at the other before the Law and yet they might be both by a Dispensation of the Primitive Institution and Ordinance And that this is in truth the case I think will be very plain if we consider that it is from the words of Christ in this very same discourse that Polygamy is now made unlawful under the Gospel The question indeed was put by the Pharisees about Divorce but our Saviour's Answer by clear and necessary Consequence extends also to Polygamy His words are these I say unto you whosoever shall put away his Wife except it be for Fornication and shall Marry another committeth Adultery And he that Marrieth her who is put away committeth Adultery Now the Reason of all this is plain if we suppose Polygamy as well as Divorce contrary to Gods first Institution For then he that Marries a Woman Divorced Marries her who by the Law of God is still esteem'd the Wife of her Husband and this is Adultery He that only puts away his Wife is not said to commit Adultery but he that puts her away and Marries another Divorce only may be a Sin but it is the Marrying again that makes the Adultery Of which the only good Reason to be given is because it is not lawful to have more than one Wife Now when it shall again be consider'd that all this part of our Saviour's Discourse is an Explanation and Confirmation of this Original Institution and Law mentioned v. 4 5. Have ye not read that he which made them in the beginning c. we must conclude that Polygamy as well as Divorce is a Violation and Transgression of it This plainly shews that whatever Permission of or Connivance at these Practices may be observed in the Jewish Law there are so many Imperfections in it and Defects of that compleater Righteousness which God now requires and wou'd then had that People been able to bear them 3. And this will teach us last of all what Answer is to be given to that part of their Objection which is taken from the Example of Abraham or any other of the Patriarchs before the Law of Moses who contrary to the purpose of this Institution had many Wives or Concubines The sum of whose case in short is this that though they were noble Patterns of Faith and Obedience in those Trials which God made of them and blessed and highly favour'd for their singular Confidence in him yet they were not Patterns of Universal Righteousness and of all Virtue and Goodness in Perfection Abraham had been brought up in an Idolatrous Country God calls him out from it and engages him to worship him alone promising him great Blessings if he wou'd do so Abraham believes Gods Promises and obeys them and God thereupon for his Illustrious Faith declares that in him all the Nations of the Earth shou'd be blessed by that Messiah which was to descend from him Thus Abraham believed in Christ and approved his Faith in the Resurrection from the Dead by his readiness to sacrifice his Son in whom these Blessings were promised to him These were eminent Instances of Confidence and Obedience with which God was so well pleased that he resolves to favour and bless him in an extraordinary manner It is no where said in Scripture that Abraham was perfect in his Righteousness but that he believed God and that was imputed to him for Righteousness In other things then he lived according to the Customs and Manners of that Age in which he lived among whom it seems that Polygamy and Divorce had now prevailed And though God was not at all pleased with these Practices nor did approve them yet he was graciously pleased for the sake of his other Virtues and particularly of this singular Faith not to impute them to him nor to punish them This is all that can be observed from the case of the Patriarchs which does by no means prove that what they did was Innocent or without Offence The most that can be drawn from hence is that God in Regard to the different Ages and Dispensations under which Men live has not always discovered to them what is best in it self or most agreeable to his Holy Will But no Practice or Custom or Manners of antient times can be improved into a just Vindication of the Innocence of either Polygamy or Divorce and much less of Fornication nor will any of these Examples prove that what has formerly been done against the purpose and design of this Original Institution was for that reason free from guilt or inoffensive to Almighty God But Secondly This Argument will yet have greater force when we shall consider that we have now supposed more than is indeed to be granted For however the case was as to Polygamy and Divorce yet Fornication was never so tolerated as to be approved nor ever had so much countenance but that we have clear Evidence that it was always counted an hateful and detestable Vice And to make this out it will be requisite to consider that there is a great deal of difference between Licita and Honesta i. e. between things tolerated in Governments to pass unpunish'd and things in their Nature Innocent and without Evil. This is a rational distinction and founded on one of the Maxims of Civil Law Licitum dicitur quod Legibus non punitur In this sense every thing is Licitum quod fit impune which the Laws have not prohibited with a Punishment And whosoever shall consider the defects of all human Laws whatever will soon see that they can be no certain Standard to distinguish the Good or Evil of Human Actions by By the Law of the xii Tables the Creditors might divide the Insolvent Debtor's Body among them It was tolerated but common Reason will tell us how much against all Rules of Piety and Religion Accordingly the Romans had a wise Distinction Non omne quod Licitum est honestum est Every thing must not be esteemed Good and perfectly innocent for the restraint of which the Laws make no good Provision by assigning Punishments Governments may tolerate what Governors do by no means Allow and Approve That therefore is in this Sense Lawful which the Letter of the Law has not made Penal in the Offender which may happen in many Cases against the Approbation and Good Liking of the Law-giver Thus it was in Divorce among the Romans which was permitted by their Law but we are told that it was not put in Practice for five hundred and twenty Years their own Sense of the Turpitude of it proving to them an Effectual Restraint Laws then may Tolerate but Honesty ties us up to act by Principles and Offices of Humanity I think therefore that it will be sufficient to my present Design to shew that notwithstanding any Toleration of this wicked Practice among the Heathens yet they were not insensible of the Turpitude and certain immorality of it By the Laws of the Athenians then tho'
A DISCOURSE ON FORNICATION SHEWING THE Greatness of that SIN AND Examining the Excuses pleaded for it from the Examples of Antient Times To which is added an Appendix concerning Concubinage As also A Remark on Mr. Butler's Explication of Hebr. xiii 4. in his Late Book on that Subject By J. Turner M. A. Lecturer of Christ-Church London Printed at the Request of some Gentlemen of that Parish O Proceres Censore opus est an Aruspice nobis Juv. Sat. 2 LONDON Printed for John Wyat at the Rose in St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCXCVIII THE CONTENTS THE Introduction page 1. I. Fornication contrary to God's Original Institution of Marriage p. 3. In what Sense that Institution is a Positive Law p. 4. Several such Laws given to Man from the beginning p. 5. The Original Institution of Marriage explain'd p. 8. How Fornication a Violation of it p. 11. Objections considered p. 13. David's Adultery with Bathsheba impertinently alleged p. 14. Abraham's Concubines were Married to him p. 15. The Laws of former Times no good objection against this Law p. 16. The Heathens corrupt in their Manners p. 17. The Jewish-Law imperfect p. 18. Divorce then allow'd but not approv'd p. 19. Polygamy was always unlawful p. 20. Abraham's Example not Universally to be imitated p. 22. Things tolerated not always approv'd the difference between Licita and Honesta p. 23. The Heathens did detest this Vice p. 24. The Jews absolutely forbid it p. 25. The Patriarchs before the Law abhor'd it p. 26. Whatever prevail'd in former Times we are now brought to the Original Institution p. 27. II. Fornication expresly forbidden by the Gospel p. 29. Reasons urged by St. Paul to disswade Men from it p. 34. 'T is inconsistent with Christian Purity and Holiness p. 38. III. Fornication a Brutish Vice and dishonourable to Humane Nature p. 41. Mischievous to the Children born of such Parents p. 42. To the Offenders themselves both in Credit Fortune and Health p. 45. It debauches Men's Spirits and makes them Enemies to Religion p. 47. The Commonness of this Sin one great occasion of Infidelity Blasphemy and Profaneness p. 49. Appendix concerning Concubinage p. 55. A Remark on Heb. xiii 4. against Mr. Butler p. 56. All Concubinage of unmarried Persons is Fornication p. 57. ERRATA PAge 1. line 7. r. has p. 2. l. 3. r. that p. 3. l 5. r. up to p. 4. l. 2. dele had p. 11. l. 5. r. this Law p. 13. l. 21. r. Title p. 16. l. 31. r. then p. 17. l. 17. r. Precedent p. 21. l. 20. r. alone l. 32. r. they p. 22. l. 15. r. him p. 37. l. 17. r. and destroy p. 40. l. 31. r. defects p. 45. l. 33. dele the p. 48. l. 15. r. Bodily p. 52. l. 1. r. their p. 53. l. 18. r. Men p. 56. l. 28. r. Contract or Marriage State p. 59. l. 22. r. their p. 60. l. 14. r. the l. 33. r. what is Scandalous and Offensive A DISCOURSE ON FORNICATION Shewing the Greatness of that Sin and examining the Excuses pleaded for it from the Examples of Ancient Times WHile all good Men lament the Wickedness and Debauchery of this Age and Nation and justly dread the heavy Judgments of God for the notorious Iniquities every Day committed among other Circumstances that increase their Grief and enhanse their Fears They have this Discomfort that the Looseness of Mens Manners had corrupted their Judgments and defaced their Sense of Good and Evil. So that instead of Humiliation before God some Men justifie themselves and are so far from abandoning their Vices that they plead Innocence and upon the Perpetration of the vilest Crimes cry out with Solomon's Harlot that they have done nothing amiss This is in no Sin more practised than in those of Adultery and Fornication Adultery may possibly be allowed to have somewhat of Ill in it especially on the Womans Side where there is a manifest Injury to a whole Family and yet it is an Argument that this makes no great Impression on some Peoples Consciences because it is so openly and publicly practised But Fornication by the leud Persons of this Age is avowed to be innocent and harmless And yet there must be a great share both of Confidence and Impiety in that Christian who disputes the Unlawfulness of a Vice which in the whole New Testament is frequently and expresly declared to shut Men out of the Kingdom of God If the Authority of the Gospel was but submitted to by these Men and suffered to guide their Consciences as it ought no more would be needful to convince and restrain them than any one of these Texts wherein it is said that no Whoremonger or unclean Person has any Inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and of God But this alone will not now prevail They appeal from the Gospel to the Law and tell you how as they imagin was the Practice of ancient Times They expostulate with you how it comes to pass that what was anciently tolerated and allowed comes now to be reckoned such a dreadful and enormous Crime so that they make it a matter of Debate and Controversy and must have their Objections and Scruples answered before the Gospel shall be heard or they can become sensible of their Wickedness and give any Hope of their being reclaimed The Preachers may say what they will in their Pulpits about the Justice and Severity of God and the Vengeance which he threatens against Sinners This is never like to move Men while they conceit their Actions justifiable and perswade themselves that they do not come within the Verge of those Menaces At a time therefore when the Piety and Wisdom of our Governors seem resolved to check and restrain the intolerable Growth of Impiety It may not be unseasonable to treat with these Men and lay open the Heinousness and certain Immorality of one of the most predominant Sins of this Age and if I mistake not one of the great Occasions and Promoters of a Spirit of Atheism Profaneness and Irreligion I hope what I shall say on this Subject may be serviceable to those whose Consciences are not feared and who are not wholly given unto vile Affections and a reprobate Mind But they who resolve to do any thing that gratifies their Lusts though never so expresly forbidden may believe any thing that favours those Pleasures tho' never so evidently false and absurd If I do not say all that might be said to the Advantage of so considerable a Subject I hope at least that it may either invite or provoke better Judges to take so good a Cause in hand The certain Immorality of this Practice and the Greatness of this Sin I shall endeavour to make appear by these Arguments I. That Fornication is a Violation of God's positive Law in the original Institution of Marriage II. That it is expresly forbidden in the Gospel and absolutely inconsistent with that pure and holy Life which the Christian Religion requires from us III. Lastly
From the natural Turpitude of it and the Evils and pernicious Consequences that attend it I. The first Assertion is that Fornication is a Violation of the positive Law of God in the original Institution of Marriage and this I shall endeavour to prove from Gen. 2. 23 24. where in the Relation of Eve's being formed out of Adam's Side there are these Words Adam said This is now Bone of my Bones and Flesh of my Flesh she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man And therefore shall a Man leave his Father and Mother and shall cleave unto his Wife and they shall be one Flesh. And for the better clearing of this Argument I shall proceed thus 1. I shall shew that God to provide against the Corruptions of Man's fal'n State when he had lost the original Perfection of his Reason by Sin did assist him in some Cases by Divine Positive Laws 2. That these Words mention'd Gen. 2. 24. have in them the Force and Authority of a Divine Law 3. I shall consider what the true Sense and Purpose of this Law is 4. I shall shew that Fornication is a certain Violation of it and must therefore be an heinous Sin and highly offensive unto God 5. Lastly I shall consider the Objections that are commonly made against this Argument from the Practice of some particular Men in ancient times that are nevertheless recorded to have had a singular share in God's Favor 1. I shall shew that God to provide against the Corruptions of Man's fal'n State when he had lost the original Perfection of his Reason by Sin did assist him in some Cases by Divine Positive Laws But here I would not be mistaken in my Meaning of a Positive Law By which Expression is commonly understood such a Command or Precept as ties Man up to Obedience in things of an indifferent Nature and where he was left at Liberty by the Laws of Reason This is the common meaning of this Phrase and things forbidden by Positive Laws in this Sense are therefore supposed to have no real Evil or Immorality in them And though it is certain that God did very early give Mankind some such positive Institutions yet I do by no means intend the original Institution of Marriage to be positive in such a Sense as to suppose that it has no Foundations in the Laws of Nature or the Principles of Reason for that it most certainly has But my Meaning is that to prevent either Ignorance or any Misconstruction of the Laws of Reason in favour of Man's Lusts God was pleased to confirm some of the Principles of Reason by Revelation and strengthen the Laws of Nature by Positive Institution For we must consider that the Laws of Nature or Reason are either 1. Such general Precepts and obvious Inferences from them as every considering Man may see and be convinced of their Obligation Or else 2. Such Remoter Principles of Virtue and Goodness which though they have their Foundation in Reason yet they lie at a greater Distance from the first plain Notices and consequently must be found out by a more careful and difficult Deduction And tho' I do not at all doubt but that Man in that Perfection of Reason in which he was originally created was then a sufficient Guide unto himself in all these Cases Yet when humane Nature was corrupted and depraved he did then require some farther Help Then either Sloth Inconsideration Prejudice the Imperfection of his Reason now impaired by Sin and the Influence of his Passions and Affections to bribe and pervert his Judgment Might easily make him ignorant of such more distant Principles although they had their Foundation in the Laws of Nature For which reason our wise and good God of his wonderful Compassion and Love to Mankind was pleased to come in to our Assistance and to prevent the Influence of our Lusts enlightned our Minds by Revelation and confirmed and establish'd the Authority of some such natural Laws by making them also express and positive Institutions And this is the Sense in which I wou'd be now understood to speak of Divine Positive Laws Now the Jews were of opinion that God gave Adam several such Laws to direct him in things that were in themselves Good or Evil Because that Good or Evil of them was not obvious enough to the common Observation of Mens depraved Minds Such they esteemed the Case of incestuous Marriages which they say God forbid by express Law to Adam therein ordaining that after Mankind was so far multiplied that the Marriage of Brother and Sister was no longer necessary to the Propagation of Human Race they shou'd all from thenceforth become unlawful And when it shall be consider'd that the natural Immorality of them has been a Subject of Debate in several Ages It will be the more reasonable to conclude that there was some very early Positive Law that prohibited all such Because this is one of the Sins charged upon the Canaanites and their Example alleged as a Caution and Warning to the Israelites Lev. xviii 24. Defile not your selves in any of these things for in all these the Nations are defiled which I cast out before you Now when it shall be consider'd how difficult it has been thought in all Ages to evince the certain Immorality of such by the clear Evidence of any natural Law only in the Transgression of which the Canaanites were guilty It is more probable that God added the Authority of some Positive Law restraining both them and all Mankind in this respect And tho Sacrifices were not so in their Nature Good as to be of Perpetual Use and Everlasting Obligation Yet as they made up a considerable Part of the divine Worship of almost all Nations until the Incarnation of our Saviour so I think they also are no improper Instances in our present purpose What Law of Nature only shou'd dictate them is very hard to shew Reason indeed teaches to worship God after the best manner that we can But I cannot imagin that any Principle of Reason only teaches that to burn the Fat of Beasts or the Fruits of the Earth can be an acceptable way of honouring God or of expressing our Dependance and Thanks Or that the Light of Nature only cou'd ever guide and determin Mankind so universally to such Sacrifices Which our best Reason teaches us are in themselves not acceptable but only valued as Types and Figures of a better Sacrifice to come Nor can I believe but that the setting apart one Day in seven for the Worship of God our Creator was what he Ordained and Commanded from the beginning For tho some wou'd have those Words Gen. 2. 2 3. to be spoken by way of Anticipation yet that is precariously asserted and without any Proof Whereas there are several good Reasons to be alleged for the more early Original of that divine Institution 1. Because the reason of keeping that Day holy is so expresly founded on the
he seems to tolerate Divorce upon Adultery because the Adulterous Person has first violated that Union which God ordained to have been perpetual Upon these things turns the whole Stress of Christ's Answer to the Jews And from this Account which he has here given it manifestly appears that this Original Institution did not only ordain that the Union of Man and Wife shou'd be perpetual but moreover that this Union shou'd be made between them two only exclusive of all others whatsoever And this God sufficiently signified by making but one Man and one Woman which without all question was designed to Illustrate and give Authority to this as the true Purpose of the Law 3. And if this be the true meaning of that Divine Institution and Law as I think I have shewn that it is from hence it will be easie to prove 4. Lastly That Fornication is a manifest Transgression of the Law and by consequence an Heinous Sin For that Union which is founded in the Partnership of the Bed and is thereupon declared to be Perpetual and Inseparable and Exclusive of all others is as inconsistent with the rambling Amours of Fornicators as Light with Darkness For at the same time that God ordains that all Persons who are so made one shou'd preserve that Union Perpetually and Inviolably In so doing he to all sufficient Intents and Purposes decrees that no Persons shou'd so come together but upon a Sincere Purpose and Solemn Contract of Perpetual Union and Cohabitation between them two only and exclusive of all others What then can be more directly contrary to such a Law than the Roving Loves of Fornicators Who never intend much less enter into a Solemn Contract and Covenant of that Perpetual Cohabitation which God ordain'd And who instead of such mutual Constancy between them two only exclusive of all others only contrive to satiate their Lusts like Brutes without any Restraint or any Regard to such an Ordinance What is more evident than that all such Practices are absolutely forbidden by this Law of God and therefore offensive to him The Purpose and Design of God in this Law I say was not only to decree that the Union between Man and Wife shou'd be perpetual But also to ordain that no Man or Woman whatsoever shou'd so come together but upon a Solemn Contract of that Perpetual and Inseparable Union first made And that I may not seem to assert any thing of this Nature without good Authority I must here observe to you that St. Paul says the same thing and urges this same Consideration to this very purpose and to dissuade Men from this very Sin 1 Cor. vi 15 16. Shall I take the Members of Christ and make them the Members of an Harlot God forbid For know you not that he that is join'd to an Harlot is one Body For two saith he shall be one flesh In which Words it is evident and plain that he alludes to this Original Institution of Marriage mentioned Gen. 2. 24. And that he makes the Union to consist in the Partnership of the Bed He that is join'd to an Harlot is one body i.e. is one flesh with her as Man and Wife are one and by that Union which God ordained to be the Foundation of perpetual and inseparable Cohabitation And by this Consequence he declares that they who thus come together without such a solemn Contract of Perpetual Union and Cohabitation are certainly guilty of a Great Sin and do what God has forbid and what does not at all become Christians and Members of Christ's Mystical Body Shall I take the Members of Christ and make them the Members of an Harlot God ' forbid This is unlawful this is contrary to God's Original Institution and Command And if this be so I think this is as clear a Proof of the Sinfulness of Whoredom as if it had been expresly said in Genesis thou shalt not commit Fornication And now let us reflect how this one Argument alone discovers both the Sinfulness and the Danger of this Practice Suppose that we were in the dark as to the Evidences of Reason against this Sin yet why shou'd not the Will and Institution of God influence and determine Mens Consciences What better Proof can we have of any thing 's being a Sin than that it is a certain Violation of God's Express Commands and Laws Or what Shadow of Reason can any Man produce why the Decree of God at our first Creation confirmed by a new Sanction of Christ shou'd not bind him to the Observance of it as firmly as any the clearest Law of mere Nature only Or why shou'd not the Danger of transgressing it be as great To imagin that God will not exact Obedience to his Laws is to charge him with Folly in enacting them And if he will punish Transgressions and Sin how will Leud Men deliver themselves out of his Hand So that if Fornication be such a Violation of God's Institution and Law as I think it already appears to be This so plainly discovers the Sin and Danger of it that I cannot see what Rational Hope these Men can entertain but upon Repentance of escaping his Vengeance for so vile a Transgression But 5. Lastly I proposed to consider the Objections that are commonly made against all this The Sum of what they object against this Inviolable Union is that David celebrated for a Man after God's own Heart not only committed Adultery with Bathsheba and murder'd her Husband but also had many Wives at once and might divorce them at his Pleasure and consequently did not Live up to this Rule That Solomon also who is fam'd in the Old Testament for an inspired Gift of Wisdom from God And Abraham the Father of the Faithful and in short all or most of the Ancient Patriarchs are recorded to have had many Wives or Concubines And why say they may not we think our selves innocent and safe in the nonobservance of such an Institution If the same was done by those very Persons who are honour'd with the Titles of Patriarchs and celebrated for their extraordinary Share in God's Favour And as for keeping Constant to those Wives or Concubines they chose it is nothing so Divorce was allowed not only by the Heathens but even by God's Laws given to the Jews and that upon Small Dislike And why say they shou'd we imagin any Sinfulness in that which God himself allowed And as for Fornication they plead it has been held Lawful both by Heathens Jews and some Christians The Heathens say they every where allow it nor do we find the Jewish Law directly to forbid it Why then shou'd we be frighted from so dear a Pleasure by the Cavils of a Tribe of Men whose Trade and Livelyhood it is to preach against us This is the Sum of what they plead and I think I have set down the Objections with all the Fairness and Advantage to their Cause which they themselves can in Justice claim Now if it
extenuate the Guilt of his own Ill-Manners And this I think is his Case He would excuse his Adultery under the soft Name of Concubinage and endeavours to prove such Concubinage Innocent from Heb. xiii 4. Marriage is honourable in all and the Bed undefiled but Whoremongers and Adulterers God will judge From which words the Argument is formed thus The Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Particle Copulative and therefore the Words so joined ought to be of a different and distinct Signification This Bed undefiled according to plain Gramatical Construction must be aptly Significant of some certain Bed distinct from the Marriage Bed and that he says must be Concubinage or the Words must start a Riddle hard to be Vnderstood In this is the force of his Argument if it has any but indeed it has none 'T is mere fallacy and sham I will not dispute with him whether the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be Copulative or Exegetical Let that pass The Determination of this Debate does not turn on so nice a Point I will suppose then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Marriage and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bed to have distinct Significations But why must this needs mean his Concubinage What will he say if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies here the Marriage Contract and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Consummation of it What Riddle is started by this Meaning Or what Hardship in it to be Understood And this I think is very evidently the Apostles Sense and this Interpretation agreable to Scripture-Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for a Marriage or Wedding Matth. xxii 2 3. Jo. ii 1. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bed in the Sense I now alledge Rom. ix 10. which our Translators have modestly Translated thus When Rebecca also had conceived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one even our Father Isaac And that I may not stand alone in this let Dr. Hammond be consulted on that Place and Grotius on this of Heb. xiii 4. who shews what his Opinion was by that notion of the Essens which he cites as agreable to the Apostles meaning They he says abstained from Marriage attamen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet they neither disallowed Marriage nor the Procreation of Children The purport of the Text then as I take it is this Marriage is honourable and the Consummation of it without Vncleanness The rest of all that fulsom Pamphlet may easily be answered from the foregoing Discourse The next thing therefore to be consider'd is the Concubinage of unmarried Persons that is when a Man and a Woman consociate on promise of Fidelity and Constancy to each other But do not solemnly Marry according to the Laws of their Country In which if it be pleaded that they fulfil the design of God's Institution altho they do not make any solemn Matrimonial Contract as the Laws of the Land require I would offer these things to be seriously consider'd 1. Whether in this pretended Fidelity and Constancy to each other they be truly and conscienciously Sincere i. e. Whether they are so firmly resolved to be thus Constant as to esteem their Seperation to be a Sin and all Consociation with any other to be Adultery This we have seen the Original Institution of Marriage most certainly requires And if Men would examine themselves carefully in this Matter I doubt it would come close to all Persons that live in such a Practice For I doubt it is a thirst for Liberty and an unwillingness to be under so strict a Confinement and Restraint that is the chief Inducement to such Practices For if Men resolve and think themselves bound in Conscience to observe such inseperable Union and Cohabitation as God's Law requires What should hinder them from confirming this Obligation by Legal Solemnities If they do not think themselves thus bound it is certain they are guilty of Fornication But 2. There is a Conscientious Obedience due to all the Civil Constitutions and Laws of the Country where we live This is one of the chief Acts of Subjection which we owe to the Supreme Magistrates and Powers And as God has commanded us to be Obedient to them So to despise their Good Laws is to Sin against God And this is the more Considerable because in a great many Cases the Good or Evil of Humane Actions is to be determined wholly by Municipal Laws As for Example the Laws of Religion oblige us to be Just to all Men and to do no wrong But the Laws of our Country are in a great many Cases the only Standard whereby to discover what is Just and Right and what is not So also in the Case before us The Design of the Gospel as I take it is to condemn all Consociation of Man and Woman as Fornication but in the State of Marriage But then it must be the Laws of our Country that must determine what is Marriage and what is not Which consideration will yet have more Force if we add 3. That Marriage must suppose a Communion of Estates and Fortunes For it cannot be that Persons so united as to be accounted but One Flesh should have divided Interests and separate Estates They are the nearest Relations to each other which the World affords Our Parents from whom we derive our Being and whose Flesh and Blood we are must yet according to God's Command yield to this closer Bond of Unity Man and Wife should be united in Heart and Life and Properties This is agreable to the common Reason of Mankind and therefore the Roman Law declared Marriage to imply a perpetual Consortship of Life with a Communication of all Divine and Humane Rights Nuptiae sunt conjunctio maris feminae consortium omnis vitae divini humani juris communicatio In order to this perpetual Consortship of Life their Law required that the Man should take the Woman to his own House and this was necessary to constitute a Marriage For thus it was enacted Mulierem absenti per litter as ejus vel per nuntium posse nubere placet si in domum ejus deduceretur A Woman might be married to a Man that was absent either by his Letters or by a Messenger provided that she was brought into his House Public Cohabitation was always required And the Communication of their Rights and Interests is by all Nations esteem'd so Natural and Necessary that the Wife whether she brought any Dowry or no has a Right to Maintenance out of the Husbands Estate tho' there preceded no Deed of Settlement And the Husband by Marriage becomes Proprietor of all that Fortune and Estate that before could properly he call'd her own To which end our Liturgy has properly inserted into the Form of Marriage with all my worldly Goods I thee endow For this reason a Public Solemnizing of Marriage according to the Laws of the Land becomes as Necessary to make their Cohabitation Lawful and Innocent as it is to
shall appear that there is nothing in all this however plausible and promising it may look that will either prove Fornication Harmless and Innocent or exempt those who live in it either from great Guilt or severe Punishment This Objection will do them no good at all And that this is the Truth of the Case I doubt not will be very Evident The full Force of the Objection is drawn 1. From the Practice of such Men as the Scripture celebrates for Holy Men. 2. From the Laws of Jews and other Nations not strictly and severely forbidding this Vice and binding Men up to the Strictness of this Law But 1. As for that Part of the Objection which is built upon their Remarks on the Actions of Good and Holy Men I have often wonder'd that the Debauches of our Age shou'd ever mention David's Miscarriage with Bathsheba as they do to excuse and countenance them For is it not as good an Instance to prove the Lawfulness of Murder and Treachery as of Adultery Or is there any thing in that whole History that proves the Innocence of either Is there not a plain Declaration both of God's heavy Displeasure for this Sin of David's and also of his Signal Repentance 'T is true David is called a Man after God's own Heart But not for any such Action as this For it is said expresly 2. Sam. xi 27. The thing that David had done displeased the Lord. And God's Anger is at large declared against him in the xii Chapter All then that these Men can infer from hence is that the best of Men by the common Frailty of Human Nature and for want of due Vigilance and Circumspection over themselves may sometimes fall into very great Transgressions The Consideration of which shou'd never be alleged for our Justification but shou'd rather teach us to be the more Watchful and the less Censorious and whenever Men do fall it shou'd engage them to return to God by Repentance as David did Without this he had not been the Man after God's own Heart but instead of that had found the dire Effects of God's Displeasure and heavy Vengeance against this Sin And I wou'd earnestly recommend it to all those who have been guilty of David's Transgression to follow his Example in his Repentance and Contrition and Devout and Exemplary Humiliation As for the other Instances they mention of Abraham and Jacob and Solomon and Jephtha that had Concubines and yet are Characterized in Scripture for Good Men and highly favour'd of God I must observe one thing by the way viz. That what the Scripture calls Concubines were not Women that prostituted themselves but such as they took upon a Solemn Contract and Covenant as Wives And sometimes they are expresly so call'd As particularly Gen. xvi 1. Sarah had an Hand-maid an Egyptian whose Name was Hagar and she gave her to her Husband Abraham to be his Wife And again Gen. xxv 1. Abraham took a Wife and her Name was Keturah And yet in Verse the 6th she is called a Concubine and also 1 Chron. 1. 32. To the better understanding of which it is remarkable what a Jewish Doctor has said upon this Place as a Reverend Father of our own Church has cited him out of Mr. Selden She was his Concubine because of her Servile Condition but his Wife because married with Covenants to provide for her and her Children So Grotius tells us that they were such Servants or others of a low Rank whom they married upon Contract giving them a Dowry and tho' their Children did not inherit they had Portions allotted them out of their Father's Inheritance and were inferior to other Wives only in their Dignity i. e. because they once were Servants Agreeably to this we read Gen. xxv 5. Abraham gave all that he had i. e. the Sum of his Inheritance to Isaac but unto the Sons of the Concubines he had he gave Gifts and sent them away All therefore that can from hence be concluded is that Polygamy or the having many Wives was then practised and allow'd But this will make nothing at all for Fornication there being a vast Difference between such a Married Concubine and a Common Prositute The most that can possibly from hence be drawn to their Advantage is that these good Men and highly favour'd of God did not observe the Law we mention in any such Sense as we now put upon it For a farther Answer therefore to this whole Objection I wou'd offer these three things to be seriously consider'd 1. That tho' it shou'd be granted that Polygamy Divorce and even Fornication it self was tolerated by the Laws of the Heathens Jews or by the Customs of Ancient Times it does by no means from hence follow that any of these were in themselves Innocent and without Offence to Almighty God 2. That Fornication especially was never so tolerated by any of them as thereby to be absolutely Approved nor ever had so much Countenance but that we may find clear Evidence of its being accounted an Hateful and Detestable Vice 3. That whatever Connivance Indulgence or Exemption from Punishment God was pleased to grant upon the Transgression of this Law in Ancient Times he has now absolutely Revoked and made void all such and brought us to this his Original Institution We are under a more Perfect Law and a better Dispensation and therefore we are justly tied up to stricter Rules as the indispensable Condition of Salvation If these things can be clearly made out as I hope they may no Just Countenance or Excuse for this Wicked Practice can there be drawn from such Examples 1. That tho' it shou'd be granted that Polygamy Divorce and even Fornication it self was tolerated by the Laws of Heathens Jews or by the Customs of Ancient Times It does by no means from hence follow that any of these were of themselves innocent and without Offence to Almighty God And that because none of these were perfect Rules for the Government of Life in all things exactly according to God's Will 1. As to the Heathens if we speak of their General Manners and exempt the particular Virtues of some few Men we know very well that they had deviated from the Ways of Truth and Virtue and were fal'n into very great and abominable Corruptions They scarce retained any Knowledg of the True God and are therefore said to live as with out God in the World Eph. 2. 12. They had Gods many but their Notions of them were so monstrously Vile and Gross that instead of Restraining they rather Tempted and Invited them to the most Flagitious Immoralities If therefore such Men as these tolerated Whoredom and Adultery and all Uncleanness is their Conversation fit to be drawn into a President How cou'd it be otherwise with them unless their own Natural Modesty restrained them They had the Examples of their very Gods to countenance them and such Abominable Practices made up a chief Part of those Religious Rites
with which they worshipped their Deities For these things they were Abandoned of God who in the Greatness of his Anger and Indignation withdrew from them that ordinary Grace which he wou'd always afford Mankind and left them to themselves and the Lusts of their own Carnal Hearts Rom. 1. 21. c. Because that when they knew God they yet glorified him not as God neither were thankful but became vain in their Imaginations and their Foolish Hearts were darkned therefore God also gave them up to Vncleanness through the Lusts of their own Hearts to dishonour their own Bodies And again v. 26. For this cause God gave them up to Vile Affections And v. 28. As they did not like to retain God in their Knowledg God gave them over to a Reprobate Mind to do those things that are not seemly being filled with all Vnrighteousness Fornication Wickedness So that the Loose Practices and Corrupt Conversation of Men so far degenerated from the Principles of True Religion are very unfit to be mentioned either for the Vindication or the Excuse of Evils committed in a Christian State But 2. They perhaps may expect better Success in their Allegations from the Mosaical Law because that is God's own given to his chosen People to be a Rule to them And if God himself tolerated any such Practices is it not a Fair Inference from hence to conclude that all such Practices are not in their Nature Sinful I answer no not at all because the Law of Moses was Imperfect and no Certain Absolute Standard to determin the true nature of Good and Evil. I do by no means grant that Fornication was allowed by that Law but only supposing that it had I say it cou'd not from hence follow by any necessary Consequence that there was no Evil in it And that because tho' it was God's own Law given to Moses by the Ministry of Angels for the Use of that People whom he had chosen out from the rest of the World yet it was far from being a Compleat Rule for the good Government of Life or from teaching Virtue in Perfection That Part of it which concerns Divine Worship establish't a Gross and Pompous Worship which chiefly consisted in Shew and was very different from that which is in it self most pleasing and best acceptable unto God A Spiritual Worship is most agreable to his Nature for God is a Spirit and must be worshipped in Spirit and in Truth i. e. with Simplicity and Sincerity of Heart with a Pure and Holy Conversation both which are inconsistent with Adultery Fornication and all manner of Leudnes and Sensuality Their Ceremonial Law was either to be their Guide to bring unto Christ and by Figures and Representations to prepare them for the Gospel or else as a means by Condescention and humouring their Gross and Moody Tempers to keep them from falling into Abominable Idolatry and that more Horrid Leudness with which the Gentile World did notoriously pollute themselves As for the ten Commandments or any other Part that concerned their Life and Manners God 't is true forbid the most heinous and highest Degrees of Impiety and Fornication among the rest as I shall shew by and by but there were several things truly Good and highly Commendable in Religion and several Evils Hateful and Blameable before both God and Man about which this Law was in great measure silent Of these Christ has furnish't us with several Instances The Mosaical Law did expresly forbid only Murder but our Saviour tells us that all Causeless and Immoderate Anger is offensive to God That Law chiefly prohibited Perjury But God detests also all Profaneness by vain Swearing and needless Imprecations some Degrees of Revenge then were allowed tho' God approves that we shou'd rather forgive Injuries and love our Enemies And which more nearly concerns the Case before us the Mosaical Law expresly prohibits only Adultery but God desires that we restrain both our Thoughts and Desires and be pure both in Heart and Mind So that the Silence of the Mosaic Law is no good Argument for any such Practice that there is no certain Evil or Immorality therein So far from it that God himself upon the account of these Concessions and Permissions which in a Prudential Regard to their Carnal Tempers he had made says expresly that he gave them Statutes that were not good Ezek. xx 25. That this is the Case of Divorce Christ has assured us Matt. xix 8. For the Hardness of your Hearts God hath suffered you to put away your Wives but from the beginning it was not so God's Allowance of this then manifestly appears not to have proceeded from either the Innocence or Indifference of this Practice for he declares plainly that it was contrary to the Original Institution From the beginning it was not so But it was because he who searcheth the Hearts knew them to be a Subborn and Inflexible People and who if they had not had this Permission wou'd perhaps have fal'n into Murder or Adultery God suffer'd this for the Hardness of their Hearts It was always offensive to him tho' of his Great Goodness and Compassion to Man's Weakness he did then connive at it which indeed is what wise and good Lawgivers are sometimes forced to do As to Polygamy I find Grotius of Opinion that that was not contrary to God's Original Institution which he understands to have ordained that the Union or Consociation of Married Persons shou'd be inseparable and perpetual but not to enjoin the Marrying of one Person only Either of these Opinions is absolutely against Fornication for those who Prostitute themselves violate this Law in both respects But yet I must confess my self not satisfied with this Account nor with the Reason given for it which is only this because Polygamy was anciently so much in use among very good Men from whence he wou'd conclude that it was not contrary to the Will of God He owns that it was alway Deo gratissimum most agreeable to God's Will that one Man shou'd have but one Wife but does not think that it was absolutely unlawful to have more because very good Men had more But with all due respect to his great Character this does not satisfie me And as I shall shew anon that it is no good Consequence on which he grounds this Opinion so at present I have this Objection against it That Divorce was as much in use under the Law as Polygamy before it nay more evidently permitted and allowed And yet Divorce is as contrary to one Part of the Institution as Polygamy to the other And by consequence it having been the Custom in some Ages for good Men to marry more Wives than one is no more a Proof that God's Original Law did not forbid it than the Permission of Divorce will prove that this Law did not ordain an inseparable Union and perpetual Cohabitation God who allowed the one under the Law might for the same Reason connive
Strangers i. e. Women of Foreign Countries were tolerated in this Practice yet it was an Infamous and Flagitious Crime to corrupt one that was free-born and the Offender who shou'd so transgress was by the Law compell'd to marry her For this reason Perigrina or a Strange Woman was the usual and common Phrase for one that did thus prostitute her self And for the same reason the Scripture seems to have used the same Language Judges xi 2. Thou shalt not inherit in our Father's House for thou art the Son of a strange Woman Among the Romans tho' Cicero in his Defence of Caelius Excuses this Iniquity and says Quando hoc non factum Quando reprehensum Quando non permissum c. Yet this indeed is but labouring to make the best of a bad Cause in behalf of his Client for in his Accusation of Cataline and his Morals he makes it up a considerable Part of their Charge that He and his Companions were Aleatores Adulteri Impuri impudici Gamesters Adulterers Vnclean Vnchast And again ut comessationes scorta quaererent they hunt after Revels and Vnchast Women And how come so many sharp Reflections upon all such Manners if there had not been some great Evil some known certain Immorality therein I will add but one Passage more out of Heathen Authors and that I shall transcribe for its great Confirmation of the Difference between Lawful and Innocent things on which I ground my present Argument It is out of Porphyry de Abstinentiâ c. his Words are these The Law does not forbid the Common People to have Harlots but lays a Tax upon such Women for their Licence and Permission and yet it is accounted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very reproachful and infamous for Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but moderately Vertuous to have any Conversation with such Which plainly shews that whatever prevailed among the Heathen to the Permission of such a Vice was only Evil Custom and Corrupt Practice introduced contrary to the Dictates of their Mind and their Natural Sense of Good and Evil. As to the Jews I am of Opinion that all Fornication was absolutely forbidden by their Law For Deut. xxiii 17. it is commanded There shall be no Whore of the Daughters of Israel And tho' I am not ignorant that some learned Interpreters understand this Place to speak of and forbid any Israelitish Woman to prostitute her self in the Idolatrous Temples as the Custom of some Gentiles was yet as this Notion is chiefly raised from the lxxii Paraphrastic Translation of these Words so the Reason they allege for this Law comes up directly to our present Purpose viz. that God wou'd have his own People to abstain from the Leudness and Uncleanness of the Gentiles as well as from their Idolatry And if they were not allowed to commit Leudness with their own Women much less with Strangers because then the Danger was greater as well as the Sin in that by their Sensual Communication they might be seduced to Revolt and by their Leudness fall into Apostacy and Idolatry Thus it happened in their Abode in the Wilderness Numb xxv 1 2. The People began to commit Whoredom with the Daughters of Moab and thereby they call'd the People unto the Sacrifices of their Gods and the People did eat and bowed down to their Gods Which Aggravation of their Crime so incensed God that he sent a Plague among them And Phinehas in a singular Fit of Zeal slaying one of their own Princes and the Midianatish Woman caught in that Fault was applauded and approved of God whose Indignation was thereby appeased and a Covenant of an Everlasting Priesthood given to Phineas on that Account And it is remarkable that St. Paul alluding to this Passage charges the Guilt upon their Fornication 1 Cor. x. 8. Neither let us commit Fornication as some of them committed and fell in one Day three and twenty thousand And to make appear that I have now put no stricter meaning upon the Jewish Laws than they themselves allowed and professed I shall give you one Passage which Grotius has transcribed out of Philo in vitâ Josephi Other Nations says he are allowed after fourteen Years of age in Cells and Stews to desile themselves with Women that are Prostitutes for Gain but we are not allowed any such With us Death is the Punishment denounced against her that shall prostitute her self So that before Lawful Marriage we have no Communication with Women but but come pure and chaste to the Marriage of pure Virgins not meerly to please our Lusts but for the Increase of our Offspring And as to the Ages before the Law I shall only mention the Action of Simeon and Levi who when Shechem had defiled Dinah their Sister slew not only him but all his People and plunder'd their City and vindicated this extraordinary Vengeance by the Notorious Heinousness of the Crime committed shou'd he deal with our Sister as with an Harlot Gen xxxiv 31. So unfit then are the Licentious Practices of former Times to be drawn into a President or to be alleged for the Vindication or Extenuation of this Vice that upon a little Observation we may easily discover what a Lively Sense all Mankind both Jews and Gentiles both before and after the Law have had of its being an Hateful Infamous and Detestable Practice I have one Step farther yet to go for 3. Lastly It must be consider'd too that whatever Dispensation or Connivance God was pleased to grant in former Times to this his first Law and Original Institution he has now Revoked and Repealed all such by the Gospel and bound us up to his Primitive Ordinance Divorce it is confessed he did permit not by Choice but for the Hardness of their Hearts to whom that Law was given Polygamy he did at most but Connive at not directly Tolerate or Allow And from the beginning it was not so there is the manifest Evidence of his great Dislike of it And now he says whom God hath Joined together let no Man put Asunder There 's the Revocation of all former Indulgence and Connivance and a Reestablishment of the first Law in its ancient and primitive force Thus God at first decreed that Man shou'd live And however those in an Obscurer Light have gone astray we Christians are now once more brought back to God's first Rule and must walk by it without any such wilful Deviations or we have no just Hope of the Mercy of God and the Salvation of our Souls by Jesus Christ. And whatever we may observe either Practised or Countenanced either before or under or after the Jewish Law we must say of it as St. Paul did of the Idolatry of the Gentiles Act. xvii 30. The Times of that Ignorance God winked at but now hath commanded all Men every where to repent in that he hath appointed a Day in which he will judg the World by Jesus Christ who has brought us out
were Vile and Flagitious Persons that did prostitute themselves to others yet that 't was not a Sin to use such And as Grotius observes tho' the Apostles found it easy to convince the Gentiles in Matters of Divine Worship and Common Honesty yet the Prejudices of their former corrupt Conversation stuck so fast upon them that they were not easily brought up to this Noble Degree of Christian Purity To oppose which Prejudice they expresly prohibit Fornication by this unanimous Command Another Opinion of theirs was that seeing all Creatures of God are in themselves good and were created for the Benefit of Men therefore they though it was lawful for them to eat all Meat whatsoever and wheresoever they found it And in their full Persuasion of the Innocence of this Liberty they made no Scruple to be present at the Heathen Idolatrous Feasts and under that Pretence communicated with them in Idolatry This therefore the Apostles absolutely forbid And though this which they alledged might possibly be a good Argument for their not abstaining from things strangled and from blood yet the Jews having a certain Tradition that these things were forbidden before the Law of Moses and had been held unlawful ever since the days of Noah they could not be satisfied that they were innocent And therefore in compliance to their Perswasion and Opinion the Apostles restrain the Gentiles in the use of that liberty in those two cases to give no Offence unto the Jews So that they had a two-sold end in this their Sanction And though some of these things were forbidden upon Prudential Considerations and to prevent Offences Fornication was one of the Real Evils and prohibited for its great and certain Immorality And to evidence the Truth of this do but consider after what an earnest and affectionate manner St. Paul disswades from this notorious Vice 1 Cor. vi 9 10. he addresses himself with a great deal of Zeal as to Men that were yet unwilling to believe that there was any great evil or danger in this Practice and he warns them to have a care of this Delusion Be not deceived neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor Effeminate nor Abusers of themselves with Mankind nor Thieves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor Revilers nor Extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God And again 13 14 c. Now the body is not for Fornication but for the Lord and the Lord for the body Know you not that your bodies are the Members of Christ Shall I then take the Members of Christ and make them the Members of an Harlot God forbid What know you not that he that is join'd to an Harlot is one body For two saith he is one flesh but he that is joined unto the Lord is one Spirit Therefore flee Fornication every other Sin that a Man doth is without the body but he that committeth Fornication sinneth against his own body Again Gal. v. 19 20 21. Now the works of the flesh are manifest which are these Adultery Fornication Vncleanness Lasciviousness Idolatry Witchcraft and such like of which I tell you before as I have told you also in time past that they which do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God And Eph. v. 3 5 6 7. But Fornication and all Vncleanness or Covetousness let it not be once named among you as becometh Saints For this you know that no Whoremonger nor unclean Person nor covetous Man who is an Idolater hath any Inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and of God And then he alludes to the delusive Notions whereby they did excuse and extenuate this Vice Let no Man deceive you with vain Words for because of these things cometh the Wrath of God upon the Children of Disobedience Be ye not therefore Partakers with them And Col. iii. 5 6. Mortify therefore your Members which are on the Earth Fornication Vncleanness Inordinate Affection Evil Concupiscence and Covetousness which is Idolatry For which things sake the Wrath of God cometh upon the Children of Disobedience Where the Apostle declares that whatever Pleas Men may allege these are all hateful Sins and such which provoked the Indignation of God even against the Heathens themselves and therefore Christians are under greater Obligations to abstain from them 1 Thes. iv 3 4 5 7. This is the Will of God even your Sanctification that you shou'd obstain from Fornication That every one of you shou'd know how to possess his Vessel in Sanctification and Honour not in the Lusts of Concupiscence as the Gentiles which know not God for God hath not call'd us to Vncleanness but to Holiness and Heb. xiii 4. Marriage is honourable and and the Bed undefiled but Whoremongers and Adulterers God will Iudge 'T is the Charge against the Church of Pergamos that it was Corrupt and had them there that hold the Doctrin of Baalam who taught Balac to cast a Stumbling Block before the Children of Israel to eat things sacrificed unto Idols and to commit Fornication Rev. 2. 14. And against the Church of Thyatria that it suffer'd the Woman Jezabel which calleth her self a Prophetess to teach and seduce my Servants to commit Fornication And I gave her Space to repent of her Fornication and she repented not upon which follow several severe Threatnings of God's heavy Judgments in case they were not seasonably prevented And Rev. xxi 8. The Fearful and Vnbelievers and Abominable and Murderers and Whoremongers and Sorcerers and Idolaters shall have their Part in the Lake which burneth with Fire and Brimstone which is the Second Death Now after such numerous Declarations and so great a Cloud of Witnesses with what Countenance and on what Grounds can Men conceit their roving Pleasures innocent or free from the extremest Danger of everlasting Condemnation These Texts are so positive so plain so intelligible and so express that I cannot but wonder how those who retain any Reverence for the Gospel of Christ can pretend to any Hope of Salvation by it while they continue in this Sin II. The Reasons which St. Paul here alleges do farther shew that this Practice must be both Offensive and Dangerous 1. He answers the most plausible Suggestion that was pleaded by the Corinthians for the Vindication of it They pleaded that their Bodies were their own and that every Man was so far Lord of himself that it was in his Power and Right to use it as he pleas'd To which St. Paul replies No their Bodies were not so absolutely their own nor had they any such incontrolable Authority or Dominion over them God that made them and with Divine Wisdom contriv'd their Frame had a better and more Natural Right than they And by Virtue of that might lay upon them what Restraints he shou'd think convenient Their Bodies too when by Sin become Mortal and subject to Corruption are Redeemed by the Blood of Christ and entitled to Immortality again And Christ by Virtue of the Price which he paid for them on the Cross
of God in the Institution of Marriage in all the parts of it is founded on sound and good Principles of Reason Divorce countenances the imperious humours of ill natured Men and gives encouragement to them to make quarrels and dissentions with the first Wife whenever new Charms shall inflame them to desire a Second Polygamy divides that Love which ought to be entire and must and will inevitably be attended with that unequal Partiality towards one which will bring the others into contempt and hatred And the Jealousie of Rivals upon such occasions must needs bring Divisions and Distractions to a Family But our present business is only with Fornication And to shew that all the Laws and Precepts of the Gospel have their Foundation in the real difference between good and evil and are in themselves Beneficial and Profitable to Men let it be consider'd whether the Dignity and Honour of humane nature is not concern'd in our abstinence from this wicked and enormous Vice Wherein is it that Man excells Brutes and becomes in any respect a nobler and better not to say also a Diviner Creature Is it not in the more valuable faculties of the Soul In an over-ruling Will and a capacious Understanding in the power of Thought and Reason to which all inferior Passions and Affections were at first created in a due and orderly Subjection And does not to this day the true difference of our Natures consist in this that Reason is the ruling Principle in us and Appetite in them By which we become capable of better and nobler Actions of Communion with God in Heaven and a Conversation more Divine How then shall we vindicate the Dignity of our Diviner Nature but by keeping up the Dominion and Superiority of our Reason over the vile Affections and Inclinations of the Body Or in what can we more Dishonour or Debase our selves than in subjecting the noble Faculties of the Soul to the Tyrannic Usurped power of our depraved Appetites and Lusts And does not every wicked Man in Fornication and sensual Uncleanness do this Does Reason prevail Does Conscience or does Lust bear sway in him who gives himself up to the conduct of his loose and sensual Desires To follow the impulse of vile Affections and Inclinations and without restraint Debauch and Prostitute himself at the Instigation of his carnal Appetites What is this but to Dishonour his Nature level himself with Beasts degenerate into a Brute that has no Understanding and reproach both the Wisdom and Goodness of God who made him of a nobler shape and frame So that if Men wou'd think seriously and without partiality it were easie from the Principles of Reason and Natural Religion as well as of Reveal'd to discover that this is a shameful and detestable Vice But it will appear yet more odious if we give our selves the trouble of but a few short Reflections on the mischievous and pernicious Consequences that attend it 1. First then consider the unhappy calamitous fate of that spurious brood that happens to be born by this Vice Shame Infamy and great Disgrace tho the least of all these Evils are such as the wiser Heathens had very deep and lively Apprehensions of To this purpose Plutarch in his Treatise of the Good Education of Children has these Words That they who desire to have Children well esteemed and of Good Repute ought by no means to cohabit with common Women that Prostitute themselves For they who either by Father or Mother are infamously born will have that indelible Infamy attend them all their Life long and be a ready occasion always at hand to every one that has a Mind to affront and reproach them But indeed this Evil does not affect only the Character and Credit of the Children so born but sometimes it becomes a means of infecting their Bodies and shortning their Lives while they labour under Calamitous Infirmities and bring Rottenness and Abominable Putrefaction into the World with them Nay sometimes the Son of Fornication falls an early Sacrifice to conceal his Mothers Shame and as one great Evil too commonly is followed by another this enormous Vice often becomes the Introduction to Unnatural Murder And he who begets such an Illegitimate Child is inevitably injurious and unjust to his own Offspring in that by the Baseness of his Birth he is cut off from all Title or Claim to the Inheritance of his Father's Fortune and Honour which by the Original Laws of God and Nature the Offspring of Man shou'd have a Right and Title to And indeed what farther Evidence can we have of the Hateful and Detestable Apprehensions which all Mankind in all Ages ever had of this Enormous Practice than this That the Children of Fornication have in all civiliz'd Governments been Neglected and Disregarded nor allow'd any Pretence of Title or Claim to the Inheritance of their Father These very Laws and Constitutions of almost all Nations of the World are a most Certain and Irrefragable Proof that this Vice always was detested and abhorr'd by them And yet there is a worse and far greater Calamity that commonly attends the unhappy Children of such Ungodly Parents And that is that either the want of Natural Affection or Shame and a Consciousness of Guilt in the Parents occasion a certain Neglect and Disregard of the Childrens Virtuous and Religious Education And every one that seriously considers the mighty Influence which Education has to make Men either Good or Bad must confess that the Mischief of this Neglect is very deplorable and much to be lamented This for ought we know might be one great End and Purpose of God in the Original Law and Institution of Marriage By sanctifying which State and ordaining that Union to be inseparable and perpetual he lays so firm and Rational a Foundation for each Parents Affection to their Children as will always oblige them to be careful and solicitous for their good And that which seems much to favour this Conjecture is That God most certainly did provide not only for the Propagation and Increase of Mankind but also that it might be in such a manner as might best secure their being trained up in the Knowlege of him And as might most strongly oblige their Parents to instruct them in that Virtue and Piety which will at last bring them to the Eternal Happiness and Glory for which they were Originally designed And yet however necessary this good Education is in the Judgment both of God and Man it is morally impossible that the Children of Fornication shou'd be Religiously brought up Oftentimes either the Poverty or the Shame of the Parents cause them to be exposed in the Streets and consequently to be put out by the Parish where they are found And in such a Case they are thought to fare well if the Nurse to whose Care they are committed supplies them with Food and Raiment but few or none think themselves concern'd in the Good of the Child's Soul and to
the Legal Communication of the Interests and Estates Whatever is wanting to convey those Rights and Priviledges which reason tells us Marriage in the very Nature of it does and must confer and which God himself must therefore be supposed to intend must needs hinder such from being Innocent and Agreable to the Laws of God and must make that Consortship to have the Guilt of Fornication He and she then that are not Married according to the Laws of the Church and State and so as thereby to convey to each other and to their Children an undoubted Title to their Estates are not Married as the Laws of God require but undoubtedly live in Fornication 'T is true a Man may by Deed of Gift settle his Estate on his Miss and her Posterity if he pleases And so he may upon any Body else But it is still in his own Power whether he will or no. Or if he does she is never the less Infamous or Criminal for that For we speak now of such a Communication of Rights as has its Foundation in the very Nature of Marriage and as the Laws both of God and Man have made inseparable from it and not left to a Man's Arbitrary Determination nothing therefore can be a true lawful innocent Marriage or Consortship according to God's Original Institution but what is so celebrated with Legal Ceremonies and Solemnities as Publicly to declare them to be One both in Affection and Interests and mutual Partakers of each others Inheritance and Fortune whether Good or Bad. All other Cohabitation is Sinful and forbidden 4. Lastly The solemnizing Marriage according to Custom of our Country is necessary to prevent Infamy and remove scandal By the Laws of Christianity we are bound to do only such things as are commendable and of good report and to give no offence to the World or to the Church of God And this cannot be in the Consortship of Man and Woman without the Legal Solemnities of Marriage For as to the World things that do not appear are as though they did not exist And they that are not Legally Married or do not Cohabit publickly as Man and Wife are in the Judgment of Mankind as Unmarried God 't is true knows the Hearts and Consciences of Men but he does oblige us not only to do that which is in it self Good but to take care that what we do appears to be so that our Good Actions may shine to his Honour He enjoins not only what is lawful but also what is Convenient He commands not only what is Innocent but what is also commendable in the sight of all Men. And we must carefully avoid not only what is in its nature Evil but also what is without Offence or Scandal And this I am perswaded is a Good Reason why Legal Solemnization and open Cohabitation should be essentially necessary to constitute a Marriage in the sense of Gods Law as well as of the Laws of Men. For though it be confess'd that a Faithful and Perpetual Consociation be the first Condition in the Essence of Marriage and that which is above all things required to make it innocent Yet as we have seen already that is not all There must be moreover a communication of Right And as the Laws of God consult not only the Natural Morality of our Actions but also his Honour in the Reputation of them and the edification and Good of our Brethren in avoiding Scandal and Offence So much must be necessary in the sense of Gods Law to a Lawful Marriage as may keep it clear of infamy and reproach Seeing it was his particular Design in this Institution to sanctify this estate and make it Honourable and of good esteem all such Consortship must needs be Criminal and Guilty before him which by its disagreableness to our common Reason and the common Approved Institutions both of Church and State becomes both Injurious and Scandalous It is therefore necessary and essential to Marriage even in the sense of Gods Law that it should be Solemnly and Legally celebrated Hereby the Ends of it may best be attain'd Hereby Man and Wise become most strongly oblig'd to perpetual cohabitation their Rights are best communicated and the Honour of that State most eminently consulted Hereby alone can it be easily distinguish'd who are Married and who live in Fornication If no more were required to make a real Marriage than the mutual Consent of perpetual Consortship how shall the World and especially how shall the Government be satisfied who are Married and who are not How shall the Law distinguish between those who have so consented and who have not How shall it be known whose Children are Legitimate and whose are not so Or how shall the greatest confusion imaginable be prevented in matters of Right or Wrong Legitimate Children have a Legal Right to the inheritance of their Parents but the illegitimate have none And yet how shall this be determin'd unless Marriage be publickly and legally Solemniz'd Again here would be the greatest encouragement to Fornication imaginable in that Whoredom could not so easily be distinguish'd They who had not consented to this inseperable union would appear in the same Reputation with those that had if the Legal Solemnization was once rejected as unnecessary to Marriage And can that be free from Sin and without God's great displeasure which is productive of such mighty mischiefs To prevent all this confusion it has universally prevail'd in all Nations that Matrimony should be Publickly own'd In the Primitive times of Christianity it was solemniz'd with the consent of the Bishop And so agreable is this to the common sense of Mankind that the Roman Law says Simulatae Nuptiae non sunt Nuptiae Counterfeit Marriage is no Marriage By which I understand that which is not celebrated Solemnly and Publickly as the Law prescribes Those that are thus Legally Married are Man and Wife and their Children Legitimate the rest live in Fornication and their Children are of base and dishonourable Birth So that the Evils which unavoidably follow the neglect of Customary Solemnities are a sufficient Argument how indispensably necessary they are in the Judgment of God as well as of Men. For God must be supposed to intend all that as essential to Matrimony which appears necessary to make it Honourable and to prevent such mighty Mischiefs And therefore if Men would but deal faithfully with their own Consciences it were easy to discover that what is contrary to the Laws of Government capable of being abused to very ill purposes brings on Man and Woman the imputation of Whoredom on their Offspring the disgrace of Bastardy is a scandal to the Church of God and in the sense of the World is esteemed and called Fornication will undoubtedly have the guilt of such before God and can never upon some Clandestine unknown reserve be found Innocent and Safe and Justifiable at his dreadful and impartial Tribunal Marriage is Honourable and the Marriage Bed undefiled but Whoremongers and Adulterers God will Judge FINIS * Bishop Patrick on Gen xxvi Jo. iv 24. Grotius de jure B. P. l 2. cap. v. §. ix Mat. xix 9. Jo viii 56. Heb. xi 19. Gen xv 6. See Bishop Patrick on Gen. xv 6. Gâ—ot de Jure B. P. 342. Dâ—gest Lib. 1. Tit. 17 §. 144. Ter. Adelph A. iv Sc. 5. M Dâ—cier in Ter. Spencer de Legibus 〈◊〉 le Clerk In Matt. v. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matt. Heb. vii 16. v. 20. Ver. 18. 1 Pet. 2. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Rom. 1. 24 26 28. Ad haec tempota quibus nec vitia nostia nec remedia pati possumus perventum est Liv. Heb. x. 29. 1 Tim. iv 2. Heb. iii. 12. Gal v. 17. Prov. ii 16 17 c. Luk. ix 55. 1 Thess. iv 7. Phil. iii. â—â— Col. iii. 4. Eph. v. 7. 1 Pet. i. 15. Jo. Butler B. D. â—ig l. 22. Tit. 2. l. 1. Iâ— l 5. Ignat. ad Polycarpum