Vpon how weake reasons they haue growne to such resolution Sect. 6. What Protestations they vse withall Sect. 7. What we are to thinke thereof namely that where such things go with all there is no likelyhood to finde any certainety of Doctrine whereon to build especially in so weighty a case as this Sect. 8. Briefly declared that those places do little helpe that they do plainly mistake those two that seemed to be strongest for them Sect. 9. How those places of Scripture are taken by them Sect. 10. That in such sort taking those places it may well be they did mistake them both that of Deutrronomie Sect. 11. And that other of Malachie also Sect. 12. What our selues are to gather on that their so taking of them Sect. 13. In those places that most are for marrying againe that they are so crossed by others that those also are likely to helpe them but little Sect. 14. How farre they may be charged therein namely that their owne defectes are such as well may make their iudgement suspected Sect. 15. How weakely they reason in such things as are in question and so of the substance of the matter it selfe Sect. 16. How weakely they reason likewise in such things as are but accidentarie therevnto Sect. 17. How weakly they reason on certaine other things also as are of such a kinde or so neere vnto thē as that thence they draw certain reasons also Sect. 18. How when they come the word it selfe they much mistake it Sect. 19. That on some places also they gather amisse first Erasmus Sect. 20. Then Mr Beza also Sect. 21. How weakly they do reason likewise on the authority of men Sect. 22. That they haue divers inconvenient and hard speeches besides especially Erasmus who in this age of ours was if not the first yet the greatest motioner of this matter Sect. 23. Then also certaine others of that company Sect. 24. In the places themselues first of that sense that they conceiue of them Sect. 25. Then what we may thinke to be their meaning in deed and first of that in the fift of S. Matthew Sect. 26. Then of that other place in the 19. of the said S. Matthew Sect 27. In such doubts as may be conceived that the Exception in such sense as we conceiue it will nothing at all helpe them Sect. 28. In the sense wherein they conceiue it that it will helpe them but little also Sect. 29. And in such case that they also must be very well advised and take good heed what they do therein Sect. 30. And that they doe nothing against any other Scripture which they haue strong against them Sect. 31. Nor against convenience neither which in that case they cannot avoide Sect. 32. That whereas the Apostle also permitteth the faithfull by an infidell forsaken to marry againe that it also doth nothing helpe them Sect. 33. The Conclusion Sect. 34. OF DIVORCE FOR ADVLTErie and marrying againe WHereas that which heretofore came lightly no farther but only to be disputed among the learned is now growne to so common a practise with many namely to prosecute divorce for adulterie and to marrie againe the greater danger that thereby we may see to grow vp apace towards the overthrowing of such integrity as yet we haue left and to bring in the Turkish libertie of putting awaie such wiues as they like not marrying others the greater cause haue we so much the rather to see vnto it not slightly now but soundly to examine whether it haue any warrant at all in the written word Which that we may the better finde out it shal be good to note that as there be two sorts of places of Scriptures whereon the learned that are for that opinion doe commonly rest some that chiefly respect divorcing or putting away others that do rather respect marrying againe so are the iudgments of the learned in such sort divided likewise all of them to speake of generallie allowing of divorce and manie of them marrying againe in such case to stand by the word of God And yet notwithstanding if we can for a time set aside the iudgement of others and consider of the thing it selfe in what case it standeth in the written word by help of that light that God in these daies hath givē vnto vs I make no doubt of it but that soone we may finde so good matter for the contrary part that whosoever shall indifferently consider of it he will not easily afterwarde thinke that hee findeth in any of that opinion matter of worth to drawe him backe to that perswasion againe Which while we shall endevour to shew because manie themselues being given to that fleshly libertie doe neverthelesse shrowd themselues vnder the iudgment of those learned that favour the same therefore it shall be needful the better to free them frō that preiudice not to dissemble whatsoever weaknes wee finde in the iudgement of those that are for it though otherwise they be by verie good right of that reckoning with vs that we ought to vphold their credit the best that we may But because the truth ought to be much dearer vnto vs and seeing it is a wonted pollicie in Sathan by the principal men so neere as he can to hatch reare vp his errors among vs therefore the dearer the truth is vnto vs the more wee should take heed that we doe not beare with the error of any the bolder may wee be in this case also so farre-forth as the nature of the case shall require to examine their iudgment and not to spare for that smal discredit that vnto them may arise thereby Which that we may do with more perspicuitie vnto the cause that we haue in hand I hold it best that wee consider severally of those two sorts of places of Scripture that before we spake of that so we may more plainely see how little warrant that perswasiō hath in either of thē notwithstanding whatsoever helpe it hath in those learned that are so much for it as they are 2 In the former sort of places therefore wee are to consider not only of the places themselues that are by divers of the learned alleadged in defense of such divorce but also how weakely that same perswasion is grounded on them The places themselues are some of them such as most of the learned doe make little reckoning of them to confirme that doctrine to any but others of them such as they do take to be of speciall force to that end and accordingly leane not a little to them Those that are such as of which most of themselues do make little reckoning to confirme that point of doctrine to anie are two one in Ecclesiasticus the other foūd in the vulgar Latin translation in the Proverbs of Salomon That which is in Ecclesiasticus is diversly read but the effect is this that it willeth the husband if the wife wil not be ruled by him to put her away
ingens Romani Pontificis clementia qui succurrat etiam iis qui apud inferos citra periculum exitii aeterni cruciarentur thereon gathering that seeing his compassion is so greate towardes those that are none of vs now it cannot be but that much rather he wil help those that are so much neerer vnto him Of his praesupposed power he reasoneth likewise two severall waies one waie out of the generall consideration of the whole the other out of a more speciall consideration of it as it hath beene imploied and what force it hath had in matters of much like nature to this Of the former he saith Videbam hoc tribui Pontifici Romano ut Evangelicam Apostolicam doctrinam interpretetur astringat laxet dispenset iuxta quosdam etiam abroget aliqua in parte so gathering thereby that seeing it is so commonly giuen to the Bishop of Rome not only to interpret the holy Scripture but also to enforce the same somewhat further and to let it downe againe when hee thinketh good or to remit some part of it as also to dispense therewith and in the iudgement of some even to abrogate some part of it also then need not he as I doe conceaue him be thought to importune him too much that doth but commēd this to his good consideration no further neither thē himselfe shall thinke good to deale therein In the latter hee doth not only set downe the ground of his reason but himselfe also addeth more then before what it is that he gathereth out of the same The ground of his reasō therein is that he saw per Romanum Pontificem person as reddi inhabiles quos neque natura neque lex divina fecerat inhabiles that is that certaine persons were by the Bishop of Rome made vnable to marry whom neither nature nor the law of God had made vnable That which himselfe doth gather out of the same is that it seemeth to be eiusdem potestatis hominis autoritate vetare ne coeat matrimonium efficere ut dirimatur matrimonium That is of like power that by mans authority mariage may bee prohibited to any and to bring to passe that when it is made it be broken againe Those other matters not vnlike to this decided already out of which he bringeth some reasons also are first the allowance of divorce by men of great reckoning then also the breaking óf both of espousals and mariage also in divers cases For the former of those hee saith Videbam viros olim probatae doctrine sanctimoniae que non fuisse deterritos Evangelij Paulique verbis quo minus admitterent divortium and for further confirmation of their doing he addeth videbam quaedam secus posse exponi quam hactenus exposita sint That is that hee hath noted divers men in times past of vndoubted learning and godlinesse not to haue been terrified by the words of the Gospell and of S. Paul but that they haue sometimes admitted divorce that certaine places belike that seemed most against thē might be otherwise expounded then hitherto they haue beene Which expositions if we may account thē those that himselfe in that Treatice bringeth in thē is it not vnworthy the marking whether most of those that are of that minde doe not since themselues also vrge them vnto vs as the truth indeede without any great examining of them how they stand with other Scripture For the former of the other two espousals I meane he saith that hee saw ob professionem instituti humani ob mutatum pallium sponsum legitimum fraudari sua sponsa that is that for the profession of some ordinance of man even for the changing of the attire a man lawfully espoused or handfast should be defrauded of his espoused wife And for the latter that he saw likewise in that age of his matrimonium dirimi ob errorem personae conditionis etiam consummatum coitu and ob lapsum in haeresim etiam illud dissolvi de quo dubitari non poterat quin verum esset matrimonium That is that he had seene likewise marriage to be accoūted void for the error either of person or condition although it were consummate before with copulation and that for falling into heresie such marriage also was held as brokē which no body might doubt of but that it was true marriage indeed In all which these his last reasons I meane it seemeth that his inference is that if so many waies men make them so bold with that holy ordinance to alter and dispose thereof in such liberty as in these cases they doe thē may no body thinke much with him for no more but propounding of that which he taketh to bee much better warranted even by the doctrine and plaine wordes of Christ himselfe That vpon these his aforesaid reasons he thought good to propounde this matter to bee farther thought on by others and that therevpon hee doth no more but propound it neither may sufficiently appeare both in the words that he vseth withall as namely when a little before his reasons and in the ende of handling the matter it selfe he saith Haec tamen paucis libuit delibare quo doctis a◠studiosis uberiorem cogitandi materiam praeberemus and immediatly after His rebus commota charitas Christiana proposuit ijs qui me plus cernunt dispicerent si qua ratione sermo Evāgelicus ac Pauli dispensari posset ad plurimorum sulutem c. And anon after Quod si hoc quod opto fieri non potest certè illud potest statui ne matrimonia praeter veterum omnium morem praeter aequitatem naturalem tam facilè ne dicātā temerè coeant That is yet these few things I thought good to giue in as a taste that I might giue occasion vnto the learned and studious to thinke better therevpon and which followeth that Christian charity being moved herewith hath propounded thus much to those that doe see farther thā I to the end that they should cōsider whether by any meanes that speech in the Gospell and in S. Paul might be dispensed to the good or safety of manie But if that which I wish may not be obtained yet certainly there might bee order taken that mariages shoulde not hence-forth be so lightly and so rashly made so far vnlik◠to all former good vsage yea and to natural equity it selfe Which things I haue more specially noted for two principall causes one concerning the validitie or force of the reasons he bringeth the other how far he buildeth thereon The force of the reasons the greater it is the iuster cause was there then yet is to helpe forward that motion so well as we can the weaker they are the lesse neede wee to account our selues vrged thereby to follow the course that they may seeme to commende vnto vs. How far he buildeth theron would be marked likewise because he doth proceed no farther thereon but to make this motion only
whereon if others since haue set an heavier building by over-ruling that point as a manifest truth that crept in but as it were two daies before as a poore and a doubtful question it seemeth to me either that they haue more and greater reasons wherevpon they are gone so farre or els which I rather thinke that they haue raised more building thereon than the foundation is able to beare 7 What protestations they haue thought good to ioine therevnto belike to qualifie the hardnes of their iudgment therein is so much the more needfull to be coÌ„sidered for that otherwise we might either charge them farther than iustly we may or suffer our selues to be carried farther by them than we ought Both which are so much as we may to be avoided the onâ— for the duty that we owe vnto them the other for the care that we ought to haue of our selues In which although chiefly I meane to rest on Erasmus also for that hee was so much as hee was our leader herein yet shall it not be amisse somwhat to heare some others also especially one that most of all hath advanced that perswasion in these our daies In Erasmus we â—inde some part of those his protestations to appertaine to that whole worke of his wherein his Treatice is of divorce marrying againe his Annotations on the New Testament and some part of them more properlie to belong to that very matter that now we haue in questioÌ„ among vs. Of those that belong to that whole worke of his I haue noted a couple one that sheweth how little he arrogateth vnto himselfe therein an other that doth shew likewise what liberty hee leaveth vnto his Reader For the former he saith Nos ad utrumque juxta parati sumus ut vel rationem reddamus si quid rectè monuimus velingenuè confiteamur errorem sicubi lapsi deprehendimur Homines sumus humani nihil alienum à nobis esse ducimus That is We are alike ready to both these either to giue a reasoÌ„ of it if any where we haue advised wel or plainely and readily to acknowledge our error if any where we be found so farre to haue slipped For the latter he saith likewise after that hee craved but such indifferencie as is afforded to all offenders at the Barre generally namely that his booke may first be read before it be condemned by any Legat prius ac inspiciat deinde si videatur damnet ac reijciat That is Let a man first read it and looke into it and then if hee thinke good let him condemne it and cast it from him Of these that doe more properly belong to that very matter that is in question I haue noted likewise a couple in the beginning of that his Treatice one other towards the end In those that he hath in the beginning first he protesteth his own good meaning therin that he doth it but to enquire of the truth and not to bee contentious therein then after he setteth good reasonable bounds for the better deciding of it As touching the former his words are these Ut semel in hujus operis initio sum testatus perpetuò testatum haberi par est in toto opere me nus quam esse velle contentiosi dogmatis autorem tantùm juvandi studio monere studiosos semper inconcusso illabefacto judicio sacrosanctae Ecclesiae et eorum quibus uberius donum eruditionis et sapientiae contigit à Christo that is As once in the beginning of this worke I did acknowledge I thinke it meere to bee acknowledged still that throughout the whole worke I wil never bee author of any contentious opinion and that my meaning is but only to admonish the studious for their help alwaies reseruing the judgement of the holy Church and of those on whome Christ hath bestowed a better gift of learning and wisdome altogether vntouched by me As touching the latter he saith likewise a little after Caeterum si semper hoc bonis viris cordi fuit opinionem in melius commutare leges seu pharmaca coÌ„venit ad morborum habitum rationem accommodare consideremus an hic expediat idem fieri si expedit an liceat ut matrimonia quaedam dirimantur non temere sed gravibus de causis neque per quoslibet sed per Ecclesiae Praefectos aut Iudices legitimos ita dirimantur vt liberum sit utrique cui velit iungi aut alteri certè qui divortio non dedit causam that is But if it ever pleased good men well to change their opinion vnto the better and if it be good to frame our Lawes even as medicines vnto the nature or maner of our diseases let vs coÌ„sider whether in this also it be good so to doe and if it be expedient whether then it be lawfull or permitted vnto vs that certaine marriages may be broken asunder againe not lightly but when the cause is weightie nor by any whomsoever but by the Governors in the Church or other lawfull Iudges and that those marriages may in such sort be broken asunder that it may bee free for either party to marry againe where they thinke good or at least for the one of them the same that gaue no cause of divorce That which he hath towards the end is much like to the former of these and of the same nature with it For wheÌ„ he hath before protested that he did propound this but to whet vp the studious to a further consideration of it hee inferreth therevpon Nec vllo pacto iudicio maiorum ob haec praeire conamur multo minus Ecclesiae Catholicae that is Neither doe we in any wise hereby desire to preveÌ„t the iudgement of our betters much lesse of the Catholike Church Those others that I haue thought good to bring forth to be heard in this cause besides are two Peter Martyr and Beza Peter Martyr though he runne the selfe same course in effect that Erasmus had before propounded and laid it open to those that would yet both hee would haue the Magistrates leaue first obtained as wee saw before hauing then set downe a good peece of his minde before for that matter in fiue whole Sections in the end of the fift he addeth Haec à me sictraduntur ut melius ac sanius consilium perpetuò sim paratus audire atque admittere that is These things are in such sort delivered by me that I am ever ready both to heare and to admit any better sounder advise Which words of his if wee restraine onely to that point that immediately goeth in that place before both I should thinke that wee should doe him manifest wrong and that his owne very wordes not speaking of one but of more would much favour our conviction therin and if we enlarge them vnto the whole or to the drift of his opinion in all those points before delivered then may we
others also that are farther of as that the Apostles to pacifie the Iewes tooke order with the Gentiles for certaine of those ceremonies to be observed of the ChristiaÌ„s in Antioche that the Bish of Rome maketh other Bishops thaÌ„ the Apostle alloweth of that the Church hath of late to speak of determined of divers matters that were left at more libertie before as Transubstantiation the proceeding of the holy Ghost from the Sonne also the Conception of the blessed Virgin and that the holy Ghost is of the same substance with the Father and the Sonne Al which he alleageth to this ende to shew that it is no new thing in the Church of God as they see occasions to arise so to take farther order in divers matters than by those had been taken that were before them and so would insinuate that in that matter also they might do well to take such order as he coÌ„mended if so be that the word of God would beare it as he was perswaded it would Of the latter divers particulars are likewise alleaged out of that same part of the Sermon of Christ in the MouÌ„taine wherein also we haue the first speech that Christ did vtter concerning this matter out of which both he some others besides doe reason for the opinion they hold in the matter that now we speake of both of the liberty that our selues do take in other such like speeches of Christ and of the perfection of those things that Christ doth there coÌ„mend vnto vs. CoÌ„cerning the liberty that ourselues doe take in other such like speeches of Christ he saith that whereas he forbiddeth vs to sweare to be angry to reproach to presume to come with our offering to God before that we are at one with our brother to go to law to requite displeasures to resist evill and doth farther command vs to loue our enemies to deserue wel of them that deserue ill of vs and to pray for them that curse vs first saith quum eodem in loco plura doceat quae purè germaneque Christianis digna sunt cur in ceteris omnibus recipimus interpretationem in uno divortio tam rigidi sumus ut magis etiam astringamus verba Christi that is When as in the same place he teacheth many things which simply and plainly concerne the dutie of Christians why do we in al things else admit of some interpretation and yet are so crabbed in this one point of Divorce that we do even farther restaine those words of Christ Concerning the perfection of those things that Christ doth there coÌ„mend vnto vs reasoning otherwise on it than others do he saith likewise Christus haec locutus est non turbis sed discipulis idque in monte depingens purissimam illam sui corporis partem quam appellat regnum coelorum cui nullis sit opus legibê° that is Christ spake these things not to the multitude but to his Disciples that in the mouÌ„t painting forth that most pure part of his bodie which he calleth the kingdome of heaven wherevnto there wil bee no need of lawes And by by after Pone talem populum qualem Christus optat nec repudio fuerit opus nec jurejuraÌ„do Quod si ob infirmos quos in tanto numero plurimos habet Etclesia nemo vetatur legibus jus suum persequi nemo vetatur vim à capite repellere nemo vetatur jurare modò ob rem ne pejeret nemo cogitur bene mereri de male merentibus cur vnum hoc de divortio promiscue exigimus ab omnibus That is Admit such a people as Christ wisheth and there shall bee no neede either of Divorce or of swearing But if for the weake whome the Church hath in so greate abundance no body is forbidden to seeke his right by law no body is forbidden to defende himselfe from violence no body is forbiddeÌ„ to sweare so there be cause and that he forsweare not no man is compelled to deserue wel of those that deserue ill of him why do we exact this matter of divorce so generally of all Others there be that because Christ taught such perfection there do therevpoÌ„ gather that if a man put away his wife for adultery and marrie another it may not in any wise be called in questioÌ„ for that it is allowed there where things of so great perfection are taught Those that are as from the lesse vnto the greater are such as these Because that Chrysostome giveth in the reason why the Iew is suffered to put away his wife ne invisam occidat that is least that vpon his hatred of her he also slay her therevpon hee reasoneth Itáne prodesse debet apud Iudaeos flagitiosa sua malitia apud nos non proderit marito sua innocentia That is Shal the Iew haue that benefit of that wicked malice of his and shall not an husband among vs haue like benefit out of his vndefiled and honest dealing The like againe and one straine farther a little after Saltem hoc apud nos detur infoelici innocentiae quod apud Iudaeos datum est perversae maritorum acerbitati quod Paulus indulget vidius intemâ—perantibus ne quid admittant sceleratius that is At least let that be graunted that we also may haue our miserable innocency so farre releiued as the Iews had their perverse crabbednes borne with and so far as S. Paul himselfe bearethwith intemperate widdowes least they commit some further evill Of what force these reasons of his are if now we examine first as touching the opinion of those others for such like matters as he presupposeth that he brought in the reason is sufficient to stop the mouths of those that so hold but not to establish that point of doctrine it selfe That the Apostles themselues and the godly Fathers after determined more plainely of divers things then those that went before them had done they had the word of God for them therein and then not to bee reproued by any but their doing therein may be no argument to moue vs to determine of this but only so farre which appeareth not yet as we may accouÌ„t that we haue the word of God to beare vs out in it But whereas he shuffleth in among the rest divers things that they determined did against the word of God we ought to be so much the more wary in suffering our selues to be led thereby whenas the reason is of that nature as buildeth on falshood as well as on truth As for the liberty that we take in those speeches of Christ we take none in any doctrine that thereof wee hold but such as standeth by good warrant of the word of God in other places and then can that be no sufficient reason to moue vs to do the like in this for which as yet we finde in the word no warrant at all And though much be to be attributed vnto him yet in this it
a great part of the inducement that led them vnto it Concerning which al such like it is cleere inough in it selfe that mistaking the Text whereon they grounded the opinion that they conceiue thereon must needs bee but weake and needeth nothing els to discover the weaknes of it but only to shewe that they mistake the Text it selfe But in Erasmus we haue some things else to note besides First that in these things he rested somewhat on the sense of nature as perilous a guide in the matters that now we speake of as of those that are of some credit a maÌ„ could lightly otherwise haue chosen For being by nature so much given as we are to the lusts of the flesh and to haue variety therein and to be avenged of such displeasures as are done vnto vs especially such as touch vs so neere as now we speake of wee are not to looke for any other but that we may be as easily blinded in this if we leane to our owne iudgement therein as in any thing else that can lightly befal vs. So that in this especiallie he should not haue rested anie thing at all on the sense of nature but haue fought some better guid whom he might more safely haue followed Then also how readily he taketh hold on that permission even onlie for that it was permitted not regarding how farre not howe though himselfe doe finde none other but that it was only for the hardnes of their hearts a sufficient burn to haue discredited the vse of that libertie to all that are godly or that haue any reasonable care even of their honestie before meÌ„ And yet whereas he doth so readily take such hold thereon it may seeme to argue that his store otherwise is but weake Lastly that after a sort abandoning these if they should not be thought meete to serue he taketh hold of an other almost as weake namelie that because there was no punishment set down for it in the Policie of Moses therfore it was after a sort or in some sense permitted vnto them And yet is it sufficiently knowne vnto al that as in al other Policies whatsoever even so in that of Moses also there be divers things that are vnlawful which there haue no punishment at al devised for theÌ„ and therefore that we are not so to reason that seeing it is not punished there as neither it was to haue manie wiues therefore it is no offence to doe it For although such a reason might best hold from thence of any other Policie in al the world besides yet even that also woulde faile vs herein if anie should rest so far vpon it 20 But now if we come to consider how farre they haue gathered amisse vpon those several Textes that they haue vsed what others may thinke I know not but for my selfe I caÌ„not but marvaile at many things that I finde therein Which kinde of gathering when I also had gathered as needful to bee commended vnto the farther consideration of the learned I found them in number to bee so many to proceede from so many great personages also that I thought it sufficient for the matter and meetest also in some other respects to take but some few of them leaving the rest vnto the search of those that desire to looke farther into them and therein also not to deale with al those or many of them that so are minded but only with some few such as the equity of the cause it selfe shal most desire to be called vnto such triall In which respect I haue thought good to resolue on Erasmus for the one and on Mr Beza for the other because that of those that are extant and yet I haue seene those two haue of set purpose discoursed thereof and most largely handled the same And in these also to omit al such collections as elsewhere by occasion may passe them while principallie they intend some other matter I meane to deale but only with those and but with some of theÌ„ neither that belong vnto the chiefe and principal points of the matter that is in question namely how they gather their opinion or iudgement therein and how they answere such ObiectioÌ„s as may be alleaged against it And first as touching Erasmus although he professe no more but only to propouÌ„de it and to commend it to the farther consideration of the learned and to that end more largely sheweth both that divers before haue beene of that minde or at least inclinable vnto it and that such like things they haue in dayly allowance among themselues yet doth he plainely enough professe that for his part he is of that minde himselfe and laboureth also to take away such obiections as seeme to be of force against it As touching the former of them the truth is that as there is none of them all that do build this opinion of theirs on any other Text besides excepting those which they did mistake of which I haue spoke before but only on that exceptioÌ„ which Christ vsed two severall times namely in the fift and in the nineteenth of S. Matthew so he also for that his opinioÌ„ goeth no further but only to it and therevpon buildeth that which he hath thereon conceiued But those words of Christ doth he account to make so plaine for hispurpose that because we allow not on such divorce to marry againe hee chargeth vs that in divortio tam rigidi fimus ut magis etiam astringamus verba Christi that is That in divorce we are so hard or greivous that we do further restraine those words of Christ. And his reason is Etenim quum ille reliquerit marito unam causam repudiandae coningis nos cam multis moâ—is astringimus that is For whereas hee left to the husband one cause for which he might put away his wife wee doe many waies restraine the faine And after againe Iudaei quod Moses â—eriâ—serat de libetto repudiâ— sic interpretabantur quasi maâ—veis jui effet qualibet lecit de causa reijcere coinge c. Id Christus astringit ad unam adulterii causam that is The Iewes did so interpret that which Moses wrote of the bill of divorce as though husbands might put away their wiues for any cause though never so smal That did Christ restraine only vnto the cause of adultery And by and by after Ergo suis Christus unam dunt axat causam indulget divortij that is Therefore Christ alloweth vnto his but only one cause of divorce And in these so far as yet I haue found is his iudgement most plainely declared In which it is good to note those two things first that he buildeth for that matter on no other Scripture but only on that exception then that hee so taketh that exception that thereon he inferreth that for adultery Christ himselfe alloweth divorce If he build vpon no other Scripture but only on that exception theÌ„ our busines lying within
founde guilty of adultery and condemned thereof shee is nowe no more vnder a husbād or that having committed adultery shee cannot be one flesh with her husband haue wee here any sufficient ground at al to rest on for the husband to account himselfe before God discharged thenceforth of al such duties as by the reason of that his wedlocke hee was before bound vnto In the latter was it so needfull a point to teach widdows in the Church of Corinth after that the Gospel was now already received among them that had a great part of their light from so many of the ancient people of God conversing among them with whom such marriages were very common the Gentiles also being little behinde them therein that this sentence of the Apostle which otherwise woulde serue vs marvelous wel to giue vs sound direction in this and in diverse such other matters besides must so bee restrained to vviddowes only that we in this case may not looke to haue any benefit of it Truely it is good to care for widdowes it is a thing that is much commended vnto vs not only in the word of God but in all other good learning besides but in al things there is a meane to be kept widdowes themselues it is to be thought wil be content that wiues also haue all their due Or did he so restraine those words of his vnto that which was then most commonly vsed that for the matter now we speake of he would not haue vs to take so much of our direction thence Or did the Apostle presuppose no farther on the behalfe of the faithful as touching their holinesse and constancie in wedlock but only that hardly or scantly they accounted wedlocke to be dissolved among them but only by death or if of the two may not a mā that is careful to finde the truth rather doubt that this is but an hard a scant interpretation of this place of the Apostle That which is of severall force by it selfe is out of this chapter also of that Epistle vnto the Corinthians where the Apostle saith that not hee but the Lord commandeth women not to depart from their husbands and if they do to seeke to be reconciled againe or to abide vnmarried that the husbands put not away their wiues Wherevnto he saith Respondeo Paulum hic nō agere de divortio sed de dissidijs quae propter simultates inter conjuges interdum oriuntur adeo ut interdum una pars ab altera secedat Quod si evenerit nō vult Apostolus ejusmodi discessione solvi matrimonium that is My answere is that Paul did not here speake of divorce but of such contentions or debates as arise sometimes betweene man and wife vpon hart-burning among themselues so that sometime they depart the one from the other Which if at any time it come to passe the Apostle will not that by such departing matrimonie be dissolved betwixt them He proceedeth somewhat farther I grant to confirme his iudgmēt therein I meane that this must be S. Paules meaning and so me thinke he had need in deed For otherwise besides that the Text it selfe doth not in appearācelead vs to that cōstructiō whatsoever it may do by implication wherein we are to see anon how himselfe doth gather thereon it seemeth to me that in either of the Apostles dealing in such matters we haue a great likelyhood that this should be no part of his meaning For it had beene a very great an intolerable disorder and such as not only the people of God but evē all the heathen also generally did ever detest vnlesse it were some speciall od loose persons among thē that now then would not sticke to breake forth to such disorder if that had beene in vse among them and most likely then that the Apostle woulde otherwise haue stormed against them as he did for other matters as for the variance that was betwixt them for those disorders in partaking that holy Communion both which hee might lay to the charge of many of them and for suffering that incestuous person though hee were but one Whereas therefore the Apostle is wont to be so round when occasion was given him and gaue so good experience of it even in this Epistle also in divers things els it may rather seeme that seeing it were such a disorder so easily vpon variance to breake of the bond of marriage betwixt them that that was not the thing that S. Paul there doth speake of but some other thing that was more vsed more tollerable also and yet not to be allowed neither as for the woman so to depart or for the husband to put her awaie either for adultery or at the least vpon some great occasion or cause given whatsoever it was Else I should hope that among them for any matter so apparantly so fowle even among the heathē also the Apostle should not haue neede to haue vsed the name of the Lord therein or at least should thinke as I said before that he would haue set his instrument on some other tune for a matter of lesse importance then it Now the reason that himselfe alleageth why he is persuaded that that is the sense of the Apostle himselfe in this manner giueth in vnto vs. Hoc autem ita esse manifeste indicant Apostoli verba qui inquit in genere Vir vxorem ne dimittito vxor à viro ne discedito Quid si enim adulterio peccarit altera pars annon innocenti licebit saltem à nocente discedere Relinquitur ergo verum esse quod diximus nempe Apostolum de simultatibus rixis non de vero divortio loqui quod mirum est Augustino in mentem non venisse that is But that this is so the wordes of the Apostle doe most plainely declare who generally saith or speaketh to all indifferently Let not the man put away his wife and let not the wife depart from her husband For what if either party shall commit adulterie shall it not bee lawfull for the innocent party at least to depart from the offēder So it must needs be true that we said namely that the Apostle did not speake here of true divorce but only of contentions and brablings which it is marvel that S. Augustine did never thinke of Whether these words of the Apostle do so plainely proue it or not let others iudge for betwixt vs I peceiue very well that in no wise it can be decided For what proofe hath it at all but only which standeth on this principle that the innocent party may in such case at least depart from the other But what warrant any where haue we for that either in the old Testament or in the new In policie I grant and for the hardnesse of our harts it may after a sort bee tolerated among vs and among the Iewes before but where haue we otherwise any one authority for it when it is
plaine enough how hard hee would bee in the whole generally And that doth the other more plainely acknowledge who reciting the same of his addeth thereto thus much of his own Ego satis putarem quod nullo casu Papa posset dissolvere matrimonium consummatum inter fideles ita quod eligerē partem negativam that is I should rather thinke that in no case the Pope might dissolue matrimony consummate both the parties being faithful so that I shoulde chuse the negatiue part So that al the helpe which he conceiveth he hath in him is no more but this Nec hic asseverat sed argumentum ut disputabile proponit cujus alteram partem ipse putat esse probabiliorem that is Neither doth this man affirme it but he propoūdeth the argumēt as disputable himselfe thinking the other part to be more probable And so likewise by and by after commending one special reason for that out of it an argument may be taken quod etiam Ecclesia nō posset illud dissolvere that is that even the Church cannot dissolue it he gathereth thereon Rursus hîc non affirmat Ecclesiam non posse dirimere matrimonium consummatum imòpotius innuit posse licet ex hoc capite dicat posse sumi argumentum pro diversa parte Neque statim expugnatum est quod oppugnari potest argumento that is Againe hee doth not here affirme that the Church cannot breake asunder mariage consummate already yea rather he implyeth that it may although he say that out of this place an argument may be taken for the contrary side Neither is it by and by won that is at any time by reason attēpted How poore helps these are I think that every one will soone perceiue I for my part wil so much spare them that nothing at al I wil disturbe them The argument that they take of the authoritie of those that are against them is in effect no more but this that whatsoever is brought by any against that cōceived opinion of theirs it is al but weake may easily bee answered And for this point I haue thought good to note not only that iudgement before to haue beene in Erasmus abroad but also that yet it seemeth in part to remaine in that one of good account among vs at home that before I spake of vpon whom diverse I heare doe rest not a little That Erasmus was of that minde his words are plaine Videbam ea quae objiciuntur facile posse dilui citra nostrae religionis injuriam Videbā rationes quas adducunt hac in causa veteres neoterici non esse tam vrgētes ut adtantam adigant necessitatem hominum genus that is I saw that those things that were obiected might easily bee answered withou◠doing of any wrong to our Religion I saw that the reasons which the Fathers of old the late writers do bring for this matter are not so vrgent as to driue mankinde to such extremity Wherein whether he were deceived or not or whether hee had but some over-weening conceipt of that his motion let it rest for me vntil the cleerenes of the matter it selfe being first beatē out may teach vs both whether it be so or not But true it is that before hee had noted some things that might seeme to be no smal part of the foundation and ground of that his opinion as namely from what authors such perswasion came and how wrong they were in some things else besides even the best of them al. For the former of them Iam ut demus saith he conjugiū legis esse divinae certe pleraque quae circa matrimoniorum causas tractantur adjus positivum pertinēt veluti de gradibus de impedimētis de rescissionibus Neque haec decreta à synodis celebribus profecta sunt ad nos sed à privatis Pontificum responsis c nonnunquam à seipsis dissentientibus that is Now that we grant that wedlocke it selfe is of the law of God yet many things that are handled about the causes of matrimony do appertaine to the positiue lawes as of degrees of impediments of vndoing againe Neither did these decrees come vnto vs from the more famous Councels but of the private answers of Bishops disagreeing sometimes even from themselues For the latter also Nec mirum est veteres illos tam iniquos fuisse divortio quod apud Ethnicos fuit odiosum qui conjugium etiam aegre admiserint aegrius digamiam that is Neither is it marvel that the ancient Fathers were so hard to allow of divorce which was an odious thing evē among the Heathen also who did but hardly allow of marriage it selfe much hardlier of second mariages In both which he sheweth himselfe to be of opinion that this restraint of such divorce as he would plead for is only of men one fowle gawle in the argument then that it proceedeth from such mē also as whose credit one way or other is in such cases but very smal for which I meane not here to cōtēd but wil rather adiourne it vnto such accoūt in the end as the issue of the cause shal then afford it And yet so far as I am able to see into it he needeth not so much to trouble himselfe in spying holes in that iudgement of the Fathers of old as in this to defende his owne In which respect I marvel the more that he findeth so many faults with that kinde of divorce which only in this case standeth by law among vs 1. Primum saith he ita licebit divertere ut posteae vivat castratus orbus 2. Deinde si post suspicionem adulterij rem habuerit cum uxore excidit à jure repudiandi 3. Adhaet si ipse quoque fuerit adulter cogetur cū adultera cohaerere 4. Postremò particulam exceptionis huc detor quemus nō ut jus faciat marito repudiandi sed ut sirepudiet non facturus sit adulteram quandoquidem jam adulteram abijcit Nam id Augustini commentum est that is First we haue divorce but so far allowed vnto vs as that whosoever will vse it he must afterward liue as a gelded man and without possibilitie of children Then if after suspition of adultery hee neverthelesse haue to do with his wife againe then is he falne from the right he had to sue the divorce Besides if himself haue committed adulterie too then must he stil cleane vnto his adulterous wife Last of al that particle of the Exception we wrest vnto this that it shal not giue any right to the husband to put away his wife for adultery but if he do it then he doth not make her an adulteresse because he doth not put away but such an one as is an adulteresse alreadie For that is saith he Augustines conceipt thereof Wherein though he did seeme to himselfe then to haue found many faults in that their iudgements and in the last with S. Augustine
himselfe yet I doubt not but that in the end it wil appeare that therein he troubled himselfe more theÌ„ he needed and in the meane season that every one may perceiue that he counteth those such faults but onely in respect of that presupposall that such divorce as he requireth doth vndoubtedly staÌ„d on the authority of the word of God which if it doe not will soone make those great faults of his to be none at all As touching that other that is of the same iudgement likewise he also accounteth that to be weake which is brought against it and accordingly dealeth therein and especially against one whome hee hath made his choice adversary in it for whom also I for my part but so far as he hath the truth will craue no sparing More specially whereas S. Augustine is accounted to be the strongest of all against the liberty of divorce for adultery and marrying againe he noteth more weaknesse in that iudgement of his then others doe that yet I haue seene both in his owne confession after in mistaking a part of the Text. But how far that weakneth the force of his iudgement is not so needfull for vs to discuâ—se as not so materiall but onely to such as rest some parte of their iudgement on him which in this I meane not to doe 23 What inconvenient speeches they haue besides if now we examine the truth is that all of them lightly that I haue seene haue some but yet that Erasmus the leader of them hath therein so far gon beyound them all that none of them so far as yet I haue fouÌ„d haue attained vnto him And because inconvenient speeches though they be no certaine argumeÌ„ts that the cause is not good that is handled by such yet are they faire warnings for any in such case to take heed because they proceed from a troubled mind and most commonly argue a want of the truth and even by that only oftimes are occasioned therfore it shall not be amisse that we somewhat consider of them but first of those that we finde in Erasmus then of such as we finde in others Of those that we finde in Erasmus there are two sorts some of his owne for which himselfe is to answere others that are none of his but belonging to such authors as himselfe bringeth in to help to beare out his owne persuasion therein Those that are his owne are of two sorts also some concerning his own iudgement in this matter others concerning the Scripture it selfe Concerning his owne iudgement in this matter he hath in such sort ordered his speech therein that although he hath not plainely set it downe yet hee seemeth to incline vnto it both that certaine disorders in making of mariages should be good cause to dissolue them again and that even the wickednesse of a woman want of children also belike he meaneth of such as are legitimate that he may not so account of those that either he had or hereafter might haue by his adulterous wife yea burning lust also should be good causes likewise to marry againe For the former he saith Apud ethnicos noÌ„ erat ratum matrimonium nisi parentum aut tutoruÌ„ authoritate comprobatum ne apud Iudaeos quidem tamen apud utrosque aliquo modo dirimi poterat matrimonium Apud Christianos facilime coit conjugium semel initum nullo modo potest divelli â—urtim inter pueros puellas per lenones lenas inter stultos ac temulentos copulatur matrimonium tam turpiter initum indssolubile est quod magis est notum sic initum fit sacramentum that is Among the Heathen there is no mariage accounted of force but that which was approued by the authority of parents or tutors neither yet among the Iewes and yet with both those might matrimonie some way or other bee dissolued againe Among Christians marriages are most easily made and yet being made may by no meanes be broken off By stealth betwixt boies and wenches by bawds and harlots betweene fooles drunken persons haue mariages beene made and yet a marriage being so ilfavourdly made may not in any wise be dissolued and which is the straunger of the two is become a Sacrament also To which ende soone after hee doth likewise insinuate that if the Magistrate or competent Iudge should dissolue such then were they rightly dissolved by the Ministers of God which before were naughtily made by the Deacons of the diuel For the latter hee saith likewise At interim seposita paulisper authoritate scriptoris rem ipsam mecum expendat lector num hae satis graves sint causae cur innoxius maritus debeat alligari sceleratae mulieri orbitatis molestiam libidinis incendium ferre per omnem vitam ne vel parum prudens habeatur à quibusdam quod rem quae non successerit denuo sit aggressus quasi turpe sit qui semel tempestatem expertus sit iterare navigationem aut qui in deligendo amico erraverit quenquam alium in amicitiam admittere vel intemperans aut avarus qui formam aut dotem mutare voluerit non vxorem that is But setting aside for a while the authority of the writer meaning S. Ierom let the reader coÌ„sider with me the thing it selfe whether these be causes of sufficient importance that then men would easily take occasion divers waies to breake of and to marry againe that the husband should be tied to a wicked woman or that he should suffer either the griefe of the want of Children or the heate of lust all his life long least he should be accouÌ„ted of divers either vnwise that hauing taken in hand such a course before as did not fall out well with him he neverthelesse doth take it in haÌ„d againe as though it were a shame that hee which once had beene in a tempest should goe to the seas againe or he that had beene before deceiued in choice of his friend should never admit any other into his friendship againe or intemperate or covetous as though he rather desired to make his exchange of more beauty or better dowry theÌ„ of his so bad a wife Which course of his if any people should establish by law among them it were hard to finde how it might bee avoided but that for matters of marriage all others thereto appertaining some would all be cleane out of order For first as touching so large a liberty of divorcing their wiues away from them vpon any of those so many braunches of disorderly marriage we may plainely see that it would lay open a ready way to many divorces for because those disorders are such as that wee may conceiue no hope that either they will or may be amended So likewise for marrying againe therevpon if but the two first causes onely might bee allowed soone should we see that such a liberty so freely graunted would be by many as freely vsed but then if
two Sections following both he setteth downe the same liberty for the one that is weake and by the other partie drawne from that faith by little and little and and answereth besides divers obiections that he taketh to be strong against it Item si contingat saith he ut conjux fidelis debilis sit sentiat ex eo matrimonio se de religione Christiana paulatim deijci ita ut abducatur quodammodo à fide ac in idololatriam ex idololatrarum convictu in procliui sit ut ruat that is Also if it fall out that the party faithfull be weake findeth it selfe by the reason of that matrimonie by little little to be carried away from Christian religion so that he bee after a sort led away from the faith and be in some special danger to fall vnto adulterie by the reason of his conversing with idolaters in this case his resolution is Non opor tet ut maneat that is he is not bound in â—uch case to tarry and his reason is for that we may not doe evill that good may follow To which ende also vpon that place of the Apostle he added further that it is apparant sententiam Christi quae tantum excipit scortationem non esse completam cum hîc Apostolus alteram adjecerit that is that the sentence of Christ whereby hee excepteth no more but fornication only is not complete or full wheÌ„as the Apostle doth here adde another cause besides hee meaneth when the infidel departeth from the faithfull in cause of religioÌ„ Zegedinus followeth the selfe same course to speak of first in that same sentence of Christ then in that presupposed libertie of divorce On that sentence of Christ Quidam saith hee literae seu dicto Christi mordicus inhaerentes clamant propter solam fornicationem matrimonia dirimi posse Verum cum Paulus permittat repudium palam mulieri fideli si propter religionem negligatur abjiciatur à viro infideli ac significet noÌ„ in fornicationis tantum infidelitatis casibus fratrem aut sororem ab altero separari posse sed in similibus ait enim non est servituti subjectus frater aut soror in hujusmodi ubi paria peccata intelligit liquidè ex his constat Christum fornicationis nomen in genere accepisse per metonymiam ac nomine fornicationis seu stupri includere ea scelera quae fornicationi paria aut certè majora sunt excludere autem minora that is divers cleaving vnto the letter or speech of Christ over-precisely will needs haue it that marriage may be dissolved for no cause else but only for adultery But seeing Paul doth plainly allow of divorce vnto a faithful woman if for religion she be despised and cast out by her vnbeleeving husband and signifieth withal that a brother or a sister may bee separated againe not only in case of fornication and infidelitie but also in others such like besides for he saith that a brother or a sister is not brought into bondage in such things as these where he vnderstandeth such like sinnes it doth plainly appeare by these that Christ by the figure of Metonymia did largely take the name of fornication that vnder the name of whoredome hee did include all such crimes as were as great or greater than it and that he did exclude or shut out of the same but only the lesse and his reason is Qui enim posset Apostolus contra praeceptorem suum docere that is For how can the Apostle teach that which would be contrary to his Masters doctrine In that presupposed liberty of divorce hee saith likewise Fieri non potest ut rei foedae nomine intelligantur leves causae ut vel moruÌ„ culpa vel corporis vitium quo maritus offendatur excludantur verò majores causae quibus matrimonia magis dirimi possunt that is It cannot be that vnder the name of some vncleane thing spoken of Deut. 24.1 smal matters should be ment as some fault in behavior or manners or some deformitie in the body wherewith the husband may be offended and that greater matters should be excluded for which marriages might be much rather dissolved That it should be so much against duty to forgiue the wife that so hath offended Mr Beza is both very plaine and copious therein as having of purpose handled the same and yet more moderate therein than some other are and therefore I rest only on him for this matter And of this matter he setteth two principal questions the one of detecting such a wife to the Magistrate the other of receiving her againe to favor Concerning the former first he setteth the question An teneatur innocens persona noceÌ„tem deferre that is Whether it be the duty of the innocent party to accuse the other that hath offended vnto the Magistrate And his answere in effect is Magistratui inprimis indicare maritum vel uxorem praecipue decet ne dum praepostera charitate alienum peccatum fovent justam lenocinij suspitionem incurrant that is that right wel or chiefly it becommeth either the husbaÌ„d or the wife to complaine thereof to the Magistrate least while they with a preposterous loue do cherish the fault of the other they incurre a just suspition that they are no better than bawds themselues And being then farther demanded whether we may not privatam injuriam condonare that is forgiue our owne private iniurie hee so far intitleth the Common-wealth vnto it maketh it to come so neere vnto Anabaptistrie that he cannot allowe it and he addeth in the end NaÌ„ certè Christiana charitas malis non favet that is For certainely Christian charitie favoureth not either evil things or as I should rather take it those that are evil So likewise being further vrged with the example of Ioseph that did not deale so hardly with Marie his espowsed wife and that he was commended for that his moderate dealing he answereth that it was but doubtful in him and that hee had no certainty of it and therefore that in that respect he did the best as his case was But what letteth but that a man might rather thinke that Ioseph made no doubt of the matter as then also himselfe had gon too far but thought himselfe very certaine of it then is this obiectioÌ„ vnanswered as yet And Mr Beza him selfe alloweth Ioseph thus much to put him out of doubte of the matter if that may serue that uterus eminens praegnantem esse demonstrat that is that her belly being growne so great as it was did plainely shew her to be with child so that he ejus videlicet rei quae extra ordinem contigerat ignarus that is ignorant of that matter which had befalne her extraordinarily might wel haue thought without any doubting with himselfe omnino ab aliquo gravidatam esse that is that certainely omnino shee had by some body beene gotteÌ„ with child
So it seemeth even by that which M Beza doth allow him that he was nothing doubtful of it but only that he was therin deceived Again being further pressed that in this case also privat admonitiō should go before at least amōg friends that rather the Church than the Magistrate as themselues are wont to speak or some certaine persons should bee first sought vnto hee both liketh not of that neither and bringeth in certaine reasons to be assistant vnto him therein but yet in the end addeth thus much withal Dixi quid hîc mihi videatur Suū cuique judicium esto modo ex verbo Dei unusquisque sapiat that is I haue said what I mee selfe doe thinke of this matter Let every one iudge as himselfe thinketh good so that no man goe any further then hee hath the word of God to leade him Concerning the latter he first likewise propoūdeth the question and then setteth downe his judgement on it The question is An inforo conscientiae nocentem personam convictam teneatur innocens ablegare an verò poenitentem rursus recipere that is Whether in conscience before God the innocent party be bound quite to put away the offender being once convicted of it or vppon repentance to receiue him againe In which point when first hee hath graunted that many of our great Divines both old and new do little agree among thēselues and in his iudgement illos quidem nimium adversus nocentem rigidos istos verò nimium faciles videri that is That one sort of them seemed to him to bee too rigorous to the partie offending others to be over easie yet thē he so taketh against those that hee accounteth too easy that little or nothing he differeth from those that he thought before too rigorous rather shewing and that rightly in deed that the reasons whereon they grounded that austerity of theirs were to weake to beare it or that those reasons did not so conclude then that hee doth so much dissent from their iudgemēt therein For he findeth no more in them in neither of those whome there he nameth Ierom and Bucet but only the negatiue that the offendor may be retained which he accounteth so great austerity and yet himselfe though in some case he doth qualifie the same yet in some other hee draweth very neere vnto thē His qualificatiō is that he doth not condemn him qui uxorem resipis centem recipiat that is who receiueth his wife vpon her repentance and againe Deinde vt modo dixi non nego posse iterum admitti adulteram resipiscentem that is Moreover as before I said I doe not deny but that an adulteresse if shee repent may bee admitted againe And elswhere he yeeldeth somewhat further also as on other occasion before I noted But as in this place hee yeeldeth thus much so are we to note that he addeth withall that which doth if it be marked not a litle impeach that which is granted and first though there be repētance afterward found in her that had committed adultery before but thē especially if the party offending as yet repent not For though the adulteresse doe repent yet first hee saith that multae aliae justae causae esse possint cur adulteram quantumvis resipis centem in thorum rursus non admittat qui tamen alioqui illatam sibi injuriam ex animo condonavit that is that there may be many iust causes why a man doth not admit his adulterous wife to his bed againe though shee repent never so much who yet notwithstanding from his heart forgiveth the iniurie that is done vnto him Wherein seeing he setteth downe that there be many iust causes and that a forgiuenes from the heart may be betwixt man wife without bedding togither againe though neither he name any of those many causes nor sheweth how such forgiuenes may stand with such strangnes too yet such as are corruptly inclined in those matters may easily finde matter enough to their contentment wherewith to feed that humor of theirs both in the one and in the other so rawly left as there they are Then also hee addeth further that he is not of minde that a man is bound in conscience to receiue the adulteresse againe though shee repent sed post modestam Ecclesiae adhortationem adhibitam unumquēque suae conscientiae relinquendum that is but after some sober exhortation given by the Church that everie one is to be left to his owne conscience and that they vsed the selfe-same order in the Church of Geneva such as most of thē are that stickle so hard for the liberty that now we speake of would in such case lightly desire both in respect of the weaknes of those to restraine any disorder of theirs that M. Beza here meaneth by the Church and especially in respect of that liberty that when the Church hath said what it will then may these notwithstanding freely do as themselues thinke good But before the adulteresse repent his iudgement is plaine that the husband in no wise may receiue her againe little differing from that rigour of those others before For by another occasion speaking of receiuing the offender againe ante resipiscentiae testimonium that is before some proofe of repentance be giuen he plainely saith that fieri non potest quin sceleri faveatur that is that it cannot be done but that wickednesse must needes be favoured A sufficient token that so to receiue an offender againe hath at all no favour with him and thereby also a sword giuen into the handes of those that are of that humor to be long enough avenged on the offender til they may finde tokens to their contentment of true repentance So haue wee hitherto partly seene both how weake reasons they haue and what inconvenient speeches besides they haue now and then interlaced among them 25 Now to examine the places themselues for the true sense and meaning of them for the better vnderstanding of the order ensuing wee are first to acknowledge that when we haue gathered the meaning of them and withall haue made it reasonable plaine even out of the consideration of the places themselues yet is it not vnlikely but that it will hardly sinke in the mindes of others vnlesse some doubts be answered withall which otherwise will much prevaile with many and therefore are we first to set downe the meaning of them then to consider of those doubts that seeme to be so strong against it And to finde out the meaning of them wee are first to set by that which is not then afterward to declare that which is That which is not being first set by both the most of the busines will bee dispatched and the other wil then more plainely appeare but herein also wee are not barely to set downe the negatiue that I meane vnto it but also to adde some such proofe therevnto as may not well bee wanting from it The negatiue that I meane vnto
24. Some againe beloÌ„ging to all others but to certain of them Ib. Others â—ow the innocent partie is to deale with the offender Ib. Though it might be done yet that it were inconveâ—ient both in respect of the publike cause of all in â—espect of many private persons besides S 32. See likewise Erasmus and Weake reasoning Indifferencie see Erasmus Things Indifferent a Rule for them S. 29. Innocent partie whether bound to seeke to the Magistrate for the punishment of the offender discoursed by Beza S. 24. So likewise whether againe to receiue â—he offender into favour Ibid. See also Inconvenience and Inconvenient Their Innocent partie see Odâ— Innocencie see Malice Insufficienâ—ie see weaknesse Intemperatenesse of a widdow see Malice Vnwonted Interpretations whà t is to be gathered out of them S. 13. The interpretation to be favorable otherwise the dispensation will be needfull S. 20. Corrupt inâ—erpretation Ib See also Heed Iohanan see Divorcers Ioseph for Marry called in question S. 24. Isaâ—0 â—0 1. God not divorcing his people S. â— Iudgements of God divers and fearefull against those that in doubtfull cases haue neglected first to seeke vnto him S 30. And for iudgement see Opinion Iudicialls of Moâ—es of what force to bind others S. 24. Iunius see Translation and Tremellius Iustifie S Basils Rule see Examples Iuvenall S. 20. K. Kemnizius see Chemnizius See likewise Musculus and speeches of others L LAndâ— of an adulterous woman remaining with her husband and by vertue of marriage argue the bond not to be altogether broken S. 16. The old Latâ—â—â—â— acknowledged by Erasmus himselfe not to to be of his minde S. 4. Lawes Those that be decretall to bee against Erasmus S. 4 That any also are laid not to bee needfull for true Christians had need to be warily taken S. 18. To be Lawfull which God alloweth how far vrged by Erasmus S. 19. That also sometimes to bee lawfull which the law punisheth not Ibid. Lawing see Divorce Ed. Le about this matter vncurteously vsed by Erasmus S. 10. Afterward Archbishop of Yorke Ib. Leà ue out see ground Of the more Learned that generally they mistooke the Text whereon they builded and that certaine of the chiefe oâ— them haue so acknowledged since S. 34. Lending on vsurie see Examples Lev. 21.7 A divorced woman not meet for any Priest to marry S. 2 Letting loosse to fleshly Liberty not likely to be any worke of Christ. S 13 And for such kind of liberty Farther see divorce and Flesh. Like to this see other things Eras. how he Limiteth his iudgement of divorce S 19 Pope Lion see Bond Loue see Enimies Lyranus such for divorce as for vsurie S. 28 His iudgment for vsurie how to be applied against divorce Ib. See divorce M MAgistrats see Adulterie Bond Innocent party and Pâ—etense Making Bishops see divorce The Mallice of the Iew the intemperatenes of the widdow thought by these to bee more fauoured then the innocencie of the partie not offending S 18 Mal. 2 16. If they hate them to put them away S. 2. v 7. Erasmus not noted to haue medled with it S. 10. In what sense taken by Musculus Martyr Calvine Gualter S 10. The place it selfe not to yeeld so much in the letter but more in the sense S. 12. See also Words Many see wiues Of Marriages disorderly made divers noted S 6 again see Bond disorderly twice Divorce Inconvenience Marry That neither the maÌ„ is punâ—shed if he mary another neither divorced women forbidden to marry both these by Erasmus pleaded S 19 see also Christ Divorce Marrying againe on divorce for adultery held by many of speciall account S. 1 But many mo of the learned against it then with it S 14. such placeâ— as seeme to be for it Ib. again see August dovorce 4. times warrant Marrying two sisters see Beza and Examples P Martyr that no men of any good sort ever vsed divorce S 4. How he protesteth S. 7. many waies to dissolv maryage S. 4 see also Adultery Dâ—ut 24. Mal. 2. speeches of theirs Mat. 5.31 32. what wee may rather take to bee the meaning thereof S. 26. See also Erasmus Politicall Mat 19.3 9. what may seeme to bee the meaning of this S. 27. See also Erasmus Meaning see Mat 5. Circumstances Perfection Not Medled with see divers places Medling see collections Misliked see Calvin How far they Mistake farther declared S 10 See also Places Moderate see Beza Ari. Montanus on that place of Mal. not suerving froÌ„ the wonted reading S. 12. See also Translation How Musculus reasoneth on certaine authorities of the word of God S. 19. Vrged by Musculus first and Chemniziusafter out of that law that a Priest might not marry a divorced woman that it was lawful for a divorced woman to mary againe S. 19. Againe see Adulterie came to tempt Deut 24. Malae 2 Meaning Obiection Politicall and Speaches of others N Natalis Bedda see Erasmus Num. 5.13.31 A probabilitie that Deut 24.1.4 is not so to be taken S. 11. O An Obiection strong against them how Erasmus and Musculus doe answere S. 16. In that Obiection that they gather out of the Apostle allowing the forsaken to mary againe as the case may be the matter to bee cleere that the case is not like the one being altogether deprived of the benefite of mariage but not the other S. 33. Obiections but the same that Erasmus had gathered before S. 21. Some out of the words of Christ others out of the Apostle S. Paul Ibid Obiections a couple the former of them of the exception vsed therein S. 28 See also Beza and opinion Occasion of this Treatise S 1. Ods see Great Offender see Innocent How they gather their owne Opinion or iudgemâ—nt and how they answere such obiections as stand against them S 20. The opinion of divers learned men that way inclining S 34. Order see Inconvenient Of the ancient Fathers Origen Tertullian Pollentius by his welwillers in this cause said to be a graue and learned man and Ambrose all noted to be at least inclining to this opinion of theirs S. 22. The Originall or Hebrew Text against that â—ense of Deut â—4 1 4. S. 11 Divers Other things which they conceiue to be like vnto this S. 18. Otherwise taken see Groundworke Others see private persons One of our Owne see Erasmus P. Panormitanus see Ioan. Andrez Pardâ—n see Innocent Particulers see divorce Parties see Bond Parties themselues see Divorce S. Paul noted to let downe oftimes the rigor of that which Christ requireth S. 20 Perfection to what end commended vnto vs S 18. That Christ in that his discoursedid not mean to teâ—câ— it but to lead them on somewhat farther to appearâ— by those exaÌ„ples that there are aleaged 526 se divorce A Perilous point see Bond. Persons see Circumstances How ready men are to sort themselues to that Persuasion S 3. Pharises tempting see Circumstances Some such Places as the