as the Scripture which is more to be credited hath taught us another Lesson because forbidding us to say ‖ Prov. 24.29 I will do to my Neighbour as he hath done to me I will render to the man according to his works so it hath elsewhere assign'd such Reasons of it as both shew the unlawfulness of such a Procedure and take off from the force of its Pretensions For giving us to understand that God to whom Vengeance originally belongeth reserveth that part of Justice to himself †Rom. 12.19 and to those whom he hath entrusted * Rom. 13.4 with his Authority it doth consequently make it unlawful to any other than such to assume to themselves the Execution of it and therefore also to do to Men as they have before dealt with them If he who hath his own Injuries return'd upon him receive no more than he doth deserve yet will not that warrant our retaliating them because we have no Authority to chastise him The more Equitable as well as more Christian Rule is certainly Do to other Men as ye would they should do to you as you your selves if you were in their Circumstances would be forward enough to desire from them So doing you will not onely not usurp upon the Prerogative of God or of his Vicegerent but comply with the Sentiments of Nature and Revelation with the several Precepts and Intimations of the one with the Law and the Prophets and Gospels of the other THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT Honour thy father and thy mother that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth theé PART I. The Contents A Transition to the Duty we owe to each other whether consider'd onely as Men or under a more near Relation The latter of these provided for in this Fifth Commandment which is divided into a Duty and a Promise An Essay toward a general Explication of the Duty where is shewn That under Father and Mother are comprehended 1. Grandfather and Grandmother and other the Ancestors from whom we came because though at a distance Authors of our Being 2. Kings and all that are in Authority partly because in the place of Parents to their People and partly because their Authority is a Branch of the Paternal one and succeeded into the place of it 3. Our Spiritual Pastors because begetting us to a better Birth And in fine All that are our Superiours whether in Authority Dignity or Age. The like Comprehensiveness evinc'd in the Honour that is requir'd which is shewn also to include Fear and Love together with the Expressions of them and Honour The Duty of Superiours connoted in the Honour that is to be paid to them and how that Duty may be inferr'd An Address to a more particular Explication of the Duty where the Honour of Parents is resum'd and the Grounds thereof shewn to be first Their being under God the Authors of ours and secondly the Maintainers of it The Consequences of the former Ground propos'd and shewn to preclude all Pretences of Disrespect OUR Duty to God being provided for in the first place as which is both the Foundation and Limitation of all others proceed we according as the Decalogue invites to consider the Duty we owe to each other which may be reduc'd to two Heads that is to say such as we owe to one another as Men or such as arise from some more intimate Relation between us The latter of these is my Task at this time because the Design of the Commandment that is now before us for the Explication whereof I will consider 1. The Duty enjoyn'd And 2. The Promise wherewith it is enforc'd I. Now though if we look no further than the Letter we could not be long to seek what that is which is here bound upon us yet because I have before shewn that many things are contain'd in a Commandment beside what is express'd in it to attain the full importance of this we must enter into the very Bowels of it and extract that Sense which is wrapp'd up in it as well as that which is apparent In order whereunto I will inquire 1. Whether any Superiours are here meant besides Fathers and Mothers 2. What is the importance of that Honour which is here requir'd 3. Whether the Commandment provide for the Behaviour of Superiours towards Inferiours as well as of Inferiours towards them 1. And first of all though Father and Mother be the onely Persons express'd to whom we are requir'd to give Honour yet the general Reason of the Commandment obligeth us to extend it to Grandfathers and Grandmothers and other the Ancestors from whom we are descended because though they contributed not immediately to our Birth yet mediately they did as being the Authors of those from whom we deriv'd it Whence it is that in the Scripture they have often the Name of Fathers as Your Father Abraham rejoyc'd to see my day and was glad But beside that Grandfathers and Grandmothers are to be understood and other the Stocks from whence we came there is no doubt but Kings and all that are in Authority are included in the same general Names Witness first their being in the place of Fathers to those who are under their Dominion For though as Moses sometime told God they do not beget their People if we understand it with reference to their Natural one yet as their Civil Birth is from them so they carry them in their bosom as a nursing Father beareth the sucking Child as the same God commanded the angry Moses Num. 11.12 Again As Kings are in the place of Fathers to their People especially in respect of their Tuition so the Authority of Kings is a Branch of the Paternal one and succeeded into the Place of it Of which beside the Testimony * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vid. Sanders de Oblig Conscient Praelect 7. sect 16. of Aristotle who was no Friend of Kingly Government and the great number of Kings that was anciently in every little Country and particularly in the Land of Canaan we may discern evident Marks in the Authority of Fathers even after the Empire was otherwise dispos'd of these having anciently the Power of Life and Death which is one of the principal Flowers of the Regal Diadem Now forasmuch as Kings are not onely in the place of Fathers to their People but vested in that Authority which was originally and naturally theirs it is but reasonable to think that when God commanded to honour these his Intention was to include the other as who beside their resemblance to them had also the best part of their Authority Next to Kings and Princes consider we our Spiritual Fathers even those who beget us to Piety and to God concerning whom there can be no place for doubt that they ought to be understood in those Fathers we are here commanded to revere For if our Earthly Father is to have Honour those certainly ought not to go
without it who beget us to an infinitely better Being To all which if we add that the Decalogue is a Summary of all Moral Duties as well those which respect our Neighbour as those which have an aspect upon God so there can be no doubt not onely that the former are included but all other our Superiours whether in Authority or Dignity or Age Because as the Honour of these may be fairly reduc'd to this Commandment as I shall shew more at large when I come to handle them apart so there is no other Commandment to which they can if you except onely the Honour of Husbands which may have a place in that Commandment which forbids violation of it 2. Having thus shewn what is meant by that Father and Mother which this Commandment requires us to honour I come now to inquire what is the importance of that Honour which we are under an Obligation to exhibit it being likely enough where the Objects thereof are so various that there is some variety in that Honour which is due To find out therefore the full importance of it I will inquire 1. Whether under the Affection of Honour any other be understood And 2. Whether the Expressions thereof be not equally due with the Affections themselves For the Resolution of the former whereof the first thing I shall offer is the primary Notion of the Hebrew Word we render Honour which the Masters of that Language inform us signifies to be heavy or weigh so and consequently in Piel not to account lightly of to esteem of as a thing of weight and moment Now though in the common acception of the Phrase that be most accommodable to that Honour by which we have chosen to express it yet it contains within the compass of it all other Respects which arise from any considerable Quality of the Thing we so value that is to say as well those which arise from its loveliness or terribleness as from the eminency of its Nature and Authority For if we give any Thing or Person its due weight and moment we must also if they be lovely afford them as great and intense a Love or if terrible fear them proportionably to it Whence it is that what is here Honour thy father and mother is in Lev. 19.3 express'd by fear or reverence them and accordingly is no less usually set to denote the Duty we owe to our Parents than that which is here made use of to express it But beside the Comprehensiveness of the Hebrew Word with the Addition of God's expressing our Duty as well by Fear as Honour it is to be observ'd that there is not in Parents a greater ground for any thing than Love witness the tenderness they have over us and particularly that which the Mother hath For if so Love must be suppos'd to be as much a Duty as any thing and consequently to be included in that Affection which is requir'd To all which if we add That it is not unusual under one Species to understand all of the same Genus so no doubt can remain but under the Name of Honour all the former Requisites are contain'd For the Commandment we have now before us being one of those which were intended as an Abstract of the whole Duty of Man it is in reason to comprehend the whole of our Duty to our Superiours and therefore also because not otherwise to be done to set that Species of our Duty for all the rest But beside that the Affection of Honour includes all the rest that are due from us to our Parents they are in like manner to be suppos'd to include the Expressions of them and particularly the Expressions of Honour of which beside the usual acceptation of the Word Honour which together with the Esteem of the Mind connotes the Expressions of it we may fetch a Proof from the Nature of the Affections of the Soul and the necessity of their exerting themselves in outward Acts For as the Affections of the Soul are naturally operative and seek out proper ways to express themselves so unless they do they are of little or rather of no use to whom they are commanded to be exhibited For what avails Charity to a distressed Person if it shew not it self in Alms and other such like Expressions of it Or what satisfaction can an honourable Esteem bring to our Parents if it contains it self in the Mind where it is neither to be discern'd nor can produce any Advantage to them But because to make it evident that the Expressions of Honour are requir'd no better way can be taken than by instancing in the Expressions themselves before I leave this Head I will attempt the Probation of it in each beginning with the Expression of it in Outward Gestures For thus Lev. 19.32 we are commanded to rise up before the hoary head and to honour the face of the old man For if we are to do that before the Face of the Old Man much more before the Face of our Natural Parent or him that is the Father of our Country From Reverence in Gesture pass we to the same testified in Words which we shall find to be no less a Duty than the former witness the several Cautions that are given against cursing our Natural or speaking evil of our Civil Parent For that shews our Words to be under a Law as to that particular and consequently because they are equally capable of honouring our Parents that they ought to be employ'd to that purpose The same is much more evident concerning our Actions and particularly concerning yielding Obedience to their Commands For as a due apprehension of their Authority doth naturally lead us to yield Obedience to those Commands that have their Authority stamp'd upon them so that this Expression of our Honour was intended St. Paul plainly shews Ephes 6.1 2. For inferring as he doth the Justice of Obeying our Parents from this very Commandment we have now before us he supposes Obedience to their Commands to be a part of that Honour which this Commandment requires us to give In like manner forasmuch as where submission to chastisement is not there can be no due apprehension of their Authority the opposing our selves thereto being a denial of it and therewith of the Justice of their Proceedings it follows that to honour our Parents includes that Expression also and we are not onely to be obedient to their Will but suffer without murmuring under the Inflictions of it Such are the Superiours whom we are requir'd to honour such the Honour and other Duties which we are by the same Commandment enjoyn'd to pay Nothing remains toward a general Explication of it but to inquire 3. Whether Superiours may not read their Duty also in it Which Question is the rather to be ask'd because setting aside this Commandment there is no other to which it can be reduc'd But as for that cause it is but reasonable to seek it here where the Duties of their
shall by and by have occasion to confirm it that God hath endu'd the Husband with Authority over the Wife and commanded her to pay Obedience to it But because it is not impossible Men may arrogate to themselves a greater Authority than ever God intended them or exercise it more fully and with greater rigour than they ought therefore it may not be amiss in describing the peculiar duties of the Husband to shew him what kind of Authority he hath how it is to be exercis'd and about what For answer to which I say first that the Authority of the Husband over the Wife is not coercive but directive that is to say an Authority which priviledges him to command but not to constrain her to Obedience For being given by God to Man as a Companion * Malach. 2.14 and a helper and which is more in such a degree as to become one with him it is unreasonable to think he should have such a power over her as to constrain her to a compliance by force and violence A forcible Treatment degrading her from the condition of a Mate and ranking her among Subjects or Servants Neither will it suffice to say that so also will the laying of Commands because according to the usual saying par in parem non habet potestatem which is alike true as to Commands and Coercions For beside that by the Divine Institution the Man is priviledg'd to rule over her as you may see Gen. 3.16 beside that in this case there is not a perfect parity as the rule before spoken of shews the power of Command is not only not destructive of the conjugal Society but absolutely necessary to the maintaining of it For inasmuch as the Married parties may both entertain different apprehensions concerning such things as are to be done and also take up different resolutions concerning them if there were not a power of ruling somewhere it would be in the power of either party to obstruct the common good of both But as there is not the same necessity of a coercive Power partly because the Husband hath the Law of God to back his Commands and partly because not without a sufficient Power from the Laws of the place he lives in to be able to effect his own purposes so it is perfectly inconsistent with that Society and fellowship into which the Wife is assumed by him It may suffice the Husband that he hath the power of Commanding and in case of refusal that of Reproof and Admonition as which those of far less Authority are not excluded from but other coercion than that no Law of God gives him and is not therefore to be arrogated by him The Authority of the Husband over the Wife being thus explain'd and shewn to consist in Commands Admonitions and Reproofs proceed we to enquire how this Authority is to be exercis'd the second thing propos'd to be discoursed of For the resolution whereof though I might again take my measures from that Partnership into which we have said the Wife to be admitted yet I shall choose rather to shape my Discourse by that Love which the Husband is every where commanded to shew her who is so admitted by him For Love where it is either finding or making Persons equal especially where there is not too great an imparity between the Parties it will follow that the Commands or Admonitions of the Husband are not generally to be delivered in imperious terms and such as savour more of Authority than Kindness St. Paul having taught us by his own behaviour toward Philemon that though a Man may have power to Command yet where that will serve the turn for Love's sake he should rather entreat and not so much constrain as invite them to a compliance I say not the same where she whom God hath commanded to obey shews her self utterly averse from a compliance For in such a case to be too officious were to make himself contemptible and not only so but that Authority which God hath vested in him Only as we learn from St. Paul elsewhere * Col. 3.19 even here also a mean is to be used and though nothing hinders him to express himself in terms suitable to his own Authority yet no Law either of God or Man allows him to be bitter against her The third and last particular comes now to be discours'd of even about what the Authority of a Husband is to be conversant which if we may judge of by the obedience the Wife is required to pay appears to be every thing as you may see Eph. 5.24 But as the same Apostle elsewhere where he entreats of that very Argument adds by way of limitation as it is fit in the Lord Col. 3.18 thereby manifestly restraining the Authority of the Husband to all such things as are within the bounds of our Religion so Reason requires the limiting it to such things also as are suitable to that fellowship into which she is admitted From whence as it will follow that the Husband ought not to impose upon her such things as are more proper for a Servant or Vassal than a Wife so also that he is generally to leave the administration of Houshold affairs to her alone care and management Because as I have often said she is admitted into a Copartnership with him which cannot well be salv'd if that should be taken from her and because both St. Paul 1 Tim. 5.14 and the Laws of Nations appropriate the guiding of the house to her According to that known Proverb which the Roman Matrons were wont to use when they were brought home to their Husbands Houses Vbi tu Caius ibi ego Caia Where you are a Master I expect to be a Mistress and enjoy the priviledges of such 2. Having thus shewn the Duty of the Husband to the Wife as to that Authority wherewith he is invested over her it remains that we enquire what is due from her to him as well in respect of his Authority as her own necessary subjection to it Now though that be easie enough to infer from the foregoing Discourse and may therefore seem to require the less pains in the investigating of it yet I think it not amiss if it were only to observe a due proportion between them to be as particular in the declaration of it as I was before in that of the Authority and Duty of the Husband In order whereunto I say 1. That inasmuch as God hath invested the Man with Authority over the Wife it must be look'd upon as highly irreligious in her to be so far from submitting to it as on the contrary to usurp Authority over him Such a Behaviour bidding defiance to the order of God and Nature because not only thwarting but perverting it And accordingly as St. Paul not only proscribes it as a thing unlawful but moreover represents it as a thing not to be suffer'd 1 Tim. 2.12 So he hath also given us there to understand what is to be
fulness saith S. John have we all received and grace for grace Joh. 1.16 Now as the assistance of the divine grace removes all pretexts of our inability to perform what he requires and consequently leaves those inexcusable who come short in the doing of it so can it not but be a powerful inducement to yield obedience to his Laws from whom that assistance is derived For when he who is the giver of the Law is also assisting to the doing of it when he doth as the Apostle speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and bear a part of that burthen which he hath laid upon us what ingratitude must it be to withdraw our shoulders from it and refuse to obey him who doth not only impose a light burthen upon us but contributes also to the sustaining of it Thus though the deliverance from Egypt cannot be pressed upon us as an inducement to yield obedience to this Royal Law yet there want not others of the like nature but of far greater force to endear its obedience to us and then I hope it will be no diminution to it if instead of I am the Lord thy God who brought thee out of the land of Egypt out of the house of bondage we substitute I am the Lord thy God who beside the common benefit of thy creation have delivered thee from sin and hell and both given thee a more ingenuous and easy service and ability to undergo it THE FIRST COMMANDMENT THE FIRST COMMANDMENT Thou shalt have no other Gods * or before me but me PART I. The Contents The Commandment divided into three Capital Precepts I. That we have the one true God for our God II. That we look upon the God of Israel as such III. That we have no other Gods beside him Of the first Capital Precept and what is meant by the having the One true God for our God which is shewn in the General to be no other than our owning him as such An address to a more Particular Explication of it where is premised a brief account of the Nature and Attributes of God how the knowledge thereof is to be attained and of what necessity such a knowledge is IT is easy to observe upon a Superficial view of this first Commandment that the whole of it may be comprised in these three Capital Precepts 1. That we have the one true God for our God 2. That we look upon the God of Israel as such and 3. and lastly that we have no other Gods besides him For as the last of these is the very letter of the Commandment and therefore not at all to be doubted of so the two former though not expressed yet are manifestly implied in the Commandment and the preamble to it For inasmuch as The God of Israel prefaceth it with the declaration of his being the Lord our God and in the body thereof forbids the having of any other before or besides himself he manifestly supposeth the having of himself and the true as well as the not having any other In the mean time if that alone be not sufficient to perswade the rule before laid down and the abstract which Christ hath given of the duties of the first Table will For if every negative in the Decalogue do include the affirmative if the loving the Lord our God which is no other than the God of Israel with all our heart and mind and strength be the abstract or summary of the Commandments of the first Table either that which is an abstract or summary must contain more in it than that of which it is one or we must be supposed to be obliged to the having the one true God and the God of Israel as well as to the not having of any other I. I begin with the first of these even the having the one true God for our God prescinding from the consideration of the God of Israel's being he Where not to insist upon the difference that seems to be between the Hebrew and our English because the difference is meerly verbal it being all one in sense There shall not be to thee any other Gods and Thou shalt not have any other Gods before me I will proceed to enquire both in the general and in particular what is meant by the having of a God 1. Now the force of that expression which will furnish us with a general explication will soon appear if these two things be considered 1. That that which is required of us must be somewhat that depends upon our will and 2. That the authority of God depends no farther upon that than as to our owning or acknowledging it Forasmuch as nothing can be the matter of a command but what is in the power of our will either to embrace or refuse and the authority of God depends no farther upon our will than as to our owning or acknowledging it it follows that when we are commanded to have the one true God for our God according as the affirmative part of this Precept imports the meaning thereof can be no other than that we own him as such as on the other side that when we are required not to have any other Gods beside that we own no other in that relation Neither is the expression here made use of any whit disagreeing from what we have said to be intended by it For as in the language of S. Paul men are said to be the servants of him to whom they yield obedience so by the same proportion of speech to have him for their God whom they own and revere as such And indeed though in a sense we may be all said to have one and the same God because we are all subject to the same yet in strictness of speech no man can be said to have any one for his God whom he doth not some way revere as such For the word have supposing our admittance of that which we are said to have if we do not admit of him and his authority neither can we be said to have him and consequently neither to perform that which this Precept requireth of us Add hereunto which will farther confirm this notion what our Saviour hath affirmed to be the sum and substance of the first table of the Decalogue for if the duties of the first table be comprised in that Precept Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul and strength according as our Saviour hath affirmed then must the having him for our God which is the first and chiefest Precept of it be our owning him as such our having that affection and esteem for him which is due unto a God 2. Having thus shewn in the general what it is to have the Lord for our God even to own and revere him as such we are in the next place to enquire more particularly how that is to be done and what respect is due unto him as a God But because that is not to be known and much less to be
Beings but is the Fountain of whatsoever is either dreadful or lovely in them hence it comes to pass that to own him for our God we are consequently to fear and love all other things with respect to the Divine Majesty from whom they derive their several Excellencies at the same time we fear or love them looking up to the Almighty and regarding them not so much for themselves as for that Majesty and Goodness which it pleas'd the Almighty to imprint upon them PART VI. How we may and ought to own God in our Bodies This done first by yielding Obedience to his Commands and particularly to such as have a more immediate aspect upon him Of which number are those concerning Invocation Praise Swearing by or Vowing to him The like effected by presenting God with external Notes of our Submission whether they be such as are performed within the Body as Bowing Kneeling and the like or such as though the Body be instrumental to yet pass from thence to other things Such as are the Building or Adorning of Temples and the setting apart certain Times for God's Worship and Service the Consecrating of certain Persons to preside in it and respecting them when they are so HAving shewn in the foregoing Discourses what Tribute is due to God from our Souls and particularly from our Vnderstandings Wills and Affections which are the several Faculties thereof it remains that we inquire 2. What Tribute is due to him from our Bodies and how we are to own him for our God in them Which is either 1. By yielding Obedience to his Commands and particularly to such as have a more immediate aspect upon him or 2. By presenting him with some external Note or Sign of our Submission The former whereof is by some call'd the Honour of the Deed the latter the Honour of the Sign I. Of the former of these there cannot be the least doubt that it is requir'd of us toward the owning him for our God For beside that the Name of God is a Name of Authority as well as Eminency and consequently implieth a necessity of Obedience in those to whom he hath that Relation God himself doth here make use of it as an Obligation to all those Commandments which we are now upon the consideration of he requiring our having no other Gods besides himself with other the Duties that follow upon the score of his being the Lord our God according as was before observ'd in his Preface to the Imposition of them But so that I may not stand upon a thing so plain doth that Lord of ours expresly require us to own him our Saviour putting by the Temptations of Satan to fall down before himself by saying It is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him yea him onely shalt thou serve Matth. 4.10 Now though what hath been said extend to all God's Commands because they all bear the stamp of his Authority yet is it especially to be understood of yielding Obedience to such Commands as have a more immediate aspect upon God these more immediately implying the owning of that Authority he hath over the Sons of Men. For the fuller declaration therefore of our own Duty in this behalf I will now set those Commands before you and shew how we own him for our God by yielding Obedience to them 1. To begin with Invocation or Praeyer one of the prime Acts of God's Worship and which therefore is of all others the most frequently and earnestly inculcated concerning which it is easie to shew how necessary it is to pay him the acknowledgment of a God For inasmuch as all Men desire the Preservation of their own Being inasmuch as that desire necessarily prompts them to look abroad for it if they think not themselves able to procure it in case any Man do not thus seek it of God it must be because he doth not believe it to come from him but either from himself or from meer Natural Causes But what other is this than to deny that God from whom every good and perfect gift cometh and to make a God either of ones self or Nature There being nothing more essential to the Divine Nature than the being the Author of all those Blessings by which the whole Creation is either maintain'd or adorn'd The same is to be said of that which is sometime reckon'd as a part of Prayer because a necessary attendant of it that is to say of giving Thanks to him for those Blessings by which we are at any time made happy He who refuseth thus to honour God in effect denying the coming of them from him because Nature it self hath taught us to make this return wheresoever we have been oblig'd If there be any thing farther to be observ'd concerning these two Acknowledgments it will fall in more pertinently when we come to entreat of The Prayer of our Lord to which therefore I shall reserve the consideration of it 2. From Prayer and Thanksgiving therefore pass we to Praise another Act of Adoration and no less frequently enjoyn'd And no wonder if we consider either the end for which the Tongue was given or its aptness to set forth the Excellencies of the Almighty For as if we consider the practice of Holy Men it may seem to have been given for nothing more than for commemorating the Excellencies of the Divine Nature so by the variety of its Expressions it is fitted to set forth all those Excellencies of which the Divine Nature is compos'd as neither wanting Words to express his Justice and Mercy and the like nor yet that which makes them more Divine the Infiniteness thereof 3. To Praising the Divine Majesty subjoyn we Swearing by him another Act of Adoration and no less expresly requir'd for so we find the Prophet Moses distinctly commanding and that too in the same Period where he prescribes his Fear and Service for thou shalt fear the Lord thy God saith he and serve him and swear by his Name Deut. 6.13 And indeed if we consider the nature of an Oath we shall not in the least doubt of the manner of our owning him for our God by it For an Oath being nothing else than the calling God to witness to the Truth of what we affirm he that swears by him doth not onely acknowledge God to be superior to himself but also to be a Witness of infallible Truth a Searcher of our Hearts and a most just and powerful Avenger of all Perjury and Falshood no one appealing to a Witness that is not of greater Authority than himself and with much less reason for the sincerity of his own Affirmations but where that sincerity may be known or any deviation from it be punish'd if he transgress it For what satisfaction could an Oath be to any Man if Men did not presume God to be an Avenger of Perjury and Falshood as well as a Discerner of the Truth And accordingly as for the most part such Clauses as this are generally
that is to say of thinking honourably of and expressing it in our words and gestures as moreover no question hath or can be made of that part of Honour which hath the name of Piety because Children must generally be supposed both to be of years and of a distinct Family before they can be in a capacity to relieve their Parents so as little question would be made of Obedience if men did but consider that the principal ground of it doth always abide for it being alike true at all times that the one is thy Father that begot thee and the other thy Mother that conceiv'd thee it must be alike true because that is the ground of thy Obedience that thou art always to give obedience to their commands If therefore Children be at any time free from the tie of Honour it must be as to the manner or measure which accordingly I come now to consider Thus for instance Though Reverence be always due from us to our Parents and accordingly hath by good Children been always paid to them yet there is no necessity it should be express'd after the same manner by one of full age as by one who is still under Pupillage because the same gestures become not one of full age that are suitable enough to the tenderness of the other Whence it is that though Children in their minority are always bare before their Parents yet those of Riper age have by a general custom which must be judge of matters of this nature been indulg'd a greater liberty as to that particular even by the consent of Parents themselves In like manner that I may instance in the measure Though Children dwelling in their Parents houses and under their power be to yield Obedience to all their commands and particularly those that concern the Family whereof they are Members whence it is that we find the Father in the Parable Mat. 21.28 commanding his Sons to go and work in his Vineyard yet there is not the same tie upon those that are sent out of it that have a Wife and Family of their own to provide for that are delivered over to the tuition of other persons or in fine have any publick charge upon them Not upon those that are sent out of the Family because as sent out with their leave so of necessity to intend their own proper Affairs Not upon those Children that have a Wife and Family of their own to provide for because beside the foremention'd reason by the command of God himself to forsake Father and Mother and cleave unto their Wives Gen. 2.24 The same is to be said much more of Daughters when Married because not only equally oblig'd to cleave to their Husbands but also subjected to their commands Whence it is that when Pharaoh's Daughter was brought to be a Wife to Solomon we find her exhorted to forget her own people and her Fathers house and to look upon and worship Solomon as her Lord Psal 45.10 11. But neither thirdly is there the same tie upon Children that are subjected to the Tuition of others as to those that are under their Fathers roof and power as will appear if we consider them as made Servants to another or pass'd over into another Family by Adoption for being by the Parents consent subjected to other Masters or Fathers they are now no more theirs who gave them Being but those Masters or adopted Fathers to whom they are so transferr'd This only would be added That as the Children spoken of in the former Instances are only free from their Fathers commands by means of those new Relations they have contracted so they are consequently no farther free from yielding Obedience to their Fathers commands than the necessity of serving those Relations doth exact And therefore if a Son or Daughter that is sent abroad to intend their own Affairs or one that is entred into Marriage or made a Servant or a Son and Daughter by Adoption if I say any of these have opportunity and power to serve their natural Parents there is no doubt they ought to do so no less than those who continue under their Roof For the exception of their obedience being only in regard to those new Relations they have contracted according to that known Rule of the Lawyers Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis it must strengthen the tie of Obedience where those Relations do no way hinder The only Children to be accounted for are such as have a publick charge upon them whether in the Church or in the State For though Children are not to enter into these without the consent of their Parents if under their Fathers Tuition or at least not without the call of their and their Fathers Superiours yet being entred they are in reason to prefer the discharge of their Place before any Commands of their Father the Private Good being in reason to yield to the Publick the Commands of Parents to those of Kings and Princes Onely as if the Child can without the neglect or debasement of his Charge fulfil his Fathers Commands there is no doubt he is oblig'd so to do so there is so much of Authority in the Name of a Father that no Dignity whatsoever will make a good Son forget it where it is not contrary to a more important Concern 5. The Duty of Honour being thus explain'd and shewn in what manner and measure it is incumbent upon Children it may not be amiss to subjoyn somewhat concerning Fear and Love which I have said to be also a part of their Duty Onely because they are rather Accessaries than Principal parts of Childrens Duties I will be so much the shorter in describing the Obligation they have upon them That we are to fear our Father and Mother the Scripture hath told us Lev. 19.3 and not without cause if we consider either that it is a part of Honour or that there is in Parents a just Object of it For as Fear is a confession of the Power of those whom we have such an apprehension of so there is Power enough in Parents to excite that Passion in us and make us as well to dread as esteem them Of this nature is first the Power of Chastisement whether as to the Body or Possessions of the Son For as I shall afterwards shew that Parents have Authority to inflict either so Experience makes it evident that they want not Power especially as to the latter Chastisement it being ordinarily in the power of Parents to withhold their Possessions from such as are disobedient to them But of all the things we are to fear in a Parent there is certainly nothing more requiring it than the Power they have with God to procure a greater Punishment of our Disobedience than they themselves are able to inflict For though as the Scripture speaks the Curse causeless shall not come yet both Reason and Experience warrant us to believe that the Curses of Parents shall not be without effect where they
proceed upon a just Cause For be it which is true enough that such Curses are not lightly to be us'd be it that generally they are not suitable either to the Tenderness of a Father or the Spirit of the Gospel which will render them so much the more unlikely to have effect yet as it is evident from St. Paul's denouncing a Curse against Simon Magus and Alexander the Coppersmith that Superiours are not wholly forbid the use of them so that it is not improper for Fathers towards their disobedient Children their being a kind of Gods to us may serve for abundant evidence But then if we add thereto Noah's cursing the Posterity of Cham for making a mock of his Nakedness and that Effect which it had upon them in after-times if we moreover reflect * Jer. Taylor Duct Dubit l. 3. c. 5. Rule 1. upon the sad Examples which Heathen Stories have represented to us in the Children of Oedipus Amintor and Theseus who grew miserable upon their Fathers Curses lastly if we add that the same thing was observ'd by the Jews one of whom even the Son of Sirach observes that the Curse of the Mother rooteth out Foundations Ecclus. 3.10 so we shall not need to doubt of the Effect of their Curses and therefore neither of their being the Object of our Fear For if as the Greek Poet observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Curses of Parents are grievous upon the Earth we have reason enough to fear lest their Curses should sometime fall upon our Heads The onely thing worthy our farther inquiry is how this Fear of ours ought to be express'd which is in short by our carefulness to please them in all things For as by so doing we shall best declare the Fear we have of them Fear naturally prompting Men to seek the Favour of those they have such an apprehension of so we shall thereby secure our selves from the Effects of their Displeasure and which is more to be dreaded from the Effects of that of God From the Duty of Fear pass we to that of Love which we shall find to be no less incumbent upon us than the former as because our Saviour hath reduc'd the Whole of the Law to Love so because our Parents are of all others the justest Object of it Witness the extraordinary Love they have naturally for us their many and weighty and constant Demonstrations of it their taking care of us when we are not able to provide for themselves their continuing that care over us even when we are their furnishing us from time to time with all things necessary for our Temporal Happiness their instilling into our Minds what may make for our Eternal one their bearing with the weakness and peevishness of our Infancy and Childhood their enduring with much long-suffering the disobedience and stubbornness of our riper Years lastly their perpetual fears lest any Evil should betide us their frequent and importunate Prayers to avert any Evil from us For as out of the Bowels of a Parent such a Love will hardly be met with though you should search for it even in the most tender and affectionate ones whence it is that God to commend the Love he hath to us doth for the most part assume to himself the Person of a Father so for a recompence in the same as St. Paul speaks it is but requisite that our Hearts should be equally enlarged and express it self in the same or the like Instances that is to say in providing for them when they are not able to provide for themselves in endeavouring to lessen their Care and Trouble when they in some measure are in bearing with the weaknesses and peevishness of their declining Years in doing what in us lies either to remove or abate them in furnishing them when they lie upon their Sick-beds with our Assistance and Comfort in supplying the defects of our Endeavours by begging the Aid of the Divine lastly in giving them the satisfaction of seeing their Care and Labour successfully employ'd whilst they behold those for whom they have thus labour'd travelling equally for their Happiness and reflecting back upon them that kindly Heat which they sometime gave So doing we shall at the same time give a proof both of our Love and of our Honour pay them the Affection which is due to the Bowels of a Father and a Mother and the Respect which belongs to their Authority Now though if we look no further than the Person of our Parents what hath been already said concerning their Fear and Love and Honour will comprehend within the compass of it the whole of our Duty to them yet because a Man may be lov'd and honour'd in his Relations and Dependents as well as in his own proper Person and in like manner hated and despis'd hence it comes to pass that to complete our Duty we are to extend our Love and Honour unto them according as their several Relations do exact The sequel whereof will be 1. The paying Honour unto those which stand upon the same Level with our Parents Thus for instance though an Uncle or an Aunt can claim no Reverence or Love by vertue of the Letter of this Commandment yet inasmuch as they are the Brothers and Sisters of my Father or Mother and the Sons and Daughters of the same Common Parents if I either love or honour my Parents or theirs I must afford these a portion of it because of their near Relation In like manner though a Mother-in-law can claim no Reverence or Love of her self because none of the Stock from whence I came yet a Regard is due to her as being made one with him whom this Commandment requires me to revere Which Particular I the rather observe because contrary to all right those are usually both hated and despis'd For how can he honour his Father who despises the one half of him yea such a one as by the Laws of God and Man is become one Person with him 2. Again As Love and Honour is due to those who stand upon the same Level with my Parents by reason of their Proximity to them so an Affection though not an Honour is due from us to our Brethren and Sisters because descended from the same Common Parents and no less the Object of their Love To whom therefore as it concerns me to shew my self affectionate if I would oblige my Parents so if I shew my self churlish to them I wound my Parents Bowels through their Sides if those Parents be yet alive but if they be not their Honour 3. It is to be observ'd thirdly as the result of the foremention'd Principle That though the same Love be not due to Cousins and other remoter Kindred that is to Brethren and Sisters yet there is a Love due to them by reason of those Common Grandfathers and Great-grandfathers from whom both they and we are descended For inasmuch as they though at a greater distance contributed to our Being and consequently
is indeed an excellent Portion or if that will not suffice or be not suitable to their Condition that they lay up for them that which Solomon tells us answers all things Otherwise they will leave them unprovided for as to that state which stands most in need of it Neither will it avail to say there is no reason the Fathers care should reach beyond his own life when we have before said that the Child's obedience generally ought not For as I have before shewn that the Honour of a Parent ought to abide after his death and Obedience to his Commands also so far as that is concerned in it so it is but requisite that answerably to that a Fathers care should extend beyond his own time and not only provide for his Children during his own life but as much as in him lies afterwards especially when the necessities of his Child which is the ground of making provision for them is then likely to be greater than before The only thing to be enquired into in this affair is after what proportion a Father is to provide for them For the resolution whereof though I might have referr'd you to what was said before concerning making provision for them in the Parents life time because giving us to understand that both the one and the other ought to be according to the condition of the Father yet I thought it not amiss to bring it anew before you if it were only to add this necessary limitation to a Fathers care to wit that he ought not so to see to the providing for his Children as to forget to minister of his substance to the more publick concernments of Church or State or the pressing and instant necessities of those charitable Objects he hath before him For as both the one and the other ought rather to be regarded than the leaving to our Children a pompous and glorious Estate so he that forgets not to do good and to communicate provides much better for his Children than he who will not suffer any the least part of his Estate to pass away from them Money lent to God as all that is so employ'd is * Pro. 19.17 being as Master Herbert hath well observ'd ‖ Country Parson chap. 10. plac'd surer for the Childs advantage than if it were given to the Chamber of London which was in his time the best security in the world 2. The second duty of Parents follows even the institution of their Children in Life and Manners which is a provision for their better part their Souls concerning which therefore I will shew first the Authority by which it stands the Duties it contains and the Inconveniences that attend the omission of it And first if we enquire by what Authority the Institution of Children stands we shall find it to be by the same whereby all other moral Duties do that is to say by the Law of Nature and Revelation both the one and the other binding it upon the Consciences of Parents and that too more stronger than the former That the Law of Nature doth the Argument before alledg'd for Parents making provision for their Subsistence is to me an abundant Evidence For the design of God in our Birth being the happiness of those to whom he gives a Being he must consequently be supposed to have enjoyn'd the adding of those things which may serve for the procuring of it Which being in an especial manner to be understood of a holy Institution because our Eternal happiness doth depend upon it will make the addition of that even by Natures Law more incumbent upon Parents than the providing for their Temporal one The same is no less evident from the positive Laws of God as well those of the Old Testament as the New in the former whereof * Deut. 6.7.11.19 we find Parents commanded to teach Gods Commandments diligently unto their Children and to talk to them of them when they sit in their House and when they walk by the way when they lie down and when they rise up in the latter ‖ Eph 6.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod significat institutionem per poenas vid. Grot. in loc which is tantamount though expressed in fewer words that they should bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. From the Authority by which this Duty stands pass we to the particulars it contains which may be reduced to these Three Heads Instruction Command and Example the first to shew them how they ought to Live and Act the two latter to induce them to the practice of it For as it is impossible for Children to live well till they know what it is to do so or know it without a precedent Institution they neither bringing with them into the world a knowledge of their Duty nor being able through the tenderness of their Understandings to find it without the help of others so the pravity of their Natures makes it but necessary that they should be Oblig'd as well as Instructed and Encourag'd as well as Oblig'd The former whereof as it is best done by the Parents commands which till the minds of Children come to be debauch'd have a mighty influence upon them so the latter by the Parents shewing themselves a Pattern of those things which they bind upon them by their Instruction and Commands nothing prevailing more with Children than Example doth nor any Example more than that of a Father Which therefore as it is but necessary that Parents should superadd to compleat the Institution of their Children so woful experience shews that the want of that alone makes all other ways of Institution fruitless it being rare to find a Child who is not more debauch'd by his Fathers ill Example than regulated by his wholesome Instruction and Commands Having thus shewn as well what the Institution of Children implies as by what Authority it stands it remains only to give it so much the more weight that I represent some of those inconveniencies which attend the omission of it For to say nothing at all that that Father is like to be ill serv'd himself who hath not taught his Children to revere his and their common parent God nor yet that the omission of a Holy Institution may expose them to the taking such Courses as will bring little comfort either to their Children or themselves I shall desire such Parents to consider how they will be able at that great day to look those Children in the face whom they have begotten only to Eternal Torments For as if they have the bowels of a Father it cannot but be an infinite affliction to them to see those who are a part of themselves plung'd in Eternal Torments so if they have any the least shame it will be an equal confusion to them to consider that they became so by their means even by theirs who ought in reason to have done their utmost to make them happy and enstate them in Gods Kingdom as well
Archangel had it in such abhorrence that when contending with the Devil who was sometime a glorious Angel he disputed with him about the Body of Moses yet he durst not bring even against him a railing accusation but said The Lord rebuke thee I will conclude this Particular with that of St. Peter as well for the affinity it hath with the fore-quoted Passage of St. Jude as because it will add more strength to the Prohibition of Evil speaking 'T is in 2 Pet. 2.10 11. For as he there reckons those that despise Government amongst such unjust ones whom God hath reserv'd to the day of Judgment to be punish'd so resuming their Character anew he tells us among other things that they are not afraid to speak evil of Dignities plainly intimating the so speaking to be a thing which is not onely unlawful for a Christian to do but to such a degree also as that he ought to tremble at the very thoughts of it adding moreover that the Angels themselves however mightier and greater do not bring a railing accusation against them before the Lord. They may perhaps according to their Office represent their Crimes before the Almighty they may for God's Glory and the sake of the Oppressed invoke the Divine Majesty to avenge himself upon them But remembring that how criminal soever they may be they are God's Vicegerents and of his own Divine Appointment they abstain from all reviling Speeches and rather accuse their Enormities than their Persons Now forasmuch as even the Angels who are mightier either than us or Princes themselves do yet religiously abstain from all reproachful Language of them forasmuch as Michael the Archangel durst not so treat the Devil himself because as anciently a glorious Image of the Almighty so at this very time an Instrument of his Vengeance upon ungodly Men forasmuch as both St. Peter and St. Jude reckon those who speak evil of Dignities amongst the worst yea the most obnoxious to the Divine Justice and St. Peter moreover intimates the so speaking to be a thing which a Christian ought to tremble at the thought of it is easie to guess that Princes as they are in no small consideration with God so they ought to be had in no small veneration with those over whom God hath appointed them to preside PART VI. Of that Declaration of our Esteem which is made by Obedience to the Commands of Princes the Necessity whereof is evidenc'd from their Legislative Power as that again from the Scriptures attributing that Power to Princes and from the impossibility of compassing otherwise the Ends of their Institution The same Obedience evidenced to be necessary from express Precepts of Scripture That every Soul whatsoever is under the tie of this Obedience as well of the Clergie as the Laity The onely particular Limits of this Obedience an express Prohibition from the Almighty or those which the Prince hath set to himself Of the Authority of Princes in Religious Matters which is either Indirect or Direct the former whereof is evidenc'd from the Influence Religious Matters have upon the State and which therefore are to be so far under their Inspection as the Weal of the State is concerned in them The Result of this Power the Calling or Limiting of Religious Assemblies the Appointing those that shall serve at the Altar in them or putting by those that are That Princes have also a Direct Authority in Religious Matters that is to say an Authority in them consider'd as such Where is also shewn what that Authority is and that it consists rather in encouraging or compelling those that preside in Religious Matters to do their respective Duties than to take upon themselves the Administration thereof The Result of which Authority is the Defending the Church from all both Foreign and Domestick Enemies the keeping the Members of it within their respective Duties and punishing with the Civil Sword those that shall refuse so to do the calling Councils to determine of Matters of Religion and giving force to those Things that shall be rightly determin'd by them The Accordance both of the Practice of this Kingdom and of the Doctrine of the Church with the foregoing Determination Of Submission to the Censures of Princes which is another Declaration of our Inward Esteem The Necessity thereof evidenc'd from the Power of Coercion in them which infers a like Necessity in the Subject of submitting to it Whether this Submission be to be understood where the Coercion is ill employ'd which is answered by distinguishing of Submission to wit as that is oppos'd to all Means of avoiding it or onely to forcible ones The former Submission no way necessary as appears by our Saviour's exhorting Men to flee in Case of Persecution and the Liberty that is given by the Laws to appeal to the Princes Courts of Judicature The latter Submission is of indispensible Duty as appears both by the Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient and Purest Church The like evidenc'd from the inconsistency of Resistance with Princes being the immediate Ministers of God with the End of their Institution and the Counsels of the Divine Providence The first because he who resisteth them endeavours to subject those who are God's immediate Ministers and therefore subject to no other so far at least unto himself as may secure him from the Effects of their Violence The second because leaving it in the power of the Subject to resist when he will himself which will make the Power of the Prince precarious and consequently because that depends upon it the Weal of the People which is the end for which all Governours were instituted The third because the Counsels of the Divine Providence are no less interessed in the Violence of Evil Princes than in the Power of Good Of the paying of Tribute to Princes and that it is both a Duty and a Declaration of our Esteem What Tribute to be paid to be judg'd of by the Laws IT having been before shewn That Honour in the Latitude of the Word comprehends Obedience to Commands it remains that we now inquire whether the Honour of Princes does so also by whom and in what measure that Obedience is to be paid 1. That Obedience is part of that Honour we are to give to Princes is evident from that Legislative Power which God hath given them over their respective Subjects For Laws being nothing else than Rules prescrib'd by those that give them for the regulating the Actions of those to whom they are if it be in the power of Princes to prescribe such Laws it must be the Duty of the Subject to obey them because that Power would be otherwise in vain Now that it is in the power of Princes to give such Laws to their Subjects will appear first of all from the Scriptures annexing this Power to them as the main of that Authority by which they shine Thus for instance when Jacob would describe the continuance of the Regal Dignity in Judah till
it ought to be exerted to wit not in determining of them according to their own will and pleasure and much less in invading the Office of the Priesthood which we know he that attempted was strucken with a Leprosie for but in defending the Church from all both Foraign and Domestick Enemies in keeping the Members of the Church within their respective Duties and punishing with the civil Sword those that shall refuse so to do in calling Councils to determine of matters of Religion and giving force to those things that shall be rightly determin'd by them For as more than these cannot be legitimately inferr'd from those places we have made use of to establish the Authority of Princes by so that they cannot rightly claim more the nature of the Church according as I have before stated it shews For since the Church by the Institution of Christ is endow'd with a power in determining in things relating to it self since also the secular Powers as well by their Baptism as the precepts of the Scripture are bound to be defenders of it for he who gives up himself to the Christian Religion doth thereby profess that he will perform his proper part in it and therefore if he be a King the part of a King it must needs be that their Authority in sacred matters should consist rather in obliging the several members of it to their respective duties than in determining of their own head concerning them The same is no less evident from the practice of Christian Princes in calling together a Council as often as any thing hath stood in need of a definition For as Mr. Thorndike * De ratione ac jure finiendi controversias hath well observ'd he who calls a Council of Bishops to make a Decree to receive a civil sanction from himself doth thereby profess as well that it belongs to the Church to determine in it as to himself to pass that Decree into a Law Which is so true as the same Mr. Thorndike ‖ Ibid. hath observ'd that though Constantius the Emperour would fain have undone what had been decreed by the Council of Nice yet he never attempted it but by Decrees of other Councils which shews what opinion was had of the Authority of the Church even by the Enemies of the Church it self These two things only seem necessary to be subjoin'd that we may give Christian Princes the whole of what is due to them 1. That it belongs to Princes to judge what is rightly or not rightly decreed by the Church and according as they shall judge either to give or withold their assent and 2. That though in things dubious or not at all determin'd by Councils the Prince is to expect the decision of the Church yet there is no necessity of so doing where the thing is evident from the word of God or hath been generally defin'd by former Councils For as where the word of God is clear the Prince need no other warrant who by that word it self is call'd upon to serve the Lord and add the force of his Sanction to the general Injunctions of it so where the thing hath been generally defin'd little doubt can be made of Princes passing what is so into a Law partly because it hath been in some measure defined by the Church and partly because it is to be presum'd the Church gives way to a more particular determination where the thing doth require a present definition or is not of such moment to require the calling of the Bishops from their several charges with the far greater detriment of the Church over which they are appointed to preside In the mean time as it is not to be deny'd that those Princes shall best provide for the peace of their own Consciences who shall not ordinarily determine of Ecclesiastical affairs without the consent of the Church or at least of some of the principal Bishops of it so we can never sufficiently commend the Institutions of this Kingdom whereas in the Parliament the place where all Laws are framed the Bishops have the principal place so the commands of King and Parliament in Ecclesiastical Affairs do for the most part follow the Canons dereed by our Convocations For after this manner both now and heretofore the Book of Common Prayers underwent the Examination of a Convocation before the use of it passed into a Law and extraordinary Forms of Prayers are approv'd by some Bishops before they have the Kings Mandate affix'd to them I will conclude this Discourse with the Doctrine of the Articles of our Church because exactly according with what I have before delivered For as the 20th of those Articles declares the Church to have power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in controversies of Faith so the 37th not only excludes from Princes the ministring either of Gods word or of the Sacraments but makes their Supremacy to consist in ruling all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restraining with the civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers To which as I know not what any reasonable man can oppose because so exactly distinguishing between the Churches Power and that of Princes so I see not how any reasonable man where the Authority of Princes keeps within these bounds can think himself exempted from yeilding obedience to it He who commits the care of the Church to secular Princes necessarily allowing them a superintendency over it and consequently also where that superintendency is not manifestly made use of to the prejudice of Religion obliging all the Members of the Church to yield obedience to their Commands How we are to honour Princes by our Obedience hath been at large declar'd It remains that we also shew both that we are and how we are to honour them with submission to their Censures Which will appear first of all from that Authority wherewith they are invested of drawing the Sword of Justice against Offenders For as an Authority to Command infers a necessity of Obedience in all those that are subjected to it so a Power of Coercion a like necessity of Submission to it in all those who are subjected to it The onely thing of difficulty is Whether that Submission be necessary where the Power of Coercion is us'd against those who seem to themselves and it may be not without reason to have done nothing to deserve it For inasmuch as the Sword of Justice is committed to Princes for the avenging of such onely as are Eyil doers it may seem but reasonable to infer that they who are not Evil doers are free from submitting themselves to the Stroke of it And indeed if the Question be concerning the avoiding of it by Flight there is no doubt it is in the power of the Subject who conceives himself not to have deserv'd it so to avoid if he can the falling under the Power of it Our Saviour having expresly given leave that if we be
evidenc'd from the prospering of Christianity under the Primitive Persecutions An Answer to that Plea which is made for Inseriour Magistrates resisting upon the account of their being Publick Persons and by the Prince himself Commissionated to execute Justice The former of the two Pretences evidenced to be vain because though the Inferiour Magistrate be a Publick Person in respect of his Fellow-Subjects yet he is but a Private one when considered with relation to the Supreme The Case of the Decree of a Judge prevailing against any private Order of the Prince shewn not to make at all for Inferiour Magistrates resisting the Supreme because the Prevalency of that Decree is founded upon the Presumption of its being the Will of the Prince rather than any private Order against it The latter Pretence of Inferiour Magistrates being Commissionated by the Supreme to punish Offenders shewn to be more vain than the former because it is not to be presum'd that he who by Divine and Humane Law is Supreme will Commissionate any Person against himself That famous Saying of Trajan to the Praefectus Praetorio Hoc pro me utere si rectè impero si malè contra me rather a piece of Ostentation than any real Intendment of his but however no way suitable to the Mouth of the Supreme Magistrate Another Plea for Resistance drawn from Princes swearing before their Coronation to Govern according to the Laws that seeming to imply a Compact between them and their Subjects upon the breach whereof on their part the Subjects may depart from their Allegiance and resist them in the Execution of their Power This Plea evidenced to be vain as to the Kings of England because fully such before their Coronation and the Reason of such Oaths declar'd The like Vanity shewn in that other Plea which alledgeth That some Kings are such rather in Title than Reality and consequently not Supreme in their Dominions Where the Supremacy of our own Kings is evidenced both from their Titles and their Actions Of the Honour of Inferiour Magistrates and what the Grounds thereof are which are shewn to be The Authority they have from God for the Deputing of Inferiour Magistrates and their actual Deputation of them The former of these evidenc'd from the impossibility of their discharging the Duty of their Place without it as the latter from their being God's Ministers in solidum in those Places where they are appointed to Preside Those Inferiour Magistrates which are invested by lesser Powers no prejudice to the forementioned Ground because those Powers do what they do by Commission from the Prince The Honours of the Inferiour Magistrate the same upon the matter for the Kind with those of the Supreme but different as to the Measure which also is there declar'd That the Honour which is to be paid to them be with subordination to that of God the Supreme Magistrate and those of Higher Authority than themselves in fine that it be according to the Measure of that Authority which is imparted to them and according to the Pleasure of him by whom it is imparted The Result whereof is 1. That if the Inferiour Magistrate command any thing which is not within his Commission it is lawful to disobey him 2. That in case of hard Measure shew'd by him we may appeal from him to the Superiour 3. That as they who have a greater Authority ought to have a greater Honour and they who have a less Authority a less so the precise Measures of them are best learn'd from the Laws because the clearest Declarations of the Pleasure of the Prince A short Paraenesis to Inferiour Magistrates where somewhat also of their Duty is describ'd 3. HAVING in the foregoing Discourses establish'd the Grounds and shewn the Kinds of Honour that are due to Soveraign Princes nothing more seems requisite to be done than to shew why and in what manner or measure we are to honour those Persons that are Commissionated by them But because some Mens impatiency of the Yoke of Government hath made them willing to find out Reasons to licence them to shake it off and after that actually to believe them I think it not amiss before I proceed any further both to propose and and answer their Objections That it is not lawful to resist the Supreme Powers even when they make use of their Power against the Innocent hath been at large declar'd and confirm'd both from Reason and Scripture and possibly not without effect as to the Resisters themselves if there wanted not some specious Reasons to take off the force of it as to some particular Cases Of this nature is first those Princes opposing themselves oftentimes against God and against that Religion which he hath establish'd in the World For though we may be oblig'd to sit down tamely under the Violence of Evil Princes when that Violence reacheth no farther than our Persons yet who can think the same Patience necessary when Religion it self is struck at which we are in reason to prefer before all other Considerations In answer to which not to tell you as I well might that Submission to Princes is an undoubted Duty of Christianity and consequently that the contrary thereof is no proper Means to defend Christianity by Not to tell you moreover that that God who hath commanded our Submission to the Higher Powers hath no where derogated from that Command by the exception of any Case And what reason have we to distinguish where the Law of God doth not Not to tell you thirdly that the Princes to whom the Apostles requir'd Men to submit were both foretold by our Saviour * Mat. 10.18 to be Persecutors of Christianity and shew'd themselves to be such in a more than ordinary manner which made it reasonable for the Apostles to except the Case of Religion if that had been intended by God to be so Lastly not to tell you that to allow of Resistance upon colour of Religion would have opened the Gap to all manner of Seditions both because it had been easie to adapt that Pretence to a thousand Cases and because Religion comprehends within it the Whole of a Christians Duty But not I say to insist upon any or all of these which yet are a sufficient Prejudice to the Exemption pleaded for I shall chuse rather to shew which will come up more closely to the Objection That Religion gains as much or more by a patient Submission to Persecuting Princes than it can be suppos'd to do by opposing our selves against them For the evidencing whereof I will first inquire What Religion may rationally be suppos'd to gain by opposing Persecuting Princes 2. What it may hope for from submitting to their Coercion And 3. and lastly compare them both together I begin with the first of these even What Religion may be suppos'd to gain by opposing the Persecutors thereof For the resolution whereof the first thing I shall return is That the utmost it can be suppos'd to gain above what
be angry if the greater be preferr'd before it Again If the Proconsul does command one thing and the Emperour does command another is there any doubt but that contemning the one we are to serve the other I observe thirdly That as the Honour of Inferiour Magistrates is to be with subordination to that of the Supreme so also as was before noted out of St. Augustine with subordination to such Powers as are in higher place than the other the lesser being in reason to give place to the greater and consequently the honour of the former to be limited by that of the other Lastly which will upon the matter acquaint us with the full measure of our duty We are to honour Inferiour Magistrates according to the measure of that Authority which is imparted to them and according to the pleasure of him by whom it is so imparted For inasmuch as they are to be honour'd as persons that are sent by the Prince they are consequently to receive honour from us according to that Authority which they receive from him and according to his pleasure from whom they do But from hence it will follow First That if the Inferiour Magistrate command us any thing which is not within the power of his Commission to do in that case I may without sin withdraw my obedience from him because so far he hath no Authority to command It will follow Secondly That if I think I have receiv'd hard measure from the Inferiour Magistrate I may without breach of submission appeal from him unto the Superiour even as we find St. Paul to have done from the Provincial Governour to Caesar Because he by whom those Inferiour Magistrates are commissionated does not ordinarily commissionate them so far as not to leave an appeal from them unto himself Care only would be taken that we appeal not from them but upon just cause and where it appears to us they exceed the bounds of their Commission and the Law For otherwise we shew our selves refractory to that supreme Authority by which they are constituted and consequently also unto God Lastly it will follow from the premises That as they who are invested with a greater Authority are to have a greater honour and they who are invested with a less Authority a less so the precise measures both of the one and others honour will be best learn'd from the Laws because most evidently declaring the pleasure of the Prince that constituted them And more than this I shall not need to say concerning the honour of Princes or of those who are commissionated by them 5. The order of my Discourse now leads me to enquire of the duty of Princes toward their Subjects and of Inferiour Magistrates toward those over whom they are appointed to preside the Commandment as was before shewn being intended no less for their regulation than of those who are subjected to their commands But because I have to do not with Princes but with Subjects and but little with Inferiour Magistrates and because too for the most part they are too intelligent to stand in need of an Instructour and have more than enough of Monitors even among those who ought rather to obey than to advise it shall suffice me to address this general exhortation to all those who have any Authority in the Commonwealth That they would remember themselves to be Gods Ministers and act with respect to his glory the Princes Ministers and make use of their Authority for and with him That they would remember they are the Ministers of both for the encouragement of the good and not make use of their Authority to vex and worry those that are so the Ministers of both for the punishing of evil-doers and therefore neither to connive at or protect them That they would remember the Oath they have taken which binds their duty so much the faster on them and for the violation whereof if the Prince does not God whose name is invok'd in it will call them to a severe account Lastly That they would remember that all profanation of Gods day by Tipling and Idleness all profanations of his Name by vain Oaths and Execrations In fine That much of the violation of the Laws of God and Man will lie at their doors if they suffer them to go unpunished For inasmuch as all that the Prince can do is to look after the great affairs of State and the appointing of Inferiour Magistrates for the punishing of Offenders the whole of the guilt of private mens Offences must be chargeable upon them who are appointed to take cognizance thereof Which however those men may now make light of because considering not to what judgment it doth expose them yet will appear to be of more importance when God shall render to every man according to his works and particularly to those to whom he hath committed the Sword of Justice For where shall they appear who beside their own personal miscarriages shall have to answer for so many and great miscarriages of other men PART VIII Of the honour of Spiritual Parents which is shewn to be their due from Reason and Scripture The Grounds of that Honour their begetting us unto God and being appointed by God as his Ministers in things pertaining to the Conscience All power in Spirituals vested in our Saviour and from him therefore to be derived through those to whom he transmitted it The kinds of Honours either such as are more peculiar to their Function or such as are common to them with other Parents Of the former sort are 1. The resorting to the place where they Teach and attending both to them and to their Doctrine 2. The yeilding Obedience to their Commands so far as the nature of their Function and the measure of their Office doth require This evidenced from Scripture and from the nature of their Authority which is shewn at large to be Imperative as well as Doctrinal That that Authority of theirs extends no firther than to matters of Religion and is bounded as to them also within the discipline of our Saviour and the edification of the Church 3. The deferring to them in their Decrees concerning matters of Faith whether it be by aquieseing in them so far as to make no publick opposition to them which is the duty of all or by contenting our selves to be debarr'd any publick employment in it unless we declare our cordial assent to such Articles of Religion as they shall judge expedient to be publickly Profess'd and Taught 4. Submission to their respective Censures where the Churches power of inflicting such is also shewn An enquiry concerning such Honours as are common to them with other Parents which also are shewn from Scripture to be their due and particularly an honourable maintenance The like evidenc'd from the impossibility of their being otherwise in any esteem with the generality of men and from the improbability of drawing Men of Worth and Parts into that Function The whole concluded with a short Prayer
there is a Tie of Fidelity as well as of Love the purport whereof is also declar'd That the Married Parties are to give each other Honour and particularly what that Honour is which is due from the Husband to the Wife In fine That in respect to God whose Institution Marriage is they ought to possess their Vessels in Sanctification and Honour as well between themselves as toward others An Address to the declaration of such Laws as concern the Married Parties severally where is shewn upon the part of the Husband that the Authority he hath over the Wife is not coercive but directive that accordingly it ought to proceed rather by the way of Love than Empire as lastly to restrain it self to such things as are within the Bounds of Religion and to such as are suitable to that Fellowship whereinto she is admitted where the Management of Houshold Affairs is shewn to be the Womans Province On the part of the Wife is shewn That she ought not in any measure to usurp Authority over the Man but endeavour rather to gain him by Meekness and Compliance That she ought to do him Honour both in Language and Gesture and obey him in all things that are not contrary to Religion or to that Condition of Life into which she is admitted by him A more particular Declaration of the Duty of the Wife in the matter of Obedience where is shewn That though she hath no Tie upon her as to such things as are contrary to Religion yet she ought to be directed by her Husband in judging of Religious Matters and where they are not manifestly contrary to the Scriptute to submit to and follow his Advices That though she be not under obedience as to such things as are sitter for a Servant than a Wife yet what is fit or not fit for a Wife to do ought not to be judg'd of by the Deportment of the most and much less by the Caprichio's of her own Brain but by the Example of Godly Matrons That though the Management of Houshold Affairs be the Wifes peculiar Province and therefore no proper matter generally for the Husband to interpose his Commands in yet she ought to comply with him even there where there is any just fear of his being discredited or undone by her evil Management An Exhortation to the Married Parties to perform their respective Duties II. IT being so rare for Popular Discourses to entreat of the Duties of Married Persons that it is almost become an Absurdity to mention them I may perhaps fall under the Censure of Indiscretion for going about to make them the Subject of mine though the Design I am now upon do naturally lead me to it But because I cannot give a satisfactory Account of the Nature of Adultery and much less of the due Importance of that Commandment which forbids it without entreating of the Laws of Marriage which Adultery is a Violation of and because how nice soever Men are now grown and how fearful soever of incurring the Censure of Indiscretion St. Paul made no difficulty of interlacing almost all his Epistles with Discourses of it lastly because there is neither that Fidelity between some Married Persons which the Divine Institution and their own Covenants nor that Accord between others which so intimate a Relation doth require I hope it will not be look'd upon by sober Persons as any Imprudence if as I have in the former Discourse shewn what is necessary to the legitimate Contracting of Marriage so I make it the business of this to demonstrate what is requisite to preserve it inviolable after it is so contracted In order whereunto I will represent 1. Such Duties as are common to the Married Parties And after that descend to 2. Those which are peculiar to each of them Now though what both the one and the other are be competently evident from those Covenants into which the Parties enter at the Solemnization of Matrimony between them yet because it is not impossible some Duties may be more obscurely express'd there than will be requisite to give each of them a due understanding of them and because those which are more clearly set down will be look'd upon as more forcible if it can be made appear that they have the Obligation of the Divine Command as well as of their own Contract to bind them on them therefore I think it but necessary to investigate them by the purport of the Divine Commands as well as by the tenor of their own Compacts 1. To begin with those which are common to the Married Parties because the most natural Results of that intimate Conjunction into which they enter Where 1. First I shall represent the Parties loving of each other as both their own Compacts and the Divine Commands bind them For though Love be most usually made the Duty of the Husband to the Wife as on the other side Obedience and Reverence that of the Wife toward the Husband yet as it is evident from St. Paul's enjoyning the aged Women to teach the younger to love their Husbands that Love is no less due from them than it is from the Husband to them Tit. 2.4 so the ground which he elsewhere assigns for the Husbands loving of the Wife inferrs equally the returning of it by her For the Love of the Husband to the Wife being founded by him in that Unity or Identity rather which Marriage conciliates between the Parties Ephes 5.28 and so on if the Wife be one with him as well as he with her there must be the same tie of Love upon her as there is upon the Husband to her Here onely is the difference that whereas the Husband by the Prerogative of his Sex hath no other tie than that of Love which is the reason why the Duty of Love is in a manner appropriated to him the Wife because subjected to the Husband is to temper hers with Reverence and Obedience for which cause we hear so little of any Love to be paid by her and so much of Reverence and Obedience It being thus evident that Love how peculiar soever it may seem unto the Man is yet alike the Duty of them both proceed we to inquire what is the due Importance of it Where first no doubt can be made but that it implies an inward Affection as because Love in propriety of Speech denotes the Affection of the Heart so because all Effects without it are but Hypocrisie and Dissimulation As little doubt is to be made secondly but that that inward Affection of Love is to exert it self in suitable Effects partly because Love is naturally operative and partly because St. Paul where he exhorts Husbands to love their Wives proposeth Christ's Love to the Church for the Pattern of it which as it was not without an inward Affection so shew'd it self in effect because as the same St. Paul observes prompting him to give himself for it The onely thing of difficulty in this matter is What is
the Ground of that mutual Love and what Effects it ought to manifest it self by As to the former of these much need not be said especially if we have an eye to the principal Ground of it the Words of St. Paul in the place before-quoted no less than those of the Institution of Marriage shewing the ground of the Parties Love to be no other than that Vnity into which the Divine Institution hath conjoyn'd them Onely as so much was necessary to be observ'd here because the proper place for it so the rather to take them off from laying the main stress of their Love upon the Aimiableness or other Qualities of those with whom they are so conjoyn'd For as though these and other such like are a just ground of Love between them yet they are neither the onely nor the principal ones so he who makes them such is in danger of overthrowing that Love which God would have to be firm and stable Because however the Word of God may endure for ever yet Beauty and other such like Qualities perish and come to nought and consequently draw after them the destruction of that Love which hath no other ground to stand upon I say not the same of that Affection which is between Christ and his Church of which St. Paul tells us Marriage was intended for a Figure because though that be not the principal Ground of Love yet it is a necessary and a lasting one For inasmuch as Marriage was intended to represent that Affection and Unity which is betwixt Christ and his Church that Affection and Unity ought in reason to be an inducement to ours as without which we shall but profane the other The Grounds of our mutual Love being thus declar'd inquire we in the next place into the due Effects of it Which are first the doing of all things that may any way contribute to each others contentment as on the other side the avoiding of all things which may displease Both the one and the other of which as they are so easie to be understood that it will be unnecessary to explain them so they are for the most part such that it will be much better to leave them to the Consciences of the Parties to inform themselves in than to give any distinct explication of It may suffice here to say 1. That as Marriage was intended for such a Society as the Parties that enter into are by Nature most fitted for so it cannot but be look'd upon as a Violation of Marriage and of that Love which it involves to refuse that Society to each other Again Forasmuch as all Love and particularly the Conjugal one excludes the doing of any thing that may displease the Party loved it will follow that they who are entred into that State are to avoid all unkind or contumelious Words all contemptuous and injurious Actions but more especially all such as may minister an occasion of suspicion to each other of their having a greater Affection for a Stranger Next to the Contentation of each other subjoyn we the seeking one anothers Profit as being a no less necessary Effect of Love and of that Union that is between the Parties For as Love where it is naturally seeks the good of those whom it makes the Object of its Affection so by so much the more by how much the nearer they are to it but how much rather then when they are in a manner one with it Which as it is the case of the Married Couple who by the Institution of the Almighty are no more twain but one flesh so being such it must be look'd upon as unnatural not to have the same care for each other not to seek each others Profit and Advantage Because however Men may sometimes have little regard to Strangers yet as the Apostle argues in the place before-quoted no man yet ever hated his own flesh but nourisheth and cherisheth it even as the Lord the Church Which place as it is a convincing Argument of the Love they ought to have for each other and which is more of seeking each othert advantage so directs us withal to the Means they are to make use of in order to the procuring of it that is to say providing for each others Welfare whilst it is yet entire by Food and Raiment and all other things that are necessary for their support as when it is any way impair'd by Sickness or Trouble of Mind endeavouring to restore it by the application of inward and outward Remedies by Advice and Comfort and Assistance Both the one * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enutrit educat sic Lexicographi and ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesych 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the other of these as they are the purport of those Words by which St. Paul illustrates the Effects of the Husbands Love so being alike common to each as both the Union that is between them shews and the aptitude that is in either to promote them For though the Care of Provision lies especially upon the Man as being best fitted for it by ability both of Mind and Body yet as the Woman oftentimes is in some measure fitted for it and consequently under a proportionable Obligation to intend it so there is a Provision within-doors which is her peculiar Province and without which the Provision of the Man will be of little or no avail either for himself or her But because the Married Parties are Spirit as well as Flesh and no Provision can secure the Welfare of that but that which Religion furnisheth therefore it may not be amiss to inquire whether that Love which ought to be between them be not to extend it self also to the seeking each others Spiritual Welfare For though Marriage in its own nature look no farther than a Temporal one as for the promoting whereof it was first ordain'd yet as nothing hinders but it may be carried much higher by the Precepts of Religion and particularly of that which we have the Honour to profess so that it is so we have not onely the general Commands of procuring each others eternal Welfare and how much more then theirs who are so nearly conjoyn'd to us but such as do more particularly direct the procuring of theirs who are united to us by the Band of Marriage For wherefore should St. Paul 1 Cor. 14.15 direct the Wife if she understood not what she had learn'd in the Publick Assemblies to ask her Husband at home concerning it but that as Bishop Davenant well argues it is the Duty of the Husband to direct his Wife in Spiritual as well as Temporal Matters Or the same St. Paul oblige the believing Wife to cohabite with an unbelieving Husband upon the hopes of gaining him over to her Religion 1 Cor. 7.13 but that he suppos'd it to be the Duty of the Wife so far as in her lies to procure her Husbands Spiritual Welfare And indeed as it is scarcely
possible for those who have any great love for each other not to desire and endeavour each others Welfare in that which most especially concerns them so they who remember Marriage to have been intended as a Figure of that Mystical Vnion that is between Christ and his Church will not think they have paid a just Respect to that Mystery which it adumbrates unless they endeavour to their power to make the Conversation of each other approach as near as may be to it Lastly Forasmuch as there is nothing more contrary to Love or to that Union from which it results than Strife and Contention between the Married Parties it will follow that it is their Duty as well as Interest to prevent them what they may or if they happen at any time to break out to suppress them The former whereof will be done by avoiding all occasion of Offence the latter by a mutual forgiving and forbearance where such Offences do arise Which whilst some Persons have imprudently neglected they have but help'd to make themselves miserable and made the Yoke of Marriage as uneasie to themselves as to those whom they design'd to revenge themselves upon It being not to be thought they should reap any advantage to themselves who either kindle or maintain a War within their own House and Bowels 2. To the Duty of Love subjoyn we that of Fidelity which is another necessary Result of that Union which Marriage conciliates he or she no less violating that Unity who bestow their Affections upon a Stranger than they who deny it to the proper Object of it Upon which account as Adultery must needs be look'd upon as highly criminal because violating it in that particular for which it was especially ordain'd so also though in a lower degree the frequenting the Company of others more than their own Consorts or using more familiarity with them than the Laws of Decency and Modesty do allow in fine the spending upon others any considerable part of their Estates to the prejudice or without the consent of the other Party he who joyn'd them so closely to one another as to make them one Flesh consequently forbidding all Commerce with Strangers which either exceeds or rivals or prejudiceth that Commerce which the Society into which they enter obligeth the Married Persons to 3. Thirdly As Love and Fidelity to each other are the indispensible Duties of the Married Parties so also though in a different measure the giving each other Honour according as they expresly stipulate For the evidencing whereof we shall need onely to instance in the Deportment of the Husband to the Wife because as I shall afterward shew there cannot be the least doubt of Honours being to be paid to the Husband by her Now that the Husband is to give Honour to his Wife is evident from that of St. Peter 1 Pet. 3.17 where he exhorts the Husband not onely to dwell with his Wife according to knowledge but to give honour to her as to the weaker vessel Which Words as they are a convincing proof of that Honour which we have affirm'd to be due to her from her Husband so shew the Honour that is to be given her because the Honour of the weaker Vessel to be such as is proper to that State in which God hath plac'd her under her Husband The purport whereof is not that the Husband should subject himself to her who is but in some respects his Equal and much less his Superiour but that inasmuch as she is assum'd into a Copartnership with him he should treat her not as a Servant but a Companion and not onely so neither but as the Companion of such a Person and according to his own Quality or Dignity that he should permit her as in reason he ought to bear her self as a Mother over his Family and not either subject her to or abridge her the exercise of her Authority over it in fine that he should permit her whilst she lives to partake of his Worldly Goods and after her and his Decease to permit her Children to succeed into them For though I know even among us there are other kind of Bargains made and such as do in truth make the Woman rather a Concubine than a Wife as shall hereafter be more at large declar'd though I know also that in Germany there is a sort of Marriage wherein the Husband gives the Wife the Left Hand in stead of the Right that is to say expresly stipulates with her not to take her as a Wife of equal Condition by means of which as * Vid Mylerum in Gamologia seu de matrimonio Personarum Imperii illustrium c citat in le Journal de Scavans parte 1. Mylerus observes neither hath she all the Rights of a Wife neither do her Children succeed either to the Fathers Name or Arms or full Inheritance Yet as I cannot but look upon such Matches among us as a contradiction in adjecto because the Husband in Marriage endows her with all his Worldly Goods so upon all such whether here or elsewhere as contrary to the Divine Institution of Marriage and particularly to that Honour which St. Peter requires Men to exhibit to them For how are they either one with their Husbands or in the esteem of Wives which are set at so great a distance from them I will conclude this part of my Discourse with a Duty that is indeed alike common with the former to each of the Married parties but which hath not themselves but God for the object of it And that is that forasmuch as God is the Author of Marriage they would in respect to him whose institution it is possess their Vessels in Sanctification and Honour as well among themselves as toward others Which they shall do if to give themselves to Fasting and Prayer they shall for a time defraud one another with consent as at all times use that moderation in their enjoyments as may shew them studious of more refined ones and that reservedness and modesty in their outward deportment which may neither tempt others to any impurity nor censure the Divine Institution because of them 2. I have hitherto insisted upon such Duties as are common to the Married parties and which for that reason it is to be hoped will not be distasteful to either of them It remains that I entreat of those that are peculiar to each of them and where if any where I must expect a censure from my Readers But as that rarely happens to a Teacher from the Sober and the Vertuous where his own indiscrete managery thereof gives not occasion to it so he must very much forget his own duty and the dignity of his Employment who shall value any thing of that nature when coming from the Ignorant and Profane Setting aside therefore any farther discourse concerning that I will betake my self to my Task and first of all to 1. Those Duties which are peculiar to the Husband I have heretofore shewn and
thought of Womens laying Commands upon their Husbands of entertaining them with Reproofs or offering violence to them For if as he there discourseth it is not so much as lawful for them to take upon them to instruct their Husbands how much less may we suppose it to be to command or check them or in fine to offer violence to them the two former being more apparent marks of Authority than Instruction the latter of so high a nature that it is not lawful from the Man to the Wife though invested by God with Authority over her It may suffice the Wife where the Husband behaves himself otherwise than he ought to expostulate with him in the most becoming terms to exhort entreat and perswade him to an amendment in fine to endeavour it by the piety and winningness of her behaviour and particularly by a meek and quiet spirit For as other courses than such are not likely to prevail with Men that understand themselves so St. Peter not only represents it as the means they are to make use of to win those who obey not the word to yield obedience to it but gives hopes withal by affirming it to be in the sight of God of great price that it is the most probable means to procure it 2. Again forasmuch as God hath not only invested the man with Authority over the Wife but represented him as the head of her even as Christ is the head of the Church Eph. 5.23 it will follow as St. Paul infers vers 33. that she ought to reverence her Husband and express it both in her behaviour and language even as Sarah declar'd hers to Abraham by calling him Lord 1 Pet. 3.6 But from hence we may collect what is to be thought of those reproachful titles which Women of haughty spirits do oftentimes bestow upon them For if by the precept of the Scripture they are not to speak to their Husbands without respect how much less may we think it lawful for them to use such contumelious terms as are scarcely fit to be given to a Slave 3. Lastly Forasmuch as God hath not only invested the man with Authority but oblig'd the Woman to yield obedience to it it will follow not only that she is under a necessity of obedience but of such an obedience also as is proportionable to that Authority wherewith we have said him to be invested The result whereof is that she is to obey him in all things that are not contrary to Religion or to that condition of life into which she is admitted by him These three things only must be added to the former exceptions as exceptions of those exceptions or rather necessary explications of them 1. That though the Wife hath no tie upon her to comply with him in such things as are contrary to Religion yet she is to be directed by him in judging of Religious matters and where they are not manifestly contrary to the Scripture to submit to and follow his advices For as there is not a more proper notion of that headship * Daven in Vol. 3.18 19. which is attributed to the Man than that which imports a power of direction so that that direction is to be understood with reference to Religious matters also St. Paul plainly shews 1 Cor. 14.35 he there obliging the Wife if she doubted of the sense of any thing delivered in the publick Assemblies to ask her Husband at home and if so to take directions from him in doubtful cases Which course as a Learned Man * Dr. Tayl. Sermon on Eph. 5.32 33. Part 2. observes hath this farther to recommend it that though if she be deceiv'd alone she hath no excuse because not attending to her instructor yet if she should happen to be deceiv'd with him she hath much pitty and some degrees of warranty under protection of that humility and deference which she shews towards him who is by God appointed over her 2. Secondly Though it be true that the Wife is not under any tie of Obedience where the things commanded by the Husband are more fit for a Servant than a Wife yet as there may be a time particularly that of Sickness wherein the Husband and Wife both may be oblig'd by turns to be a kind of Servants to each other so what is fit or not fit for a Wife to do is at all times to be judg'd not by the deportment of the most which in each Sex are always the worst and much less by the caprichi'os of their own brain but by the examples of godly Matrons as which are most likely to direct them best in judging of it 3. Lastly Though it be true that the management of Houshold Affairs is the proper Province of the Wife and therefore no proper matter generally for the Husband to interpose his commands in yet as no man is oblig'd to be impos'd upon as to his own particular or discredited or undone by her to whom he is appointed as a head so if there be any danger of either of these by her imprudent or wilful management of Affairs there is no doubt in such a Case he hath Authority to controul her and consequently she also a necessity of submitting to it Having thus shewn at large the Duties of Married Persons as well those which are peculiar to each as those which are common to them both nothing remains for me to do but to exhort them to a performance and particularly of such duties as are peculiar to each of them For beside that by so doing they shall each of them comply with the Divine Commands and because that is a natural consequent of the other procure the peace of their own Consciences beside that they shall thereby consult the peace and welfare of themselves and families which for want of a just compliance are oftentimes torn in pieces and beggary and confusion introduc'd the Married parties have this farther inducement to it that they shall thereby provide for their own reputation which is a thing that prevails often where neither Interest nor Religion can For what credit can it be to the Husband to domineer over his Wife who as well by the weakness of her Sex as by the Divine command is obliged to subject her self to him or what credit to the Wife to detrect her Husbands just commands or usurp Authority over him when she cannot do either without proclaiming her self to be proud and insolent and her Husband to be a fool for permitting it Which last title if such persons cannot with patience hear others affix unto their Husbands because of that strait tie which is between them let them see how they will absolve themselves in their own breasts who by their imperious carriage give occasion to the reproach of both On the other side when Man and Wife perform their respective duties and his will looks more like a desire than a command and her actions like the result of his will than of her own when the Man avoids
covet thy neighbours wife nor his servant nor his maid nor his ox nor his ass nor any thing that is his PART I. The Contents That the Commandment we have now before us is not two but one as also that it strikes not at those first stirrings or motions of Sin which we call Concupiscence but at the coveting of that which is the property of another By which account the Negative part of the Commandment is resolved to be The not coveting of that which is another as the Affirmative The contenting our selves with that which is our own An address to a general explication of the former where is shewn that the thing forbidden to be coveted is any thing of our Neighbours how small or inconsiderable soever as also that the Covetousness which is prohibited is not such an one as includes in it a desire or resolution to use unlawful means to compass the object of it but such as abideth in the Mind or at least doth not prompt it to the other An Objection out of Mark 10.19 answered A more particular explication of the Negative part of the Commandment where is shewn that all coveting of that which is anothers is not forbidden but either 1. Such as is peccant in the Object of which nature are the coveting of such things as are not lawful for the Proprietor to part with as his Wife or cannot be quitted by him without disadvantage or are the object of his affection no less than of ours Or 2. Such covetings as are peccant in their quality Of which number are those Covetings that are not with submission to the will both of God and the Proprietor that are not accompanied with a like desire of gratifying our Neighbour or breed perturbation in us The criminalness of these and such like Covetings their implying a dissatisfaction with the Divine Providence which hath bestowed what we covet upon another IT being sufficiently known that to blend the Second Commandment with the First the Patrons of Image-worship have divided this Commandment into two I made it my business in my entrance upon the Second to shew the unreasonableness of this Division as well as of that conjunction or confusion To which therefore all I shall now add is that as they who divide this Commandment into two might with as much reason divide it into more even into as many as there are things which are forbidden in it to covet the formal reason of the prohibition being one and the same in all even the propriety thereof being vested in another so St. Paul in two places of his Epistle * Rom. 7.7 13.9 to the Romans sets it down in those general terms of Thou shalt not covet and so makes it but one Commandment If there be any force in the repeating of the word covet which some it seems though unadvisedly enough have laid some stress upon it might be rather to shew the earnestness of the Lawgiver in forbidding them than to prompt men to look upon the covetousness there decryed as distinct prohibitions of the Almighty The way being thus cleared to the Explication of the Commandment proceed we to the subject matter of it the purport whereof is commonly conceived to be the prohibition of those first motions or stirrings of sin which we call Concupiscence arising in the sensual appetite corrupted by Adam 's Fall as all other the faculties of the Soul are before any actual deliberation of the Vnderstanding thereabout or actual consent of the Will thereunto But beside that there is no necessity as Dr. Sanderson * Serm. on Phil. 4.11 Part. 1. hath well observed for the affixing of such a sense to it because those motions or stirrings supposing them sinful are aptly enough referrable according to their respective objects to those several Commandments wherein they are forbidden the general reason of the Commandment and the place it hath in the Decalogue oblige rather to understand it of the not coveting of that the property whereof is vested in another For the Commandment being in the number of those which regard our duty to our Neighbour and moreover as appears both by the whole contexture of it and the last clause in it desinged by the Giver of it to take men off from the desire of that which is anothers it is in reason to be construed of such irregular desires as become so rather upon the Object upon which they are fixed than by that corrupt Fountain from which they flow Upon which account as the same Learned Man †Sanderson ibid. hath observed the words of the Authour to the Hebrews chap. 13. 5. may serve for a short but full Commentary upon this last Commandment both in the Negative and affirmative part thereof Let your conversation be without covetousness the Negative and be content with such things as you have the Affirmative In the mean time though I thus depart from the received explication of the Commandment in obedience to a greater Authority even that of Reason as well as of our own Church which delivers * Church Catechism Answer to What is thy duty towards thy Neighbour Not to covet or desire other mens goods but to learn c. the self-same explication yet I shall not fail to consider of the thing it self when I come to entreat of Original sin which will fall in pertinently enough in the Discourse of that Sacrament which was intended for its expiation and its cure Now there are two things in the Negative part of the Commandment Negative part which will require a general explication before I descend to a more particular one the due importance of the object which the Commandment forbids us to covet and the general nature of that Covetousness which it condemns Of the first of these much need not be said if we consider either that general clause in the end of the Commandment or that account which is given of it in the parallâ—l place of Deuteronomy For though the Commandment we have now before us specifie only our Neighbours House Wife Servant Maid Ox and Ass yet as that parallel place in Deuteronomy adds also the coveting of his Field as well as of those other things before mentioned so both the one and the other annex the coveting of any thing that is our Neighbours which will comprehend within the compass of it the coveting of his Farm his Office his Honour yea of the most inconsiderable things which appertain to him Whether it be as the Ellipsis * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Intelligendum enim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut maneat eadem constructio per Accusativum Grot. in Decalog in the Septuagint version of this Commandment intimates any portion of his Ox Ass or other Cattel or that which is yet more inconsiderable than they according to that of the Greek Poet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let not thy desires extend themselves even to the Needle of another or as
as much as may be the interesting himself in her affairs and the Wife not only intermeddles not with such as are proper to his cognizance but endeavours to approve her self to him in the management of her own Lastly when the Man treats the Wife as his associate or rather as himself and the Wife demeans her self to him as her directour and superiour then there is not only a happy compliance with the Divine Institution and with one another but a just foundation of universal applause and all wise and good persons think themselves oblig'd to honour the Man for knowing how to temper his Authority so as to make it acceptable and pleasant as the Wife for being able by the obligingness of her behaviour to transform him into an adorer of her and make him change his soveraignty into kindness and condescension PART III. Whether or no and by what means Marriage may be dissolved which are resolv'd to be no other than either the Death of one of the Parties or Fornication Of that Liberty which our Law allows to Marry again where the Parties have been Seven Years absent from and ignorant of each others being which is shewn to proceed upon the presumption of the absent Parties death That Fornication is a just ground of dissolving the Marriage and that nothing in Gods Law hinders either the Innocent or Nocent Party to Marry again but that the cognizance of the cause belongs to those who are in Authority An Essay toward the shewing that there is no other just ground of a Divorce than Fornication or some uncleanness that is equal thereunto This evidenc'd First in that among the Jews where there was manifestly a greater Liberty a Divorce proceeded not but upon supposition of something of Vncleanness The like evidenc'd more fully from the words of our Lord in this affair When other crimes appear they ought either to be born or a separation made only for so long time till Time or Gods Grace shall bring the Parties to a better mind The matter of Divorce rather of Permission than Command and alike common to the Woman and the Man A Transition to the Negative part of the Commandment where is entreated first of all of that Adultery which lies on the side of the Married Parties and the Man that is false to his Wife shewn to be as truly guilty of Adultery as the Woman that is false to her Husband The like evinced on the part of those by whom the Married Parties are debauched with a large account of the criminalness both of the one and the other Adultery III. WHAT is requisite to the due contracting of Marriage or the preserving it inviolable when it is so enough hath been said to shew in my former Discourses upon this Argument it remains only that we enquire whether or no and by what means it may be dissolv'd which will cost no great pains to resolve Not the former because at the same time I point out the means by which it may be dissolv'd I shall also prove it to be capable of being so as neither the latter because however men have been willing to find out others yet Christianity generally allows only two grounds of the dissolution of it the former whereof is the Death of one of the Parties the latter Fornication or Adultery 1. Now that the Death of one of the Parties dissolves the Contract and puts the living one in the same condition they were in before is evident first of all from the expressed declaration of the Scripture For not contented to say Rom. 7.2 that the Woman which hath an Husband is bound by the Law to her Husband so long as he liveth but if the Husband be dead she is loosed from the Law of her Husband which may be interpreted as to that relaxation which the Law of Moses gave we find the like affirmation elsewhere and with such an addition also as shews it equally to hold under the dispensation of the Gospel For St. Paul affirming as he doth 1 Cor. 7.33 that though the Wife be bound by the Law as long as her Husband liveth yet if her Husband be dead she is at liberty to be Married to whom she will only in the Lord he thereby plainly intimateth because entreating of the Marriage of Christians that death dissolves the Contract no less under the Gospel than the Law The same is no less evident from the end of Marrige and the terms of the Contract at least as they are express'd among us For both the end of its Institution being for the comfort of this present life and the terms upon which it is contracted being expresly during the continuance of it it followeth unavoidably that where the Society is interrupted by death the contract must also fall because intended only for the comfort of the present life and covenanting for no more than the time of the continuance of it The only thing on this head that can admit of any just scruple is that liberty which our Law * 1 Jac. 11. allows to Marry again where the Husband or Wife shall be continually remaining beyond the Seas by the space of Seven Years together or where the Husband or Wife shall absent him or herself the one from the other by the space of Seven Years together in any part of his Majesties Dominions the one of them not knowing the other to be living within that time But even this also if duly examin'd will not be found in the least to contradict the forementioned Precepts For as it is necessary in many cases and particularly in the present one to proceed by presumptions oftentimes unless we would have very material controversies to remain undecided which is not for the peace or interest of the world so there is a just presumption of his or her death where during so long a time the party that is certainly alive knows nothing at all of the others being so 2. It being thus evident that Death dissolves the Contract of Marriage and leaves the living Party to the liberty of a second Marriage it remains that we enquire concerning Fornication which we have affirm'd to be another just ground of a Dissolution where again we are to enquire whether Fornication be such a ground and whether it be the only one both the one and the other of which will receive a solution from the words of our Blessed Saviour For affirming as he doth that whosoever shall put away his Wife except it be for Fornication and shall marry another committeth Adultery and whoso Marieth her which is put away committeth Adultery he both implieth that Fornication is a just ground of a dissolution and declareth it to be the only one The only difficulty that hath been made as to the first head is whether or no after such a Divorce there be a liberty to Marry again at all or if so whether for the Nocent as well as the Innocent But beside that to speak first unto the former