est consequendo coelesti regno Here is Priests after their consecration or others vowing Virginity for ever after denied marriage This the modern law of the Greek Church and if the prohibiting them afterward makes them the more who intend Priesthood to take wives before and so many of the Greek Clergy de facto are married to enjoy this liberty more than for necessity yet this is an abuse no ways countenanced by their Ecclesiastical Canons Much less may we imagin that they are obliged by any such law ne periculo fornicandi se exponant to take wives before they may enter into this Holy profession so contrary both to the Apostle's Counsel 1 Cor. 7. and the Church'es former Injunctions when-as even all secular imployments have at least the liberty of a single life and the Reformed themselves so great friends to marriage yet impose no such yoke upon their Clergy nor hath any that I know of entertained such a fancy save Vigilantius Out of the Canons then recited above you may observe 1. That the Greek Church who acknowledg and practise these Canons in this point to this day allow indeed the use of their wives except when they officiate but what if they officiate every day as many Priests do to Priests married before Ordination but not so to Bishops but permit not that any Ordained unmarried may afterward marry at all 2ly Again That those married persons who were to be made Presbyters in the Roman Church and Bishops in the Oriental might not separate from their wives without consent received from the wives before such Ordination or Consecration of them 3ly That such continency was annexed to Holy Orders only by Ecclesiastical Constitution and was rather Lex Continentiae than Votum which therefore hath bin capable of many dispensations and the Canons about it somewhat differing and the Clergy more restrained by some of them than by others But this seems to be a received ground amongst them all in those primitive times that Continency is a general gift at least in potentia remota i.e. which is by God denied to none using the means and rightly preparing himself for it c. Els how could they prudently make such laws strictly prohibiting marriage for such a number of men involving also the Deacons and Subdeacons upon penalty of degradation from their office which laws you see the Reformed because they hold continency a particular gift only possible to some generally decry How could they allow of a separation by consent once given of a man and his wife for ever required in the Roman Church of all in the Eastern of Bishops notwithstanding what the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 7.5 unless you will say that the Church-Officers in time of Ordination could discern who had this gift who not Or that there was no party coming to be ordained or consenting to such a separation but was able to discern it in himself and that not only for the present but always for the future and likewise that none would present himself that knew he had it not § 20 Neither doth the Apostle's declaring from the Spirit 1 Tim. 4.1 c. that in the latter times there should arise Apostates c forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats any way prejudice these injunctions and practices of ancient Church nor consequently of the latter times herein following only her example 1. Because the Apostle by opposing to such error that every creature and ordinance of God is good according to Gen. 1.31 and 2.23 24. and therefore being sanctified first by the word of God and prayer may lawfully be used see 1 Tim. 4.3 4 5. sheweth that he means such Apostates as abstain from or prohibit marriage and meats as in themselves unlawful and unclean and contaminating Which thing can neither be objected to the ancient nor modern Church-practice using abstinence from some meats for the chastisement of the body not for any uncleaness in the food and not forbidding marriage to any single person absolutely but only upon his voluntary undertaking such an employment with which they imagin a married condition not so well to sute In which case if necessary abstinence from marriage be a fault the Apostle himself may seem to comply with it in those expressions of his 1 Tim. 5.11.12 2ly Because experience hath manifested the Apostle's prophecy to have bin most eminently fulfilled in other persons of these latter times whom these Fathers even in these points most vehemently resisted affirming downright all marriage especially with reference to procreation of children therefore the married were advised by them in such manner to use their wives as to avoid this see S. Aust de moribus Manich. 18. c. to be unlawful and the work or design of the Devil as likewise flesh-diet to be unclean and defiling Animata abominantes interdicunt saith Epiphanius haer 47. non continentioe gratia neque honestoe vitae sed ob timorem imaginations ut non contaminentur ab animatorum esu Vino vero omnino non utuntur Diabolicum esse dicentes And S. Austin contra Faust 30. l. 5. c. Ipsam creaturam immundam dicitis quod carnes Diabolus operetur faeoulentioâ—e materia mali And de haeres 46. c. Non vescuntur carnibus tanquam de mortuis vel occisis fugerit divina substantia Vinum non bibunt dicentes fel esse principum tenebrarum Such were some of the Gnosticks Encratites Montanists Marcionites and in the last place the Manichees being as it were the last extract and quintessence of all those former gross errors not a little potent even in S. Austin's times who not holding all things to have bin created by the same good God but this lower world by an evil principle or by the Prince of darkness as they call him affirm in the begetting of a man that the Soul which they account to be a part of the substance of God himself becomes fettered and imprisoned in the walls or handy-work of the devil i.e. the body from which it is again released only by death therefore was marriage occasioning such imprisonment forborn by all their elect and tho this permitted to their auditors yet saith Austin it was non dicences non esse peccatum sed peccantibus veniam largientes propterea quod illis necessaria ministrabant con Faust. Man 30. l. Likewise that the same part of God was continually more defiled and enclosed by such and such gross nourishments of the body And when of such errors they were accused by the Fathers it was ordinary with them to recriminate the Orthodox with the same things both for their frequent abstinencies from flesh and some other fruits and for their to some persons at least recommending virginity who in this matter were answered by them after the same manner as the Protestants objecting the same things are now by the Church of Rome See concerning this the contest between Faustus the Manichee and S. Austin cont Faust Manich. 30. l.
This in the copies approved by Archbishop Vsher and Dr. Hammond Tertullian and S. Cyprian before A. D. 300 writ Tracts one de velandis virginibus i.e. sacris That they should cover their faces with veils c. where he mentions votum continentiae viderit ipsum continentiae votum p. 200. and distinguisheth between virgines hominum and virgines Dei Ambiunt virgines hominum adversus virgines Dei c. p. 193. and near the end he saith to such Non mentiris nuptam Nupsisti enim Christo illi tradidisti carnem tuam illi sponsasti maturitatem tuam c. And of those who should offer to pull off this veil he saith O sacrilegae manus quae dicatum Deo habitum detrahere potuerunt c. The other de disciplina habitu virginum i.e. sacrarum of whom he saith there Quae se Christo dicaverunt a carnali concupiscentia recedentes tam carne quam mente se Deo voverunt and that they were flos Ecclesiastici germinis c gaudere per illas atque in illis largiter florere Ecclesiae matris gloriosam foecunditatem and that those of them who afterward yeild to lust are adulterae Christi And see his Epistle to Pomponius about some that lived unchastly after that exfide se Christo dicaverant sanctitati suaese destinarant propter regna coeborum se castraverant c. To these that you may know that anciently also those who lived Monastick lives made vows thereof the contrary of which some endeavour to perswade us I wil add only two other testimonies one out of S. Basil praesat constitut Monast Nuptias velut compedes fugit vitam suam Deo consecrat castitatem profitetur ut neque facultas ipsi sit conversionis ad nuptias the other out of S. Austin in Psalm 75. upon Vovete reddite Domino Deo nostro Alii virginitatem ipsam ab ineunte aetate vovent c. isti voverunt plurimum Alius vovet relinquere omnia sua distribuendo pauperibus ire in communem vitam in societatem sanctorum magnum votum vovit Nescio quae castimonialis nubere voluit Aliquid mali voluit mali plane Quare Quia jam voveâ—at Domino Quid enim dixit de talibus Apostolus Paulus Cum dicat viduas adolescentulas nubere si velint Quid autem ait de quibusdam quae voverunt non reddiderunt habentes inquit damnationem quia jam fidem irritam fecerunt Nemo ergo positus in Monasterio Frater dicat Recedo de Monasterio Neque enim soli qui sunt in Monasterio perventuri sunt in regnum coelorum Respondetur ei sed illi non voverunt tu vovisti And concerning the married by consent vowing continency and obligation afterward for ever to observe it see S. Austin's 199 Epistle to Ecdicia The argument of which Epistle I will transcribe you Mulier quaedam i. e. this Ecdicia inscio marito susceperat votum Continentiae Post tamen maritus assensus est continenter cum ea vixit non sinens tamen ut Monachae vestem sumeret Tandem inscio marito facultates omnes duobus Monachis veluti pauperibus erogavit cum haberet filium puerum ex eodem viro Maritus suspicans eos Monachos esse ex eorum numero qui penetrant praedantur domos alienas resiliit a proposito coepit maechari Now in this Epistle St. Austin blames Ecdicia indeed for all the things above named which she had done without the consent of her husband commanding her to submit and ask his pardon c. but as to the vow of Continency to which they had once both consented notwithstanding his fornicating he holds them both for ever obliged to it and exhorts her at least to perseverance therein Quod enim saith he Deo pâ—riconsensu ambo voveratis perseveranter usque in finem reddere ambo debuistis a quo proposito si lapsus est ille tu saltem constantissime persevera Thus He. As for other quotations of Fathers I refer you to the Controvertists instead of which I will set you down the confessions concerning them of Calvin Instit 4. l. 12. c. 27. s. Secuta sunt deinde tempora he means after the Conc. Nicen. quibus invaluit nimis superstitiosa coelibatus admiratio c. Haec quia videbantur reverentiam Socerdotio conciliare magno plausu etiam antiquitus recepta esse fateor Now the reason why he censures not the times till after Nice is the story of Paphnutius from which he gathers those former times Conjugium in Sacerdotio tolerasse not observing or concealing that it was only Conjugium contracted before Ordination Himself mean-while condemning the Canons which these times approved quibus vetitum est ne matrimonium contraherent qui pervenissent ad sacerdotii gradum Sect. 27. Sect. 29.28 Nulla omnino conditione dandum esse locum iis Canonibus censeo qui vinculum Coelibatus Ecclesiastico ordini injiciunt Concerning vows of single life 13. c. 17. § Hoc inquiunt ab ultima memoria fuit observatum ut se alligarent continentiae voto qui totos se Domino dicare vellent His Answer Fateor â—erre antiquitus quoque receptum fuisse hum morem sed eam aetatem sic ab omni vitio liberam fuisse non concedo ut pro regula habendum sit quicquid tunc factum est And the confession of Pet. Martyr de Coelibatu Votis Vt quod verum est fateamur cos in hac causa habemus iniquiores Statim enim ab Apostolorum temporibus nimium tribui coeptum est Coelibatui And of St. Austin he saith Iste vir Dei scribit speaking of Vows ut homo deceptus Now the objections which are made by the opposers of the law of Celibacy for those entring into Holy Orders or of vows of Celibacy for other persons out of the Canons of Councils or the writings of the Fathers are not against any thing here affirmed but either concerning some who having wives before Ordination were not obliged afterward to abstain from them allowed still by the Greek Church except to Bishops only * or concerning marriages contracted after Ordination or Vows that such are not irrita of which opinion S. Austin is clearly De bono Viduitatis c. 8 9 c. a thing granted by all after only simple vows and after solemn disputed still whether such persons who have so solemnly delivered and made over themselves in a particular espousal to God are made illegitimate for any Secular marriage afterward jure Divino or only jure Ecclesiastico See Bell. de Monach. 2. l. 34. c. sect Respond convenit For the Church hath always claimed much power as being not restrained by the Levitical law qua talis but only by that of Nature nor prescribed any thing by Christ in ordering the matters of marriage and in hindering some persons from marrying even not to making the marriage illicitum to be done but irritum
only Old-Testament-ceremonial holiness but see 1 Cor. 7.5 a place parallel to these Defraud ye not one the other except it be with consent for a time that ye may give your selves to fasting and prayer Where it may be noted that as fasting hath no good correspondence with the acts of the conjugal bed sine Cerere c. so these also are as prejudicial to fasting and its companions And sutable to these Scriptures were the Decrees of the ancient Church Diebus orationis jejuniorum praeparationis ad Eucharistiam a conjuge abstinendum And this because carnal pleasures are some way or other always enemies to spiritual exercises either proceeding to excess and so rendring us faulty or too much either heightening or also debilitating our temper and so making us undisposed or dividing and diverting some portion of that love and of those intentions to things inferior which are always all incomparably best spent upon and consecrated to God the supreme good § 4 Again we find after one marriage the abstaining from a second both commended see Lu. 2.36 and to some persons to wit Forbearance of second marriages commended in some cases enjoined those entertained in the pious or holy Services of God or the Church enjoyned as appears in the widdows of the Church 1 Tim. 5.9 of whom it is there required that such widdow have bin the wife of one man which words being capable of several sences either that she have not had two husbands at once or not two successively again not two successively either by a divorce from the former or upon the death of the former seeing that no woman might have two husbands at one time nor any women at all were allowed remarrying upon divorce see 1 Cor. 7.11 it follows that the Apostle's widdow must be understood to be such as had not had a second husband after the first dead For this injunction seems to have something singular in it the same caution being given no where to any but only to Church-officers and servants Nor is it probable as some against the current of Antiquity interpret it that the Apostle here restrained only the admission of such a widdow as had causlesly turned away her husband and unlawfully married another man which is granted was done sometimes but seldom and without any permission of Moses law see Mar. 10.12 or as had many husbands at the same time of which there are some rare examples amongst the heathen because such things cannot well be imagined tho possible to have hapned in the Church or when they hapned not to have bin severely punished with excommunication as we see the incestuous Corinthian was And the Apostle seems here rather to require something of extraordinary example and goodness above others in such as were thus to be devoted to the Churches Service and maintained by her Charity than only to caution that they should not be of the worst wicked amongst Christians Which is further confirmed by St. Paul's displeasure against those Church-widdows that remarryed ver 11. And if this interpretation be admitted for the widdows much more may it upon the like expression a husband of one wife for the Bishops of the Church 1 Tim. 3.2 and for the Deacons 1 Tim. 3.12 § 5 III. Tho Celibacy as it occasions larger fruits of righteousness to many Having a greater reward in the world to come yet if a married condition also produceth the same it hath no preheminence in this beyond wedlock yet as in it self it is a stronger resistance of the lusting of the flesh and a greater subduer of the natural concupiscence which all have less or more whose importunities it heroically repelleth whilst the married only lawfully satisfies them thus it seems worthy of and so to have promised to it a higher reward and crown in the world to come and is one of the eminentest of all the virtues as not moderating but subduing the most violent of passions See Esai 56.4 5. where Eunuchs who as dry trees under the law were much disparaged Deut. 23.1 yet under the Gospel have ample promises beyond those who beget children See Matt. 19.12 where the Kingdom of heaven being inheritable without it the using of this means seems to be for something singular in that Kingdom as well as for the more easie or certain attaining it But however this be those who grant there several degrees of glory proportioned to those here of sanctity must give the highest to Virgins because if supposed only equal with the rest in all other graces they are granted in one to be superior See Act. 21.9 where Virgin seems to be a term of honor § 4 Continency especially neâ—â—ssâ—â—y or the Clergy IV. Single life being so advantageous for having our liberty freed from any other conjugal fetters to bestow our selves wholly on Christ and to wait upon him without distraction freed from cares and holy in body and spirit seems tho worthy to be sought for by all yet so necessary to none as to those of the Clergy so far as they find themselves capable of it that perfection which others as it were unnecessitated thereto attain by it being their constant duty and profession as it were especially that to give themselves unto prayer 1 Cor. 7.5 Act. 6.4 and to wait upon the Lord without distraction v. 35. and to take a special care of the poor Act. 6.3 § 5 That it is the gift of God V. T is plain that this Continency and the power of living a single life is the gift of God both 1. such a cool and moderate temper and calm passions as do not so eagerly provoke and kindle the fire of lust in us and 2ly the grace to be able to abstain and quench these fires when we are provoked if we will use the means and 3ly the actions or means which we use by them to procure the grace to abstain as prayer mortifications of the body avoiding all temptations constant and diligent employment are the gift of God For so also are all other good things said to be both natural and moral and spiritual even all those things which we have most in our power and which our industry most procures and the powers themselves and every action of them So to be rich to be honourable the condition of a free-man or of a servant c. are the gift of God See 1 Cor. 7.17 Deut. 8.17 18. .3.27 And if we cannot of our selves think a good thought much less refrain the most violent of our lusts except from the gift of the Almighty VI. Taking this ability to contain §. 8 n. â— Given to very mâ—â—â— not for a power of being freed from all concupiscence and from the first motions of lust for so none at all have this power but for a power to suppress these first motions and quench these lesser sparks before they break out into a flame 1. either into fornication therefore v. 2. marriage is opposed to
deficiency otherwise be allayed was by reason of our ordinary weakness not of our absolute necessity to whom he in some times indulged a facile changing also of those to whome men were joyned but it likewise not for their necessity but for the hardness of their hearts Matt. 19.8 Whereas now it is a fruit of the Evangelical perfection that husbands by mutual consent do separate from their wives without taking others for the Kingdom of God Lu. 18.29 compared 28. always secure of the gift of continency from God if resolute in their endeavours of preserving it Else this would be an act most unlawful which our Saviour makes so heroical and promiseth to it so great a reward It seems therefore that God this gift being so advantageous to his service § 13 see parag 1. and so common see par 7. not denied upon repentance and prayer c to many grievous sinners after long contrary habits without their using the remedy of marriage that God I say denies not this power to any at all who first have power over their own will decree and stand stedfast in their heart 1 Cor. 7.37 resolutely undertake and offer this their singleness to God for such an end as is so much approved by him and then practise also the means conducing to it which are observed as abstinency for example naturally to cure the burnings of lust even in brute beasts § 14 Which thing to confirm yet further both from the Scriptures and from the primitive times of the Church first had God denied this gift to any 1. it seems that St. Paul could not justly have blamed the widdows when some of them young for remarrying whose marriage he saith was out of wantonness and that they had damnation for having cast off their first faith and promise i. e. of living single and attending wholly to those charitable duties c. which they had made to Christ and the Church but if God had not given them the power of observing their vow the Apostle should have allowed their remarrying and blamed their vowing who ordered also for the future that such young women should no more be admitted to such vows or duties for publick service of the Church not because they could not but ordinarily would not abstain § 15 2. Neither would our Saviour have recommended the like resolution and attempt in those who he saith made themselves Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven Matt. 19.12 if he would not also be assistant to them with his grace as he approved their purpose and design to which also they were allured by his Encomiums of that happier condition Nor would he have and that in the general commended those who leave the pleasures of marriage for the Kingdom of God's sake that is for the better serving God in any way see 1 Cor. 7.34 35. or those who have forsaken their wives i. e. by mutual consent 1 Cor. 7.4 5. see Lu. 18.29 compared with Matt. 19.29 There is none that hath left or every one that hath forsaken wife c. who shall not receive c. Forsaken i. e. as the Apostles did in local separation from them see Matt. 19.27 unless continency were a gift which all pious purposes using the means for conserving it and intending God's glory in it may presume upon Tho where we do not subdue our lust S. Paul as much prohibits any long separation as our Saviour here encourageth it See 1 Cor. 7.5 § 16 3. Neither would S. Paul have approved the same resolution in those who could master so far their own will 1 Cor. 7.37 who doubtless what he praiseth in the father who yet might be necessitated to go against his will by the virgin's incontinacibility he would much more have approved in the virgin Neither is that need ver 36. necessity absolute as appears by what follows do what he will the other doing better § 17 4. The prohibition likewise in the primitive times tho not in all Churches that no married person might be admitted to sacred Orders or that every one upon these received must separate from his wife yet that none single when entring into holy Orders I mean of Priesthood might afterward marry shews the perswasion of Antiquity to be either that continency was denied to none using the means or else that it being a special gift only to some every one before taking Orders or making a Vow might certainly know not only whether he had the gift for the present but whether he might also persevere therein to his death forasmuch as concerned God the Doner thereof But here it is unintelligible how such assurance can arise only to some particular persons nor can any direct how such a special gift not only for the present but the future also may be discerned Meanwhile concerning the prohibitions and practice of Antiquity see and compare together Can. Apostol 27. Conc. Chalcedon can 13.15 Constantinop in Trullo can 6.12 13. compared Can. Apost 6 In brief you will find the issue to be much-what to this purpose That no Presbyter may marry after his taking Orders nor Bishop after his Consecration That of those who being before married are admitted afterward into holy Orders some Churches required that they should ever after by mutual consent which was known before Orders conferr'd abstain from their wives as the Roman-Church Some that Bishops only should abstain universally and simple Presbyters only abstain then when they were to officiate as the Greek Church See likewise Provincial Councils celebrated about the time of the Nicene Council and approved afterwards by the Constant Conc. in Trullo can 2. Ancyran Conc. can 10. Neocaesar can 1 c § 18 But I think it best for saving the labour of seeking to set you down some of them which you will find so clear as that I think nothing can be replied to them Apostol Canon 27. In nuptiis autem qui ad Clerum evecti sunt Praecipimus ut sivoluerint uxores accipiant sed lectores cantoresque tantummodo not the higher Orders of Bishop Presbyter Deacon c. Conc. Ancyranum before the first Council of Nice Can. 10. Diaconi quicunque cum ordinantur si in ipsa ordinatione protestati sunt dicentes velle se habere uxores nâ—â— posse se continere where posse is taken as expounded § 24. hi postea si ad nuptias venerint maneant in ministerio propterea quod his Episcopus licentiam dederit Quicunque sane tacuerunt susceperunt manus impositionem professi continentiam si postea ad nuptias venerint a ministerio cessare debebunt But note that si protestati sunt is here said of Deacons only Conc. Naeocaesar before Nice câ—n 1. Presbyter si uxorem duxerit ab ordine suo illum deponi debere Conc. Nicaenum can 3. Omnibus modis interdixit sancta Synodus neque Episcopo neque Presbytero c. omnino licere habere secum mulierem extraneam nisi forte sit mater aut soror aut
avia aut amita vel matertera In his namque solis personis harum similibus omnis quae ex mulieribus est suspicio declinatur Whereas might they have entertained a wife neither would there have bin cause of such suspicion nor would it have bin reasonable nor safe to deprive their wives of all Women-attendance or Society As for the story of Paphnutius in this Council which makes so great a noise amongst us so that this instance stands for a bulwark against all the other evidence in this point of Antiquity see Calvin Institut 4. l. 12. c. 26. and generally all our writers this is the All of it That motion being made by some in the Council that the married Presbytery i. e. such as were married before made Presbyters should after their Ordination be separated from their wives which separation the Greek Church allows not to this day and of which the 6th of those called Canons Apostolical saith thus notwithstanding that the same Canons prohibit marriage after Ordination except to Lectores Cantores Episcopus aut Presbyter uxorem propriam nequaquam sub obtentu religionis abjiciant Some conceive this to be meant * without her consent others * not for cohabitation but for maintenance only Si vero rejecerit excommunicetur And Concil Gangrense because some held it unlawful to receive the Communion from a Presbyter formerly married was necessitated to make this Canon 4. Quicunque discernit a Presbytero qui uxorem habuit here t is habuit not habet quod non oporteat eo ministrante de oblatione percipere Anathema sit That such a motion being made I say Paphnutius a Reverend Bishop and a Confessor tho never married withstood it saying Grave jugum c. neque a singulorum uxoribus fortasse eam castimoniae normam posse servari But now mark what follows Illud satis esse ut qui in Clerum ante ascripti erant quam duxissent uxores hi secundum veterem Ecclesiae Traditionem deinceps a nuptiis se abstinerent non tamen quenquam ab illa quam jampridem cum laicus erat uxorem duxisset sejungi debere The story is in Socrates Eccl. Histor. 1. l. 8. c. and in others from him Sozomen 1. l. 22. c. Judg now what cause there is to urge Paphnutius for the marrying of the Clergy after H. Orders received by them when as single I go on Conc. Romanum under Silvester in the time also of Constantine the Great Can. 7. Nullum autem Subdiaconorum ad nuptias transire praecipimus ne aliquam praevaricationem sumpserit Elibertin Concil about the same time in Spain Can. 33. Placuit in totum prohibere Episcopis Presbyteris Diaconis ac Subdiaconis positis in ministerio abstinere se a conjugibus suis non generare silios Quod quicunque fecerit ab honore Clericatus exterminetur Which Canon plainly shews That at that time in the Western tho not in the Eastern Churches not only marriage after Holy Orders was forborn but abstinence from their wives by those who were married before was commonly practised since he who should do the contrary was so highly punished Conc. Arelatense secundum under the same Silvester Can. 2. Assumi aliquem in Sacerdotium in vinculo conjugii constitutum nisi fuerit praemissa conversio non oportet Two Councils in which S. Austin was present * 1. Conc. Carthag 2. Can. 2. Placuit condecet sacro-sanctos Antistites Dei Sacerdotes necnon Levitas i. e. Deacons c continentes esse in omnibus c. ut quod Apostoli docuerunt ipsa servavit antiquitas nos quoque custodiamus Ab universis Episcopis dictum est omnibus placet ut Episcopi Presbyteri c pudicitiae custodes etiam ab uxoribus se abstineant Hence S. Austin Confess 10. l. 30. c. speaking of his continency before obliged by Priesthood to it saith Et quoniam dedisti factum est antequam dispensator Sacramenti tui fierem And * 2. Conc. Africanum cap. 37. Praeterea cum de quorundam Clericorum quamvis erga uxores proprias incontinentia referretur placuit Episcopos Presbyteros Diaconos secundum priora statuta etiam ab uxoribus continere Quod nisi fecerint ab Ecclesiastico removeantur officio Caeteros autem Clericos ad hoc non cogi sed secundum uniuscujusque Ecclesiae consuetudinâ—m observari debere These were before the third General Council Add to these the fourth General Council of Chalcedon Can. 13. Quoniam in quibusdam provinciis concessum est Psalmistis Lectoribus se Apost Can. 27. quoted before uxores ducere constituit sancta Synodus prorsus cuiquam ex his non licere alterius sectae accipere uxorem c. Where t is plain that other Clergy besides Psalmists and Readers might not marry at all § 19 Hitherto I have kept within the times of the first four General Councils to which we promise much conformity I will joyn to these a Canon or two in Constantinopol Conc. in Trullo reckoned by the Eastern Church for a part of the sixth General Council tho it was not consented to by the Roman Patriarch Can. 6. Quoniam in Apostolicis Canonibus dictumest corâ—m qui non duct ae uxore in Clerum promoventur solum lectores cantores uxorem posse ducere nos hoc servantes decernimus ut deinceps nulli penitus Hypodiacono vel Diacono vel Presbytero post sui Ordinationem conjugium centrahere liceat c. Canon 12. Jubet omnino Antistites i. e. Bishops postquam sunt ordinati a propriis uxoribus secedere and here they take notice of the 6th Apostol Canon quoted before in the last § and yet advance beyond it quoniam Apostoli say they cum sides inciperet ad fidelium imbecillitatem se magis demittebant c. Can. 13. decernunt Presbyteros a prioribus suis legitimis uxoribus non separari sed eo tempore quo sacrificant expellentes suas uxores pietatis praetextu excommunicandos And this say they notwithstanding the contrary custom of the Roman Church Thus the Council in Trullo And ever since have the same laws and customs bin preserved in the Eastern Churches as we may see in the Answer of Jeremias Patriarch of Constantinople in Epilogo to the Reformed soliciting his approbation of their innovation in this matter and remembring him of the Apostle's rule Melius est nubere quam uri and his order Oportet Episcopum esse unius uxoris virum to which he replies this Proinde nos illis sacerdotibus qui in virginitate persistere non possunt priusquam tamen consecrentur Sacerdotes i. e. futuri siant c. Ille autem Sacerdos entring into Orders or others vowing Virginity qui semel virginitatem professus est virgo permaneat nec jam illi ullam amplius licentiam post votum susceptum nubendi damus Nemo enim mittens manum ad aratrum respiciens retro idoneus
perfection 1 Cor. 9. Luk. 12.33 Matt. 19.29 if he may not presume on God's assistance in such things only profitable without which he is able of himself to do nothing profitable 4. Again I know not why if we may safely vow the keeping of any of God's commandements and may make a covenant with our eyes not to look upon a woman to lust after her why I say we may not also to guard our passion from being set on fire and from burning since the former seems to be the more difficult § 24 5. To which this further may be added That Continency as any other thing advantaging us in God's Service from Vows receives a much higher value which may invite us to such pious engagements than without it whilst it proceeds from an affection more confirmed and stedfast in good A resolute vow having the virtue of an habit and to act good as it were necessarily being Angelical and he that vows offering up and sacrificing to God not the act only of continency with others for the present but the power or faculty thereof for ever and the fruit together with the tree that bears it Therefore find we frequent exhortations and examples of vowing in Scripture see Ps 76.11 Jon. 1.16 Is 19.21 c. And very expedient doubtless it is after some trial and experience of our having a reasonable command over our selves and of our not suffering a very tyrannical mastery of our passions to pass a vow in such matters to fortify our selves against temptations and the mutability of our inclinations by which the less former tye we have of our selves the easilier we are seduced Faelix necessitas quae ad melior a compellit saith S. Austin of Vows As for those places of the Apostle which are urged against vowing at least before sixty or for leave given to marry tho it be after vows upon incontnency as 1 Tim. 5.9 Let not a widow be taken into the number under 60 years old and 14. I will therefore that the younger women marry c. and 1 Cor. 7.9 If they cannot contain let them marry and v. 35. I speak not that I may cast a snare upon you In answer to them I take this first for granted that all those young or old who have the power to be continent may safely vow it since the reason given by the Reformed why it may not be vowed is because it is a thing not in our power Again I say that if these places prove either that continency before 60. may not be vowed or marrying after a vow may be lawful upon this reason because some persons before sixty and after vowing cannot contain then the Apostle will be made to contradict himself For according to this he could not say of the Juniors whose particular gift of continency he could not know but had rather reason to presume from the miscarriage he saw in them that they had it not that they had damnation for marrying or for not keeping their vow or promise to Christ which they could not keep but damnation for making such a vow which they must necessarily break For Non est peccatum violare quod servare impossibile est and it was as lawful to break such a vow as unlawful to make it But yet notwithstanding this the Apostle plainly saith damnation they had for marrying and for breaking this promise not for making it I conclude therefore that the Apostle's advice here of marriage is not * to Votaries nor absolutely to all other younger women for so his volo juniores nubere here would be contrary to his volo omnes esse sicut meipsum 1 Cor. 7.7 and would lay an obligation on all young folks to marry But * to those that are in such a manner qualified as those were that miscarried so qualified not from want of power from God to contain but want of will and of a stedfast purpose to make use of that power as S. Paul describes it 1 Cor. 7.37 which instability of the will and pronenes to incontinency that is in some much more than in others every one ought well to examin before they vow that so they may make use of the lawful remedy which in the second place God hath provided for it namely marriage if they do not aspire to the higher cure thereof by prayer and mortifications See Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase expounding it thus That those who have not attained to such gravity of mind and command over themselves do in that case betake themselves to a married life So in that text if they cannot contain let them marry Where note that our Translation renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If they cannot contain and so Matt. 19.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All men cannot receive this saying c. without rule or precedent that I know of for the Vulgar hath it omnes non capiunt si non se continent The advice is not to any that have an obligation to contain tho actually perchance they do not so as it is not to the married tho one party be sick absent or impotent nor to those who have vowed it being proved that such may contain from the Apostle's saying they have damnation in marrying who yet actually non se continebant But the advice is to those only that are free from any obligation against marriage that if they perceive themselves so affected as that they have much temptation and no stedfast purpose to contain if they have gotten which yet is by their own defect so little power and mastery over their will which mastery is acquired by some pains and practice as that they cannot not cannot possibly but cannot without much difficulty contain for we say we cannot do a thing tho in our power which we can hardly do that then they should make use of the common remedy allowed by God for it All which weaknesses since they are by industry remediable excuse none from continency who have already made any engagement to it To the 3d. place 1 Cor. 7.35 I grant a vow rashly undertaken to be a dangerous snare rashly I say i.e. without well proving before it what mastery we have over our carnal inclinations Lastly for the admission of none under sixty the Apostle seems to prescribe this age with respect to their impotency then to get their living and liableness to want see ver 4 and 16. and to their staydness and gravity see v. 13 14. as much or more than to their continency in which a lesser age would have rendred them secure But suppose the Apostle chiefly to have reference to this yet was it not done as if any lesser age hath not a power of continency or experiencing their ability to live single might not also resolve it but because the Church had not the same means to be assured of their inclinations and was much concerned in her first growth after the experience too of some miscarriages thus to prevent all scandal But later Church
youth thro the indulgent discipline the infancy of the Church was then capable of not so restrained as latter times have since provided ordered that none under sixty should be admitted into publick service upon such strict bonds and obligations And indeed in the business of continency in which some degree of burning is in the most pure it is very hard till long experience hath as it were assured us at any one time exactly to measure our own strength constancy and stedfastness whether we shall be able to contain for the time to come and by the intervening of new temptations c. unless we resolve wholly to shut up our selves from them our future is not easily judged by our present complexion And as when I look at the heavenliness of a single life I would advise all men to abstain so when at the great difficulty of such a purity as shall not be contaminated with one uncleanness than which the Apostle adviseth rather to marry I would counsel all men to marry See Conf. 2. l. 3. c. how S. Austin complains of his parents not preventing by marriage the many exorbitances of his wanton youth seeing the single person much hazards a great sin whilst he attempts as great a glory But yet the zealous Servant of God can do all thro Christ that strengthneth him Nor shall he in this be tempted above his power 1 Cor. 10.13 if he first tempt not himself and the reward is well worthy the pains § 27 Yet not unlawful for the Church and very beneficial to restrain the sacred function of the Ministry to single persons XII T is not only lawful but of singular benefit that those offices more neerly conversant about the publick service of God or the Church should be discharged only by single persons wholly sequestred from the world Which if the Apostle saw fitting in the ministring widows the Deaconesses Rom. 16.1 how much more is it in the Clergy Tho he loth to lay such a hard burden on the tender shoulders of the Infancy of the Church therefore nourished by him with milk rather than strong meat * when there was not so much choice of Pastors and they of necessity to be admitted to such functions much sooner than the widows and * when single life and Eunuchism was as yet especially to the Jew a strange proposal which may partly be the reason why he who became all things to all men in the 1 Cor. 7. recommends single life so modestly and after the way of delivering only his advice and judgment a phrase unusual in his other doctrines see 1 Cor. 7.6 8. compared with the 10 25 40 restrained then the Clergy only to one wife Yet where there is sufficient plenty of single persons that are worthy and not else it seems no way unlawful or unjust if the Church which is * in this left to her liberty for S. Paul restraining the Clergy only to one wife obligeth them not by this to have a wife and * hath power to establish what the H. Scriptures no way prohibit shall ordain which is a means to make many more zealous of this excellent gift * that single persons only shall be admitted into such employments or at least into those functions amongst these of the more eminency and moment and if these persons should afterward engage in marriage * that they shall no longer stay in the same office Which wisdom since the world frequently shews in many other places of less consequence they cannot be excused for omitting it in the Church-affairs to which it is most proper Neither do I see what hurt or scandal can come thereof if only the Ecclesiastical Canons were strictly executed 1. If none but after long probation of their temperance continency gravity mortification were admitted into such sacred employments see what tryal the Apostle requires before such admission 1 Tim. 3. and elsewhere not a novice lest he fall into the temptation of the Devil one of a good report and found blameless even the Deacons to be proved before they use that office 1 Tim. 3.10 2. If all necessary restraints from the ordinary occasions and temptations of incontinency were used to such persons after admitted 3. If the Church'es censures were vigorously executed against the offenders Else as Celibacy is better than Marriage so Marriage is always honourable but unchast celibacy especially in the Ministers of Christ most abominable and for ever void of excuse And even after such vows in which petenti dabitur nec patietur Deus nos supra id quod possumus tentari yet if such a one will not contain I conceive supposing no Ecclesiastical law to intervene which may render marriage to such when contracted invalid or not to be a marriage he sins much less in marrying i. e. in doing a thing in it self lawful but against his vow than in fornication i.e. in doing a thing eternally unlawful being against God's command for the one fault is against God's law the other only against his own And if some in comparing marriage with some one act of fornication or uncleaness may affirm the first to be more opposite to a vow than the latter as rendring one uncapable of observing his vow at all for the future which the latter doth not yet in this all will agree that even to a Votary the living in Marriage than living in continual Fornication or other uncleaness is a life to God less offensive S. Austin de Bono Viduitatis 9. c. Non quia ipsae nuptiae vel talium i.e. voventium damnandae judicantur sed damnatur propositi fraus damnatur fracta voti fides c. Postremo damnantur tales non quia conjugalem fidem posterius inierant sed quia continentiae primam fidem irritam fecerunt FINIS