another body will remove lonelines but the uniting of another compliable mind and that it is no blessing but a torment nay a base and brutish condition to be one flesh unlesse where nature can in some measure fix a unity of disposition Lastly Christ himself tells us who should not be put asunder namely those whom God hath joyn'd A plain solutiō of this great controversie if men would but use their eyes for when is it that God may be said to joyn when the parties and their friends consent No surely for that may concurre to leudest ends or is it when Church-rites are finisht Neither for the efficacy of those depends upon the presupposed fitnes of either party Perhaps after carnal knowledge lest of all for that may joyn persons whom neither law nor nature dares joyn t is left that only then when the minds are fitly dispos'd and enabl'd to maintain a cherfull conversation to the solace and love of each other according as God intended and promis'd in the very first foundation of matrimony I will make him a help meet for him for surely what God intended and promis'd that only can be thought to be of his joyning and not the contrary So likewise the Apostle witnesseth 1 Cor. 7. 15. that in mariage God hath call'd us to peace And doubtles in what respect he hath call'd us to mariage in that also he hath joyn'd us The rest whom either disproportion or deadnes of spirit or somthing distastfull avers in the immutable bent of nature renders uncōjugal error may have joyn'd but God never joyn'd against the meaning of his own ordinance And if he joynd them not then is there no power above their own consent to hinder them from unjoyning when they cannot reap the soberest ends of beeing together in any tolerable sort Neither can it be said properly that such twain were ever divorc't but onely parted from each other as two persons unconjunctive and unmariable together But if whom God hath made a fit help frowardnes or private injuries have made unfit that beeing the secret of mariage God can better judge then man neither is man indeed fit or able to decide this matter however it be undoubtedly a peacefull divorce is a lesse evil and lesse in scandal then a hatefull hard hearted and destructive continuance of mariage in the judgement of Moses and of Christ that justifies him in choosing the lesse evil which if it were an honest civil prudence in the law what is there in the Gospel forbidding such a kind of legal wisdom though wee should admit the common Expositers Having thus unfoulded those ambiguous reasōs wherwith Christ as his wont was gave to the Pharises that came to sound him such an answer as they deserv'd it will not be uneasie to explain the sentence it self that now follows Whosoever shall put away his wife except it be for fornication and shall marry another committeth adultery First therfore I will set down what is observ'd by Grotius upon this point a man of general learning Next I produce what mine own thoughts gave me before I had seen his annotations Origen saith he notes that Christ nam'd adultery rather as one example of other like cases then as one only exception And that it is frequent not only in human but in divine Laws to expresse one kind of fact wherby other causes of like nature may have the like plea as Exod. 21. 18 19 20. 26. Deut. 19. 5. And from the maxims of civil Law he shews that ev'n in sharpest penal laws the same reason hath the same right and in gentler laws that from like causes to like the Law interprets rightly But it may be objected saith he that nothing destroys the end of wedlock so much as adultery To which he answers that mariage was not ordain'd only for copulation but for mutual help and comfort of life and if we mark diligently the nature of our Saviours commands wee shall finde that both their beginning and their end consists in charity whose will is that wee should so be good to others as that wee be not cruel to our selves And hence it appears why Mark and Luke and St. Paul to the Cor. mentioning this precept of Christ adde no exception because exceptions that arise from natural equity are included silently under general terms it would be consider'd therfore whether the same equity may not have place in other cases lesse frequent Thus farre he From hence is what I adde first that this saying of Christ as it is usually expounded can be no law at all that man for no cause should separate but for adultery except it be a supernatural law not binding us as wee now are had it bin the law of nature either the Iews or some other wise and civil Nation would have pres't it or let it be so yet that law Deut. 24. 1. wherby a man hath leave to part whenas for just and natural cause discover'd he cannot love is a law ancienter and deeper ingrav'n in blameles nature then the other therfore the inspired Law-giver Moses took care that this should be specify'd and allow'd the other he let vanish in silence not once repeated in the volume of his law ev'n as the reason of it vanisht with Paradise Secondly this can be no new command for the Gospel enjoyns no new morality save only the infinit enlargement of charity which in this respect is call'd the new Commandement by St. Iohn as being the accomplishment of every command Thirdly It is no command of perfection further then it partakes of charity which is the bond of perfection Those commands therfore which compell us to self-cruelty above our strength so hardly will help forward to perfection that they hinder set backward in all the common rudiments of Christianity as was prov'd It being thus clear that the words of Christ can be no kind of command as they are vulgarly tak'n wee shall now see in what sense they may be a command and that an excellent one the same with that of Moses and no other Moses had granted that only for a natural annoyance defect or dislike whether in body or mind for so the Hebrew words plainly note which a man could not force himself to live with he might give a bill of divorce therby forbidding any other cause wherin amendment or reconciliation might have place This law the Pharises depraving extended to any slight contentious cause whatsoever Christ therfore seeing where they halted urges the negative part of that law which is necessarily understood for the determinate permission of Moses binds them from further licence and checking their supercilious drift declares that no accidental temporary or reconciliable offence except fornication can justifie a divorce he touches not heer those natural and perpetual hindrances of society which are not to be remov'd for such as they are aptest to cause an unchangeable offence so are they not capable of reconcilement because not of amendment Thus is
the mind rather then the body els it would be but a kind of animal or beastish meeting if the mind therfore cannot have that due company by mariage that it may reasonably and humanly desire that mariage can be no human society but a certain formalitie or gilding over of little better then a brutish congresse and so in very wisdome and purenes to be dissolv'd But mariage is more then human the covnant of God Pro. 2. 17. therfore man cannot dissolve it I answer if it be more then human so much the more it argues the chief society therof to be in the soul rather then in the body and the greatest breach therof to be unfitnes of mind rather then defect of body for the body can have left affinity in a covnant more then human so that the reason of dissolving holds good the rather Again I answer that the Sabbath is a higher institution a command of the first Table for the breach wherof God hath far more and oftner testify'd his anger then for divorces which from Moses till after the captivity he never took displeasure at nor then neither if we mark the Text and yet as oft as the good of man is cōcern'd he not only permits but commands to break the Sabbath What covnant more contracted with God lesse in mans power then the vow which hath once past his lips yet if it be found rash if offensive if unfruitfull either to Gods glory or the good of man our doctrin forces not error and unwillingnes irksomly to keep it but counsels wisdom and better thoughts boldly to break it therfore to injoyn the indissoluble keeping of a mariage found unfit against the good of man both soul and body as hath been evidenc't is to make an Idol of mariage to advance it above the worship of God and the good of man to make it a transcendent command above both the second and the first Table which is a most prodigious doctrine Next Wheras they cite out of the Proverbs that it is the covnant of God and therfore more then human that consequence is manifestly false for so the covnant which Zedeckiah made with the infidell King of Babel is call'd the covnant of God Ezech. 17. 19. which would be strange to hear counted more then a human covnant So every covnant between man and man bound by oath may be call'd the covnant of God because God therin is attested So of mariage he is the author and the witnes yet hence will not follow any divine astriction more then what is subordinate to the glory of God and the main good of either party for as the glory of God their esteemed fitnes one for the other was the motive which led them both at first to think without other revelation that God had joyn'd them together So when it shall be found by their apparent unfitnes that their continuing to be man and wife is against the glory of God and their mutuall happines it may assure them that God never joyn'd them who hath revel'd his gratious will not to set the ordinance above the man for whom it was ordain'd not to canonize mariage either as a tyrannesse or a goddesse over the enfranchiz'd life and soul of man for wherin can God delight wherin be worshipt wherin be glorify'd by the forcible continuing of an improper and ill-yoking couple He that lov'd not to see the disparity of severall cattell at the plow cannot be pleas'd with any vast unmeetnes in mariage Where can be the peace and love which must invite God to such a house may it not be fear'd that the not divorcing of such a helples disagreement will be the divorcing of God finally from such a place But it is a triall of our patience they say I grant it but which of Iobs afflictions were sent him with that law that he might not use means to remove any of them if he could And what if it subvert our patience and our faith too Who shall answer for the perishing of all those souls perishing by stubborn expositions of particular and inferior precepts against the general and supreme rule of charitie They dare not affirm that mariage is either a Sacrament or a mystery though all those sacred things give place to man and yet they invest it with such an awfull sanctity and give it such adamantine chains to bind with as if it were to be worshipt like some Indian deity when it can conferre no blessing upon us but works more and more to our misery To such teachers the saying of St. Peter at the Councell of Ierusalem will do well to be apply'd Why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the necks of Christian men which neither the Iews Gods ancient people nor we are able to bear and nothing but unwary expounding hath brought upon us To these considerations this also may be added as no improbable conjecture seeing that sort of men who follow Anabaptism Famelism Antinomianism and other fanatick dreams be such most commonly as are by nature addicted to a zeal of Religion of life also not debausht and that their opinions having full swinge do end in satisfaction of the flesh it may come with reason into the thoughts of a wise man whether all this proceed not partly if not cheefly from the restraint of some lawfull liberty which ought to be giv'n men and is deny'd them As by Physick we learn in menstruous bodies where natures current hath been stopt that the suffocation and upward forcing of some lower part affects the head and inward sense with dotage and idle fancies And on the other hand whether the rest of vulgar men not so religiously professing doe not give themselves much the more to whordom and adulteries loving the corrupt and venial discipline of clergy Courts but hating to hear of perfect reformation when as they foresee that then fornication shall be austerely censut'd adultery punisht and mariage the appointed refuge of nature though it hap to be never so incongruous displeasing must yet of force be worn out when it can be to no other purpose but of strife and hatred a thing odious to God This may be worth the study of skilful men in Theology the reason of things and lastly to examin whether some undue and ill grounded strictnes upon the blameles nature of man be not the cause in those places where already reformation is that the discipline of the Church so often and so unavoidably brok'n is brought into contempt and derision And if it be thus let those who are still bent to hold this obstinate literality so prepare themselves as to share in the account for all these transgressions when it shall be demanded at the last day by one who will scanne and sift things with more then a literal wisdom of enquiry for if these reasons be duely ponder'd and that the Gospel is more jealous of laying on excessive burdens then ever the Law was lest the soul
Moses law heer solidly confirm'd and those causes which he permitted not a jot gainsaid And that this is the true meaning of this place I prove also by no lesse an Author then St. Paul himself 1 Cor. 7. 10 11. upon which text Interpreters agree that the Apostle only repeats the precept of Christ where while he speaks of the wives reconcilement to her husband he puts it out of controversie that our Saviour meant only matters of strife and reconcilement of which sort he would not that any difference should be the occasion of divorce except fornication But because wee know that Christ never gave a judicial law and that the word fornication is variously significant in Scripture it will be much right don to our Saviours words to consider diligently whether it be meant heer that nothing but actual fornicatioÌ„ prov'd by witnes can warrant a divorce for so our Canon Law judges Neverthelesse as I find that Grotius on this place hath observ'd the Christian Emperours Theodosius the second and Iustinian men of high wisdom and reputed piety decree'd it to be a divorsive fornication if the wife attempted either against the knowledge or obstinately against the will of her husband such things as gave open suspicion of adulterizing as the wilfull haunting of feasts and invitations with men not of her neer kindred the lying forth of her hous without probable cause the frequenting of Theaters against her husbands mind her endeavour to prevent or destroy conception Hence that of Ierom Where fornication is suspected the wife may lawfully be divorc't not that every motion of a jealous mind should be regarded but that it should not be exacted to prove all things by the visibility of Law witnessing or els to hood-wink the mind for the Law is not able to judge of these things but by the rule of equity and by permitting a wise man to walk the middle-way of a prudent circumspection neither wretchedly jealous nor stupidly and tamely patient To this purpose hath Grotius in his notes He shews also that fornicatioÌ„ is tak'n in Scripture for such a continual headstrong behaviour as tends to plain contempt of the husband and proves it out of Iudges 19. 2. where the Levites wife is said to have playd the whoor against him which Iosephus and the Septuagint with the Chaldaean interpret only of stubbornnes and rebellion against her husband and to this I adde that Kimchi and the two other Rabbies who glosse the text are in the same opinion Ben Gersom reasons that had it bin whoordom a Jew and Levite would have disdain'd to fetch her again And this I shall coÌ„tribute that had it bin whoordom she would have chosen any other place to run to then to her fathers house it being so infamous for an hebrew woman to play the harlot and so opprobrious to the parents Fornication then in this place of the Iudges is understood for stubborn disobedience against the husband and not for adultery A sin of that sudden activity as to be already committed when no more is don but only lookt unchastly which yet I should be loath to judge worthy a divorce though in our Saviours language it be call'd adultery Neverthelesse when palpable and frequent signes are giv'n the law of God Num. 5. so far gave way to the jealousie of a man as that the woman set before the Sanctuary with her head uncover'd was adjuâ—'d by the Priest to swear whether she were fals or no and constrain'd to drink that bitter water with an undoubted curse of rottennesse and tympany to follow unlesse she were innocent And the jealous man had not bin guiltles before God as seems by the last ver. if having such a suspicion in his head he should neglect this trial which if to this day it be not to be us'd or be thought as uncertain of effect as our antiquated law of Ordalium yet all equity will judge that many adulterous demeanors which are of lewd suspicion and example may be held sufficient to incurre a divorce though the act it self hath not bin prov'd And seeing the generosity of our Nation is so as to account no reproach more abominable then to be nick-nam'd the husband of an adultresse that our law should not be as ample as the law of God to vindicate a man from that ignoble sufferance is our barbarous unskilfulnes not considering that the law should be exasperated according to our estimation of the injury And if it must be suffer'd till the act be visibly prov'd Salomon himself whose judgement will be granted to surpasse the acutenes of any Canonist confesses Prov. 30. 19 20. that for the act of adultery it is as difficult to be found as the track of an Eagle in the air or the way of a ship in the Sea so that a man may be put to unmanly indignities ere it be found out This therfore may be anough to inform us that divorsive adultery is not limited by our Saviour to the utmost act and that to be attested always by eye-witnesse but may be extended also to divers obvious actions which either plainly lead to adultery or give such presumtion wherby sensible men may suspect the deed to be already don And this the rather may be thought in that our Saviour chose to use the word fornication which word is found to signify other matrimonial transgressions of main breach to that Covnant besides actual adultery Thus at length wee see both by this and by other places that there is scarse any one saying in the Gospel but must be read with limitations and distinctions to be rightly understood for Christ gives no full comments or continu'd discourses but scatters the heavnly grain of his doctrin like pearle heer and there which requires a skilfull and laborious gatherer who must compare the words he finds with other precepts with the end of every ordinance and with the general analogy of Evangelick doctrine otherwise many particular sayings would be but strange repugnant riddles the Church would offend in granting divorce for frigidity which is not heer excepted with adultery but by them added And this was it undoubtedly which gave reason to St. Paul of his own authority as he professes and without command from the Lord to enlarge the seeming construction of those places in the Gospel by adding a case wherin a person deserted which is somthing lesse then divorc't may lawfully marry again And having declar'd his opinion in one case he leavs a furder liberty for christian prudence to determin in cases of like importance using words so plain as are not to be shifted off that a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases adding also that God hath call'd us to peace in mariage Now if it be plain that a Christian may be brought into unworthy bondage and his religious peace not only interrupted now and then but perpetually and finally hinderd in wedlock by mis-yoking with a diversity of nature as well as