| JOHN
MILTON THE JUDGMENT OF MARTIN BUCER CONCERNING DIVORCE |
( Based
upon the text of Bucer's edition,
London, 1644 ). |
| XV • XX • XXV • XXX • XXXV • XL • XLV |
| THE JUDGMENT OF MARTIN BUCER CONCERNING DIVORCE. |
| |
Written
to Edward the Sixth, in his Second Book of the Kingdom of Christ ;
and now English'd : Wherein a late Book, restoring the “ Doctrine
and Discipline of Divorce, ” is here confirm'd and justify'd
by the Authority of Martin Bucer. |
| To the Parliament of England. |
| John iii. 10. “ Art thou a teacher of Israel, and knowest not these things ? ” |
| Publish'd by Authority. |
| TESTIMONIES OF THE HIGH APPROBATION WHICH LEARNED MEN HAVE GIVEN OF MARTIN BUCER. |
| ~ Simon Grinæus, 1533 ~ |
Among
all the Germans, I give the palm to Bucer, for excellence in the Scriptures.
Melancthon in human learning is wondrous fluent; but greater knowledge
in the Scripture I attribute to Bucer, and speak it unfeignedly. |
~ John
Calvin, 1539 ~ |
Martin
Bucer, a most faithful doctor of the church of Christ, besides his rare
learning, and copious knowledge of many things, besides his clearness
of wit, much reading, and other many and various virtues, wherein he
is almost by none now living excelled, hath few equals, and excels most;
hath this praise peculiar to himself, that none in this age hath used
exacter diligence in the exposition of Scripture. |
And
a little beneath. |
Bucer
is more large than to be read by overbusied men, and too high to be
easily understood by unattentive men, and of a low capacity. |
~ Sir
John Cheek, Tutor to King Edward VI, 1551 ~ |
We
have lost our master, than whom the world scarce held a greater, whether
we consider his knowledge of true religion, or his integrity and innocence
of life, or his incessant study of holy things, or his matchless labour
of promoting piety, or his authority and amplitude of teaching, or whatever
else was praise-worthy and glorious in him. Script. Anglican. pag. 864. |
~ John
Sturmius of Strasburgh ~ |
No
man can be ignorant what a great and constant opinion and estimation
of Bucer there is in Italy, France, and England. Whence the saying of
Quintilian hath oft come to my mind, that he hath well profited in eloquence
whom Cicero pleases. The same say I of Bucer, that he hath made no small
progress in divinity, whom Bucer pleases; for in his volumes, which
he wrote very many, there is the plain impression to be discerned of
many great virtues, of diligence, of charity, of truth, of acuteness,
of judgment, of learning. Wherein he hath a certain proper kind of writing,
whereby he doth not only teach the reader, but affects him with the
sweetness of his sentences, and with the manner of his arguing, which
is so teaching, and so logical, that it may be perceived how learnedly
he separates probable reasons from necessary, how forcibly he confirms
what he has to prove, how subtilely he refutes, not with sharpness but
with truth. |
~ Theodore
Beza, on the Portraiture of M. Bucer ~ |
This
is that countenance of Bucer, the mirror of mildness tempered with gravity;
to whom the city of Strasburgh owes the reformation of her church. Whose
singular learning, and eminent zeal, joined with excellent wisdom, both
his learned books and public disputations in the general diets of the
empire shall witness to all ages. Him the German persecution drove into
England; where, honourably entertained by Edward the VIth, he was for
two years chief professor of divinity in Cambridge, with greatest frequency
and applause of all learned and pious men until his death, 1551. Bezæ
Icones. |
~ Mr.
Fox’s Book of Martyrs, Vol. iii. p. 763 ~ |
Bucer,
what by writing, but chiefly by reading and preaching openly, wherein,
being painful in the word of God, he never spared himself, nor regarded
health, brought all men into such an admiration of him, that neither
his friends could sufficiently praise him, nor his enemies in any point
find fault with his singular life and sincere doctrine. A most certain
token whereof may be his sumptuous burial at Cambridge, solemnized with
so great an assistance of all the university, that it was not possible
to devise more to the setting out and amplifying of the same. |
~ Dr.
Pern, the Popish Vice-chancellor of Cambridge, his adversary ~ |
Cardinal
Pool, about the fourth year of Queen Mary, intending to reduce the university
of Cambridge to popery again, thought no way so effectual, as to cause
the bones of Martin Bucer and Paulus Fagius, which had been four years
in the grave, to be taken up and burnt openly with their books, as knowing
that those two worthy men had been of greatest moment to the reformation
of that place from popery, and had left such powerful seeds of their
doctrine behind them, as would never die, unless the men themselves
were digged up, and openly condemned for heretics by the university
itself. This was put in execution, and Doctor Pern, vice-chancellor,
appointed to preach against Bucer: who, among other things, laid to
his charge the opinions which he held of the marriage of priests, of
divorcement, and of usury. But immediately after his sermon, or somewhat
before, as the Book of Martyrs for a truth relates, vol. iii. p. 770,
the said Doctor Pern smiting himself on the breast, and in manner weeping,
wished with all his heart, that God would grant his soul might then
presently depart, and remain with Bucer’s; for he knew his life
was such, that if any man’s soul were worthy of heaven, he thought
Bucer’s in special to be most worthy. Histor. de Combust. Buceri
et Fagii. |
~ Acworth,
the University-orator ~ |
Soon
after that Queen Elizabeth came to the crown, this condemnation of Bucer
and Fagius by the cardinal and his doctors was solemnly repealed by
the university; and the memory of those two famous men celebrated in
an oration by Acworth, the University-orator, which is yet extant in
the Book of Martyrs, vol. iii. p. 773, and in Latin, Scripta Anglican.
p. 936. |
Nicholas
Carre, a learned man; Walter Haddon, master of the requests to Queen
Elizabeth; Matthew Parker, afterwards primate of England; with other
eminent men, in their funeral orations and sermons, express abundantly
how great a man Martin Bucer was; what an incredible loss England sustained
in his death; and that with him died the hope of a perfect reformation
for that age. Ibid. |
~ Jacobus
Verheiden of Grave, in his eulogies of famous divines ~ |
Though
the name of Martin Luther be famous, yet thou, Martin Bucer, for piety,
learning, labour, care, vigilance, and writing, are not to be held inferior
to Luther. Bucer was a singular instrument of God, so was Luther. By
the death of this most learned and most faithful man, the church of
Christ sustained a heavy loss, as Calvin witnesseth; and they who are
studious of Calvin are not ignorant how much he ascribes to Bucer; for
thus he writes in a letter to Viretus: “What a manifold loss befel
the church of God in the death of Bucer, as oft as I call to mind, I
feel my heart almost rent asunder.” |
~ Peter
Martyr Epist. to Conradus Hubertus ~ |
He
is dead, who hath overcome in many battles of the Lord. God lent us
for a time this our father, and our teacher, never enough praised. Death
hath divided me from a most unanimous friend, one truly according to
mine own heart. My mind is overpressed with grief, insomuch that I have
not power to write more. I bid thee in Christ farewell, and wish thou
mayst be able to bear the loss of Bucer better than I can bear it. |
Testimonies
given by learned men to Paulus Fagius, who held the same opinion with
Martin Bucer concerning divorce. |
Paulus
Fagius, born in the Palatinate, became most skilful in the Hebrew tongue.
Being called to the ministry at Isna, he published many ancient and
profitable Hebrew books, being aided in the expenses by a senator of
that city, as Origen sometime was by a certain rich man called Ambrosius.
At length invited to Strasburgh, he there famously discharged the office
of a teacher; until the same persecution drove him and Bucer into England,
where he was preferred to a professor’s place in Cambridge, and
soon after died. Bezæ Icones. |
Melchior
Adamus writes his life among the famous German divines. |
Sleidan
and Huanus mention him with honour in their history : and Verheiden
in his eulogies. |
To
the Parliament. |
The
Book which, among other great and high points of reformation, contains
as a principal part thereof, this treatise here presented, supreme court
of parliament! was, by the famous author Martin Bucer, dedicated to
Edward the VI.: whose incomparable youth doubtless had brought forth
to the church of England such a glorious manhood, had his life reached
it, as would have left in the affairs of religion nothing without an
excellent pattern for us now to follow. But since the secret purpose
of divine appointment hath reserved no less perhaps than the just half
of such a sacred work to be accomplished in this age, and principally,
as we trust, by your successful wisdom and authority, religious lords
and commons! what wonder if I seek no other, to whose exactest judgment
and review I may commend these last and worthiest labours of this renowned
teacher; whom living all the pious nobility of those reforming times,
your truest and bestimitated ancestors, reverenced and admired. Nor
was he wanting to a recompense as great as was himself; when both at
many times before, and especially among his last sighs and prayers,
testifying his dear and fatherly affection to the church and realm of
England, he sincerely wished in the hearing of many devout men, “that
what he had in his last book written to King Edward concerning discipline
might have place in this kingdom. His hope was then, that no calamity,
no confusion, or deformity would happen to the commonwealth; but otherwise
he feared, lest in the midst of all this ardency to know God, yet by
the neglect of discipline, our good endeavours would not succeed.”*
These remarkable words of so godly and so eminent a man at his death,
as they are related by a sufficient and well-known witness, who heard
them, and inserted by Thuanus into his grave and serious history; so
ought they to be chiefly considered by that nation, for whose sake they
were uttered, and more especially by that general council, which represents
the body of that nation. If therefore the book, or this part thereof,
for necessary causes be now revived and recommended to the use of this
undisciplined age; it hence appears, that these reasons have not erred
in the choice of a fit patronage for a discourse of such importance.
But why the whole tractate is not here brought entire, but this matter
of divorcement selected in particular, to prevent the full speed of
some misinterpreter, I hasten to disclose. First, it will be soon manifest
to them who know what wise men should know, that the constitution and
reformation of a commonwealth, if Ezra and Nehemiah did not misreform,
is like a building, to begin orderly from the foundation thereof, which
is marriage and the family, to set right first whatever is amiss therein.
How can there else grow up a race of warrantable men, while the house
and home that breeds them is troubled and disquieted under a bondage
not of God’s constraining, with a natureless constraint, (if his
most righteous judgments may be our rule,) but laid upon us imperiously
in the worst and weakest ages of knowledge, by a canonical tyranny of
stupid and malicious monks? who having rashly vowed themselves to a
single life, which they could not undergo, invented new fetters to throw
on matrimony, that the world thereby waxing more dissolute, they also
in a general looseness might sin with more favour. Next, there being
yet among many such a strange iniquity and perverseness against all
necessary divorce, while they will needs expound the words of our Saviour,
not duly by comparing other places, as they must do in the resolving
of a hundred other scriptures, but by persisting deafly in the abrupt
and papistical way of a literal apprehension against the direct analogy
of sense, reason, law, and gospel; it therefore may well seem more than
time, to apply the sound and holy persuasions of this apostolic man
to that part in us, which is not yet fully dispossessed of an error
as absurd, as most that we deplore in our blindest adversaries; and
to let his authority and unanswerable reasons be vulgarly known, that
either his name, or the force of his doctrine, may work a wholesome
effect. Lastly, I find it clear to be the author’s intention,
that this point of divorcement should be held and received as a most
necessary and prime part of discipline in every Christian government.
And therefore having reduced his model of reformation to fourteen heads,
he bestows almost as much time about this one point of divorce, as about
all the rest; which also was the judgment of his heirs and learned friends
in Germany, best acquainted with his meaning; who first published this
his book by Oporinus at Basil, (a city for learning and constancy in
the true faith honourable among the first,) added a special note in
the title, “that there the reader should find the doctrine of
divorce handled so solidly, and so fully, as scarce the like in any
writer of that age:” and with this particular commendation they
doubted not to dedicate the book, as a most profitable and exquisite
discourse, to Christian the IIId, a worthy and pious king of Denmark,
as the author himself had done before to our Edward the VIth. Yet did
not Bucer in that volume only declare what his constant opinion was
herein, but also in his comment upon Matthew, written at Strasburgh
divers years before, he treats distinctly and copiously the same argument
in three several places; touches it also upon the 7th to the Romans,
and promises the same solution more largely upon the first to the Corinthians,
omitting no occasion to weed out this last and deepest mischief of the
canon law, sown into the opinions of modern men, against the laws and
practice both of God’s chosen people, and the best primitive times.
Wherein his faithfulness and powerful evidence prevailed so far with
all the church of Strasburgh, that they published this doctrine of divorce
as an article of their confession, after they had taught so eight and
twenty years, through all those times, when that city flourished, and
excelled most, both in religion, learning, and government, under those
first restorers of the gospel there, Zelius, Hedio, Capito, Fagius,
and those who incomparably then governed the commonwealth, Ferrerus
and Sturmius. If therefore God in the former age found out a servant,
and by whom he had converted and reformed many a city, by him thought
good to restore the most needful doctrine of divorce from rigorous and
harmful mistakes on the right hand; it can be no strange thing, if in
this age he stir up by whatsoever means whom it pleases him, to take
in hand and maintain the same assertion. Certainly if it be in man’s
discerning to sever providence from chance, I could allege many instances,
wherein there would appear cause to esteem of me no other than a passive
instrument under some power and counsel higher and better than can be
human, working to a general good in the whole course of this matter.
For that I owe no light or leading received from any man in the discovery
of this truth, what time I first undertook it in “the Doctrine
and Discipline of Divorce,” and had only the infallible grounds
of Scripture to be my guide, He who tries the inmost heart, and saw
with what severe industry and examination of myself I set down every
period, will be my witness. When I had almost finished the first edition,
I chanced to read in the notes of Hugo Grotius upon the 5th of Matthew,
whom I straight understood inclining to reasonable terms in this controversy:
and something he whispered rather than disputed about the law of charity,
and the true end of wedlock. Glad therefore of such an able assistant,
however at much distance, I resolved at length to put off into this
wild and calumnious world. For God, it seems, intended to prove me,
whether I durst alone take up a rightful cause against a world of disesteem,
and found I durst. My name I did not publish, as not willing it should
sway the reader either for me or against me. But when I was told that
the style, which what it ails to be so soon distinguishable I cannot
tell, was known by most men, and that some of the clergy began to inveigh
and exclaim on what I was credibly informed they had not read; I took
it then for my proper season, both to show them a name that could easily
contemn such an indiscreet kind of censure, and to reinforce the question
with a more accurate diligence: that if any of them would be so good
as to leave railing, and to let us hear so much of his learning and
Christian wisdom, as will be strictly demanded of him in his answering
to this problem, care was had he should not spend his preparations against
a nameless pamphlet. By this time I had learned that Paulus Fagius,
one of the chief divines in Germany, sent for by Frederic the Palatine,
to reform his dominion, and after that invited hither in King Edward’s
days, to be a professor of divinity in Cambridge, was of the same opinion
touching divorce, which these men so lavishly traduced in me. What I
found, I inserted where fittest place was, thinking sure they would
respect so grave an author, at least to the moderating of their odious
inferences. And having now perfected a second edition, I referred the
judging thereof to your high and impartial sentence, honoured lords
and commons! For I was confident, if any thing generous, any thing noble,
and above the multitude, were left yet in the spirit of England; it
could be no where sooner found, and no where sooner understood, than
in that house of justice and true liberty, where ye sit in council.
Nor doth the event hitherto, for some reasons which I shall not here
deliver, fail me of what I conceived so highly. Nevertheless, being
far otherwise dealt with by some, of whose profession and supposed knowledge
I had better hope, and esteemed the deviser of a new and pernicious
paradox; I felt no difference within me from that peace and firmness
of mind, which is of nearest kin to patience and contentment: both for
that I knew I had divulged a truth linked inseparably with the most
fundamental rules of Christianity, to stand or fall together, and was
not uninformed, that divers learned and judicious men testified their
daily approbation of the book. Yet at length it hath pleased God, who
had already given me satisfaction in myself, to afford me now a means
whereby I may be fully justified also in the eyes of men. |
When
the book had been now the second time set forth well-nigh three months,
as I best remember, I then first came to hear that Martin Bucer had
written much concerning divorce: whom, earnestly turning over, I soon
perceived, but not without amazement, in the same opinion, confirmed
with the same reasons which in that published book, without the help
or imitation of any precedent writer, I had laboured out, and laid together.
Not but that there is some difference in the handling, in the order,
and the number of arguments, but still agreeing in the same conclusion.
So as I may justly gratulate mine own mind with due acknowledgment of
assistance from above, which led me, not as a learner, but as a collateral
teacher, to a sympathy of judgment with no less a man than Martin Bucer.
And he, if our things here below arrive him where he is, does not repent
him to see that point of knowledge, which he first and with an unchecked
freedom preached to those more knowing times of England, now found so
necessary, though what he admonished were lost out of our memory; yet
that God doth now again create the same doctrine in another unwritten
table, and raises it up immediately out of his pure oracle to the convincement
of a perverse age, eager in the reformation of names and ceremonies,
but in realities as traditional and as ignorant as their forefathers.
I would ask now the foremost of my profound accusers, whether they dare
affirm that to be licentious, new, and dangerous, which Martin Bucer
so often and so urgently avouched to be most lawful, most necessary,
and most Christian, without the least blemish to his good name, among
all the worthy men of that age, and since, who testify so highly of
him? If they dare, they must then set up an arrogance of their own against
all those churches and saints who honoured him without this exception:
if they dare not, how can they now make that licentious doctrine in
another, which was never blamed or confuted in Bucer, or in Fagius?
The truth is, there will be due to them for this their unadvised rashness
the best donative that can be given them; I mean, a round reproof; now
that where they thought to be most magisterial, they have displayed
their own want, both of reading, and of judgment. First, to be so unacquainted
in the writings of Bucer, which are so obvious and so useful in their
own faculty; next, to be so caught in a prejudicating weakness, as to
condemn that for lewd, which (whether they knew or not) these elect
servants of Christ commended for lawful; and for new that which was
taught by these almost the first and greatest authors of reformation,
who were never taxed for so teaching; and dedicated without scruple
to a royal pair of the first reforming kings in Christendom, and confessed
in the public confession of a most orthodoxical church and state in
Germany. This is also another fault which I must tell them; that they
have stood now almost this whole year clamouring afar off, while the
book hath been twice printed, twice brought up, and never once vouchsafed
a friendly conference with the author, who would be glad and thankful
to be shown an error, either by private dispute, or public answer, and
could retract, as well as wise men before him; might also be worth their
gaining, as one who heretofore hath done good service to the church
by their own confession. Or if he be obstinate, their confutation would
have rendered him without excuse, and reclaimed others of no mean parts,
who incline to his opinion. |
But
now their work is more than doubled; and how they will hold up their
heads against the sudden aspect of these two great and reverend saints,
whom they have defamed, how they will make good the censuring of that,
for a novelty of license, which Bucer constantly taught to be a pure
and holy law of Christ’s kingdom, let them advise. For against
these my adversaries, who, before the examining of a propounded truth
in a fit time of reformation, have had the conscience to oppose naught
else but their blind reproaches and surmises, that a single innocence
might not be oppressed and overborne by a crew of mouths, for the restoring
of a law and doctrine falsely and unlearnedly reputed new and scandalous;
God, that I may ever magnify and record this his goodness, hath unexpectedly
raised up as it were from the dead more than one famous light of the
first reformation, to bear witness with me, and to do me honour in that
very thing, wherein these men thought to have blotted me; and hath given
them the proof of a capacity, which they despised, running equal, and
authentic with some of their chiefest masters unthought of, and in a
point of sagest moment. However, if we know at all when to ascribe the
occurrences of this life to the work of a special Providence, as nothing
is more usual in the talk of good men, what can be more like to a special
Providence of God, than in the first reformation of England, that this
question of divorce, as a main thing to be restored to just freedom,
was written, and seriously commended to Edward the VIth, by a man called
from another country to be the instructor of our nation; and now in
this present renewing of the church and commonwealth, which we pray
may be more lasting, that the same question should be again treated
and presented to this parliament, by one enabled to use the same reasons
without the least sight or knowledge of what was done before? It were
no trespass, lords and commons! though something of less note were attributed
to the ordering of a heavenly power; this question therefore of such
prime concernment both to Christian and civil welfare, in such an extraordinary
manner, not recovered, but plainly twice born to these latter ages,
as from a divine hand I tender to your acceptance, and most considerate
thoughts. Think not that God raised up in vain a man of greatest authority
in the church, to tell a trivial and licentious tale in the ears of
that good prince, and to bequeath it as his last will and testament,
nay rather as the testament and royal law of Christ, to this nation;
or that it should of itself, after so many years, as it were in a new
field where it was never sown, grow up again as a vicious plant in the
mind of another, who had spoke honestest things to the nation; though
he knew not that what his youth then reasoned without a pattern had
been heard already, and well allowed from the gravity and worth of Martin
Bucer: till meeting with the envy of men ignorant in their own undertaken
calling, God directed him to the forgotten writings of this faithful
evangelist, to be his defence and warrant against the gross imputation
of broaching license. Ye are now in the glorious way to high virtue,
and matchless deeds, trusted with a most inestimable trust, the asserting
of our just liberties. Ye have a nation that expects now, and from mighty
sufferings aspires to be the example of all Christendom to a perfectest
reforming. Dare to be as great, as ample, and as eminent in the fair
progress of your noble designs, as the full and goodly stature of truth
and excellence itself; as unlimited by petty precedents and copies,
as your unquestionable calling from Heaven gives ye power to be. What
are all our public immunities and privileges worth, and how shall it
be judged, that we fight for them with minds worthy to enjoy them, if
we suffer ourselves in the mean while not to understand the most important
freedom, that God and nature hath given us in the family; which no wise
nation ever wanted, till the popery and superstition of some former
ages attempted to remove and alter divine and most prudent laws for
human and most imprudent canons: whereby good men in the best portion
of their lives, and in that ordinance of God which entitles them from
the beginning to most just and requisite contentments, are compelled
to civil indignities, which by the law of Moses bad men were not compelled
to? Be not bound about, and straitened in the spacious wisdom of your
free spirits, by the scanty and unadequate and inconsistent principles
of such as condemn others for adhering to traditions, and are themselves
the prostrate worshippers of custom; and of such a tradition as they
can deduce from no antiquity, but from the rudest and thickest barbarism
of antichristian times. |
But
why do I anticipate the more acceptable and prevailing voice of learned
Bucer himself, the pastor of nations? And O that I could set him living
before ye in that doctrinal chair, where once the learnedest of England
thought it no disparagement to sit at his feet! He would be such a pilot,
and such a father to ye, as ye would soon find the difference of his
hand and skill upon the helm of reformation. Nor do I forget that faithful
associate of his labours, Paulus Fagius; for these their great names
and merits, how precious soever, God hath now joined with me necessarily,
in the good or evil report of this doctrine, which I leave with you.
It was written to a religious king of this land; written earnestly as
a main matter wherein this kingdom needed a reform, if it purposed to
be the kingdon of Christ: written by him, who if any, since the days
of Luther, merits to be counted the apostle of the church: whose unwearied
pains and watching for our sakes, as they spent him quickly here among
us, so did they, during the shortness of his life, incredibly promote
the gospel throughout this realm. The authority, the learning, the godliness
of this man consulted with, is able to outbalance all that the lightness
of a vulgar opposition can bring to counterpoise. I leave him also as
my complete surety and testimonial, if truth be not the best witness
to itself, that what I formerly presented to your reading on this subject,
was good, and just, and honest, not licentious. Not that I have now
more confidence by the addition of these great authors to my party:
for what I wrote was not my opinion, but my knowledge; even then when
I could trace no footstep in the way I went: nor that I think to win
upon your apprehensions with numbers and with names, rather than with
reasons; yet certainly the worst of my detractors will not except against
so good a bail of my integrity and judgment, as now appears for me.
They must else put in the fame of Bucer and of Fagius, as my accomplices
and confederates into the same indictment; they must dig up the good
name of these prime worthies, (if their names could be ever buried,)
they must dig them up and brand them as the papists did their bodies;
and those their pure unblamable spirits, which live not only in heaven,
but in their writings, they must attaint with new attaintures, which
no protestant ever before aspersed them with. Or if perhaps we may obtain
to get our appeachment new drawn a writ of error, not of libertinism,
that those two principal readers of reformation may not now come to
be sued in a bill of license, to the scandal of our church; the brief
result will be, that for the error, if their own works be not thought
sufficient to defend them, their lives yet, who will be ready, in a
fair and Christianly discussive way, to debate and sift this matter
to the utmost ounce of learning and religion, in him that shall lay
it as an error, either upon Martin Bucer, or any other of his opinion.
If this be not enough to qualify my traducers, and that they think it
more for the wisdom of their virulence, not to recant the injuries they
have bespoke me, I shall not, for much more disturbance than they can
bring me, intermit the prosecution of those thoughts, which may render
me best serviceable, either to this age, or, if it so happen, to posterity;
following the fair path, which your illustrious exploits, honoured lords
and commons! against the breast of tyranny have opened; and depending
so on your happy successes in the hopes that I have conceived either
of myself, or of the nation, as must needs conclude me one who most
affectionately wishes and awaits the prosperous issue of your noble
and valorous counsels. |
John
Milton. |
| THE JUDGMENT OF MARTIN BUCER TOUCHING DIVORCE : |
|
Taken out of the Second Book
entitled “ Of the Kingdom of Christ ; ” written
by Martin Bucer to Edward the Sixth, King of England. |
| XV. |
| The 7th Law of the sanctifying and ordering of Marriage. |
Besides
these things, Christ our King, and his Churches require from your Sacred
Majesty, that you would take upon you the just care of Marriages. For
it is unspeakable how many good Consciences are hereby entangled, afflicted,
and in danger, because there are no just Laws, no speedy way constituted
according to God's Word, touching this holy Society and Fountain of
Mankind. For seeing Matrimony is a civil thing, Men, that they may rightly
contract, inviolably keep, and not without extreme necessity dissolve
Marriage, are not only to be taught by the Doctrine and Discipline of
the Church, but also are to be acquitted, aided, and compell'd by Laws
and Judicature of the Commonwealth. Which thing pious Emperors acknowledging,
and therin framing themselves to the Law of Nations, gave Laws both
of contracting and preserving, and also where an unhappy need requir'd,
of divorcing Marriages. As may be seen in the Code of Justinian, the
5th Book, from the beginning through twenty-four titles. And in the
Authentic of Justinian the 22d, and some others. |
But
the Antichrists of Rome, to get the Imperial Power into their own hands,
first by fraudulent persuasion, afterwards by force drew to themselves
the whole authority of determining and judging as well in matrimonial
causes, as in most other matters. Therfore it hath bin long believ'd,
that the care and government therof doth not belong to the Civil Magistrate.
Yet where the Gospel of Christ is receiv'd, the Laws of Antichirst should
be rejected. If therfore Kings and Governors take not this care, by
the power of Law and Justice to provide that Marriages be piously contracted,
religiously kept, and lawfully dissolv'd, if need require, who sees
not what confusion and trouble is brought upon this holy Society ; and
what a rack is prepar'd, even for many of the best Consciences, while
they have no certain Laws to follow, no Justice to implore, if any intolerable
thing happen. And how much it concerns the honour and safety of the
Commonwealth, that Marriages, according to the Will of Christ, be made,
maintained, and not without just cause dissolv'd, who understands not ?
For unless that first and holiest Society of Man and Woman be purely
constituted, that houshold Discipline may be upheld by them according
to God's Law, how can we expect a race of good Men ? Let your Majesty
therfore know that this is your duty, and in the first place, to reassume
to yourself the just ordering of Matrimony, and by firm Laws to establish
and defend the Religion of this first and divine Society among Men,
as all wise Law-givers of old, and Christian Emperors have carefully
done. |
The
two next Chapters, because they chiefly treat about the Degrees of Consanguinity
and Affinity, I omit ; only setting down a passage or two concerning
the Judicial Laws of Moses, how fit they be for Christians to imitate
rather than any other. |
| XVII. |
| ( toward the end ) |
I
confess that we being free in Christ, are not bound to the Civil Laws
of Moses in every circumstance ; yet seeing no Laws can be more
honest, just, and wholesome, then those which God himself gave, who
is eternal Wisdom and Goodness, I see not why Christians, in things
which no less appertain to them, ought not to follow the Laws of God,
rather than of any Men. We are not to use Circumcision, Sacrifice, and
those bodily Washings prescrib'd to the Jews ; yet by these things we
may rightly learn, with that purity and devotion both Baptism and the
Lord's Supper should be administer'd and receiv'd. How much more is
it our duty to observe diligently what the Lord hath commanded, and
taught by the Examples of his People concerning Marriage, wherof we
have the use no less than they ? |
And
because this same worthy Author hath another passage to this purpose,
in his Comment upon Matthew, Chap. 5. 19. I here insert it from p. 46. |
Since
we have need of Civil Laws, and the power of punishing, it will be wisest
not to contemn those given by Moses ; but seriously rather to consider
what the meaning of God was in them, what he chiefly requir'd, and how
much it might be to the good of every Nation, if they would borrow thence
their manner of governing the Commonwealth ; yet freely all things and
with the Spirit of Christ. For what Solon, or Plato, or Aristotle, what
Lawyers or Caesars could make better Laws than God ? And it is
no light argument, that many Magistrates at this day, do not enough
acknowledge the Kingdom of Christ, though they would seem most Christian,
in that they govern their States by Laws so diverse from those of Moses. |
The
18th Chapter I only mention as determining a thing not here in question,
that Marriage without consent of Parents ought not to be held good ;
yet with this qualification fit to be known. |
That
if Parents admit not the honest desires of their Children, but shall
persist to abuse the power they have over them ; they are to be mollify'd
by Admonitions, Entreaties, and Persuasions, first of their Friends
and Kindred, next of the Church Elders. Whom if still the hard Parents
refuse to hear, then ought the Magistrate to interpose his Power : lest
any by the evil mind of their Parents be detain'd from Marriage longer
than is meet, or forc'd to an unworthy match : in which case the Roman
Laws also provided. C. de nupt. l. 11, 13, 26. |
Whether
it may be permitted to revoke the Promise of Marriage. |
Here
ariseth another Question concerning contracts, when they ought to be
unchangeable ? for religious Emperors decreed that the Contract
was not indossoluble, until the spouse were brought home, and the Solemnities
perform'd. They thought it a thing unworthy of divine and human Equity,
and the due consideration of Man's infirmity in deliberating and determining,
when space is given to renounce other Contracts of much less moment,
which are not yet confirm'd before the Magistrate, to deny that to the
most weighty contract of Marriage, which requires the greatest care
and consultation. Yet lest such a covenant should be broken for no just
cause, and to the injury of that person to whom Marriage was promised,
they decreed a Fine, that he who deny'd Marriage to whom he had promis'd,
and for some cause not approv'd by the Judges, should pay the double
of that pledge which was given at making sure, or as much as the Judge
should pronounce might satisfy the damage, or the hindrance of either
party. It being most certain, that oft-times after contract, just and
honest causes of departing from promise, come to be known and found
out, it cannot be other than the duty of pious Princes to give Men the
same liberty of unpromising in these causes, as pious Emperors granted
: especially where there is only a promise, and not carnal knowledge.
And as there is no true Marriage between them, who agree not in true
consent of Mind ; so it will be the part of godly Magistrates to procure
that no Matrimony be among their Subjects, but what is knit with love
and consent. And tho' your Majesty be not bound to the Imperial Laws,
yet it is the duty of a Christian King to embrace and follow whatever
he knows to be any where piously and justly constituted, and to be honest,
just, and well-pleasing to his People. But why in God's Law and the
Examples of his Saints, nothing herof is read ; no marvel, seeing his
ancient People had power, yea a precept, that whoso could not bend his
mind to the true love of his Wife, should give her a Bill of Divorce,
and send her from him, though after carnal knowledge and long dwelling
together. This is enough to authorize a godly Prince in that indulgence
which he gives to the changing of a Contract ; both because it is certainly
the invention of Antichrist, that the promise of Marriage de pr¾senti,
as they call it, should be indissoluble, and because it should be a
Prince's care that Matrimony be so join'd, as God ordain'd ; which is,
that every one should love his Wife with such a love as Adam express'd
to Eve : So as we may hope that they who marry may become one flesh,
and one also in the Lord. |
Concerns
only the Celebration of Marriage. |
The
Means of preserving Marriage holy and pure. |
Now
since there ought not to be less care that Marriage be religiously kept,
than that it be piously and deliberately contracted, it will be meet
that to every Church be ordained certain grave and godly Men, who may
have this care upon them, to observe whether the Husband bear himself
wisely toward the Wife, loving, and inciting her to all Piety, and the
other duties of this life ; and whether the Wife be subject to her Husband,
and study to be truly a meet help to him, as first to all Godliness
so to every other use of life. And if they shall find each to other
failing of their duty, or the one long absent from the other without
just and urgent cause, or giving suspicion of irreligious and impure
life, or of living in manifest Wickedness, let it be admonish'd them
in time. And if their Authority be contemn'd, let the names of such
contemners be brought to the Magistrate, who may use punishment to compel
such Violators of Marriage to their duty, that they may abstain from
all probable suspicion of transgressing ; and if they admit of suspected
company, the Magistrate is to forbid them ; whom they not therin obeying,
are to be punish'd as Adulterers, according to the Law of Justinian,
Authent. 117. For if holy Wedloc, the fountain and seminary of good
Subjects, be not vigilantly preserved from all blots and disturbances,
what can be hop'd, as I said before, of the springing up of good Men,
and a right Reformation of the Commonwealth ? We know it is not
enough for Christians to abstain from foul deeds, but from the appearance
and suspicion therof. |
Of
lawful Divorce, what the ancient Churches have thought. |
Now
we shall speak about that dissolving of Matrimony which may be approv'd
in the sight of God, if any grievous necessity require. In which thing
the Roman Antichrists have knit many a pernicious entanglement to distressed
Consciences : for that they might here also exalt themselves above God,
as if they would be wiser and chaster than God himself, is, for no cause,
honest or necessary, will they permit a final Divorce ; in the mean
while, Whoredoms and Adulteries, and worse things than these, not only
tolerating in themselves and others, but cherishing and throwing Men
headlong into these evils. For although they also disjoin married persons
from Board and Bed, that is, from all conjugal Society and Communion,
and this not only for Adultery, but for ill Usage, and matrimonial Duties
deny'd ; yet they forbid those thus parted, to join in Wedloc with others,
but, as I said before, any dishonest associating they permit. And they
pronouce the Bond of Marriage to remain between those whom they have
thus separated. As if the Bond of Marriage, God so teaching and pronouncing,
were not such a league as binds the married couple to all society of
life, and communion in divine and human things ; and so associated keeps
them. Something indeed out of the later Fathers they may pretend for
this their Tyranny, especially out of Austin and some others, who were
much taken with a preposterous admiration of single life ; yet though
these Fathers, from the words of Christ not rightly understood, taught
that it was unlawful to marry again, while the former Wife liv'd, whatever
cause there had bind either of Desertion or Divorce ; yet if we mark
the custom of the Church, and the common judgment which both in this
time and afterward prevail'd, we shall perceive that neither these Fathers
did ever cast out of the Church any one for marrying after a Divorce,
approv'd by the Imperial Laws. |
Nor
only the first Christian Emperors, but the latter also, even to Justinian,
and after him, did grant for certain causes approv'd by Judges, to make
a true Divorce ; which made and confirm'd by Law, it might be lawful
to marry again : which if it could not have bin done without displeasing
Christ and his Church, surely it would not have bin granted by Christian
Emperors, nor had the Fathers then wink'd at those doings in the Emperors.
Hence ye may see that Jerom also, though zealous of single life more
than enough, and such a condemner of second Marriage, though after the
death of either party, yet forc'd by plain equity, defended Fabiola,
a noble Matron of Rome, who having refus'd her Husband for just Causes,
was married to another. For that the sending of a Divorce to her Husband
was not blame worthy, he affirms, because the Man was heinously vitious
; and that if an adulterous Wife may be discarded, an adulterous Husband
is not to be kept. But that she married again, while yet her Husband
was alive ; he defends in that the Apostle hath said, It is better to
marry than to burn ; and that young widows should marry, for such was
Fabiola, and could not remain in Widow-hood. |
But
some one will object that Jerome there adds, Neither did she know the
vigour of the Gospel, wherin all cause of marrying is debarr'd from
Women, while their Husbands live ; and again, while she avoided many
wounds of Satan, she receiv'd one ere she was aware. But let the equal
Reader mind also what went before ; Because, saith he, soon after the
beginning, there is a rock and storm of slanderers opposed against her,
I will not praise her converted, unless I first absolve her guilty.
For why does he call them slanderers who accus'd Fabiola of marrying
again, if he did not judge it a matter of Christian Equity and Charity,
to pass by and pardon that fact, though in his own opinion he held it
a fault ? And what can this mean ? I will not praise her,
unless I first absolve her. For how could he absolve her, but by proving
that Fabiola, neither in rejecting her vitious Husband, nor in marrying
another, had committed such a sin, as could be justly condemned ?
Nay, he proves both by evident reason, and clear testimonies of Scripture,
that she avoided Sin. |
This
also is hence understood, that Jerome by the vigour of the Gospel, meant
that height and perfection of our Saviour's precept, which might be
remitted to those that burn ; for he adds, But if she be accused in
that she remained not unmarried, I shall confess the fault, so I may
relate the necessity. If then he acknowledg'd a necessity, as he did,
because she was yound, and could not live in Widowhood, certainly he
could not impute her second Marriage to her much blame : but when he
excuses her out of the Word of God, does he not openly declare his thoughts,
that the second Marriage of Fabiola was permitted her by the Holy Ghost
himself, for the necessity which he suffer'd, and to shun the danger
of Fornication, though she went somewhat aside from the vigour of the
Gospel ? But if any urge that Fabiola did public penance for her
second Marriage, which was not imposed but for great faults ; 'tis answer'd,
she was not enjoin'd to this penance, but did it of her own accord,
and not till after her second Husband's death. As in the time of Cyprian,
we read that many were wont to do voluntary penance for small faults,
which were not liable to excommunication. |
That
Marriage was granted by the ancient Fathers, even after the Vow of single
Live. |
I
omit his Testimonies out of Cyprian, Gelasius, Epiphanius, contented
only to relate what he thence collects to the present purpose. |
Some
will say perhaps, Wherfore all this concerning Marriage after vow of
single life, whenas the question was of Marriage after Divorce ?
For this reason, that they whom it so much moves, because some of the
Fathers thought Marriage after any kind of Divorce, to be condemned
of our Saviour, may see that this conclusion follows not. The Fathers
thought all Marriage after Divorce to be forbidden of our Saviour, therfore
they thought such Marriage was not to be tolerated in a Christian. For
the same Fathers judg'd it forbidden to marry after vow ; yet such Marriages
they neither dissolved nor excommunicated : For these words of
our Saviour, and of the Holy Ghost, stood in their way ; All cannot
receive this saying, but they to whom it is given. Every one hath his
proper gift from God, one after this manner, another after that. It
is better to marry than to burn. I will that younger Widows marry ;
and the like. |
So
there are many Canons and Laws extant, wherby Priests, if they married,
were remov'd from their office, yet is it not read that their Marriage
was dissolv'd, as the Papists now-a-days do, or that they were excommunicated,
nay expresly they might communicate as Laymen. If the consideration
of human infirmity, and those testimonies of divine Scripture which
grant Marriage to every one that wants it, persuaded those Fathers to
bear themselves so humanely toward them who had married with breach
of vow to God, as they believed, and with Divorce of that Marriage wherin
they were in a manner join'd to God ; who doubts but that the same Fathers
held the like humanity was to be afforded to those who after Divorce
and Faith broken with Men, as they thought, entered into a second Marriage ?
For among such are also found no less weak, and no less burning. |
Who
of the ancient Fathers granted Marriage after Divorce. |
This
is clear both by what hath bin said, and by that which Origen relates
of certain Bishops in his time, Homil. 7. in Matth. I know some, saith
he, which are over Churches, who without Scripture have permitted the
Wife to marry while her former Husband liv'd. And did this against Scripture,
which saith, The wife is bound to her Husband so long as he lives ;
and she shall be call'd an Adultress, if, her Husband living, she take
another Man ; yet did they not permit this without cause, perhaps for
the infirmity of such as had not continence, they permitted evil to
avoid worse. Ye see Origen and the Doctors of his Age, not without all
cause, permitted Women after Divorce to marry, though their former Husbands
were living ; yet writes that they permitted against Scripture. But
what cause could they have to do so, unless they thought our Saviour
in his precepts of Divorce had so forbidden, as willing to remit such
perfection to his weaker ones, cast into danger of worse faults ? |
The
same thought Leo, Bishop of Rome, Ep. 85. to the African Bishops of
Mauritania Caesariensis, wherin complaining of a certian Priest, who
divorcing his Wife, or being divorc'd by her, as other copies have it,
had married another, neither dissolves the Matrimony, nor excommunicates
him, only unpriests him. The Fathers therfore, as we see, did not simply
and wholly comdemn Marriage after Divorce. |
But
as for me, this remitting of our Saviour's precepts, which these Ancients
allow to the infirm in marrying after Vow and Divorce, I can in no ways
admit ; for whatsoever plainly consents not with the Commandment, cannot,
I am certain, be permitted, or suffered in any Christian : for heaven
and earth shall pass away, but not a tittle from the Commands of God
among them who expect life eternal. Let us therfore consider, and weigh
the words of our Lord concerning Marriage and Divorce, which he pronounced
both by himself, and by his Apostle, and let us compare them with other
Oracles of God ; for whatsoever is contrary to these, I shall not persuade
the least tolerating therof. But if it can be taught to agree with the
Word of God, yea to be commanded that most Men may have permission given
to them to divorce and marry again, I must prefer the Authority of God's
Word before the Opinion of Fathers and Doctors, as they themselves teach. |
The
words of our Lord, and of the Holy Ghost, by the Apostle Paul concerning
Divorce, are explain'd. |
But
the words of our Lord, and of the Holy Ghost, out of which Austin and
some others of the Fathers think it concluded that our Saviour forbids
Marriage after any Divorce, are these ; Mat. v. 31, 32. It hath bin
said, And Mat. xix. 7. They say unto him, why did Moses then command ?
And Mark x. and Luke xvi. Rom. vii. 1, 2, 3. 1 Cor. vii, 10, 11. Hence
therfore they conclude that all Marriage after Divorce is call'd Adultery
; which to commit, being no ways to be tolerated in any Christian, they
think it follows that second Marriage is in no case to be permitted
either to the Divorce, or to the Divorced. |
But
that it may be more fully and plainly perceiv'd what force is in this
kind of reasoning, it will be the best course to lay down certain grounds
wherof no Christian can doubt the truth. First, it is a wickedness to
suspect that our Saviour branded that for Adultery, which himself, in
his own Law which he came to fulfil, and not to dissolve, did not only
permit, but also command ; for by him the only Mediator, was the whole
Law of God given. But that by this Law of God, Marriage was permitted
after any Divorce, is certain by Deut. xxiv. 1. |
That
God in his Law did not only grant, but also command Divorce to certain
Men. |
Deut.
xxiv. 1. When a Man hath taken a Wife, But in Mal. ii. 15, 16. is read
the Lord's command to put her away whom a Man hates, in these words
: Take heed to your Spirit, and let none deal injuriously against the
wife of his youth. If he hate, let him put away, saith the Lord God
of Israel. And he shall hide thy violence with his garment, that marries
her divorc'd by thee, saith the Lord of hosts ; but take heed to your
Spirit, and do no injury. by these Testimonies of the divine Law, we
see that the Lord did not only permit, but also expresly and earnestly
commanded his people, by whom he would that all holiness and faith of
Marriage-covenant should be observed, that he who could not induce his
mind to love his Wife with a true conjugal love, might dismiss her that
she might marry to another. |
That
what the Lord permitted and commanded to his antient people concerning
Divorce belongs also to Christians. |
Now
what the Lord permitted to his first-born people, that certainly he
could not forbid to his own among the Gentiles, whom he made coheirs,
and into one body with his people ; nor could he ever permit, much less
command aught that was not good for them, at least so us'd as he commanded.
For being God, he is not chang'd as Man. Which thing who seriously considers,
how can he imagine that God would make that wicked to them that believe,
and serve him under Grace, which he granted and commanded to them that
serv'd him under the Law ? Whenas the same causes require the same
permission. And who that knows but human matters, and loves the truth,
will deny that many Marriages hang as ill together now, as ever they
did among the Jews ? So that such Marriages are liker to Torments
than true Marriages. As therfore the Lord doth always succour and help
the oppressed, so he would ever have it provided for injur'd Husbands
and Wives, that under pretence of the marriage bond, they be not sold
to perpetual vexations, instead of the loving and comfortable marriage
duties. And lastly, as God doth always detest hypocrisy and fraud, so
neither doth he approve that among his people, that should be counted
Marriage, wherin none of those duties remain, wherby the league of wedloc
is chiefly preserved. What inconsiderate neglect then of God's Law is
this, that I may not call it worse, to hold that Christ our Lord would
not grant the same remedies both of Divorce and second Marriage to the
weak, or to the evil, if they will needs have it so, but especially
to the innocent and wrong'd ; whenas the same urgent causes remain as
before, when the discipline of the Church and Magistrate hath try'd
what may be try'd ? |
That
our Lord Christ intended not to make new Laws of Marriage and Divorce,
or of any civil matters. |
It
is agreed by all who determine of the Kingdom and Offices of Christ
by the holy Scriptures, as all godly Men ought to do, that our Saviour
upon Earth took not on him either to give new Laws in civil affairs,
or to change the old. But it is certain that Matrimony and Divorce are
civil things. Which the Christian Emperors knowing, gave conjugal Law,
and reserv'd the administration of them to their own Courts ; which
no true ancient Bishop ever condemn'd. |
Our
Saviour came to preach Repentance and Remission : seeing therfore those
who put away their Wives without any just cause, were not touch'd with
conscience of the sin, through misunderstanding of the Law, he recall'd
them to a right interpretation, and taught that the Woman in the beginning
was so join'd to the Man, that there should be a perpetual union both
in body and spirit : where this is not, the Matrimony is already broke,
before there be yet any divorce made, or second Marriage. |
That
it is wicked to strain the words of Christ beyond their purpose. |
This
is his third Axiom,wherof there needs no explication here. |
That
all places of Scripture about the same thing are to be joined, and compared, to avoid Contradictions. |
This
he domonstrates at large out of sundry places in the Gospel, and principally
by that precept against swearing, which compar'd with many places of
the Law and Prophets, is a flat contradiction of them all, if we follow
superstitiously the letter. Then having repeated briefly his four Axioms,
he thus proceeds. |
These
things thus pre-admonish'd, let us enquire what the undoubted meaning
is of our Saviour's words, and enquire according to the rule which is
observ'd by all learned and good men in their expositions ; that praying
first to God, who is the only opener of our hearts, we may first with
fear and reverence consider well the words of our Saviour touching this
question. Next, that we may compare them with all other places of Scripture
treating of this matter, to see how they consent with our Saviour's
words, and those of his Apostle. |
This
Chapter disputes against Austin and the Papists, who deny second Marriage
even to them who divorce in case of Adultery ; which because it is not
controverted among true Protestants, but that the innocent person is
easily allow'd to marry, I spare the translating. |
That
a manifest Adultress ought to be divorc'd, and cannot lawfully be retained
in Marriage by any true Christian. |
This
though he prove sufficiently, yet I let pass, because this question
was not handled in the Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce ; to which
book I bring so much of this Treatise as runs parallel. |
That
Adultery is to be punish'd by Death. |
This
chapter also I omit for the reason last alledg'd. |
That
it is lawful for a Wife to leave an Adulterer, and to marry another
Husband. |
This
is generally granted, and therfore excuses me the writing out. |
Places
in the Writings of the Apostle Paul, touching Divorce explain'd. |
Let
us consider the answer of the Lord given by the Apostle severally. Concerning
the first, which is Rom. vii. 1. Know ye not, brethren, for I speak
to them that know the law, Ver. 2. The woman is bound by the law to
her Husband so long as he liveth. Here it is certain that the Holy Ghost
had no purpose to determine aught of Marriage, or Divorce, but only
to bring an example from the common and ordinary law of Wedloc, to shew
that as no covenant holds either party being dead, so now that we are
not bound to the law, but to Christ our Lord, seeing that through him
we are dead to sin, and to the law ; and so joined to Christ that we
may bring forth fruit in him from a willing godliness, and not by the
compulsion of law, wherby our sins are more excited, and become more
violent. What therfore the holy Spirit here speaks of Matrimony, cannot
be extended beyond the general rule. |
Besides
it is manifest, that the Apostle did alledge the law of Wedloc, as it
was deliver'd to theJews ; for, saith he, I speak to them that
know the law. They knew no law of God but that of Moses, which plainly
grants divorce for several reasons. It cannot therfore be said that
the Apostle cited this general example out of the law, to abolish the
several exceptions of that law, which God himself granted by giving
authority to divorce. |
Next,
when the Apostle brings an example out of God's law concerning Man and
Wife, it must be necessary that we understand such for Man and Wife,
as are so indeed according to the same law of God ; that is, who
are so disposed as that they are both willing and able to perform the
necessary duties of marriage ; not those who under a false title of
marriage, keep themselves mutually bound to injuries and disgraces ;
for such twain are nothing less than lawful Man and Wife. |
The
like answer is to be given to all the other places both of the Gospel
and the Apostle, that whatever exception may be prov'd out of God's
law, be not excluded from those places. For the Spirit of God doth not
condemn things formerly granted and allowed, where there is like cause
and reason. Hence Ambrose, upon that place, 1 Cor. vii. 15. A brother
or a sister is not under bondage in such cases, thus expounds ;
The reverence of marriage is not due to him who abhors the author of
Marriage ; nor is that Marriage ratify'd which is without devotion to
God : he sins not therfore who is put away for God's cause, though he
join himself to another. For the dishonour of the Creator dissolves
the right of Matrimony to him who is deserted, that he be not accus'd,
though marrying to another. The faith of wedloc is not to be kept with
him who departs, that he might not hear the God of Christians to be
the author of wedloc. For if Ezra caused the misbelieving Wives and
Husbands to be divorc'd, that God might be appeased, and not offended,
though they took others of their own faith, how much more shall it be
free, if the misbeliever depart, to marry one of our own Religion. For
this is not to be counted Matrimony, which is against the law of God. |
Two
things are here to be observed toward the following Discourse, which
truth itself, and the force of God's word hath drawn from this holy
Man. For those words are very large, Matrimony is not ratify'd, without
devotion to God. And the dishonour of the Creator dissolves the right
of Matrimony. For devotion is far off, and dishonour is done to God
by all who persist in any wickedness and heinous crime. |
That
although it seem in the Gospel, as if our Saviour granted Divorce only
for Adultery, yet in very deed he granted it for other causes also. |
Now
is to be dealt with this question, Whether it be lawful to divorce and
marry again for other causes besides Adultery, since our Saviour express'd
that only ? To this question, if we retain our principles already
laid, and must acknowledge it to be a cursed blasphemy, if we say that
the words of God do contradict one another, of necessity we must confess
that our Lord did grant Divorce, and Marriage after that, for other
causes besides Adultery, notwithstanding what he said in Matthew. For
first, they who consider but only that place, 1 Cor. vii which treats
of believers and misbelievers match'd together, must of force confess,
That our Lord granted just Divorce, and second Marriage in the cause
of Desertion, which is other than the cause of Fornication. And if there
be one other cause found lawful, then is it most true, that Divorce
was granted not only for Fornication. |
Next,
it cannot be doubted, as I shew'd before, by them to whom it is given
to know God and his Judgments out of his own word, but that, what means
of peace and safety God ever granted and ordain'd to his elected people,
the same he grants and ordains to Men of all ages who have equally need
of the same remedies. And who, that is but a knowing Man, dares say
there be not Husbands and Wives now to be found in such a hardness of
heart, that they will not perform either conjugal affection, or any
requisite duty therof, though it be most deserv'd at their hands ? |
Neither
can any one defer to confess, but that God whose property it is to judge
the cause of them that suffer injury, hath provided for innocent and
honest persons wedded, how they might free themselves by lawful means
of Divorce, from the bondage and iniquity of those who are falsly term'd
their Husbands or their Wives. This is clear out of Deut. xxiv. 1. Malach.
ii. Matth. xix. 1 Cor. vii. and out of those principles which the Scripture
every where teaches, That God changes not his mind, dissents not from
himself, is no accepter of persons ; but allows the same remedies to
all Men oppress'd with the same necessities and infirmities ; yet, requires
that we should use them. This he will easily perceive, who considers
these things in the Spirit of the Lord. |
Lastly,
it is most certain, that the Lord hath commanded us to obey the civil
Laws every one of his own Commonwealth, if they be not against the Laws
of God. |
For
what causes Divorce is permitted by the civil Law ex l. Consensu Codic.
de Repudiis. |
It
is also manifest that the Law of Theodosius and Valentinian, which begins
Consensu, touching Divorce, and many other Decrees of pious Emperors
agreeing herewith, are not contrary to the word of God ; and therfore
may be recalled into use by any Christian Prince or Commonwealth ; nay,
ought to be with due respect had to every nation. For whatsoever is
equal and just, that in every thing is to be sought and used by Christians.
Hence it is plain that Divorce is granted by divine approbation, both
to Husbands and to Wives, if either party can convict the other of these
following offences before the Magistrate. |
If
the Husband can prove the Wife to be an Adultress, a Witch, a Murdress,
to have bought or sold to slavery any one free-born, to have violated
Sepulchres, committed Sacrilege, favour'd thieves and robbers, desirous
of feasting with strangers, the husband not knowing, or not willing,
if she lodge forth without a just and probable cause, or frequent theatres
and sights, he forbidding ; if she be privy with those that plot against
the State, or if she deal falsly, or offer blows. And if the wife can
prove her Husband guilty of any those forenamed crimes, and frequent
the company of lewd women in her sight ; or if he beat her, she had
the like liberty to quit herself ; with this difference, that the Man
after Divorce might forthwith marry again ; the Woman not till a year
after, lest she might chance to have conceiv'd. |
An
Exposition of those places wherin God declares the nature of holy Wedloc. |
Now
to the end it may seem that this agrees with the divine law, the first
institution of Marriage is to be considered, and those texts in which
God establish'd the joining of male and female, and describ'd the duties
of them both. When God had determined to make Woman, and give her as
a Wife to Man, he spake thus, Gen. ii. 18. It is not good for Man to
be alone, I will make him a help-meet for him. And Adam said, but in
the spirit of God, v. 23, 24. This is now bone of my bone, and flesh
of my flesh ; Therfore shall a Man leave his Father and Mother, and
shall cleave to his Wife, and they shall be one flesh. |
To
this first institution did Christ recall his own ; when answering the
Pharisees, he condemn'd the licence of unlawful Divorce. He taught therfore
by his example, that we, according to this first institution, and what
God hath spoken therof, ought to determine what kind of Covenant Marriage
is, how to be kept, and how far ; and lastly, for what causes to be
dissolv'd. To which Decrees of God these also are to be join'd, which
the Holy Ghost hath taught by his Apostle, that neither the Husband
nor the Wife hath power of their own body, but mutually each of either's.
That the Husband shall love the Wife as his own body, yea as Christ
loves his Church ; and that the Wife ought to be subject to her Husband,
as the Church is to Christ. |
By
these things the nature of holy Wedloc is certainly known ; wherof if
only one be wanting in both or either party, and that either by obstinate
malevolence or too deep inbred weakness of mind, or lastly, through
incurable impotence of Body, it cannot then be said that the covenant
of Matrimony holds good between such ; if we mean that covenant which
God instituted and call'd Marriage, and that wherof only it must be
understood that our Saviour said, Those whom God hath join'd, let no
Man separate. |
And
hence is concluded, that Matrimony requires continual cohabitation and
living together, unless the calling of God be otherwise evident ; which
union if the parties themselves disjoin either by mutual consent, or
one against the other's will depart, the Marriage is then broken. Wherin
the Papists, as in other things, oppose themselves against God ; while
they separate for many causes from bed and board, and yet will have
the bond of Matrimony remain, as if this covenant could be other than
the conjunction and communion not only of bed and board, but of all
other living and helpful duties. This we may see in these words ; I
will make him a help-meet for him ; bone of his bone, and flesh of his
flesh : for this cause shall he leave Father and Mother, and cleave
to his Wife, and they twain shall be one flesh. By which words who discerns
not, that God requries of them both so to live together, and to be united
not only in body but in mind also, with such an affection as none may
be dearer and more ardent among all the relations of Mankind, nor of
more efficacy to the mutual offices of love and loyalty. They must communicate
and consent in all things both divine and human, which have any moment
to well and happy living. The Wife must honour and obey her Husband,
as the Church honours and obeys Christ her head. The Husband must love
and cherish his Wife, as Christ his Church. Thus they must be to each
other, if they will be true Man and Wife in the sight of God, whom certainly
the Churches ought to follow in their judgment. Now the proper and ultimate
end of Marriage is not copulation, or children, for then there was not
true Matrimony between Joseph and Mary the Mother of Christ, nor between
many holy persons more ; but the full and proper and main end of Marriage,
is the communicating of all duties, both divine and human, each to other
with utmost benevolence and affection. |
The
Properties of a True and Christian Marriage more distinctly repeated. |
By
which definition we may know that God esteems and reckons upon these
four necessary properties to be in every true Marriage. 1. That they
should live together, unless the calling of God require otherwise for
a time. 2. That they should love one another to the height of dearness,
and that in the Lord, and in the communion of true Religion. 3. That
the Husband bear himself as the head and preserver of his Wife, instructing
her to all godliness and integrity of Life ; that the Wife also be to
her Husband a help, according to her place, especially furthering him
in the true worship of God, and next in all the occasion of civil life.
And 4. That they defraud not each other of conjugal benevolence, as
the Apostle commands, 1 Cor. vii. Hence it follows, according to the
sentence of God, which all Christians ought to be rul'd by, that between
those who either through obstinacy, or helpless inability, cannot or
will not perform these repeated duties, between those there can be no
true Matrimony, nor ought they to be counted Man and Wife. |
Whether
those Crimes recited Chap. xxxvii. out of the Civil Law, dissolve Matrimony
in God's account. |
Now
if a Husband or Wife be found guilty of any of those crimes, which by
the Law consensu are made causes of Divorce, 'tis manifest that such
a Man cannot be the head and preserver of his Wife, nor such a Woman
be a meet help to her Husband, as the divine Law in true Wedloc requires
; for these faults are punish'd either by death, or deportation, or
extreme infamy, which are directly opposite to the covenant of Marriage.
If they deserve death, as Adultery and the like, doubtless God would
not that any should live in Wedloc with them whom he would not have
to live at all. Or if it be not death, but the incurring of notorious
infamy, certain it is neither just, nor expedient, nor meet that an
honest Man should be coupled with an infamous Woman, nor an honest Matron
with an infamous Man. The wise Roman Princes had so great regard to
the equal honour of either wedded person, that they counted those Marriages
of no force which were made between the one of good repute, and the
other of evil note. How much more will all honest regard of Christian
expedience and comeliness beseem and concern those who are set free
and dignified in Christ, than it could the Roman Senate, or their Sons,
for whom that Law was provided ? |
And
this all godly Men will soon apprehend, that he who ought to be the
head and preserver not only of his Wife, but also of his Children and
Family, as Christ is of his Church, had need be one of honest name :
so likewise the Wife, which is to be the meet help of an honest and
good Man, the Mother of an honest Offspring and Family. The Glory of
the Man, even as the Man is the Glory of Christ, should not be tainted
with ignominy ; as neither of them can avoid to be, having bin justly
appeach'd of those forenamed crimes ; and therfore cannot be worthy
to hold their place in a Christian Family : yea, they themselves turn
out themselves and dissolve that holy covenant. And they who are true
Brethren and Sisters in the Lord, are no more in bondage to such violaters
of Marriage. |
But
here the patrons of wickedness and dissolvers of Christian discipline
will object, that it is the part of Man and Wife to bear one another's
cross, whether in calamity or infamy, that they might gain each other,
if not to a good name, yet to repentance and amendment. But they who
thus object, seek the impunity of wickedness, and the favour of wicked
Men, not the duties of true charity ; which prefers public honesty before
private interest, and had rather the remedies of wholesome punishment
appointed by God should be in use, than that by remissness, the licence
of evil doing should encrease. For if they who, by committing such offences,
have made void the holy knot of Marriage, be capable of repentance,
they will be sooner mov'd when due punishment is executed on them, than
when it is remitted. |
We
must ever beware, lest in contriving what will be best for the soul's
heath of Delinquents, we make ourselves wiser and discreeter than God.
He that religiously weighs his Oracles concerning Marriage, cannot doubt
that they who have committed the foresaid transgressions, have lost
the right of Matrimony, and are unworthy to hold their dignity in an
honest and christian Family. |
But
if any Husband or Wife see such signs of repentance in their transgressor,
as that they doubt not to regain them by continuing with them, and partaking
of their miseries and attaintures, they may be left to their own hopes,
and their own mind, saving ever the right of Church and Commonwealth,
that it receive no scandal by the neglect of due severity, and their
Children no harm by this invitation to licence, and want of good education. |
From
all these considerations, if they be thought on, as in the presence
of God, and out of his word, any one may perceive, who desires to determine
of these things by the Scripture, that those causes of lawful Divorce,
which the most religious Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian set forth
in the forecited place, are according to the law of God, and the prime
institution of Marriage ; and were still more and more straiten'd, as
the Church and State of the Empire still more and more corrupted and
degenerated. Therfore pious Princes and Commonwealths both may and ought
establish them again, if they have a mind to restore the honour, sanctity,
and religion of holy wedloc to their people, and disentangle many consciences
from a miserable and perilous condition, to a chaste and honest life. |
To
those recited causes wherfore a Wife might send a Divorce to her Husband,
Justinian added four more, Constit. 117. And four more, for which a
Man might put away his Wife. Three other causes were added in the Code
de repudiis, l. Jubemus. All which causes are so clearly contrary to
the first intent of Marriage, that they plainly dissolve it. I set them
not down, being easy to be found in the body of the civil Law. |
It
was permitted also by Christian Emperors, that they who would divorce
by mutual consent, might without Impediment. Or if there were any difficulty
at all in it, the law expresses the reason, that it was only in favour
of the children ; so that if there were none, the law of those godly
Emperors made no other difficulty of a Divorce by consent. Or if any
were minded without consent of the other to divorce, and without those
causes which have bin nam'd, the Christian Emperors laid no other punishment
upon them, than that the Husband wrongfully divorcing his Wife, should
give back her dowry, and the use of that which was called Donatio propter
nuptias ; or if there were no dowry nor no donation, that he should
them give her the fourth part of his goods. The like penalty was inflicted
on the Wife departing without just cause. But that they who were once
married, should be compell'd to remain so ever against their wills,
was not exacted. Wherin those pious Princes follow'd the Law of God
in Deut. xxiv. 1. and his express charge by the Prophet Malachi to dismiss
from him the Wife whom he hates. For God never meant in Marriage to
give to Man a perpetual torment instead of a meet-help. Neither can
God approve that to the violation of this holy league (which is violated
as soon as true affection ceases and is lost) should be added murder,
which is already committed by either of them who resolvedly hates the
other, as I shew'd out of 1 John xv.Whoso hateth his Brother is a Murderer. |
Whether
the Husband or Wife deserted, may marry to another. |
The
Wife's desertion of her Husband, the Christian Emperors plainly decreed
to be a just cause of Divorce, whenas they granted him the right therof,
if she had but lain out one Night against his will without probable
cause. But of the Man deserting his Wife they did not so detemine :
Yet if we look into the word of God, we shall find, that he who though
but for a year without just cause forsakes his Wife, and neither provided
for her maintenance, nor signifies his purpose of returning, and good-will
towards her, whenas he may, hath forfeited his right in her so forsaken.
For the Spirit of God speaks plainly, that both Man and Wife have such
power over one another's person, as that they cannot deprive each other
of living together, but by consent, and for a time. |
Hither
may be added, that the holy Spirit grants desertion to be a cause of
Divorce, in those Answers given to the Corinthians concerning a Brother
or Sister deserted by a misbeliever. If he depart, let him depart, a
Brother or a Sister is not under Bondage in such cases. In which words,
who sees not that the Holy Ghost openly pronounced, that the party without
cause deserted, is not bound for another's wilful desertion ? |
But
some will say, that this is spoken of a misbeliever departing. But I
beseech ye, doth not he reject the faith of Christ in his deeds, who
rashly breaks the holy covenant of Wedloc instituted by God ? And
besides this, the holy Spirit does not make the misbelieving of him
who departs, but the departing of him who misbelieves, to be the just
cause of freedom to the Brother and Sister. |
Since
therfore it will be agreed among Christians, that they who depart from
Wedloc without just cause, do not only deny the faith of Matrimony,
but of Christ also, whatever they profess with their Mouths ; it is
but reason to conclude, that the party deserted is not bound in case
of causless desertion, but that he may lawfully seek another consort,
if it be needful to him, toward a pure and blameless conversation. |
That
Impotence of Body, Leprosy, Madness, are just causes of Divorce. |
Of
this, because it was not disputed in the Doctrine and Discipline of
Divorce, him that would know further, I command to the Latin original. |
That
to grant Divorce for all the causes which have bin hitherto brought,
disagrees not from the words of Christ, naming only the cause of Adultery. |
Now
we must see how these things can stand with the words of our Saviour,
who seems directly to forbid all Divorce except it be for Adultery.
To the understanding wherof, we must ever remember this : That in the
words of our Saviour there can be no contrariety : That his words and
answers are not to be stretch'd beyond the question propos'd : That
our Saviour did not there purpose to treat of all the causes for which
it might be lawful to divorce and marry again ; for then that in the
Corinthians of marrying again without guilt of Adultery could not be
added. That it is not good for that Man to be alone, who hath not the
special gift from above. That it is good for every such one to be married,
that he may shun Fornication. |
With
regard to these principles, let us see what our Lord answer'd to the
tempting Pharisees about Divorce, and second Marriage, and how far his
answer doth extend. |
First,
no Man who is not very contentious, will deny that the Pharisees ask'd
our Lord whether it were lawful to put away such a Wife, as was truly,
and according to God's law, to be counted a Wife ; that is, such a one
as would dwell with her Husband, and both would and could perform the
necessary duties of Wedloc tolerably. But she who will not dwell with
her Husband, is not put away by him, but goes of herself : and
she who denies to be a meet-help, or to be so hath made herself unfit
by open Misdemeanors, or through incurable Impotencies cannot be able,
is not by the Law of God to be esteemed a Wife ; as hath bin shewn both
from the first institution, and other places of Scripture. Neither certainly
would the Pharisees propound a question concerning such an unconjugal
Wife ; for their depravation of the Law had brought them to that pass,
as to think a Man had right to put away his Wife for any cause, though
never so slight. Since therfore it is manifest that Christ answer'd
the Pharisees concerning a fit and meet Wife according to the Law of
God, whom he forbid to divorce for any cause but Fornication ; who sees
not that it is a Wickedness so to wrest and extend that Answer of his,
as if it forbade to divorce her who hath already forsaken, or hath lost
the place and dignity of a Wife, by deserved infamy, or hath undertaken
to be that which she hath not natural ability to be ? |
This
truth is so powerful, that it hath mov'd the Papists to grant their
kind of Divorce for other causes besides Adultery, as for ill usage,
and the not performing of conjugal duty ; and to separate from bed and
board for these causes, which is as much Divorce, as they grant for
Adultery. |
But
some perhaps will object, that though it be yielded that our Lord granted
Divorce not only for Adultery, yet it is not certain that he permitted
Marriage after Divorce, unless for that only cause. I answer, first,
that the Sentence of Divorce, and second Marriage, is one and the same.
So that when the right of Divorce is evinc'd to belong not only to the
cause of Fornication, the power of second Marriage is also prov'd to
be not limited to that cause only ; and that most evidently, whenas
the Holy Ghost, 1 Cor. vii. so frees the deserted party from Bondage,
as that he may not only send a just Divorce in case of Desertion, but
may seek another Marriage. |
Lastly,
Seeing God will not that any should live in danger of Fornication and
utter ruin for the default of another, and hath commanded the Husband
to send away with a Bill of Divorce her whom he could not love ; it
is impossible that the charge of Adultery should belong to him who for
lawful causes divorces and marries, or to her who marries after she
hath bin unjustly rejected, or to him who receives her without all fraud
to the former wedloc. For this were a horrid blasphemy against God,
so to interpret his words, as to make him dissent from himself ; for
who sees not a flat contradiction in this, to enthral blamelss Men and
Women to miseries and injuries, under a false and soothing title of
Marriage, and yet to declare by his Apostle, that a Brother or Sister
is not under bondage in such cases ? No less do these two things
conflict with themselves, to enforce the innocent and faultless to endure
the pain and misery of another's perverseness, or else to live in unavoidable
temptation ; and to affirm elsewhere that he lays on no Man the burden
of another Man's sin, nor doth constrian any Man to the endangering
of his Soul. |
That
to those also who are justly divorc'd, second Marriage ought to be permitted. |
This
although it be well prov'd, yet because it concerns only the Offender,
I leave him to search out his own Charter himself in the Author. |
That
some persons are so ordain'd to Marriage, as that they cannot obtain
the gift of Continence, no not by earnest Prayer ; and that therin every
one is to be left to his own Judgment and Conscience, and not to have
a burden laid upon him by any other. |
The
words of the Apostle concerning the praise of single Life unfolded. |
These
two Chapters not so immediately debating the right of Divorce, I chose
rather not to insert. |
The
Conclusion of this Treatise. |
These
things, most renowned King, I have brought together, both to explain
for what causes the unhappy, but sometimes most necessary help of Divorce
ought to be granted, according to God's Word, by Princes and Rulers
: as also to explain how the words of Christ do consent with such a
grant. I have bin large indeed both in handling those Oracles of God,
and in laying down those certain principles, which he who will know
what the mind of God is in this matter, must ever think on and remember.
But if we consider what mist and obscurity hath bin pour'd out by Antichrist
upon this question, and how deep this pernicious contempt of Wedloc,
and admiration of single life, even in those who are not call'd therto,
hath sunk into many Men's persuasions, I fear lest all that hath bin
said, be hardly enough to persuade such that they would cease at length
to make themselves wiser and holier than God himself, in being so severe
to grant lawful Marriage, and so easy to connive at all, not only whoredoms,
but deflowerings and adulteries : Whenas among the people of God,
no whoredom was to be tolerated. |
Our
Lord Jesus Christ, who came to destroy the works of Satan, send down
his Spirit upon all Christians, and principally upon Christian Governors
both in Church and Commonwealth (for of the clear judgment of your royal
Majesty I nothing doubt, revolving the Scripture so often as ye do)
that they may acknowledge how much they provoke the anger of God against
us, whenas all kind of unchastity is tolerated, fornications an adulteries
wink'd at : but holy and honourable Wedloc is oft with-held by the mere
persuasion of Antichrist, from such as without this remedy, cannot preserve
themselves from damnation ! For none who hath but a spark of honesty
will deny that Princes and States ought to use diligence toward the
maintaining of pure and honest life among all Men, without which all
Justice, all fear of God, and true Religion decays. |
And
who knows not that chastity and pureness of life can never be restor'd,
or continued in the Commonwealth, unless it be first establish'd in
private houses, from whence the whole breed of Men is to come forth ?
To effect this, no wise Man can doubt that it is necessary for Princes
and Magistrates first with severity to punish Whoredom and Adultery
; next to see that Marriages be lawfully contracted, and in the Lord
; then that they be faithfully kept ; and lastly, when that unhappiness
urges, that they be lawfully dissolv'd, and other Marriage granted,
according as the law of God, and of Nature, and Constitutions of pious
Princes have decreed ; as I have shewn both by evident authorities of
Scripture, together with the writings of the ancient Fathers, and other
testimonies. Only the Lord grant that we may learn to prefer his ever
just and saving Word, before the Comments of Antichrist, too deeply
rooted in many, and the false and blasphemous Exposition of our Saviour's
words. Amen. |
| A POSTSCRIPT. |
| Thus
far Martin Bucer : Whom, where I might without injury to either part
of the cause, I deny not to have epitomiz'd ; in the rest observing
a well warranted rule, not to give an Inventory of so many words, but
to weigh their force. I could have added that eloquent and right Christian
discourse, written by Erasmus on this Argument, not disagreeing in effect
from Bucer. But this, I hope, will be enough to excuse me with the mere
Englishman, to be no forger of new and loose opinions. Others may read
him in his own phrase on the first to the Corinthians, and ease me who
never could delight in long citations, much less in whole traductions
; whether it be natural disposition or education in me, or that my Mother
bore me a speaker of what God made mine own, and not a translator. There
be others also whom I could reckon up, of no mean account in the Church
(and Peter Martyr among the first) who are more than half our own in
this Controversy. But this is a providence not to be slighted, that
as Bucer wrote this tractate of Divorce in England and for England,
so Erasmus professes he begun here among us the same subject, especially
out of compassion, for the need he saw this Nation had of some charitable
redress herein ; and seriously exhorts others to use their best industry
in the clearing of this point, wherin custom hath a greater sway than
verity. That therfore which came into the mind of these two admired
strangers to do for England, and in a touch of highest prudence which
they took to be not yet recover'd from monastic superstition, if I a
native am found to have done for mine own Country, altogether suitably
and conformly to their so large and clear understanding, yet without
the least help of theirs, I suppose that hence-forward among conscionable
and judicious persons, it will no more be thought to my discredit, or
at all to this Nation's dishonour. And if these their Books, the one
shall be printed often with best allowance in most religious Cities,
the other with express authority of Leo the tenth, a Pope, shall for
the propagating of truth, be publish'd and republish'd, though against
the receiv'd opinion of that Church, and mine containing but the same
thing, shall in a time of reformation, a time of free speaking, free
writing, not find a permission to the Press ; I refer me to wisest Men,whether
truth be suffer'd to be truth, or liberty to be liberty now among us,
and be not again in danger of new fetters and captivity after all our
hopes and labours lost : and whether Learning be not (which our enemies
too prophetically fear'd) in the way to be trodden down again by ignorance.
Wherof while time is, out of the faith owing to God and my Country,
I bid this Kingdom beware ; and doubt not but God who hath dignify'd
this Parliament already to so many glorious degrees, will also give
them (which is a singular blessing) to inform themselves rightly in
the midst of an unprincipled age ; and to prevent this working mystery
of ignorance and ecclesiastical thraldom, which under new shapes and
disguises begins a-fresh to grow upon us. |
|
|