 'tis confefl by all knowing men, he meant only between them of the fame faith. But what (hall we f.^y then to S. Paul^ who feems to bid us not divorce an Infidel willing to {\ay ? We miy fafely fay thus, that wrong colledions have been hitherto made out of thofe words by modern Divine?, His drift, 3$ Was heard before, is plain- not to command our (lay in marriage with an Infidel , that had been a flit renouncing of the religious and^ moral Law • but to inform the Corinthians that the body of an unbeliever was not defiling , if his defire to livein Chri- ftian Wedlock fhewd any likelihood that his heart was opening to the faith *, and therefore adrifts to forbear dsparturefo long, till nothing have been negle(^cd to fet forward a converfion : this I fay he advifes , and that with certain cautiors, not commands If we can take op fo much credit for him, as to gn him believ'd upon his own word- for what is this elfe but his counfel in a thing indiffdrenr, iothere^ (peak, h ^ot the Lord; for though it be true that the Lord never fpake it, yet from S Pauls mouth we fliould have took it as a comiiand, had not hirafelf forewirnM us, and difclaim'd, which not- withftandingif we fliall ftill avouch to be a command, he palpably denying it, this is not to expound S. Paul, but to ourf:ice him Nei- ther doth it follow, butthatthe ApoHle may incerpofe his jidg-nent in a cafe of Chridian liberty , without the giilc of adding to. Gods word How do we know marriage or fingie li'^'e to be of choice, but by fuch like words as thefe, /fpeal( this hj permifflon, not of comma^Jd^cnt^ J hdve n^csmmandofthe Lord, yet I give my judgment. Why fh^ll not the like words have leave to fignifiea freedom in this our prefent

D 3 quedion,

ax The 7)octrine and T>i(c inline o^ Divorce,

^ueQion, though Be^a deny. Neither is the Scripture hereby lefs in- rplrM, bccaufe S. 'P^^/ canfefles to have ivritc*n therein what he had not oi commmd \ for we grant chat the Spirit of God [td him thus to ex pre fs hitufelf to Chnitian prudence , in a raacter which God thought belt to leave uncommanded. Be:K.a therefore muCt be warily read, when hetaxei S. Atijlin of B/a/phemy, far holding that S.P^«/ fpake hrre as of a thing indifferent. But if it muQ be a command , I fhall yet the more evince it to be a command that we (hould herein be lefcfree.* and that out of the Greek wordus'd in the 12 v. which inl^ruds us plainly , there mull be a joynt aflenc and good liking on both iides ; he that will not deprave the Text, muft thus render icj If a brsther have an unbel'uving roiftt and Jhe jojn in cor>fent to drvell rfiith h'm (which cannot utter iefs to us than a mutual agreement^ let him not put her away for the meer furraize of Judaical undean- nefs ; and thereafon follows, for the body of an Infidel is not pollu- ted, neither to benevolence, nor to procreation. Moreover, this note of mutual complacency forbids all offer of feduccment , which tea perfon of zeal cannot be attempted without great offence : if there- fore feducement be fear'd , this place hinders not divorce. Another caution was put in this fuppofed command, of not bringing the be- liever into bondage hex thy ^ whicli doubtlefs might prove extreme, if Chriftian liberty and confcience were left to the humor of a Pagan flaying at pleafure to play with, and to vex and wound with a thou- fand fcandals and burdens, above flrength to bear : If therefore the conceived hope of gaining a foul come to nothing , then charity commands that the believer be not wearied out with endlefs waiting under many grievances fore to his fpirit^bututhat refpeft be had ra- ther to the prefent fufferingof a true Chriftian , than the uncertain winning of an obdur'd Heretick. The counfel we have from S.Paul to hope, cannot countermand the moral and Evangeiick charge we have from God to fear feducement, to feparate from the misbelie- ver, the unclean, the obdurate. The Apofile wifheth us to hope, but does not fend us a Wooll- gathering after vain hope ^ he faith , How knoivefl thoH^Ofnan, tvhether thou jhdt fave thj wife, that is, till he try all due means , and fet fome reafonable time to himftlf after which he may give over wafliing an Ethiope, if he will hear the ad- vice of the Gofpel , C^/? mt Pearls before Sw'ine , faith Chrift him- felf. Let him be to thee as a Heathen, Shake the Sft off thj feet. If this be not enough, hate aisdforfake^ what relation foever. And this

alfo that follows muft appertain to the Precept. L(t ever) mm where^

in

Reflor'd to the good of loth Sexe^. i j

in he is cail'd, thereh abid'e with God, v. 24. that k, fo walking in his inferiour calling of Marriage, as not by dangerous fabjedion to that Ordinance , to hinder and difturb the higher calling of his Chriftianity. La{l,and never too ott remcmbred, whether this be a command, or an advice, werriuftlook that it be rounderQood , as not to contradid the leaft point of moral Religion that God hath formerly commanded, otherwife what do we butfet the moral Law and the Gofpel at civil war together : and who then (hall be able to fcrvB thofe two Mafters?

CHAP. IX. That Adultery is mtthe greatefi breach of MAtrlmonj, that there may he other viol at tens as greats

NOw whether Idolatry or Adultery be the greateft violation of Marriage, if any demand , let him thus confidcr, that among Chriftian Writers touching Matrimony , there be three chief ends thereof agreed on •, godly fociety, next civil, and thirdly, that of the Marriage-bed.Of thefe the firft in name to be the higheft and mod ex- cellent, no baptiz'd man can deny , nor that Idolatry fmices diredly againft this prime end, nor that fuch as the violated end is, fuch is the violation j but he who affirms adultery to be the higheft breach > af- firms thebedtobethe highcftof marriage, which is in truth a grofs and boriih opinion, how common foever • as far from the counte- nance of Scripture, as from the light of all clean Philofophy, or civil Nature. And out of queftion the chearful help that may be in mar- riage toward fandity of life, is the purefl, and fo the nobleft end of that contrad : but if the particular of each perfon be confider'd, then of thofe three ends which God appointed , that to him is greateft which is moftneceffary ; and marriage is then moft brok'n to him, when he utterly wants the fruition of that which he mod fought therein, whether it were religious, civil, or corporal fociety. 'Of which wants to do him right by divorce only for the laft and mean- eft, is a perverfe injury , and the pretended reafon of it as frigid as frigidity it felf, which the C<?^^ and Canon are only fenfible of. Thus much of this controver/ie. I now return to the former argu- ment. And having fhewn that difproportion, contrariety, or num-- nefs of mind may juRly be divorc'c, by proving already , that the prohibition thereof oppofes the exprcfs end of Gods Inftitut'on, fuffersnot Marriage to facisfie that intelle(Sual and innocent defire- which God himfelf kindl'd in man to be the Bond of Wedlock, buc only to remedy a fublunary and beaftial burning, which frugal Dicr, .

" "^ ' wilhou€

^4 7^^ T^oSfrine and T>i[ci^line ofDlvoYce^

without Marriage, would eafify chaft'n. Next, that it drives many to tranfgrefs the Conjugal Bed, while the foul wanders after that jfaclsfadion which it had hope to find at home , but Iiatiimift ; or elfeic fics repining , even to Acheifm, finding ic feif hardly dealt wirh, but mifdeeming the caufc ro be in Gods Law, which is in mans uns ighteous ignorance. I haveftiewn alfo how it untyes the inward knot of Marriage , which is peace and love fif that can be unty 'd which was never knit) while it aims to keep faft the outward forma- lity ; how it lets perifh the Chriftian man, to compel impoffibly the raarried man.

CHAP. X. 'The fix th Reafonof this Law^ that to prehiiit divorce fought fornatU' ral cafes ^ is againft natnre.

1"He fixth pi ice declares this Prohibition to be as refpedlefs of humane Nature, as it is of Religion , and t^Jereforeis not of God. He teaches, that an unlawful marriage may be lawfully di- vorc't : And thac thofe who having throughly difcern'd each others difpofirion , which oft-times cannot be till after Matrimony , fliall cben find a powerful rcludanceand recoil of Nature on either fide, blading all the content of their mutual fociecy, that fuch perfons are not lawfu.ly married f to ufe the A poftles words j Saj It hefe things as a man ^ or faith not the k aw alfo the fame ? for it is r^ritt'n^ Deut. 22. Thou fh alt not fonf the Vimjard With divers feeds , le^ thou defile both. Thou [halt not plow n>ith an Oxe and an Afs together and the like, i follow the pattern of S. Paub reafoning ^ Doth God care for Jiffes and Oxen^ how ill they yoke together, or is it not faid altogether for our fakes ? foi our fakes no doubt this is written. Yea the Apoftje liimfelf in the forecited z Corinth, 6. \\, alludes from that place of Dent, to forbid roifyoking marriage ^ as by the Greek word is evi- dent, though he inftance but in one example of raifmatching with an infidel; yet next to that, what can be a fouler incongruity, a greater violence to the reverend fecret of Nature, than to force a mixture of minds that cannot unite , and to fow the furrow of mans Nativity with feed oftwo incoherent and uncombining difpofitions ^ which ad being kindly and voluntary, as it ought, the Apoftle in the Language be wrote call'd Eunoia^ and the Latines Bene- volence , intimating the original thereof to be in the underflanding, and the will- if not, furcly there is nothing which might more properly be call'd a malevolence rather ; and is the mof^ injurious and unnatural Tribute thac can be extorted from a perfon fn-

dew'd

Rejfor'd tt) the goodof lo'h Sexes. ij

d^w'd with reafon,to be made pay out the bcfl fubflance of his body, and of his foul too, rs fomc think, when either for jufl and powerful caufes he cannot like, or from unequ-ii caiif^s finds not recommence ; And that there is a hidden efficacie of love and hatred in man as well as in other kinds, not moral, but natural , which though not alwaycf in the choice, yet in the fuccefs ofmariage will ever be mofl; predo- minant, befides daily experience* the auifior of Eccle[\Af}ictis^ whofc wifdora hath fet him next the Bible, acknowledges, I 3. 16. A man, faith he, nvilt cleave to hlsHks. But what might be the caufe, whether each ones allotted Gcmujor proper Star, or whether the fupernatural influence of Schemes and angular afpeds or this elemental Cr/ifis here below, whether all thefe joyntly orimgly meeting friendly, or un- frierdly in either p^rry, I dare not, with the men I am like to ch(h, appear fo much a Philofopher as to conjedure. The ancient Proverb in H<7Wfrlef$obQrufe entitles this work of leading each like perfon to his like, peculiarly to God himfeif : which is plain enough alfo by hii naming of a meet or like help in the firft efpoufal indituted •, and that every woman is meet for every man, none fo abfurd as to affirm. Seeing then there is indeed a two-fold Seminary or ftock in nature , from whence are deriv'd the ifTuesof love and hatred, didir.dly flow- ing through the whole mafs of created th ngs , and that Gods doing ever is to bring the due likcneflcs and harmonies of his works toge- ther, except when out of two contraries met to their own deRrudioOj he moulds a third esiftcnce ^ and that k is error , or fo re evil Angel which either blindly or malicioufly haih drawn together in two per- fofls ill imbarkt in wedlock the fleepingdifcords and enmities of na- ture luH'd on purpofewith fome falfe biir, that they may wake to f agony and flrife, later then prevention could have wrflir, if from the ^:benc of Juft and honeft intentions beginning what was begun, and fo continuing, all that is equal, all that is fair and poffible hath been tri'd, and no accomodation likely to fucceed •, what folly ii it ftill to fland combiting and battering againfl: invincible caufes and t&cdfs , with evil upon evil , till either the beft of our da\ s be lingered our, or ended with fome fpeeding forrow.The wife Ecc!eftd0ic^f3id\\k%r^- iher, 37*27. My fort prove thjfottlin thjlifejee what is eviforit^ and give not that mtoit. Reafon he had to fay fo ; for if the noifomnefsoc disfigurement of body can foon deflrcy thcfympathy oi mind to wed- lock duties , much more will the annoyance and trouble of mind infufe it k\i into all the faculties and afts of the body , to render

2.6 7he T>ocirine and Di^ci^line of Divorce,

them invalid, unkindly , and even unholy a gainft the Fundamental Lawbook of Nature, which ^c/f/ never thwarts, but reverences . therefore he commands us to force nothing againft Sympathy orna- rural order, no not upon the rooft ab/cLt Creatures ■ to (hew tha fach an indignity cannot be offer'd to man without an impious crime. And certainly thofe divine meditating words of finding out a mcec and like help to man, have in them a conHderation of more than the indertnire likenefs of Womanhood ^ nor are they to be made wafte paper on, for tiic dulnefsof Canon Divinity; no , nor thofe other Ailcgorick precepts of Beneficence feccht out of the Clofctof Na- ture, to reach uj goodnefs and compafiion in not compelling toge- ther unmuchable Societies, or if they meet through mifchance , by allconfequence todisjoyn them, as God and Nature fignifies, andle- dures to us not only by thofe recited Decrees , but ev'n by the firft and laft of all his vifible worki?-, when by his divorcing command the World firflrofe out of Chaos, nor can be renew. tl again out of con'^ufion, but by the feparating of unmeet Conforts.

C H A P. X I.

Ihe fevefith Reafon , That fometimes cantinuance in Marriage way he

evidently the fiortning or indangering of lift to either party, both Law andDivimtj cone Ipf dingy that Life is to be prefer* d before LMarri' age^ the intended folace of Life,

QEventhly, The Canon- Law and Divines coiifent, that if either par- *^ ty be found contriving a^ainfl: anothers life, they may bcftver*d by divorce ; for a fin againft the life of Marriage , is greater than a fm againfl: the Bed ^ the one deQroys , the other but defiles. The fame may be faid touching thofe perfons who being of a penfive na- ture and courfe of life, have fum*d up all their folace in that free and lightfome converfation which God and man intends in Marriage^ whereof when they fee themfelvcs deprived by meeting an unfocia- ble Confort, they oft-itimes refenc one anothers miftake fo deeply ,that long it is not eVc grief end one of them. When therefore this dan- ger isforefeen, that the life is in peril by living together, what matter is it whether helplefs grief' or wilful pradicc be the caufc : This is certain, that the prefervation of life is more worth than thecompuf- fory keeping of Marriage •, and it is no lefs than cruelty, to force a man to remain in that flate as the fokce ot his life^ which he ^nd his

friends

RcJIor'd to\ the good of both Sexes. 27

friendi know will be either the undoing or the diflieartning of his life. And what is life without the vigour and fpirityal exercifc of life? how can it be ufcful ei her to private or publickimployment .? (hJl it therefore be quite dejeded, though never fo valuable, and lef: to moulder away in heavinefs for the fupenlitious and impofiible ptr- formance of an i'l-driv n b.irgun? Nothing more inviolable than vows made to God, yet we read in Nury.hersyih^i if a Wife had made fuch a vow, the meer will and authority of her Husband might break it ; how much more mav he break the error of his own bonds with an unfit and midak'n Wife, to thefavingof his welfare, his life, yea hi^ faith and verrue from the hazard of over-ftrong tempcations j for if m^n be Lord of the Sabbath, to the curing of aFevor, can he be Icfs than Lord of Marriage in f.ch important caufcs as thcfe f

CHAP. xir.

Ty, t'ighh Reafon , Jt is frobable^ or rather certain, that every one U»^o hafp*r}t to marry , kath not the calling , and therefore upsfi ftfffltnefs found and confderdj force o'^^ght net to he us'd.

Eighthly, It i« rood fure i hat fome even of thofe who are not plain- ly dcfeftive in body, yet are deftitute of all other Marriageabl^e girts, and confequently have not the calling to marry, unlefs nothing be requifite therao but a meer inftrumental body-, which to affirm, is to that unanimous Covenant a reproach : yet it is as fure that ma- ny fuch, not of their own defire, but by the pcrfwafion of friend?, or not knowing therofclvcs, do often enter into Wedlock j where find- ing the difference at length between the duties of a married life, and the gifts of a finglc life, what unfitnefs of mind, what wearifomnefs, what fcrupks and doubts to an incredible offence and difplcafure sre like to follow between, may be foon imagined; whom tha« to fhuc up, and immure, and fhut up together , the one with amifchofen Mate, the other in a roiflaken calling, is not a courfe that Chriftian wifdom and tendernefs ought toufe. As for the cuftome that fome Parents and Guardians have of forcing Marriages, it will be better to fay nothing of fuch a favage inhumanity, but only thus , that the Law which gives not all freedom of divorce to any creature indued with rcafon fo ^ffaffinated, is next in cruelty.

E» CHAPi

2? The T>octrine and T)ijcipine of Divorce

CH f^P. XIII;

The mnth Reafoti , Sccaptfe marriage U not a nteer CArnd coitm^hfa a humane Socieij, ^^here that cannot re^fondhlj he had , there can he n^ true matrimony. Marriage ccmpar'dwith all other cov'ngnts and vows Warrantable hrokjnfor the good of man. Marriage the PapiftsSacrdf ment , and unft marriage the Protefiatfts jdJ.

I^T Inthly , I fuppofe it will be aliow'd us that marriage is a humane J.\| Society , and that all humane fociery muft proceed from the mind rather than the body , eh it wouid be but a kind of animal or beadifh meeting •, if the mind therefore cannot have that due compa- ny by mariage » that it may reafonably and humanly dtCne, that mari- age can be no human (ociety , but a certain formality ;, or guilding over of little better then a brutilh congrcfs , and fo in very wifdome and purenefs to be diflblv'd.

But mariage is more then human, ?k Covenant ofGod^ Prov. 2. 17* therforc man cannot diffolve it. I anfwer , if it be more then human , fb much the more it argues the chief fociety thereof to be in the foul rather then in the body, and the greateft breach thereof to be unfitnefi of mind rather then ddtSt of body : for the body can have leaft afR- fiity in a cov'nant more then human, fo that the reafon ofdiffolving holds good the rather. Again , i anfwer , that the Sabbath is a higher in{litution,a command of the firft Table , for the breach whereof God hath far more and oftner teftify 'd his anger, then for divorces, which from Mofes to Malachj be never tookdifpleafure at,nor then neither, if we mark the Text ; and yet as oft as the good of man is concerned, he not only permits, but commands to break the Sabbath. What co* v'nant more contracted with God, and Icfsin mans power, than the vow which hath once pail his lips ? yet if it be found rafli, ifoffenfive, if unfruitiu! either to Gods glory or the good of man , our do^rine forces not error and unwillingnefs irkfomly to keep it , but counfcfs wifdom and better thoughts boMIy to break it ^ therefore to en/oyn the indiiTo^uble kcepingof a marriage found unfit againft the good of man both foul and body, as hath been evidenc't, is to make an Idol df marriage , to advance it above the worfhip of God and the good of roan, to make it a tranfccndent command, above both thcfecond and the firft Table, which is a mod prodig ous Dod^rine.

Ncxt,whereas they cite out of the Proverbs ^ihn it is the Covenant ^f Cff^, and therefore more than human, that confequcnce ismanifcftly

falfe;

Reflor'd ti the good of both Sexes. ^ 9

falfe : for fo the covnant which Zedechiah made wich the InSdel King of Babd^ \%c2\Viiih^Ccv€nantofGody Ez«k. 17. 19. which would be ftrangc to hear counted more than a human covnanr. So every co- venant between man and man, bound by oath, may be calld the cove- nant of God, becanfe God therein is attefted. So of marriage he is the author and thewitnefsj yet hence will not follow any divine aftri(5ti- on more than what is fubordinate to the glory ot God and the main good of either p.uiy ',for as the glory of God and their eftecmed fit- nefs one for the other, was the moiive which led them both at firft co think without other revelation that God had joyned them together. So when it (hall be found by their apparent unficnefs, that their con- tinuing to be man ard wife is sgainft the glory of God and their mu- tuil happinels, it may affure them that ©od never joyn'd them •, who hath reveal'd his gracious will not to fet the ordinance above the man for whom it was ordair/d : not to canonize mariage cither as a tyranncfsor a goddefs over the enfranchis'd life and foul of man: for wherein can God delight,wherein be worffiiptj wherein beglorifi'd by the forcible continuing of an improper and ill-yoking couple ? He that loved not to fee the difparity oi fcveral cattel at the plow , can- not be pleafed with any vaft unmeetnefs in marriage. Where can be the peace and love which muft invite God to fuch a houfe , may it not be feared that the not divorcing of fuch a belplefs difagrecment , will bcthedivorcingof God finally from fuch a place? But it is a trial o£ our patience they fay : Igrant it : but which o^foh aiSidions were fent him with that law , that he might not ufe means to remove any of them if he could ? And whit if it fubvert our patience and our faith too f Who (hall anfwer for the perifhing of all thofe fouls perifliingby ftubborn expoficions of particular and inferior precepts againftthe general and fupreme rule of charity ? They dare nor affirm that Mar- riage is either a Sacrament or a mydery , though all thofe facred things give place to man, and yet they inveft it with fuch an awful fandicy , and give it fuch adamantine chains to bind with , as if ic were to be worfhipt like fome Indian deity , when it can confer no bleffing upon us, but works more and more to our mifery. To fuch teachers the fayingof S.*P^f^r at the Council ofjerufalem will do well to be applied : fvhy nmftye Goi to put a joke upon the necl^s of Chrifti- an men^which neither the Jews^ Gods ancient people, mr we are Me t^ kar ; and no thing but unwary expounding bath brought upon us.

* CHAP.

JO The "DoEtrine and T>i^ci^line 0/ Divorce,

CHAR XIV.

Conp derations coreernhff Familifmfy J^ntinomiafi'fme^ Afii w/y iV may

he thos^g'jt that f^ch opinions maj proceed from ths undue Ycjtrai^t of fome juft I'ibtrtj^ then which m greater caufi to Cf.ntsmn dJcfUns,

TO thcfc confideiMcions this alfo m:iy be sddcd as no improbable conj c^ure, feeing th:iC fort of men who follow Anahaptfm, F^mi ifm, Antinomiamfm, and Other fanadck dreams if we under- hand them notamifs j be fuch moft commonly as are by nature ad- dided CO Religion, of iife alfo not debmchr, and that their opinions h iving full fwinge, Ao end in facisra(^ion of the fl.Hi, ic may be come with rcafon into ihe thoughts of a wife man, w. hether all this proceed not partly, if not chi fly, from the reflrdint of fome lawful liberty which ought to be giv'n men, and isdeni'd thera..Asby Phyfick we Hearn In menPiruous bodies, where Natures current hath been flopt, that the fuff^jcation and upward forcing of fome lower p rt,affeds the head and inward fenfe with dot3ge and die fancies. And on the other hand j whether the reft of vulgar men not (o religioufly profeiling,do not givechemfeives much the more to whoredom and adulteries, lo- ving the corrupt and venial difeipline of Clergy Courts, but hating to hearofperfed Reformation-, when as they forefee that then forni- cation fhallbe aufterely ccnfur'd, adultery punilhc, and marriage the appointed refuge of nature, though ic hnp to be never fo incongruouj and difpleafing, muft: yet of force be worn out, when ic can be to no other purpofe but of ftrife and hatred, a thing odious to God. This may be worth the fludy of skilful men in Theology^, and the reafon of things: And laftly, to examine whether fome undue and ill ground- ed ftridnefs upon the blamelefs nature of man , be not the caufe in thofe places where already Reformation is, that the difcipljne of the Church fo often and fo unavoidably brok'n, is brought into conrempt and derifion. And if it be thus, let thofe who are flill bent to hold this obftinate liter ality^ fo prepare themfelvef , as to (hare in the ac- count forallihefe tranfgreffions, when it fliall be demanded at the iafl day by one who will fcan and fife things with more than a literal wi fdom of equity > for if thefe rcafons be duly pondcr'd,and that the Gofpel is more jealous of laying on exceflive burdens than ever the Law was, left the foul of a Chriftian which is ineftimable , (hould be ©ver-tempted and cafl away, confidcring alfo that many properties of nature, which the power of Regeneration ic feif never alters , may

Reffor'd mthe good of both Sexes. J i

caufe diflike of conver(ing, even between the moft fandifiM, which continually grating in harfhtune together, may breed fo me jar and difcord.andthatendinrancor anditrife, a thing fo oppofite both to Marriage, and to Cnriftianicy, it would perhips be lefs fcandal to di- vorce a natural difparity, then to link violently together an unchri- niandiffencion, committing two infnared fouls inevitably to kindle one another, not wich ths fire of love , but with a hatred irreconciU- able , who were they diflf^vered, would be ftraight friends in any o- ther relation. But if an alphabetical fervility mull be dill urged, ic may fo fnli out, that the true Church may unwi:tingly ufe as much cruelty in forbidding to divorce, as the Church of Antichr.ft doth Wilfully in forbidding to Marry.

THE SECOND BOOK.

CHAP. I.

The Ordinmce of Sabbath and Marriage c&mfurd. 'Bjptrbde no unfre- (^uem figure in the GofpeU Excefs curd by Contr^rj excefs. Chrifi neither did^ nor cou/d abrogate the £> aw of Divorce ^ l^ftt only reprieve the abfffe thereof.

Hitherto the Pofition H^dertaken hath been dedar'd , and proved by a Law of 6od, that Law proved to be moral, and unabolifhable, for many reafons equal, honefl, cha- ritable, juft, annext thereto. Ic follows now, that thofe places of Scripture which have a feeming to revoke the prudence of Mofes, or rather that merciful Decree of God, be forthwith ex- plain'd and reconcil'd. For what are*all thefereafonings worth, will fome reply, when as the words of Chrift are plainly againftall di- ve ce, excep: in cafe of forniedtien. To whom he whofe mind were to anfwer no more but this, except alfo in cafe of charity, might fafely ap. peal to the more plain words of CbriH: in defence of fo excepting, Thofi/halt do n9 wanner of work,, f^ith the Commandment of the Sab- baths Yes, faith Chrift, works of charity. And fhallwe bemorefevere in parapbrafing the confiderare and tender Gospel, than he was in ex- pounding the rigid and peremptory Law? What was ever in all ap- pearance lefj made for man, and more for God alone, than the Sab- bath ? yet when the good of man come^ into the Scales, we hear that voice of infinite goodnefif and benignity, chat Sabbath wa^ made for

mayii

3 2- 7&^ jDoffrh/e and 7^i[ci^me of Divorce.

W4«, not man for Sabhath* W^at thing ever was more made for man alone and Isfs for God than marriage ? And fliall we load it with a cruel and fencekfs bondage utrerly againft both the good ofman and she gJory of God ? Let who fo will now iiftenj want neither pall nor mitre, I ftay neither for ordination or indudion, but in the firm faith of a knowing Chriftian^ which is the bed and trueft endowaient of the keyes, I pronounce, the man who (hall bind fo cruelly a good and gracious ordinance of God^ hach not in that the Spirit oi Chrift. Yet that every text of Scripture fceming oppofite may be attended with a due expofition, this other part enfues, and makes account to find no flender arguiients for this affertion outof thofe very Scriptures, which are commonly urg'd againft it ;

Firft therefore let us remember as a thing not to be deny'd,that all ;p1acs$ of Scripture wherein juft reafon of doubts arifes from the let- ter, are to be expounded by confidering upon what occafion every thing is fet down ; and by comparing oiher Texts. The occafion which induc'tour Saviour to fpeak of divorce, was either to convince the extravagance of the Pharifes in that point, or to give a (harp and vehement anfwer tea tempting qucftion. And in fuch cafes that VJt are not to repofe all upon the literal terms of fo many word$> 'inany inftances will teach us ; Wherein we may plainly difcover how Chrift meant not to be tak'n word for word » but like a wife Rhjfi- cian, adminiftringoneexcefs ag.iinft another, to reduce us to a per- inifs •, where they were too remifs , he faw it needful to feem moft fevere : in one place he cenfures an unchafl: look to be adu'tery al- ready committed : another time he pafles over adual adulcery with lefs reproof then for an unchaft look; not fo heavily condemniog fecrct weaknefs, as open malice ; So here he may be jtilily thought to have giv*n this rigid fentence againft divorce, net to cut off all remedy from a good man who find himfelf confuming away in a difconfolate and uninjoyn d matrimony , but to l<iy a bridle upon the bold abufes of thofe over-weening RMies ^ which he could not more cfTedually do, then by a counterfway of reftraint curbing their wild exorbitance almoft into the other extream ^ as when we bow things the contrary way , to make them come to their natural ftraitnef?: And that this was the only intention of Chrift is moft evident- if we attend but to his own words and proteftation made in the fame Sermon, not many vcrfes before he treats of divorcing, that he came

no:

Rejto/dito the good of both Sexes. j j

not to abrogate from the Law one jot or tittle ^ and denounce ^gainft them that (hall ib teach. \'^^^6'^'^>( io ^iru/j^^i ii; ji v ^ -nn vii ni.; > c >

But S.Lnks the verfe immediately before- going that of Dlvbrce^ inferts the fame caveat, as if the latter could not be underftood with- out the former} and as a witnefs to produce againft this our wilful raiftake of abrogating,which mull: needs confirm us that whatever els in the poUticalTawofmorefpecial relation to the Jews might ccafe ro us, yet that of thofe precepts concerning Divorce,not one of them was repeal'd by the Dodrine of Ghrid, unlefs we have vow'd not to believe his own cautious and immediate profefTion ; for if chefe our Saviours words inveigh againft all Divorce,and condemn it as adul- tery, except it be for adultery, and be not rather underftood againft the abufe of thofe divorces permitted in the Law,then is that Law oif Mofesy Deut.24. I. not onely repeaPd ^nd wholly annullM againft the promife of Chrift and his known profeflion, not to meddle in matters Judicial , but that which is more ftrange, the very fubftance andpurpofe of that Law iscontradidedand convinc'tbothof in;u- ftice and impurity , as having authoriz d and maintaln'd legal adul- tery by ftatute; >4/^^a alfo canoot fcapetobeguilty of unequal and "unwife decrees, punifhingonead of fecrct adultery by death , and permitting a wliole life of open adultery by Law. And albeit Law- yers write that fomc political edids, though not approvU, arcyet aliow*d to the fcum of the people and the necefTity' of the times 1 4:hefe excufes havel3utaweakpu!fe: for firft, weread!, nbt that the fcoundrel people, but the choiceft, the wifeft, theholieftofthat na- tion have frequently us'd thefe laws, or fuch as thefe in the beft and hdlieft times. Secondly, be it yielded , that in matters not very bad or impure, a human lavrgiver may flacken fbmcthing of that which is ex'adly good, to the difJ)6fition of the people and the times : but If the perfect, the piire, the righteous law of God , for fo are all his ftatutes and his judgements , be found to have allow 'd fmoothly without any certain repreherifion ^ that which Chrift afterward de- clares to be adukejy , how ctn we free this Law. from the horrible Inditerrient of being bochurnpure, unjuft, and f^^^^cipu^i ;^^l[^^''gj'*^^;^_

■C H A P. 1 1. '" , - •

JI(m Divorce vpM f&mit ted f<^r hardnefsdf hearty cannot 'be mderfloGd hj

the common expojition. That the Law cannot fermit^ much hfs ena^ a

permijpon of Jin. 1^ Either will it ferve'td fay this ;vas permitted for the hardnefs of their hearts, in that /enfe , as is ufually explain'd, for the Law

F ' were

54 ^^ Do^rine af^J 7)ifeiflhfe of Divorce.

were then but a corrupt and erroneous School-mafter , teaching us to da(h againft a vital Maxime of Religion,by doing foul evil in hope offome uncertain good.

This onely Text not to be matcht again throughout the whole Scripture , whereby God in his perfect Law fhould feem to have granted to the hard hearts of his holy people linder his own hand, a civil immunity and free charter to live and die in a long fuccef-* five adultery, under a covenant of works, till the Mcfsiah^ and then that indulgent permiffion tobeftridlydeny'dby a covenant of grace 5 befides the incoherence of fuch a dodirine, cannot, muft not be thus interpreted,to the raifing of a Paradox never known till then, onely hanging by the twin'd thread of one doubtful Scripture , a^ gainft fo many other rules and leading principles of religion, of ju-r ftice, and purity of life. For what could be granted more either to the fear, or to the luft of any tyrant or expliticiat, than this author!^ ty of Mofes thus expounded j which opens him a way at will to damme up juftice , and not onely to admit of any Romijh or Anftrian. difpenccs, but to enaft a ftatute of that which he dares not feem ta^ approve, ev'n to the legitimate vices , to make fin it felf , the ever alien and vaffal fin, a free Citizen of the Commou-wealth, pretend- ing onely thefe or thefe plaufible reafons. And well he might , all' the while that ^a/a (hall be alledgcdto have done as much without fhewing any reafon at alK Yet this could not enter into the heart ofDavidyFfaL^^. 20. how any fuch authority as endeavours tofajhiou mckedne[s by a larvy Ihould derive it felf from God. And Ifaiah layes woe ftpon them that decree untight eons deer eesyi 0,1. Now which of thefe two is the better Law-giver , and which deferves moft a woe, he that gives out an ediftfinglyunjuft, orhethatconfirmes to generations a fix t and unmolefted impunity of that which is not onely held to be un;uft,but alfo unclean, and both in a high degree, not only as they themfelves affirm, an injurious expullion of one wife, but alio an un^ clean freedom by more than a patent to wed another adulterouP- fy.^ How can we therefore with fafety thus dangeroufly confine the free ftmplicity-^f our Saviours meaning to that which meerly a- tnounts from fb many Letters, when as it can confift neither with his former and cautionary word, nor with other more pure and ho- ly principles, nor finally with the fcope of charity, commanding by his exprefs Commiffion in a higher grain. But all rather of necef- fity muft be uaderftood as onely againft the abufc of that wife and

ingenu-

hor of fn more than any thing o^eiied b^ the ifi PfedeflinAtioii^A'''^'^'A,^'^> ^^'^- 1'^^^'^

Rejiord to the good of both Sexes. % j

ingenuous liberty which Mofesgivt ^ and to terrific a roaving con- fcience from finning under that pretext.

CHAP. III.

That to allow fin by Lavf , is againfl^the nature of Law ^ the end of the law- giver and the good of the people. Impoffihle therefore in the L^w of God, That it makes God the author ' ^efuits or Arminians again^

BUt let us yet further examine upon what confideration a Law of licence could be thus gtv'n to a holy people for the hardnefs of heart.I fuppofc all will anrwer,that forfomegood end or other.Buc here the contrary (hall beprov'd. Firft, that many ill efFcds , but no good end of fuch a fufFerance can be (hewn ; next,that a thing unlaw- ful can for no good end whatever be either done or allow'd by a pofi- tivc law.If there were any good end aim'd at,that end was then good, either to the Law, or to the lawgiver licencing ; or as to the perfon licenc*t. That it could not be the end of the Law , whether Moral Or Judicial to licence afinjproveeafilyoutof /^oaw. 5.20. The Law entered that the offence might abound , that is, that fin might be made abundantly manifeft to be hainous and difpleafing to God, that fo his otfer'd grace might be the moreefteem'd. Now if the Law in ftead of aggravating and terrifying fin, (hall give out licence, it foils itfelf , and turns recreant from its own end; it foreftalls the pure grace of Chrift which is through righteoufnefs , with impure in- dulgences which are through fin. And in ftcad of difcovering fin, for by the Law is the knowledge t hereof , faith S, P^W,and that by certain and true light for men towalkinfafely^ it holds out falfe and dazling fires to ftumblc men : or like thofe miferable flies to run into with delight , and be burnt : for how many (buls might eafity think that to be lawful which the Law and Magfftrate allow'd them ? Again we read, i Tim. i . 5* . The end oftde Commandment is chanty out of a purs h?artjandof a goodconfcience^and of faith unfained. But never could that, be charity to allow a people what they could not ufe wixh a pure heart, but with confcience and faith both deceiv'd , or elfe defpis'd. The mort particular end of the Judicial Law is fet forth to us clearly Rom. 1 1 .that God hath giv'n to that Law a Sword not in vAin, but to be a terror to evilworkjj a revenge to execute wrath upon htm that doth eviL If this terrible commiHTion (houldbut forbear topuniOi wickednci.% were it other to be accounted than parnal and unjuft ^ but if it

F 2 bejrin

56 The l^o^rine and TDi^cif line 0/ Divorce.

begin to write indulgence to vulgar uri clean nefs can it do more to corrupt and iliame theend ofits own being ? Laftly^if the Law albw^^ fin, it enters into a kind of covenant with fin, and ifit do, there is not a greater fmner in the world than the Law it felf. The Law, to ufe an allegory fomething different from that in ThiU f^d<zus concerning Amaleck^^ though haply rnore fignificant, the Law is the //r^^//>f,and hath this abfolutc charge given it, Deut. 2f. Toklototit the memory of fin the u4makk^te from under he av*n^ not to forget it. Again, the Law is the Ifraeiite, and hath this exprefs repeated command to make no cov- nantwhh {m t he Cananite ^ hut to expel him, left he prove a fnare. And to fay truths it were too rigid and realbnlefs to proclaim fiich an enmity between manand rnan, were it not the type of a greater • enmity between law and fin. Ifpeak ev'n now, as if fin were con- demned in a perpetual viUen^ie never to be free by law , never to be mannmitted: but fure fin can have no tenure by law at all^but is rather an eternal outlaw , and in hoftility with Law paft all attonement : both ^;4^omrt/ contraries, as much allowing one another, as day and night together both inone hemifphere.Or ifit be poirible,that finwith his darknefs may come toeompofition, it cannot be without afoul cclipfe and twyllght to the law, whofe brightnefs ought to furpafs the noon. Thus we fee how this unclean permittance defeats the facred and glorious end both of the Moral and Judicial Law.

As little good can the lawgiver propofe to equity by fuch alayifli' remifnefs as this : if to remedy hardncfs of heart, F^r<c;/^ and other di- vines confefs, it more incfeafes by this liberty, then islefsn'd : and how.isit probable that their hearts were more hard in this that it fbould l)e yielded to than in any other crime ? Their hearts were fet upon ufury, and are to this day, no. Nation more; yet that which was the endammaging only of their eftates , was narrowly forbid 5 this which is thought the extream injury and diihonour of theif Wives and Daughters,with the defilement alfo of themfelve?,is boun- teoufly allow'd. Their hearts were as hard under their beft Kings to offer in high places, though to the true God 5 yet that but a fmall thing is ftridly forewarned 5 this accounted a high offence againft one ofthegreateft mora I duties, is calmly jpermitted and eilablilht. How can it be evaded but that the heavy cenfure of Chrift (hould fall worfe upon this lawgiver of theirs , than upon all the Scribes and Pharifes ? For they did but omit Judgment and Mercy to trifle in Mint and Cummin , yet all according to Law ; but this their Law- giver, altogether as punctual in fuch niceties , goes marching on to

adulte-

Rejlor'dto the good of both Sexes, 3 7

3rdiiIterie5,through the violence of divorce by Law againft Law. If it were fiich a curfed ad: of Filat a fubordinate Judge to C^far , over- fwayed by thofe hard hearts with much ado to futfer one tranfgref- fion of Law but once , what is it then with lefs ado to publifh a Law oftranfgreiTion for many ages? Did God for this comedown and cover the Mount of Sinai with his glory , uttering in thunder thofe his facred Ordinances out of the bottomlefs treafures of his wifdomeand infinite purenefs,to patch up an ulcerous androttn com- mon-wealth with ftrid and ftern injundions , to wafh the skin and garments for every unclean touch, and fuch cafie permifTion giv'n to pollu te the foul with adulteries by publick authority , without dif- grace or queftion ? No it had been better that man had never known Law or Matrimony , then that fuch foul iniquity fhouldbe faftn'd upon the Holy One of Ifrael^ the Judge of all the earth, and fuch a piece of follow as Bdz.eM would not commit,to divide againft him- felf and pervert his own ends j or if he to compafs more certain mis- chief, might yield perhaps to fain fbme good deed , yet that God fhould enadt a licence of certain evil for uncertain good againft His owii glory and purenefs, is abominable to conceive. And as itisde- ftrudive to the end of Law , and bl^fphemous to the honour of the Lawgiver licencing , fo is it as pernicious to the perfoh licen't. If a private friend admonifii nor, the Scripture faith hs hates his brother and lets himperijh ; but if he (both him and allow him in his faults,the Proverbs teach ushefpreads a net for hts neighbour sfeet^andworkethrHiriy If theMagiftrate or Prince forget to adminifterdue juftice and re- train not fin ; EU himfelf could fay itm^di thi Lords people to tranf- grefs. Bat if he countenance them againft law by*his own example , what havock if makes both in Religion and \ ertue among the people, may be gueft by the anger it brought upon Hophni 2in^P hine'^s, notxo be appeased withfacrifice nor offering for ever. If theL^w'be filent to de^ clare fin, the people muft needs generally go aftray ; for the Apoftle himfelf faith , he h/td not known lafl bat by the law : and furely fuch a Nation feems not to be under the illuminating guidance ofGods hm^ but under the horrible doom ratherof fuch as defpife the Gofpel ^hethat fifilthy It him b; filthy ftHL But where the Law it felf gives a warrant fof fin,! know not what condition of mifery to imagine mKerable enough for fuch a people, unlefs that portion ofnhe wicked, or ra- therof the damned , on whom God threatens in 2 1 Pf^drfi, to- rain fnares : but that queftionlefs cannot be by any Law, which the Apo- ftle faith, //^ miniftry ordain 4 af God for our good j and not fomany

F 3 . ways

J 8 The T>o5Mne and DifdfLjie of Divorce

waycs and in fo high a degree to our deftrudion, as we have now bin graduating. And this is all the good can come to the perfbn liccnc'd in his hardneft of heart.

I am next to mention that which becaufe it is a ground in divini- ty, jR(;w. 5. will fave the labour of demonftrating, unlefs her giv n Axioms be more doubted than in other Arts (although it be no lefs firm in the precepts of Philofophy) that a thing unlawful can for no good whatfoever be done , much kfe allow'd by a pofitive hw. And this is the matter why Interpreters upon thatpaiTage in Hofea will not confent it to be a true ftory , that the Prophet took a Har- lot to wife, becaufe God being a pure Spirit, could not command a thing repugnant to his own nature , no not for Co good an end as to exhibit more to the life a wlioKbmeandperhaps a converting para^ bleto many anifraclite. Yet that he commanded the allowance of adulterous and injurious divorces for hardnefs of heart, arealbnob- icure and in a wrong fenfe, they can very favourily perfwade them- fclves ; fo tenacious is the leven of an old conceit. But they ihift it, hepermitted only. Yet filence in the Law is confent, and confent is aeceflbry 5 why then is not the Law being filent, or not adive againft a crime, aeceflbry to its own convidion, it felf judging ? For though we fliould grant, that it approves not, yet it wills 5 and the Lawyers Maxim is that the willcompeil'd is jet the will. And though Ariftotle in his Ethicks call this ^ mixt aBion^ yet he concludes it to be voluntary and inexcufable, if it be evil. How juftly then might human law and Fhilofophy rife up againft the righteoufnefs ot Mo[es , if this be true which our vulgar Divinity fathers upon him , yea upon God :himfelf 5 not iilently and onely negatively to permit, but in his law to divulge a written and general priviledge to commit andperfift in unlawfuldivorceswitha high hand , with fecurity and no ill fame.-, for this is more than permitting and contriving, this is maintaining : this is warranting, this is proteding, yea this is doing evil, and fuch an evil as that reprobate lawgiver did , whofe lafting infaniy is in- grav'n upon him like a furname he who made Ifrael to^n. This is the loweft pitch contrary tot3od that^yuUick fraud and in juft ice jcaxi dcfcend. '.^.«j \\.;v,-.,v.. -' .- ti. ' ' 'J^.

If it be affirmM that God as being Lord, may do what^hewilfj yet we muft know that God hath not two wills., but one will, much iefs twocontrarv. If he once wilPd adultery (hould be finful^ and to be punifht by death ., all his omnipotence will not allow him to -will the allowance that his holieft people might as it were by hi$

own

Refiord to the good of both Sexes. 3 9

oyiTiAnumonie^ or counter-ftatute live unreprov'd in the fame fa<ft as he himfe If eftecm'd it, according to our common explainers. The hidden wayes of his providence we adore and fearch notjbut the lav/ is his revealed will,hiscompleat, his evident and certain will; herein he appears to us as it were in humane (hapejenters into covenant witji us,(\vears to keep it,binds himfelf like a ;ult lawgiver to his own pre- fcriptions,givcs himfelf to be underftood by men, judges and is judg'd, mcafures and is commenfurat to the right reafon ; cannot require fefs of us in one cantle of his Law than in another , his legal juftice cannot l)cfo fickle and fo variable , fometimes like a devouring fire^ and by and byconnivent inthe embers, or, if I may fbfay, ofcitant and fupine. The vigor of his Law could no more remit , than the hallowed fire upon his altar could be let go out. The Lamps that' burnt before him might need fnuffing , but the light of his La\ir never. Of this alfo more beneath , in difcufllng a Solution of i^- vetHu

The Jefuits and that Seft among us which is namM o^Afminiw^ are wont to charge us of making God the Author of Sin in two da-* grees efpecially , not to (peak of his permiffion. i. Becaufc we hold that he hath decreed fome to damnation, and confequently to fin, fay they : Next, becaufe tho(e means v/hich are of faving knowledge to others, he makes to them an o<^afion of greater fin. Yet confider- ing the perfedion wherein man was created, and might haveftood, no decree neceilitating his free-will , but fiabfequent though not \h time , yet in order to caufes which were in his own power , they might, me thinks be perfwaded to abfolve both God and us. When as the doftrine of VUto and Chryfvffm with their followers the Aca^ dsmics and the Stoics , who knew not what a confummat and moft^ adorned Pandora.vf2iS beftow*d upon Adam^ to be the nurfe and guid of his arbitrary happinefs and perfeverance , I mean his native inno- cence and perfection , which might have kept him from bdng our true Epimethens^ and though they taught of vertue and vice to be both the gift of divine deftiny^ they could yet give reafbns not inva- lid , to juftifie the Councils of God and Fate from the infulfity of . mortal tongues: That mans own will felf corrupted is the adequat and fufficient caufe of his difobedience befdss Fate j as Homey alfo wanted not to expreft both in his Iliad and Odijfei, And Manilim the Poet, although in his fourth book he tells of Ibme created bath to firt and fHtiiJhment j yet without murmuring and with an induftrious chccrfuinefs acquits the I>^^>;, They were not ignorant in their hea- then

^o The doctrine and T>i(ciflifje of' Divorce

then lore, that it is moft God- like to puniih thofe wboof his crea- tures became his enemies with the greateft punifhmeni: ; and tht^ could attain alfb to think that the greatelt , when God himfelf throws a man furtheft from him y which then he held they did , when he blinded, hardn d, and ftirr'd up his offendorsto fini{h,anci pile up their defperate work fince they had undertak'n it. To banifh for ever unto a local Hell, whether in the Air or in the Center, or ih that uttermoftand bottomlefs gulph o^ Chaos , deeper from Holy Blifs than the Worlds Diameter multipli'd ; they thought not a^ punifhing (b proper and proportionate for God toinfiid, as to pu- nifti finne with finne. Thus were the common fort of Gentiles wont to think, without any wry thoughts call upon divine go- vernance. And therefore C/c^ro not in \\\sliifcHlan or Compmi an re^ tirements among the learned wits of that age; but ev'n in the Senat to a mixt auditory (though he were fparing other wile to broach his Philofophy among Statifts and Lawyers) yet as to this point both' in: his oration againft Pifo and in that which is about the anfwers of the footh-(ayer$ againft C/tf^Wj he declares it publickly as no para- dox to common ears, that God cannot punifh man more, nor make him more miferable, then ftiil by making him more finful. Thus we fee how in this controverfie thejufticeof God ftood upright ev-n among heathen difputers." But if any one be truly, and not preten- dedly zealous for Gods honour, here I call him forth before Men and Angelsytou^ his beft and moli ad vifed skill, left God more unavoi^ dably then ever yet, and in the guiltieft manner be made the author ©f fin : if he (hall not onely deliver over and incite his enimies by re- buke to fin as a puni(hment,but (hall by patent under his own broad feald allow his friend whom he would fandifie and (ave, whom he would unite to himfelf and not dif^joyn, whom he would corre<ft by wholfome chaftning , and rot punifh as he doth the damned by' kwd finning, if he ffhall allow thefe in his Law the perfed rule of his own pureft willjand our moft edify 'd confcience, the prepetrating of an odious and man'fold fin without theleaft contefting. 'tis wondefd. how there can be in God a fecret and revcard-T^^ill ; and ye t what wonder, if there be in man two anfwerable caiifes. But here there' muftbe two revealed wills grappling in a fraternal war with 6nc another without any reafonable caufe apprehf hded. This cannot be kfs then to ingraft fin into the fubftance of the law, which law is to provoke fin by crofiing and forbidding , not by comply Ihg "^^ith it.' Kay thk-is, which I tremblein utteringj to ihcariratt fin-into'tht^iin-

.puniihing

Re florid to the good of both Sexes, 4 1

punifhing and well plcasM will ofGod. To avoid thefe dreadful con- lequences that tread upon the heels of thole allowances to fin, will be a task of far more difficulty then to appeaie thofe minds which perhaps out of a vigilant and wary confcicnce except againft predefti- nation. Thus finally we may conclude,that a Law wholly giving li- cence cannot upon any good confideration be given to a holy people tor hardncfs of heart in the vulvar ienfe. . CHAP. IV. That if divorce be no command ^ no more is marriage. That divorce ccnld he no diffenjuition if it were lawful. The Solution ofKivetusythat God dispenc^d ty fo?ne liok^^ovpn way^ought not tofatisfie a Chriflian mind.

OTners think to evade the matter by not granting any Law of di- vorce,but onely a difpenfation, which is contrary to the w^ords of Chrifi:,who himfelf calls it a Law^Marl^io.^.or if we fpeak of a command in the ftriifteft definition, then marriage it felf is no more a command then divorce,but only a free permiiTion to him who cannot contain .But as to difpcnfation I affirm^theiameas before of the Law^, that it can never be given to the allowance of fin,God cannot give it neither in refpect of himfelf nor in refpe<5l of man : not in refpecf 01 himfelf^beinga m.oO: pure cfTence^the juft avenger of fm*, neither can he make that ceafe to be a fin^which is in it felf mjuft and impure5as all divorces they fay were which were not for adultery.Not in refpc A of man for then it mufl be either to his good or to his evil. Not to his good;,for how can that be imagin'd any good to a fmncr whomi no- thing but rebuke and due correction can fave, to hear the determi- nate oracle of divine Law louder then any reproof difpenfing and providing for the impunity and convenience of fm *, to make that doubtfu;], or rather lawful, which the end of the Law was to make moft evidently hateful. Nor to the evil of man can a difpence be gi- venjfor nthe Law vpere ordain d^nto //j^,Rom.7. lo.how can the'fame God publifh difpences againft that Law^which mufl: needs be unto death? Abf.ird andmonftrousvvould that difpence bcjif any Judge or Law fhould give it a man to cut his own throat^or to damne himfelf. Difpence therefore prefuppoles full pardon^orelfe it is not a difpence but a mofV baneful & bloudy Ihare. And why fhould God enter cove- nant w^ith a people to be hGly^as the Command is h^iy^cr j^fi^andgood^ Rom.i. 1 2. and yet fufFer an impure and treacherous difpence to mif- lead and betray them under the vizard of Lav/ to a legitimate pra- ftifeof uncleannefs. God is no covenant breaker^he cannot do this.

G Rivstm

44 ^^^ Doctrine md Difcifline ^/"Divorce,

Rivetm, a diligent and learned Writer, having well weighed what hath been written by thofe Founders of Dilpenee, and finding the fmall agreement among them, would fain work himfelf aloof thefe rocks and quicklknds, and thinks it bed to conclude that God cer- tainly did difpence.but by Ibme way to us unknowHjand fo :o leave it. But to this 1 oppofcjthat a Chriftian by no means cught rcfl hini- iclfin fuch an ignorance ; whereby fo many abfurdities will ftraitre- fit^ both agafrift the purity5Jun:ice;,and wifdom of God, the end alfo both of Law and Gofpel,and the comparifon of them both together. God indeed in forae ways of his Povidenceishigh andlecret, paft finding out : but in the delivery and execution of his Law, efpecially in the managing of a duty fo daily and fo familiar as this is whereof we reafon,hath plainly enough revealed himfelf,and requires theob- fervance thereof not otherwife then to the law of nature and of equi» ty imprinted in us feems correfpondent. And he bath taught us to love and to extol his laws,not only asthey arehis,but as they arejuft and good to every wdfe and fober underftanding.lherefore Abraham even to the face of God himfelf, feemed to doubt of divine ju{lice,if it fhould fwerve from that irradiation wherewith it had enlightned the mind of man,and bound it felf to obferve its own rule. Wilt thou de- flroy the righteom with the wicked / that hefarfvgm thee -^Jh^Ilmt the Jnage of the earth do right f thereby declaring that God hath created a righteoufnefs in right it felf,againft which he cannot do. So Vavidy Tf. lip. The teftimoriies which thou hafl commanded are righteom and very faithful ^ thy Word is very purest here fore thyfervant loveth it. Not only then for the Authors fake,but for its own parity. He ufaithfnly faith S.Pdulyhe cannot deny himfelf : that is,cannot deny his own pro- mifes,cannot but be true to his own rules. He often pleads with men the uprightnefs of his w^ays by their own principles. How ihouldwe imitate him elfe to be ferfetl as he is ferfeB, If at pleafure he can dif- pence with golden poetick ages of fuch pleafmg licence, as in the fa- bled reign oiolASatnrn.hxi^ this perhaps before the Law might have fome covert^ but under fuch an undifpencing covenant ^sMofes made with them, and not to tell us why and wherefore indulgence cannot give quiet to the bread of any intelligent man. We muft be refolved howtiieLaw can be pure and perfpicuous^and yet throw a polluted skirt over thdc EleHjiman myfteries5that no man can utter what they mean : worfe in this then the worft obfcenities of heathen fuperfliti" €-n 3 fox their fiUhiaefs was hid;but the myftick reafon thereof known

to

Refror^d to the good of both Sexes, ^j

to their Sages.But this Jewifh imputed Elthinefs was daily and open, but the reaibn of it is not known to cur Divines. We know of no de- fign the Gofpel can have to impolb new righteoulneis upon works, but to remit the old by faith without works, if we mean juftifying works : we know no myftery our Saviour could have to Jay new bonds upon marriage in the covenant of grace which himfcif had loofned to the fevcrity of Law^So that Rivet 144 may pardon us if wc cannot be contented with his non-folution to remain in Ibch a peck of uncertainties and doubtSjfo dangerous and gaftly to the fundamen- tals of our faith.

CHAP. V. Wh.tt a Difpojfation is,

THereforc to get fome better fatisfaftion, we mud proceed to in- quire as dihgently as we can what a Difpenfation i5,w^hich I find to be either properly fo caird,or improperly .Improperly lb call'd is rather a particular and exceptive law^ abfolving and difobliging from a more general command for Ibme juft and reafonablc caufe. As/W/?. 9. they who were unclean,or in a journy^had leave to keep the PafTe- over in the fecond moneth,but otherwiie ever in the firft. As for that in Lemtkm of marrying the brothers wife, it was a penal ftatute ra- ther then a difpence ; and commands nothing injurious or in it idi unclean only prefers a fpecial reaibn of charity before an inftitutive decency,and perhaps is meant for life time onely, as is expreft be- neath in the prohibition of taking tw^o fillers. What other Edict of Mofes^ carrying but the femblance of a Law in any other kind, may bear the name of a Difpence,! have not readily to inftance.But a Dif- penfation moft properly is fome particular accident rarely hapning, and therefore not fpecified in the Law^,but left to thedecifion of cha- rity,even under the bondage of Jewilh ritesjmuch more under the li- berty of the Gofpel. Thus did David enter into the hoiife ofGody and dideat the Shewhread^he and hl^ followers ^which vccu ceremonially un^ /;zn////.Of fuch difpences as thefe it was that V^erdime the French Di- vine fo gravely difputedin the Council oiTrent againll Friar Adriarty who held that the Pope might difpenfe with anything. It is a fond perfnafion jiniith Verdune^th^it difpenfing is a favour /i ay it is as good di- flrihHtive]iiftice as what is mofl^and the Friefi fins if he gives it not ^ for it is nothing elfebnt a right interpretation of Law, Thus far that I can learn touching this matter wholfomly decreed. Butthat God,who is the giver of every good and perfe^^gift, Jam.\,ihQ^^\^ give out a

G z rule

44 ^^^ Doctrine and Difci^Une (^f Divorce,

rule and dire^flory to fm by^fhould enaft a Difpenfation as long liv'd as a Law whereby to live in privileg'd adultery for hardnefs of heart,andthis obdurate difeafe cannot be conceived how it was the more amended by this unclean remedy 5is the moft deadly and Scor- pion-like gift that the enemy of mankind could have given to any mi- ferable fmncr, and is rather fuch a Difpence as that was which the Serpent gave to our firft parents. God ^ave Qaails in his wrath, and Kings in his wrath,yet neither of thefe thingrevil in thcmfelves, but thathewhofe eyes cannot behold impurity,lhould in the book of his holy covenant.his moft unpalBonate law, give licence and ilatute for uncontrolled adultery ^although it go for the receiv'd opinion,! fhall never diiTuade my foul from fuch a creed/uch an indulgence as the Hiop of Antichrifb never forg'd a bafer.

^ C H A P, VI.

That the Jew had no more right to this fnppofed Dlfffence then the. Chrifiian hath^ and rather not fo much, U T if we muft needs difpence, let us for awhile fo far difpence with truth, as to grant that fm may be diipenc'd •, yet there will be copious reafon found to prove that the Jew had no more right to fuch a fuppos'd indulgence then the Chriftian, whether we look at the clear knowledge wherein he liv'd, or the ftri»ft performance of works whereto he was bound. Be-ldes vi^^ons and prophefies they had the Law oF God, which in the f'fdms and Proverbs is chiefly prais'd for furenefs and certainty, both eafie and pcrfeft to the enlightning of the fimple.How could it be fo obfcurethen,or they fo fottiihly blmd in this plain,moral,an:l houfhold duty? They had the fame precepts about Marriage,Chri{l added nothing to their clearnefs,for that had argued them imperfeft -^ he opens not the Law,but removes the Pha- rifaick mifts rais'd between the law and the peoples eyes : the only fentence which he adds, What God hath joyn d let no man pit afi^inder^ is asobfcure as any claufe fctchM out oiGenefis^^ccA hath encreas'da yet undecided controverfie oiclandeffiine marriages. If we examine overall his Sayings, we fhall find him not fo much interpreting the Law with his words,as referring his own words to be interpreted by the Law, and oftner obfcures his mind in fhort, and vehement, and compaft fcntences, to blind and puzzle them the more who would not underftand the Law. The Jews therefore were as little to be dif- penc'd with for lack of moral knowledge as we.

Next,none I think will denyjbut that they were as much bound to

per-

Rejlor'^d to the good of both Stxes, 45

perform the Law as any Chriftian.That fever e and rigorous knife not Ijparingthe the tender foreskin of any male infant, to carve into his flefh the mark of that ftri:!: and pure covenant whereinto he cntrcd, might give us to undeiftand enough againil the fancy of difpenfing. S 7-'^2///tefl:iiies,that tv^r^circHmtts^dman is adebtortothe whole Uwy Gal.'^.oxQKccircii.mcifion is in vain ^Ro, 2. 2^, How vain then and how prepoderous mud it needs be to exarfl a circumcifion of the fic(h from an intant unto an outward fign of purity.^and to difpcnce an un- circumcifion in the foul of a grown man to an inward and real im- purity ? How vain again was that law to impofc tedeous expiations for every llight fin ot ignorance and error, and to privilege without penance or difturbance an odious crime whether of ignorance or ob- ftinacy ? How unjuft alfo inf]i«5ling death and extirpation for the mark ofcircumftantial purenefs omitted, and proclaiming all honefl and liberal indem^nity to the a£l of afubftantial impurenefs commit- ted^making void the covenant that was made againfl: it. Thus if we confiderthe tenor of the Law, to be circumcis'd and to performi all, not pardoning fo much as the fcapes o: error and ignorance, and compare this with the condition of the Gofpel, Believe and be biftt- z.cd^ I fiippole it cannot be long ere we grant that the Jew was bound as ftrictly to the performance of every duty as was poiTible, and therefore could not be difpencM with more then] the Chriilian, perhaos not fo much.

> CHAP. VIL

7lo,'itth€ G off el is apter to di [pence then the L.'iV^. Fs.YXUsanfaered,

IF then the Law will afford no realbn why the Jew fhould be more gently dealt with then the Chriil:ian,then lurely theGofpel can af- ford as little why the Chridian fhould be lefs gently dealt with then the Jew\The Gofpel indeed exhorts to highefb perfeif^ion, but bears with weaked infirmity more then the Law^Hence thofe indulgencies, u4ll cannot receive this faying ^Evcry man hath his -proper gift ^ with ex- prefs charges not to lay o^yo^s which opir forefathers cokldnot bear. The nature of man ftiil is as weak, and yet as hard^and that weaknefs and hardnefs as unfit and as unteachable to be harfhly ufed as ever. I but, faith Par<zmj there is a greater portion of fpirit poured upon the Gofpel,which requires from us perfe(f(:er obedience. I anfwer. This does not prove that the Law there ore might give allowance to fm more then the Gofpel *, and if it were no Hn^we know it the work of the Spirit to mortifie onr corrupt defirss and evil concnpi fence , but

not

4? 7T}e Doctrine and Difci^line of Divorce,

not to root up our natural affe<fl:ions and difaffe£lions moving to and fro even in wifeft men upon juO: and neceiTary realbn, which were the true ground of that Afi^jC^/t^Diipence, and is the utmoil extent of our pleading. What is more or lefs perfect we difpute not, but what is fm or no fin. And in that I ftill affirm the Law required as perfedl obedience as the Gofpel. Befidesjthat the prime end of the Gofpel is not fo much to exa£l our obediencejas to reveal grace and the ilttisfaiTlion of our difobedience. What is now exacted from us^it is the accufing Law that does it,even yet under the Gofpelj but can- not be more extreme to us now then to the Jews of old', for the Law ever was of works^and the Gofpel ever was of grace.

Either then the Law by harmlefs and needful Difpences, w^hich the Gofpel is now made to deny,muft have anticipated and exceeded the grace of the Gofpel, or elfe muft be found to have given politick and iliperficial graces without real pardon,faying in general, Do this and live, and yet deceiving and danriing under hand withunfound and hollow permilTions, which is utterly abhorring from the end of ail Lawjas hath been Viewed. But if thofe indulgences were fafe and llnicfsout oftendernefs and compaflTionjas indeed they were,and yet fhali be abrogated by the Gofpel-,then the Law, whofe end is by ri- gor to magnihe grace,fhall it felf give grace, and pluck a fair plume iirom the Gofpel, inftead of haftning us thither, alluring us from it. And whereas the terror of the Law v\'as as a fervant to amplifie and illuftratethe mildnefs of grace : now the unmildnefs 'o# Evangelick grace fhall turn fervant to declare the grace and mildnefs of the ri- gorous Law. The Law w^as har.1i toextoll the graceofthe Gofpel, and now the Gofpel by a new afFe£led ftritflnefs of her own fliall ex- tenuate the grace which her felf offers. For by exafting a duty which the Law difpens'd5ifwe perform it then is grace diminifn'd, by how much performance advances, unlefs the Apoflle argue wrong : if we perform it not,and perifh for not performing,then are the conditions of grace harder then thofe of rigor.If through Faith and Repentance weeper ifh not, yet grace ftill remains the lefs, by requiring that which rigor did not require, or at leaft not fo ftriclly. Thus much therefore to P^r^^^j,that if the Gofpel require perfefter obedience then the Law as a duty, it exalts the Law and debafes it felf, which is difhonourable to the work of our Redemption. Seeing therefore that all the caufes of any allowance that the Jews might have, remain as well to the Chrifilans ^this is a certain rule, that folong as

the

Rtftor^d to the good of both Sems, 4P

the caufes remain the allowance ought. And having thus at length in- quired the truth concerning Law and Diipence^their ends,their ufes, their limits,and in what manner both Jcvo and ChriHian ftand liable to the one, or capable of the other,we may fafely conclude, that to affirm thegiving of any Law or Lawlike Dilpenceto fin for hard- nels of heart, is a doftrine of that extravagance from the fage prin- ciples of piety, that whofo confiders throughly, cannot but admire how this hath been digefted all this while.

CHAP. VIIL

I'he true fcnfe how Mofesfeiffered Divorce for hardnefs of heart.

W Hat may we do then to falve this Teeming inconfiftence ? I mufl not diffemble that I am confident it can be done no other way then this :

MofesJDeHt.2^.i.c{i3h\\{ht a grave and prudent Law,full of moral equity, full of due confideration towards Nature, that cannot be re- rifted,aLaw confenting with the Laws of wifeft men and cLvileft nati- ons,! hat when a man hath married a wife,if it come to pafs he can- not love her by reafon of fome difpleafing natural quality or unfit- nefs in her,let him write her a bill of divorce. The intent of which law undoubtedly was this, that if any good and peaceable man fhoulddif- cover fome helplefs difagreement or diflike either of mind or body,. whereby he could not cheerfully perform the duty of a husband with- out the perpetual difTembling of offence and difturbance to hisfpirit^ rather then to live uncomfortably and unhappily both to himfelf and to his wife,rather then to continue undertaking a duty which he could not pofFibly difcharge,he might difmifs her whom he could not tolerably and fo notconfcionably retain. And this law the Spirit of God by the mouth q{ Solomon, Proi/.;o.2i,2 3. teftifies to be a good and a necelTary Law, by granting it that A hated womm (for ^o the Hebrew w^ord fign.fies,rather then (?^'/c^,though it come all to one) that A hatedwoman^whcn JIk is married, is a thing that the earth cannot bear. What follows then but that the charitable Law mull remedy what Nature cannot undergo ? Novs^ that many licentious and hard hearted men took hold of this Law^ to cloke their bad purpofes,is no- thing flrange to believe. And thefe were they, not for whom Mofec^ made the Law,God forbid,but whofe hardneft of heart taking ill ad- vantage by this Law,he held it better to fuffer as by accident, where it could not be detec\ed,rather then good meafhould lofe their juft

and

4^ 71] t Un^Urlne and. Difcifline of Divorce,

and lawful privilege of remedy : Chrifl: therefore having to anfwet thefc tempting Pharifes^according as his cuftom was, not meaning to inform their proud ignorance what Mofes did in the true intent of the law,\vhich they had ill cited, fuppreding the true caufe for which Mofes gxjcii^^n^ extending it to every flight matter5tels them their own,what Mofcs was forc'd to fuffer by their abufe of his Law. Which is yet more plain if we mark that our Saviour in Math. 5. cites not the Law ofAIofes^ but the Fharifaical tradition falfiy grounded upon that law. And in thofe other places, Chap, i p.and Mark^ 10. the Pha- rifes cite the Law,but conceal the wife and human reafon there ex- preft ^ which our Saviour correds not in tbem^whofe pride deferv'd not his inflrudionjonly returns them what is proper to them •, Mofes for the hardhefofyoiir heart ffffer'^dyoHyths.t is,fuch as you top^t away your );vivcs *, and toyvn he wrote this precept for that cauie,which (joyou) muft be read v\ith an impreffion^and underftood iimitedly of fjch as covcr'd ill purpofes under that Law : and it was feafonable that they 0iould hear their own unbounded licence rebuk'd.but not feafonable for them to hear a good mans requifite liberty explain'd. But us he hath taught betterifwehave ears to hear. Hehimfelf acknowledg'd it to be a Lawj/I^f.^r/^i o.and being a law of God,it muft have an un- doubted Ciidvf charity ^vhich may be Hs'*d with a pure heart ^a good con fci- erice ^and faith imf eigne d^2iS w^as heard : it cannot allow fmjbutis pur- pofely to reftft iin^as by the fame chap.to Timothy appears. There we le^m -di^o that the Law is good if a man life it law f idly. Out of doubt then there muft be a certain good in this Law which Afc?/^J willingly aliow'd5and there might be an unlawful ufe made thereof by hypo- crites*, and that w^as it which Mofes unwillingly fufFer'd forefeeing it in general.but not able to difcern it in particulars. Chrift therefore mentions not here what Mofes and the Law intended, for good men might know that by many other rules : and the fcornful Pharifes were not fit to be told, until they could imploy that knowledge they and lels abujively.Only he acquaints them with what Mofes bj them was put to fuffer.

CHAP. IX. The words of the JnftitHtion how to he mderftood -^ and of our Savi- oiirs anfwer to his Difciples,

AND to entertain a little their overweening arrogance as beft be- fitted ^and to amaze them yet further, becaufe they thought it no hard matter to fulfil the Law? he draws them up to that unfeparable

inftitu-

jReJlor'^dtothegood'ofboth Stx^s» 4P

inflitution which God ordain'd in the beginning bcfoie the fall, whe ! man and woman were Doth perfcd,and could have no caule toi^peiate : juH: as in the fame Chap, he fiances not to contend w.th the arrogant young man who boaftedhis oblervanceot the whole Lawjwhcthcr indeed he had kept it or not, but skrues him up higher to a task of that perfe:lion, which no man is bound to imitate. And in like manner that patern of the firft inftitution he fet before the opinionative Phariices to dazle them and not to bind us. For this is a Iblid rule, that every command j^iven with a reafon, binds our obedience no otherwife then that reafon hold?. Of this fort was that command in Eden \ Therefore Jlhilla man cleave to his wife, a7:d they Phillbeo/ie/lejh : which we i^ce is no abfolute command, but with an inference, Therefore : the reafon then muft be firft confider'd, that our obedience be not mifobedience. The firft is, for it is not imglc, becaufe the wife is to the Hushrndflip ofhtsfle[hj as in the verfe go- ing before. But this reafon cannot be fufficientof it felf-, for why then fhould he for his wife leave his father and mother, with whom he is far moreflejlj offlejhy and bone ofhone^^s being made of their lub- ftance. And befides it can be but a forty and ignoble fociety of li e, whofeinleperable injunction depends mecriy upon flefh and boms. Therefore we muft look higher, fmce Chrift himfelf recalls us to the beginning, and we fhall find that the primitive reafon of never di- vorcing wasthatfacred and not vain promife of God to remedy manslonelinefs by mal^f7^ him a meet htlpfor him^ though not now in perfe^lion, as at firft ; yet ftill in proportion as things now are. And this is repeated verf. 20. when all other creatures wxre fitly afTocia- ted and brought to Ad;im^d.s if the divine power had bin in forae care and deep thought, becaufe there w^ not yet found a help meet for man. And can we fo (lightly deprefs the all wife purpofe of a delibera- ting God, as if his confultation had produc'd no other good for man but to joyn him with an accidental companion of propagation, which his fuddcn word had already made for every beaft ? nay a far lefs good to man it will be found, if (he muft at all adventures befaftned upon him individually. And therefore even plain fenfe and equity ,and which is above them both, the all interpreting voice of Charity her felf cries loud that this primitive reafon, this conful- ted promife of God fo w^i^f«?f^? help^ is the only caufe that gives authority to this command ofnot divorcing, to be a command. And it might be further added, that if the true definition of a wife w^re ask'd in good earneft, this daufe being <?. meet help w^ould fliew it felf

H fo

50 Thet>oitrme arid Difcip line 6>/Divorce,

To necefTary, andfo elTential in that demonftranve argument, that it- might be logically concluded : therefore fne who naturally and per- petually is no meet help can be no wife ;, which clearly takes away the difficulty of difmiffrngiuch a one. If this be not thought enough lanUver yet furthcr^that Vl;irriage,unlefs it mean a (it and tolerable Marriage, is not infeparable neither by nature nor inftitution. Not by nature,forthcn thofe M',0?W<^DiVorces had been againft nature, if ieparable and inieparable be contraries, as who doubts they be ? and what is ag.iind nature is againd huv, if found eft Philofophy ab.ufe us not : by this reckoning Mofes fhould be mod immofak]^^ that is, mod illegal, not to fay mod unnatural. Nor is it infeparable by the tird inditution : for then no fecond inditution in the lame law for fo many caufes could diffolve it; it being mod unworthy a human (as T/.^rd>'s judgment is in the fourth book of his Laws) much more a divine Lawgiver, to write two feveral Decrees upon the fime thing. But what would PUito have deemed if the one of thefe were good, the other evil to be done? Ladly.fuppofe it be infeparable by infti- tution,yet in competition with higher things^as Religionand Charity in maineft matters, and when the chief end is frudratefor which it. was ordained, as hath been fhewn, if dill it mud remain infeparable, it holds a ftrange and lawlefs propriety from all other works of God under heaven. From thefe many confiderations we mayfafelyga- ther^thatfo much of the fird inditution as our Saviour mentions, for he mentions not all,wasbut to quell and put to nonplpu the tempting Fharifees,and to lay open their ignorance and ih allow underftanding of the Scriptures. For, iaith he, Have ye not read that he which made them at the hegr/iningy made them male and female^ andfald^ for this caiife (lialla man cleave to his wife f which thefe blind ufurpers of Mjfes Chair could not gainlay : as if this fingle refpecfl of male and female were fufficient againd a thoufand inconveniences and mif- chiefs, to clog a rational creature to his endlefs forrow unreliri- quifhably, under the guileful fuperfcription of his intended folace and comfort. What if they had thus anfwer'd ? Mader,if thou mean to make wedlock as infeparable as it was from the beginning, let it be made aifo a fit fociety , as God meant it, which we fhall foon un- derdand it ought to be, if thou recite the whole reafon of the Law. Doubtlefs our Saviour had applauded their jud anfwer. For then they had expounded his command of Paradife, even as Mofes hmi- felf expounds it by his Laws of Divorce, that is, with due and wife regard had to the premifcs andreafons of the firll command,accord-

Rejlor^d to the good of both Sexes, 5 r

ing to which, without unclean and temporizing permilTions, he in^ llru<fl:s us in this imperfefl fcate what we may lafully do about Di- vorce.

Bur if it bethought that the Difciples oirended at the rigor of Chriib anfwer, could yet obtain no mitigation of the former fen-. tenceprono::ncM to thcPharirces,it m.w be fully aniwered,that our Saviour contmues the lame reply to his Difciplcs, as men leavened with the fame cudomary licence which the Pharifees maintained^and dilplealed at the removing of a traditional abufe, whereto they had fo long not unwillingly been ufed : it was no time then to contend with .their flow and prejudicial belief,in a thing wherein an ordinary meafurc of light in Scripture5with fome attention, might afterwards inform them well enough. And yet ere Chrirthad finillied this argu- ment, they might have pickM out of his own concluding words an anlwer more to their minds, and in eitecl the fame with that which hath been all this while intreating audience : u4ll msri^ faid he, ca^i- 7iot receive this faying ^fave they to whom it is given : he th.it is able to receive it let him receive it. What faying is tbis which is left to a mans choice to receive or not receive? what but the married lifer' was our Saviour fo mild and fo favourable to the weaknefs of a ling!e man,andisheturn'd onthe fudden fo rigorous and inexorable, to the diilrefles and extremities of an ill wedded man ? Did he fo gra- ciouOy give leave to change the better fmglelife for the worfe mar- ried life ? Did heopenfoto us this hazardous and accidental door of marriage to fhut upon us like the gate of death, without retract- ing or returning, without permitting to change the worft, moft in-; fupportable, moft unrhriftian mifchance of Marriage, for all the-, mifchiefs and forrowsthat can enfue, being an Ordinance which was> efpecially given as a Cordial and Exhilarating Cup of folace, the^ betten to bear our other crofTcs and afflictions ? Qye^i^^^^^^s ^^is, were a hardheartednefs of undivorcing,worfe then that in the Jews,; which they fay extorted the allowance from Mcfes^ and is utterly-^ dififonant from all the Do£lrine of our Savioar. After thele confi- derations therefore to take a Law out or" Paradifo gi^^en in time off original perfeftion,and to take it barely withoutthofejtjil and equal- inferences and reafons which mainly eftablifh it, nor lb nmHi as ad- mitting thofe needful and fafe allowances wnQr:c\\nth.Mafeshm^t'ii interprets it to the fain condition of man, argues nothing in us bur rafhnefs and contempt of thofe means that God left us in his pure arfd chafte Law, withoutwbich it will-nofbe pofiible \ox us to per-

H .2 form

5 2 Tlje Doctrine andDifcipline e?/Divorce,

form the ftri£^ impofition of this command : or if we ftrive beyond our ftrength, we fhall ftrive to obey it otherwife then God com- mands it. And lamented Experience daily teaches the bitter and'^ vain fruits oi t- i^ our prelumption , forcing men in a-tning wherein W'C are not able to judge either of their ftrength or of th':ir fuffer- ance. Whom neither one vice or other by natural addidlion, but on- ly marriage ruinSjwhich doubtlefs is not the fault of that Ordinance, for God gave it as a bleffing^not always of raansaiiiichufing •, it be- ing an error above wifdom to prevent,as examples of wifeft men fo miftaken manifeft : it is the fault there ore ofaperverfe Opinion that will have it continued in defpight of Nature and Reafon, when indeed it was never fo truly joynd. All thofe Expofitors upon the ^k\\ oi M^tthtVQ confefs the h^iV^ o^ Mofcs to be the Law of the Lord, wherein no addition or diminution hath place -^ yet coming to the point of Divorce, as if they fear'd not to be caU'd leaft in the Kingdom of Heaven, any flight evafion will content them to recon- cile thofe contradi^ions w^hich they make between Ghrift and /1/<?- fes^ between Chrift and Ghrift.

C H A P. X,

'the vain fhift of thofe who make the Law of Divorce te be.of^ely the fremifes of a fuccecdi7ig Law,

SOme will have it no Law, but the granted premifes of another; Law following, contrary to the words'ofChrift,A/^r^lo. 5. and all other Tranflations of graveft Authority, who render it inform of a Law, agreeable to M-d.i. 16. as it is moft ancient and modernly expounded. BefideSjthe bill of divorce, and the particular occafion therein mention'd, declares it to be orderly and legal. And what avails this to make the matter more righteous, if fuch an adulterous condition fhall be mention'd to build a Law upon without either pu- nifhment or fo much as forbidding : they pretend it is implicitly re- proved in thefe words, Df/^^.24.4. after ^e is defVd^ but who fees not that tr is defilement is onely in refpe^: of returning to her for- mer Husband after an intermixt Marriage ; elfe why was not the^ defiling condition firft foTbidden, which ^vould have fa ved the labour of this after Law : nor is it feemly or pioufly attributed to the Ju- ftice of God and his known hatred of fin, that fiich a heinous fault as this through all the Law fhould be onely whtppM with an implicite and oblique touch5(which yetis falfly fuppos'd) and that .his peculiar

people

Rejlor^d to the good of both Sexes. 5^3

people (hould be let wallow in adulterous Marriages almoft two thouland years for wantof adired Law to prohibit them : 'tis ra- ther to be confidently aiTumed that this was granted to apparent ne- cefTities, as being of unqueftionable right and realon in the Law of Nature, in that it (till pafifes without inhibition, even when greateft caufe is given to us to expe:t itlhould be dire^lly forbidden.

CHAP. XI.

l^'he other JJjift of faying Divorce w^u vermittcd by Laxp-, hnt not- approv''d. More of the InjlltHtioru

Bll T it was not approv'd.So niuch the worfe that it was allow'd, as if fin had overmafter'd the word of God,to conform her fted- dy and ftrait rule to fms crookednefs, which is impofTiblc. Befides, what needed a pofltive grant of that which was not approv'd ? it re ftrain'd no liberty to him that could but ulc a little fraud,it had been better filenc'd, unlefs it were approv'd in lome cafe or other. But ftillitwas not approv'd. Miierable Excufers ! He who doth evil that good may come thereby, approves not what he doth -> and yet the grand rule forbids him, and counts his damnation juft if he do it. The Soiccrc(s Midea did not approve her own evil doings, yet look'd not to beexcus'd for that : and it is the conftant Opmion of Plato^s 1 rotagor^j'^nd other of hisDialogues agreeing with that Pro- verbial Sentence among the Greeks y that No man is wickid willingly. Which alfo the Peripateticks do rather diftinguifn then deny. What great thank then if any man reputed wife and condant, will neither. do nor permit others under his charge to do that which he approves not, efpecially in matter of l^n. But for a Judge, but for a M^gi- ftrate and Shepherd of his people, to lurrender up his approbation againft Law and his own Judgment to the obftinacy of his heart, what more un- Judge- like, more un Magiftrate-like, and in War more un-Commander-Iike ? Twice in a fhoi t time it was the undo- ing of the Roman State, firft when Pompey^ next when Mar cm Br at via ^ had not magnanimity enough but to make fa poor a refignation of what they approv'd, to what the boifterous Tribunes and Souldiers bawl'd for. Twice it was the faving of two the greateft Common- wealths in the world, oi Athens by Themtflocles^i the Sea fight of Sal amis '^ of Rome by Fa biptsM'ixi mm in the /'^////Vi^ War, for that thefe two matchlefs Generals had the fortitude at home a- gainft the ralhnefs- and the clamours of their own Captains and Confederates, towithfland the doing or permitting of what, they

H i fo^ld

5 4 -7"^^ Doctrine a^dDifcipline of Dlvorctj

could not approve in their duty of their great command. Thus far of civil prudence. But when we fpeak of (in, let us look again upon tlie old reverend £//' '^ who in his heavy punifhment found no c'ifFerence between the doing and permitting of what he did not ap- prove. If hardnefs of heart in the people may be an excufe , why then is P/7^f branded through all memory f He approv'd not what he did' he openly proteded, he wafh'd his hands and laboured not a little, ere he would yield to the hard hearts of a w^hole people, both Princes and Plebeans importuning and tumulting even to the fear of a revolt. Yet is there any will undertake his caufe s" If therefore Ft- //;f for fuffjring but one ad of cruelty againft law, though with much unwiiiingnefs teftify'd, at the violent demand of a whole Nation , iliall lland fp black upon record to all pofterity ? Alas for Mofes I -what -aiall w^e lay for him, while we are taught to believe he Ibffer'd not one aotonclyboth of cruelty and uncleannefs in one divorce, but made it a plain and lading lav,' againft law, whereby ten thoufand ac^s accounted both cruel and unclean, might be daily committed,.. and this without the leaft fuit or petition of the people that we can; read of.

And can we conceive without vile thoughts, that the Majefly and Holinefsof God could endure fo many ages to gratifie a ilubborn people in the pradice of a foul polluting (In, and could heexpevH: they iliould abilain, he not fignifying his mind in a plain command, at luch time elpecially when he was framing their laws and them to all i3oiTible perfe^lion ? But they were to look back to the firft inftitu- tion, nay rather why was not that individual inftitution brought out of Paradife, as was that of the Sabbath, and repeated in the body of the Law, that men might have underRood it to be a command .^ for that any fentcnce that bears the refemblance of a precept, fet there, fo out of place in another world at fuch a diftance from the whole Law, andruot once mention'd there, fhould be an obliging command to us, is very difputable, and perhaps it might be deny'd to be^ command without further difpute : however, it commands not ablo- lutely, as hath bin clear'd, but onely with reference to that prece- dent promife of G.od, which is the very ground of his inftitution^ if that appear not infome tolerable fort, how can we affirm fuch a' matrimony to be the fame which God inftituted ? In fuch an accident) it will befibehooye our fobeniefs to follow rather w^hat moral Simi prefcibes equal to- our ftrength , then fondly to think w^ithin our (Irength all that loft Paradife relates.

; . - - CHAPi

RefioidtothegoodofhothStxts, - 55

CHAP. XII.

The third jh/ft of them whoefteem it a mecr Judicial Laiv. Proved again to be a Liw of moral equity.

ANother while it fhall fufiice them,that it was not a Moral but a Judicial Law and lo was abrogated. Nay rather not abroga- ted becauie Judicial ^ which Law the Miniftry of Chrift came not to deal with. And who put it in mans power to exempt, where Ghrifi: Ipeaks in general of not abrogating the leafijot or tittle^ and in ipecial not that of Divorce,becaule it follows among thole Laws which he premis'd exprefly not to abrogate^but to vindicatefrom abufivetra- ditions : w^ich is raoft evidently to be lecn in the 16 o'i Liiki^ where this caution of not abrogating is inferted immediately ,and not other- wife then pur pofely, when no other point of Law is touch'd but that of Divorce. And if we mark the uveife of 4/^^. 5. he there cites not the Law ofMofes, but the licentious Glofs which traducM the Law '^ that therefore which he cited, that he abrogated^and not only abrogated but dilTallowed and flatly condemned, which could not be the Law of Afofs^fon that had been foully to the rebuke of his great Servant.To abrogate a Law made with Gods allowance,had been to tell us onely that fuch a Law was now to ceafe : but to refute it with an.ignominious note of civillizing adultery, cafts thereprooF, which was meant onely to the Phai ifees,even upon him that made the Law. But yet ifthat be Judicial which belongs to a Civil Court, this Law iskfs Judicial then nine of the ten Commandments : for Antiquaries afiirm^that Divorces proceeded among the Jews without knowledge of the Magifl:rate,onely with Hands and Seals under the teftimony of fome Rabbi's to be then prelent. Perkins m a Trcatifs ofConfcterice grants,that what in the Judicial Law is of conimon equity, binds al- io the Chriftian : and how to judge of this prelcribcs two ways *, If wife Nations have enacfed the like Decree: Or if it maintain the good or Family, Churchjor Commonwealth. This therefor e-is a pure motdAcscoricmicalh?.\N, toohadily imputed of tolerating nn ; bcin,^ rather fo clear in nature and realbn, that it vvas \dt to a mans own arbitrcment to be determined between God and his own confcience ; not only among the Jews, but in every wife Nation : the reftraint whereof, who is not too thick (ighted, may fee how hurtful and di- llradive it is to the Houfe,the Church,and Commonvvcalth. And that power which Chrift never took from the Mailer of a Family, but re- (lifted onely to a right and wary ufe at home y that power the undi-

fccrning

5 6 The Do5trine and Dlfcipline (^/Divorce,

Icerning Canonift hath improperly ufurpt into his Court leetjand be- icribblM with a thouiimd trifling impcrtincncies,vv'hich yet have filPd the life of man with fcrioiis trouble and calamity. Yet grant it were of old a judicial Law, it need not be the lefs moral for that, being converfant as it is about vertucor vice. And our Saviour difputes nor here the judicature, for that was not his office, but the mortality of Divorce, whether it be Adultery orno -^ iftherefore he touch the Law ofMofcs at all,he touches the moral part thereof, -which is ah- iurd to imagine,that the Covenant ofGrace fhould reform the exa6l and perfeft Law ofWorks^ eternal and immutable *, or if he touch not the Law at all,then is not the allowance thereof difaliow^'d to us.

CHAP. xin.

The ridiculoyjOpwion that Divorce was permitted from the ckfiom in

A~gypt. Thaty[o{Q^ gave not this Law unwillwgly. Perkins

cof.fcfcs this L^w was not abrogated.

OThcrs arefo ridiculous as to allege that this licenfe of divorcing was given them bccaufe they were fo accuftom'd in ^y£gypt. As if an ill cuftomwere to be kept to all poflerity ; for theDilpen- fation is both univerfal and of time unlimited, and fo indeed no Dif- penfationatalj ^ for the over dated Difpeniation of a thing unlaw- .ful ferves for nothing but to increafe hardnelsof heart,& makes men but wax more incorrigible, which were a great reproach to befaid of any Law or Allowance that God fhould give us. In thefe Opini- ons it would be more<RcIigion to advile well, left \nc make our felves jufter then God, by cenfuringrafhly that for fm w^hich his u.n- Ipotted Law without rebukes allows, and his people without being confciou6 ofdifpleafing him have us'd. And if we can think fo of ^<?- fesj as that the Jew iJJ} obftinacy could compel him to write fuch im- pure permiflions againft the Word of God and his own judgment, doubtlefs it was his part to have protefled publickly what ftraits he was driven to, and to have declar'd his confcience when he gave any Law againft his mind ^ for the Law is the Touchftone of fin and of confcience,and muft not be ifitermix'd with corrupt Indulgences ; for then it lofes the greatcft praife it has of being certain and infalli- ble, not leading into error, as the yews were led by this Connivence of/I/^Tf/, ifitwerea Connivence. But ftill they fly back to the primitive Inftitution, and would have us re-enter Paradife againft the Sword that guards it. Whom I again thus reply to, that the place in Ger/e/is contains the defcription of a fit and perfe^ Marriage,with

an

ReJlor'*d to the good of both Sexes, y J

an interdict of ever divorcing fiich a union', but where nature isdil- cover'd to have never joyn'd indeed,but vehemently feeks to part^it cannot be there conceived that God forbids it, nay he commands it both in the Law and in the Prophet Malachy^which is to be our rule. And Perkins upon this Chapter o^ Matthew deals plainly, that our Saviour here confutes not Mofes Law, but the falfe GloiTes that de- prav'd the Law ;, which being true, P^^i^^^muii: needs grant, that Ibmething then is left to that Law which Chrift found no fault with ^ and what can that be but the conlcionable ufc of fuch liberty as the plain words import ? So that by his own inference Chrift did not ab- lolutely intend to reftrain all Divorces to the only caufe of Adultery . This therefore is the true fcope of our Saviours will, that he who looks upon theLaw concemingDivorce,{hould alfo look back upon the Inil:itui:ion,that he may endeavour what is perfecleft: and he that looks upon the Inftitution fhaU not refufe as finful and unlawful thofe allowances which God affords him in his following Law,left he make himfelf purer then his Maker ^and prefuming above ftrength flip into temptations irrecoverably.f or this is w^onderful,that in ail thofe Decrees concerning Marriage God fhould never once mention the prime Inftitution to difluade them from divorcing ^and that he fhould forbid fraailer fins as oppofite to the hardnefs of their hearts^and ht this adulterous matter of Divorce pafs ever unreproved.

This is alfo to be marvelled, that feeing Chrift did not condemn whatever it was that ^^^/^jfufferedjand that thereupon the Chriftian Magiftrate permits lllury and open Stews,and here with us Adulte- ry to befo flightly puni(hed,which was publifhed by death to thefe hard hearted JeVvs^ why v/e fhould ftrain thus at the matter of Di- vorce,which may ftand fo much wath charity to permit^and make no fcruple to allow Ufury efteem'd to be fo much againft charity. But this it is to embroyi our felves againft the righteous and all-wife Judgments and Statutes of God *, which are not variable and contra- rious, as we w^ould make them, one while permitting and another while forbiddingjbut are moft conftant and moft harmonious each to other.For how can the uncorrupt and majeftick Law of God^bearing in her hand the wages of life and death, harbour fuch a repugnance within her felf,as to require an unexempted and impartial obedience to all her Decrees, either from us or from our Mediator^and yet de- bafe her felfto faulter fo many ages with circumcis'd Adulteries by unclean andflubbering permifTions.

I CHAP.

5 § The Docirine mA Difci^line of Divorce >

CHAP. XIV.

'That Beza'j Opinion of regelating fin by u4poflolick^L.m cannot

be foHnd,

YE T Bez.as Opinion is, that a politick Law (but what politick Law I know not, unlefs one ofA^atchiavePs) may regulate fin •, may hear indeed, I grant with impcrfcclion for a time, asthofeCa- nons of the Apoilles did in Ceremonial things : but as for fin, the ef- lence of it cannot confifl: with rule*, and if the Law fail to regulate fin and not to take it utterly away, itneccfTariiy confirms and efta- blifhes Cm. To make a regularity of fin by Law, either the Law mull ftreighten fin into no fin, or fin mud crook the Law into no Law. The Judicial Law can ferve to no other end then to be the Proteclor and Champion of Religion and honell Civility, as is fet down plainly Kom.i I. and isbutthearmof MoralLaw,whichcan no more befe- parate from jufl;ice then juftice from vcrtue.T^'heir office alfo in a dif- ferent manner fteers the lame courfe ; the one teaches what is good by precept, the other unteaches what is bad by punifliment. But if, we give way to politick Difpenfations of lewd uncleannefs, the firil good confequence of fuch a relax will be the juftifying of Papal Stews, joyn'dwith a toleration of epidemick whoredom. Juftice muft revolt from the end of her authority ,and become the patron of that where- of flie was created the puniftier.The example of Ufury, which is com- monly alleged, makes againft the allegation which it brings, as I touch'd before. Befides that Ufury, fo much as is permitted by the Magiftrate, and demanded with common equity, is neither againffc the Word of God, nor the rule of charity, as hath been often dif- cufs'd by men of eminent learning and judgment. There muft be therefore fome other example found outtofhew us wherein civil policy may with warrant from God fettle wickednefs by Law, and make that lawful which is lawlefs. Although I doubt not but upon deeper confideration, that which is true in Phyfick will be found as true in Policy, that as of badPulfes thofethat beat moftin order are much worfe then thofe that keep the moft inordinate circuit, fo of popular vices thofethat may be committed legally ,will be more per- nicious then thofe that are left to their own courfe at peril ,not under a ftinted privilege to fin orderly and regularly, which is an implicite contradi6lion,but under due and fearlefs execution of punifhment.

The political Law,fince it cannot regulate vice,is to reftrain it by ufing all means to root it out.But if it fuffer the weed to grow up to

any

Rejlor'^d to the good of both Sexes. 59

any pleafurable or contented height upon what pretext foevef, it fattens the root, it prunes and drefTes vice.as if it were a good plant. Let no man doubt therefore to affirm that it is not fo hurtful or dil- honourable to a Commonwealth, nor fo much to the hardening of hearts, when thofe worfe faults pretended to be feard are commit- ted, by who fo dares under ftri<^and executed penalty, as when thofe lefs faults tolerated for fear of greater harden their laces, not their hearts onely, under the prote£lion of publick authority. For what lefs indignity were this,thenas if Juftice her felf the Queen of Vertues (defcending from her Sceptred Royalty) inftead of conquer- ing Ihould compound and treat with fin, her eternal adverlary and rebel, upon ignoble terms ? or as if the Judicial Law were like that untruily Steward in the Gofpcl, and inftead of caliing in the debts of his moral mafter,fhould give out fubtile and fly Acquittances to keep himfelf from begging ? Or let us perfon him like fome wretched Iti- nerary Judge,whoto gratifiehis Delinquents before him, would Jet thembafely break his head,left they fhould pull him from the Bench and throw him over the Bar.Unlefs we had rather think both Mora! and Judicial full of malice and deadly purpofeconfpir'dto let the IDchtov Ifraeliteythc Scedoi^^hraham^icun on upon a bankrupt fcore, flattered with infufScient and enfnaring Difcharges,that fo he might be haled to a more cruel forfeit for all the indulgent arrears which thofe Judicial Acquitments had engaged him in. No no, this cannot be that the Law, whofe integrity and faithfulnefs is nexttoGod, fhould be either the fliamelefs broker of our impunities, or the in- tended inftrument of our defl:ru£lion. The method of holy corre£li- on, fuch as became the Commonwealth of Ifrael^ is not to bribe f n with fin,to capitulate and hire out one crime with another : but with more noble and graceful feveritythen TofrliusthQRoma^LeguuCcd with ArjtiockHi^to limit and level out the direct way from vice to vertue,with ftreighteft and exa£left lines on either fide, not winding or indenting fo much as to the right hand of fair pretences. Violence indeed and Infurre<^ion may force the Law to fuffer what it cannot mend 9 but to write a Decree in allowance of fin, asfoon can the hand of Juftice rot off. Let this be ever concluded as a truth that will outlive the faith of thofe that feek to bear it down'.

I 2 CHAP.

£q 77je Doctrine dnd Difcifline of Divorce^

C H A P. XV.

7'hat Divorce VP as not given for Wives onely^as Beza andFsiVXUS write. More of the Insiitution,

IAftly, if Divorce were granted, as Bez^i^ and others fay,not for ^ Men, but to releafe afflided Wives ; certainly it is not onely a Difpenfation,but a moft merciful LaWjand why it (hould not yet be inforce^ being wholly needful, I know not what can be in caufe but lenflels cruelty. But yet to fay, Divorce was granted for relief of Wives rather then of Husbands, is but weakly conjeclurM,and isma- nifeftly the extreme Ihift of a huddled expofition. Whenas it could not be found how hardnefs of he.^rt Ihould be lefTen'd by li- berty of Divorce,a fancy was^ devis'd to hide the flaw by comment- ing that Divorce was permitted onely for the help of Wives. Palpa- bly uxorious I who can be ignorant that Woman was created for Man,and not Man for Woman •, and that a Husband may be injured as infufFerably in marriage as a W^ife ? What an injury is it after \vedlock not to be belovM,what to be flighted, what to be contented with in point of houie rule who fhall be the head, not for any parity of wildom, for that werefomething reafonable, but out of a female pndQlIfuffcr notyhithS.Paul/he woman to pif^rp aittority over the man. if the Apoftle could not fuffer itjinto what mould is he m.ortified that can ? Solomon faith, That a bad wife is to her hmhand a^ rottennefs to his hones ^a continual dr off ing,Better dwell m the corner of the houfetop^ or in the wilder nefs^ then with fuch a one. Whofo hideth her hideth the yvind^and one of the four mifchiefsthat the earth cannot bear. If the Spi- rit of God wrote fuch aggravations as thefe,and (as may be gueft by thefe fimilitudes) counfels the man rather to divorce then to live with fuch a collegue ^and yet on the other fide exprelTes nothing of the wifes fuffering with a bad husband.Is it not moft likely that God in his Law had more pity towards man thus w^edlock'd^then towards the woman that was created for another ? The fame Spirit relates to us the courfe w^hich the Medes and Ferfians took by occafion of F^/?jri,whofe meer denial to come at her husbands fending loft her the being Queen any longer, and fet up a wholefom Law, that every man ^witld hear rule in hii own hon^e. And the Divine Relater fhews usnottheleaftfignofdiflikingwhat was done; how fhould he, if Mofes long before was nothing lefs mindful of the honour and pre- eminence due to man.So that to fay Divorce was granted for Wo- man rather then Man, was but fondly invented , Eft eeming therefore

to

RejJor^d to the good of both Sexes, ^ j

to have aflerted thus an injur'd Law ofMofes from the unwarranted and guilty name of a Difpenfation, to be again a moft equal and re- quifiteLaw^we have the Word of Chrifl; himfelF, thathe caraenot to alter the lead tittle of it *, and fignifies no fmalf difpleafure acainil him that fhal teach to do fo.On which relying I fhal not much waver to affirm, that thofe words which are made to intimate^as if they for- bad all Divorce but for Adultery, (though Af(v/^^ have conftituted othervvife) thofe words taken circumfcriptly, without regard to any precedent law ofMofes or atteftation of Ghrifl: himfelf;, or without care to preferve thole his fundamental and fupcriour laws of nature and charity, to which all other Ordinances give up their feal, are as much againft plain equity and the mercy of religion, as thofe words QfT^:k£yeat^th^sls my ^i?^_y, elementally underftood,are againft nature and fenfe. -

And furely the reftoring of this degraded Law hath well recom- pcnc'dthe diligence was us'd by enlightning us further to find out wherefore Chrift took off the Pharifees from alleging the Law, and referr'd them to the firft Infl:itution,notcondemning,altering,or abo- Jiiliing this precept of DivorGe,which is plainly raora^or that were againft his truth,his promife,and his prophetick office:,but knowing howfallaciouily they had cited and conceal'd the particular and na- tural reafon of the Law, that they might juftifie any froward reafon of their own,he lets go that Sophiftry unconvinc'd,ior that had been to teach them eife,which his purpofe was not. And fincethey had ta- ken a liberty which the Law gave not, he amufes and repels their tempting pride with a perfe<^ion of Paradife, which the Law re- quir'd not ', not thereby to oblige our performance to that whereto the Law never enjoyn'd the fallen eftate of Man •, for if the firft Infti- tutionmuft make wedlock whatever happen jinfeparable to us,it muft make it alfo as perfe^ as meetly helpful, and as comfortable as God promis'd it fhould be,at leaft in fome degree •, otherwife it is not e- qual or proportionable to the ftrength of man, thathe fliould be re- duc'd into fuch indilToluble bonds to his afTured mifery,ifall theo- ther conditions of that covenant he manifeftly alter'd. CHAP. XVI. Hoxv to he H?7der flood that they muft be one fleflj : and how thJ^ thofe whom God hath ']oyn^ d Man ^ould. not f under .

NExt he faith, they mnfl heoneflefljy which, when all conjecHiuring is done, will be found to import no more but to make legiti- mate

52 The Doctrine and Difcipline (^/Divorce,

mate and good the carnal a£l, which elfe nciight feem to have fome- thmg of poliGtionin it ; and infers thus much over,that the fit union of their fouls be fiich as may even incorporate them to love and ami- ty : but that can never be where no Correfpondent is of the mind ; nay^inftead of being one flefhjthey will be rather twocarcafes chained unnaturally together *, or^ as it may happen^a living foul bound to a dead corps, a punishment too like that infii£led by the Tyrant Me- z.cmmi;io little worthy to be received as that remedy of lonelinefs which God meant us. Since we know it is not the joyning of another body will remove lonelmefs, but the uniting of another compliable mind,and that it is nobleflingbut a torment^nay a bafe and brutiih condition to be one fleih, unlefs where a nature can in Ibme nature fix a unity of Dilpofition. The meaning thereof of thefe words,For this caiife jlmll a man leave his father and his motherland jljall cleave to his wlfejwsis firft to (hew us the dear afFedion which naturally grows in every not unnatural Marriage, even to the leaving of parents, or other familiarity whatroever.Next5it juftifies a man in fo doing, that nothing is done undutifully to father or mother. But he thatihould be here fternly commanded to cleave to his error, a difpofition which to his he finds will never cement a quotidian of forrowand difcon- tent in his houle, let us beexcus'd to paufe a little, and bethink us every way round ere we lay fuch a flat Solccifm upon the gracious, and certainly not inexorable, not rufhlefs and flinty Ordinance of Marriage.For inthe meaning of thefe w^ords mufi: be thus block'd up within their own letters from all equity and fair dedu(flion,they will ferve then well indeed their turn, w^ho aflirm Divorce to have been granted onely for wives ^ whenas we fee no word of this Text binds Vv^omen,but Men onely,what it binds. No marvel then if Salomith (Siflier to Herod) fentaWrit of Eafe to Cafiobar^ her Husband, which (as Jofefhm there attefts) was lawful only to Men. No marvel though Placidia the Sifter of Honorim threatned the like to Earl Conftantim for a trivial caufe, as Thotmi relates from Olympodorus, No marvel any thing if Letters muftbeturn'd into Palifadoes, to ftake out all requifite fenfe from entring to their due enlargement.

LaftlyjChrifthimfelf tells who fhouldnot beput afunder,namely, thofe whom God hath joyn'd. A plain folution of this great contro- verfie,if men would but ufe their eyes ; for when is it that God may be faid to joyn,when the parties and their friends confent ? No fure- ly/or that may concur to Icvs^deft ends.Or is it when Churches Rites

are

Rejior^d to the good of both Sexes, 5^

arefinilh'd? Neither;, for the efficacy of thofe depends upon the prefuppofed fitnefs of either party .Perhaps after carnal knowledge ? Leaft of all , for that may joyn perfons whom neither Law nor Na- ture dares joyn : 'tis left, that only then when the minds are fitly dif- pofed and enabled to maintain a chearful converfation, to thefolace and love of each other, according as God intended and promifed in the very firfl foundation of Matrimony, I will make him a hcl^ meet for him'^ for furely what God intended and promifed, that onely can be thought to be his joyningjand not the contrary. So likewife the Apoftle witneiTeth i Cor^-j. 1 5. that in Marriage God hath called m to fe^tce.Kridi doubtlefs in what refpecl he hath call'd us to Marriagejin that alfo he hath joynM us. The reft, whom, either difproportion or deadnefsof fpirit,or fomething diftafteful and averfe in the immuta- ble bent of Nature renders conjugal, error may have JQynM,but God never joyn'd againft the meaning of his own Ordinance. And if he joyn'd them not,then is there no power above their own confent to hinder them from unjoyning,when they cannot reap the fobreft ends of being together in any tolerable fort.Neither can it be faid proper- ly that fuch twain were ever divorc'd, but onely parted from each other jas tw^o perfons unconjunflive and unmarriable together. But if, whom God hath made a fit help,torwardnefs or private injuries hath made unfit, that being thefecret of Marriage God can better judge then Man5neither is Man indeed fit or able to decide this matter : however it be,undoubtedly a peaceful Divorce is alefsevil, and lefs in fcandal then a hateful hardhearted and deflru5tive continuance of Marriage in the judgment ofMofes and of Chrift, that juftifies him m chufmg the lefs evil, which if it were an honeft and civil prudence in the Law,whatis there in the Gofpel forbidding fuch a kind of le- gal wifdom, though we fhould admit the common Expofitors ?

CHAP. XVII.

The Sentence ofChrifl concerning Divorce how to he expounded. What Grotius hath obferved. Other Additions.

HAving thus unfolded thofe ambiguous Reafons, wherewith Chrift (as his wont was) gave to the Pharifees that came to found him fuch ananfwer as they deferv'd, it will not be uneafie to explain the Sentence it felf now that ioWo^s y/hofoever Jhallpm away his wife J except it beforfornication-y andjliall marry another^commltteth adultery, Firft therefore I will fet down what is obferv'd by Grotini

upon

^4 ^^^ DoUrine md Difcl^l'mt (^/Divorce,

upon this point^a man of general learning.Nextl produce what mine own thoughts gave me before I had feen his Annotations. Origen^ faith he, notes thatChrift nam'd Adultery rather as one example of other like cares,then as one onely exception. And that it isfrequent not onely in human but in divine Law;?, to exprefs one kind of fa<ft, whereby other caufes of like nature may have the like plea, as Exod. 2i.i8,I952o,26.jD^/^^M9.5. And from the Maxims of Civil Law he ihewSjthat even in (harpeft Penal Laws the fame realbn hath the fame right ', and in gentler Laws, that from like caufes to like the Law in- teiprets rightly. But it may be obje£led, (liith he, that nothing de- ilroys the end of wedlock fo much as adultery .To which heaniwers, that Marriage was not ordain'd only for copulation^but for mutual help and comfort ot life : and if we mark diligently the nature of our Saviours commands,we fliall find that both their beginning and their end confifts in charity *, whofe will is that we fhould be lb good to others,asthat we be not cruel to our felves. And hence it appears why Markjind Lnke^ and S.Paid to the Corinthians y mentioning this precept of Chrift adde no exception : becaufe exceptions that arife from natural equity are included filently under general terms : it would be confider'd therefore whether the fame equity may not have place in other cafes lefs frequent. Thus far he. From hence is what I adde : fir(l,that this faying of ChriH, as it is ufualiy expound- cdjCan be no law at all, that a man for no caufe fhould feparate but for adultery, except it be a fupernatural law, not binding us as we are had it been the law of nature,either the Jews^ orfome other wife and civil nation would have prefs'd it : or let it be fo,yet that law, Df^f .24. 1, whereby a man hath leave to part, whenas for juft and natural caufe difcover'd h£ cannot love,is a law ancienter and deeper ingraven in blamelefs nature then the other : therefore the infpired Lawgiver Mofes took care that this (hould befpecifiedand allowed : the other he let vanifh in filence, not once repeated in the volum of his Law, even as the reafon of it vanifh'd with Paradife. Secondly, this can be no new command, for the Gofpel enjoyns no new morali- ty ,fave onely the infinite enlargement of charity , which in this refpeft is called the new commandment by S. John^ as being the accomplifh- ment of every comraand.Thirdly,it is no command ofperfeftion fur- ther then it partakes of charity, which is the bond ofperfeU:lon. Thofe commands therefore which compell us to felf cruelty above our ftrengthjfo hardly w^ill help forward to perfeaion,thatthey hinder

and

Refior'^dtothegoodofboth Sexes, 6^

and fet backward in all the common rudiments of Chriftlanity, as was prov'd. It being thus clear, that the words of Chrift can be no kind of command as they are vulgarly taken, we fhall now fee in what fenfe they may be a command, and that an excellent one, the fame with that o^ Mofes^2LX\^ no other. Mofes had granted that onely for a natural annoyance,defe£ljOr diilike,whether in body or mind, (for fo the Hebrew words plainly note) which a man could not force himfelf tolivewuthjhe might give a bill of divorce, thereby forbid- ding any other caufe wherein amendment or reconciliation might have place.This Law the Fharifees depraving extended to any flight contentious caufc whatioever. Chrift therefore feeing where they halted urges the negative part of that Law, which is neceffarily un- derftood (for the determinate permiflion o't Mofes binds them from farther licence) and checking their fupercilious drift, declares that no accidental,tcmporary,or reconcilable ofFenee^exceptlornication) can juftifie a Divorce.He touches not here thofe natural and perpe- tual'hindrances of fociety, whether in body or mind,whicharenot to be remov'd ; for fuch as they are apteft to caufe an unchangeable of- fence fo are they not capable of reconcilement becaufe not of amend- ment : they do not break indeed,but they annihilate the bands of mar- riage mo: e then Adultery .For that fault committed argues not always a hatred either natural or incidental againfl whom it is commit- ted '^ neither does it infer a difability of future helpfulnefs, or loyal- ty,or loving agreement, being once paft and pardon'd, where it can be pardonM : but that which naturally diftaftes,andyj;7<fl^j no favour in r/?f f^fjofMatrimonyjCanneverbe conceal'd^never appeas'd, never intermitted, but proves a perpetual nullity of love and contentment, a folitude and dead vacation of all acceptable converfmg. Mofes therefore permits Divorce, but in cafes onely that have no hands to joyn,and more need feparating then Adultery. Chrift forbids it,but in matters onely that may accord, and thofe lefs then Fornication. Thus is Mofesh^Yi here plainly confirm'djand thofe caufes which he permitted not a jot gainfaid. And that this is the true meaning of this place I prove by no other Author then S.T^///himfeIf, i Cor. 7. lb, 1 1. upon which Text Interpreters agree that the Apoftle onely repeats the precept of Chrift : where while he fpeaks oUhe wifes re- concilement to her hmbandjhe puts it out of controverfie,that our Sa- viour meant chiefly matters of ftrife and reconcilement *, of which fort he would not that any difference fnould be the occafion of Di- vorce,except Fornication. And that we may learn better how to va-

K luc

45(5 ^^^ Oo^rm^ and Difci flint of Divorce ,

lue a grave and prudent Law of Mofes^ and how unadvifedly we fmatter with our lips,when we talk of Chrifts abolifhing any Judici- al Law of his great Father, except in fome circumftances which are Judaical rather then Judicial, and need no abolifhing-, butceafe of themfelves : ] fay again, that this recited Law ofMofes contains a caufe of Divorce greater beyond compare then that for Adultery ; and whofo cannot fo conceive it,errs and wrongs exceedingly a Law of deep wifdom for want of well fadoming. For let him raark,no man urges the juft divorcing of Adultery as it is a On, but as it is an in- jury to Marriage ; and though it be but once committed, and that without malice, whether through importunity or opportunity, the Gofpel does not therefore diffuade him who would therefore di- vorce ; but that natural hatred ,whcncver it arifes,is a greater evil in Marriage then the accident of Adultery, a greater defrauding, a greater injuflice,and yet not blameable,he who underftands not after all this reprefentingji doubt his Will like a hard Spleen draws fader then his Underftanding can well languifie. Nor did that man ever know or feel what it is to love truly, nor ever yet comprehend in his thoughts what the true intent of Marriage is. And this alfo will be fomewhat above his reach,but yet no lefs a truth for lack of his per- lpe(!^ive,that as no man apprehends what vice is fo well as he who is truly vertuous, no man knows Hell like him who converfcs moft in Heaven,fo there is none that can eftimate the evil and theafflidion of a natural hatred in Matrimony, unlefs he have a foul gentle enough and fpacious enough to contemplate what is true love.

And the reafon why men fo difefteem this wife judging Law of God,and count hate,or the net finding of favour ^^s it is there term'd, a humorous ,a difhoneft,and flight caufe of Divorce,is becaufe them- felves apprehend fo little of what true concord means : for if they did,they would be jufter in their balancing between natural hatred and cafual adultery *, this being but a transient injuryjand foon amen- ded,! mean as to the party againft whom the trefpafs is : but that other being an unfpeakable and unremitting forrow and offence, whereof no amends can be made,no cure,no ceafmg but by Divorce, which like a divine touch in one moment heals all, and (like rfie Word of God) in one inftant hufhes outrageous tempefts into a fud- den ftilnefs and peaceful calm. Yet all this fo great a good of Gods own enlarging to us, is by the hard rains of them that fit us wholly diverted and imbezelled from us. Maligners of mankind ! But who hath taught youto mangle thus, and make more gafhes in the mife-

ries

Rejlor'^d tothegoodofboth Sexes. 6j

ries of a blamclefs creature, with the leaden daggers of your literal Decrees, to whofe eafe you cannot adde the tithe of one fmall atom, but by letting alone your unhelpful Surgery. As for fuch as think wandring concupifccnce to be here newly and more precifely for- bidden then it was before, if the Apoftle can convince them *, we knowthat we are to knovs? Infi by the LaWj and not by any new difco- very of theLaw.TheLaw of^^^/^iknew what it permitted, and the Gofpel knew what it forbid \ he that under a peevifh conceit of de- barring concupilcence ftall go about to make a Novice of Afi?/^/, (not to fay a worfe thing for reverence fake) and fuch a one of God himfelf,as is a horror tothink5to bind oi r Saviour in the default ofa downright promife breaking, and to blind the difunions of com- plaining nature in chains together, and curb them with a Canon bit, 'tis he that commits all the whoredom and adultery, which himfelf adjudges, befides the former guilt fo manifold that lies upon him. And if none of thcfe confiderations with all their weight and gravity can avail to the difpofTefling him of his precious LiteraIifm,letfomc one or other intreat him but to read on in the fame 19 ofMatth, till he come to that place thatfays,So«?f make themfelves Euriuchsfor the Kingdom of Heavens fake. And if then he pleafe to make ufe of OrL gens Knife, he may do well to be his own Carver. CHAP. XVllI. whether the xcord of our Saviour he rightly exfoundedonely ofaEtu^ al fornication to be the caufe of Divorce. The Opinion of Grotius, v^ith other reafcns.

BU T becaufe we know that Chrift never gave a Judicial Law> and that the word fornication is varioufly fignificant in Scripture, it will be much right done to our Saviours words, to confider dili- gently whether it be meant here that nothing but a^Slual fornication prov'd by witnefs can warrant a Divorce, for fo our Canon Law judges Neverthelefs as I find thaxGroti^i^ on this place hath obferv'd the Chriftian Empcroms ^Thecdo/ifu the fecond and jufiinian fmcn of high wifdom and reputed piety ,decreed it to be a divorcive fornica- tion, if the wife attempted either againft the knowledge, orobfti- nately againft the will of her husband,fuch things as gave open fufpi- tionsof adulterizing, as the wilful haunting of Feafts^and Invitations with men not of her near kindred ,the lying forth of her houfe with- out probable caufe, the frequenting of Theatres againft her husbands mind,her endeavour to prevent ordeftroy Conception. Hence that of Jerom.^Where fornication isfuf^e^edthe mfe may lawfully hedpvorc'*d ^

K 2 not

£^ The Doctrine and Difcifline of Divorce ,

not that every motion of a jealous mind fhould be regarded, but that it fhould not be exafted to prove all things by a viiibility of Law witnefling, or elfe to hoodwunkthe mind : for the Law is not able to judge of thefe things but by the rule of equity, and by per- mitting a wife man to walk the middle way of prudent circumlpe£li- on,,neither wretchedly jealous,nor ftupidly and tamely patient. To this purpofe hath Grottm in his Notes. He fhews alfo that Fornicati- on is taken in Scripture for luch a continual headftrong behaviour, as tends to plain contempt of the husband, and proves out of J/^4^^j 19.2. where the Levites wife is faid to have plaid the whore againft him *, which Jofefhm and the SeptHagwtymth the Chaldean jinter^rtt onely of ftubbornnefs and rebellion againft her husband : and to this I adde that Kimchi^ and the two other Rabbles who glofs the Text, are in the fame opinion. Ben Gerfom realons,that had it been whore- dom,a Jew and a Levite would have difdain'd to fetch her again .And thisi fhall contribute, that had it been whoredom, fhe would have chofen any other place to run to then to her fathers houle, it being fo mfamous for an Hebrew woman to play theHarlot,aad fo oppro- brious to the parents. Fornication then in this place oit\\t Judges is underftood forftubborn difobedience againft the husband, and not for adultery. A fin ofthat fudden activity as to be already commit- ted5when no more is done,but onely lookt unchaftely : which yet I would be loth to judge worthy a Divorce, though in our Saviours language it be called Adultery . Never thelefs when palpable and fre- quent figns are given, the Law ofGod,A^;^«^.5. fo far gave way to thejealoufieofa man, as that the woman fet before the San^uary with her headuncovered,was adjur'd by thePrieft to fwear whether fhe were falfe or no, and conftrain'd to drink that hitter water with an undoubted cnrfe of rottennefs and tympany to follow, unlefs {he>. were innocent. And the jealous man had not been guiltlefs before God,as feems by the laft verfe,if ha ving fuch a fufpicion in his head, he fhould negledl his trial ^ which if to this day it be not to be us'd, or bethought as uncertain of effeft as our antiquated Law of Orda- Hum, yet all equity will judge that many adulterous demeanours, which are of lewd fufpition and example, may be held fufficient to incur a Divorce, though the aft it felf hath not been prov'd. And feeing the generofity of our Nation is fo, as to account no reproach more abominable then to be nicknam'dthe Husband ofanAdulte- refs, that our Law fhould not be as ample as the Law of God to vin- dicate a man from that ignoble TufFerance, is our barbarous unskil-

fulnefs.

Rejlor^d to the good of both Sexes. 6g

fulnefs, not confidering that the Law ihould be exafperated accord- ing to oureftimation of the injury. And if it muft be fufFer'd till the adl be vifibly prov'd,^!?^^;? himfelf, whofe judgment will be grant- ed to furpafs the acutenefs of any Canonift, confelTes^Pyo, 30. 19,20. that for the a^ft of Adultery it is as difficult to be found asthefr^cj^ of an Eagle in the air^or the way of a Ship in the Sea ^ fo that a man may be put to unmanly indignities ere it be found out. This there- fore may be enough to inform us,that Divorcive Adultery is not li- mited by our Saviour to the utmoft aft, and that to be attefted al- ways by eye witnefsjbut may be extended alfo to divers ob.vious afti- ons,which either plainly lead to Adultery ^or give fuch prefumption whereby fenfible men may fufpeftthe deed to be already done. And this the rather may be thought, in that our Saviour chofe to ufc the \s ox di fornication^ which word is found to fignifie other matrimonial tranfgrcflionsof main breach to that covenant befides aftual Adulte- ry .For that fm needed not the riddance of Divorce, but of death by the Law, which was active even till then by the example of the wo- man taken in adultery j or if the Law had beendormant,our Saviour was more likely to have told them of their negleft, then to have let a capital crime filently fcape into a Divorce : or if it befaid, his bufi- nels was not to tell them what was criminal in the Civil Courts, but what was fmful at the Bar ofConfcience, how dare they then having no other ground then thefe our Saviours words,draw that into trial of Law,which both M^fis and our Saviour have left to the jurifdidi- on ofConfcience ? But we take from our Saviourjfay they,onely that it was Adultery, and our Law of it felfapplies the puniiliment. But. by their leave that fo argue, the great Lawgiver of all the world, who knew beft what was Adultery both to the Jew and to the Gentile, appointed no fuch applying, and never likes when mortal men will be vainly prefuming to outftrip his Juftice.

CHAP. XIX.

ChriBs manner of teaching, 5.Paul adds to this matter of Divorce with- out command to fhexv the matter to be of equity^ not of rigour. That the bondage of a Chrifiian may be a^ mnch^. and in peace U4 little^ in fpme other Marriages befides Idolatrom, Jfthofe Arguments there-- fore be good in that one cafe^ why not in thofe other . Therefore the Apoftlehimf elf adds Iv iu<i Tn^nm ,

THus at length we fee both by this and by other places, that there is fcarce any one faying in the Gofpel but muft be read

with

yo The Do^rme and D'tfcifUm e>/Divorcc^

with limitations and di(lin£^ions to be rightly underftood *, for Chrift gives no full comments or continued diicouries, but (as Demetrim ^t Rhetorician phrafes it) fpeaks oft in Monofyllables, like a Ma- fler Icattering the heavenly grain of his Doctrine like Pearls here and there, which requires a skilful and laborious gatherer, who muft compare the words he finds with other precepts, with the end of every Ordinance,and with the general analogy of Evangellck Do- <fh'ine : othervvife many particular fayings would be but one repug- nant riddle, and the Church vs'ould offend in granting Divorce for Frigid ity,which is not here accepted with Adultery, but by them ad- ded.And this was it undoubtedly which gave rcaibn to S.P^Wof his own authority as he profefres,and without command from the Lord, to enlarge thefeeming conftru6lion of thofeplaces in the Gofpel, by adding a cafe wherein a perfon deferted, which is fomethinglefs then divorc'd,may lawfully marry again And having declared his opinion in one cafe, he leaves a further liberty for Chriftian prudence to de- term ine in cafes of like importance^ufiag words fo plain as are not to be (hifted off, that a brother or afifter is not mider bondage in fiich ca.- /^J",adding alfojthat God hath called m to peace in Marriage.

Now if it be plain that a Chriftian may be brought into unworthy bondage^ and his religious peace not onely interrupted now and then, but perpetually and finally hinder'd in wedlock by mifyoking with a diverfity of nature as well as of ReIigion,the reafons oiS.Papil can- not be made fpecial to that one cafe of infidelity, but are of equal moment to a Divorce, whereever Chriftian liberty and peace are without fault equally obftrufted. That the Ordinance which God gave to our comfort, may not be pinn'd upon us to our undefervcd thraldom, to be coop'd upas it were in mockery of wedlock to a perpetual betrothed lonelinefs and difcontent, if nothing worfe en- lue. There being nought elfe of Marriage left between fuch but a <lifpleafing and forc'd remedy againft the fting of a brute defire; which fleihly accuftoming without the Souls union and commixture ^f intelleftual delightjas it is rather a foiling then a fulfilling of Mar- riage Rites, fo is it enough to abafe the mettle of a generous fpiritj and finks him to a low and vulgar pitch of endeavour in all his at^ii- ons,or (which is worfe) leaves him in a defpairing plight of abjed and hardned thoughts : which condition rather then a good man fhould fall into, a man ufeful in the fervice of God and Mankind, Chrift himfelf hath taught us to difpence with the moft facrcd Ordi- nance of his Worfhip,evenfor a bodily healing to difpence with that

holy

Refior*d to the good of both Sexes. jx

holy and fpeculative reft of Sabbath, much more then with the erro- neous obfervanceof an ill knotted Marriage, for the fuftaining of an overcharged faith and perfeverance.

CHAP. XX. The meamng of S.?^u\ythat charity believeth all things. What is to bt faid to the Licence which is vainly fear'^dwtll grow hereby. What to thofe who never have done prefer ibing patience in that cafe. The Pa- pifi ptofi fevere againfi Divorce, yet mofi eafie to all Licence, Of all the m'feries in Marriage Godi^sto be clear d^and the fanltsto be laid on Mansimjuft Laws.

AND though bad caufes would take licence by this pretext, if that cannot be remedied, upon their confcience be it who fhali io do.This was that hardnefs of hcart,and abufe of a good Law,which Mofes was content to fufFer, rather then good men fhould not have it at all to ufe needfully. And he who to run after one loft fheep left ninety nine of hisownflocK at random in the wildernefs,wouid little perplex his thoughts for the obduring of nine hundred and ninety luch as will daily take worfe liberties,whethcr they have permilTion or not.To conclude,as without charity God hath given no command- ment to men/o without it neither can men rightly believe any com- mandment given. For every adl of true faith,as well that whereby we believe the Law ^as that whereby we endeavour the Law,is wrought in us by charity, according to that in the Divine Hymn of S. Panl^ I Cor, 1 5. Charity believeth all things-^ not as if fhe were fo credu- Ious,which is the Expofition hitherto current^for that were a trivial praife, but to teach us that Charity is the high governefs of our be- lief, and that we cannot fafely alTent to any precept vvritten in the Bible,but as Charity commends it to us. Which agrees with that of thefameApoft!etothe£/?/7?/]4.i4,i5. where he tells us that the way to get a llire undoubted knowledge of things, is to hold that for Truth which accords moft with Charity. Whofe unerring guidance and condua having foUow'd as a Loadftar with all diligence and fi- delity in this queftion, I truft (through the help of that illuminating Spirit which hath favoured me) to have done no every days work,ia afferting after many Ages the words ofChrift with other Scriptures of great concernment from burdenfom and reraorflefs obfcurity, tangled with manifold repugnancies, to their native luftre and con- fent between each other \ hereby alfo difTolving tedeous and Gordi- an difficulties,which have hitherto molefted the Church of God, and are now decided not with the Sword 0^ Alexander^ but with the im- maculate

72 The DoHrine md Difcifline (^/Divorce,

maculate hands of Charity ,to the unfpeakable good ofChriftendom. And let the extreme Literalift fit down now and revolve whether this in all neceflity be not the due refult of our Saviours words *, or if he perfiffc to be otherwifeopinion'd, let hira well advife left thinking to gripe faft the Gofpel, he be found inftead w^ith the Canon Law in his €(l : whofe boifterous Edivls tyrannizing the blelTed Ordinance of Marriage into the quality of a moft unnatural and unchriftianly yoke, have given the flelh this advantage to hate it, and turn afide, oft times unwillingly,to alldifTolute uncleannefsjeventill punifhment it felf is weary and overcome by the incredible frequency of trading Luftand uncontrolled Adulteries. Yet men whofe Creed is Cuftom, I doubt not but will be ftill endeavouring to hide the floth of their Own timorous capacities with this pretext,that for all this 'tis better to indure with patience and filence this aftlidion which God hath fent.And I agree 'tis true^if this be exhorted and not enjoyned ^ but withall it will be wifely done to be as fure as may bejthat what mans iniquity hath laid on be not imputed to Gods fending, left under the colour of an affecfled patience we detain our lelves at the gulphs mouth of many hideous temptations, not to bewitbftood without proper gifcs,which (as Perkins w^ell notes) God gives not or- dinarily,no not to moft earneft prayers. Therefore we ^x^^^Leadi^A not into temptation '^2l vain pray er,if having led our felves thither we love to ftay m that perillous condition. God fends remedies as well evils, under which he w^ho lies andgrones, that may lawfully acquit himfelf,is accefTory to his own ruine : nor will it excufe him though he liifF.r through a fluggifh fearfulnefs to fearch throughly what is lawful, forfearofdifquietingofa fecurefalfity ofanold Opinion. Who doubts not but that it may be pioufly faid, to him who would difmifs his frigidity , bear your trial ,take it,as if God would have you live this life of continence : if he exhort this 1 hear him as an Angel, though he fpeak without warrant i but if he would compell me, I know him for Satan. To him who divorces an adultrefs Piety might lay,Pardon her ; you may fliew much mercy, you may win a foul : yet the Law both of God and Man leaves it freely to him *, for God loves not to plow out the heart of our endeavours with over hard and fad tasks. God delights not to make a drudge of Vertue, whofe anions muft be all eleaive and unconftrained. Forc'd Vertue is as a Bolt overihot, it goes neither forward nor backward, and does no good as it ftands.Seeing therefore that neither Scripture nor Reafon hath laid thisunjuft aufterity upon Divorce,we may refolve that no- thing

Rejlor^d to the good of both Sexes. 6$

thing elfe hath wrought it but that Letter-bound Servility of the Canon Dcftors, fuppofing Marriage to be a Sacrament, and out of the art they have to lay unneceiTary burdens upon all men, to make a fair fhew in the fiefniy obfen'ance of Matrimony, though peace and love with all other conjugal refpe£ls fare never lb ill. And indeed the Papifts, who are the ftri£left forbidders of Divorce, are the eafi- ell Libertines to admit of groffeft uncleannefs ;, as if they had ade- fign by making Wedlock a lupportlefs yoke to violate it moft,under colour of preferving it moft inviolable *, and withall delighting (as their myflery is) to make men the day-labourers of their ownaffli- ^ions^as if there werefuch a fcarcity of