the fentence of God, which all Chriftians ought to be ruled by, that between thofe, who either through obftinacy, or helpless inability, cannot or will not perform thefe repeated duties, between those there can be no true matrimony, nor ought they to be counted man and wife.

CHAP. XL.

Whether thofe crimes recited chap. xxxvii. out of the civil law, diffolve matrimony in God's account.

NOW if a husband or wife be found guilty of any of thofe crimes, which by the law "confenfu" are made causes of divorce, it is manifeft, that fuch a man cannot be the head and preferver of his wife, nor fuch a woman be a meet help to her husband, as the divine law in true wedlock requires; for thefe faults are punished either by death, or deportation, or extreme infamy, which are directly oppofite to the covenant of marriage. If they deferve death, as adultery and the like, doubtlefs God would not that any fhould live in wedlock 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 juft, nor expedient, nor meet, that an honeft man fhould be coupled with an infamous woman, nor an honeft matron with an infamous man. The wife Roman princes had fo great a regard to the equal honour of either wedded perfon, 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 honeft regard of chriftian expedience and comelinefs befeem and concern thofe who are fet free and dignified in Christ, than it could the Roman fenate, or their fons, for whom that law was provided?

And this all godly men will foon apprehend, that he who ought to be the head and preferver not only of his wife, but alfo of his children and family, as Chrift is of his church, had need be one of honeft name: fo likewife the wife, which is to be the meet help of an honeft and good man, the mother of an honeft offspring and family,

the

the glory of the man, even as the man is the glory of Christ, thould not be tainted with ignominy; as neither of them can avoid to be, having been juftly appeached of those forenamed crimes; and therefore cannot be worthy to hold their place in a chriftian family: yea, they themfelves turn out themselves and diffolve that holy covenant. And they who are true brethen and fifters in the Lord are no more in bondage to fuch violators of marriage.

But here the patrons of wickedness and diffolvers of chiftrian difcipline will object, that it is the part of man and wife to bear one another's crofs, 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, feek the impunity of wickedness, and the favour of wicked men, not the duties of true charity; which prefers public honefty before private intereft, and had rather the remedies of wholefome punishment appointed by God fhould be in ufe, than that by remiffness the licence of evil doing fhould increase. For if they who, by committing fuch offences, have made void the holy knot of marriage, be capable of repentance. they will be fooner moved when due punishment is exe cuted on them, than when it is remitted.

We must ever beware, left, in contriving what will be best for the foul's health 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 forefaid tranfgreffions, have loft the right of matrimony, and are unworthy to hold their dignity in an honeft and christian family.

But if any husband or wife fee fuch figns of repentance in their tranfgeffor, as that they doubt not to regain them by continuing with them, and partaking of their miferies and attaintures, they may be left to their own hopes, and their own mind; faving ever the right of church and commonwealth, that it receive no fcandal by the neglect of due feverity, and their children no harm by this invitation to licence, and want of good education. From all these confiderations, if they be thought on, as in the prefence of God, and out of his word, any one

may perceive, who defires to determine of these things by the fcripture, that thofe caufes of lawful divorce, which the most religious emperors Theodofius and Valentinian fet forth in the forecited place, are according to the law of God, and the prime inftitution of marriage; and were still more and more ftraitened, as the church and state of the empire ftill more and more corrupted and degenerated. Therefore pious princes and commonwealths both may and ought establith them again, if they have a mind to restore the honour, fanctity, and religion of holy wedlock to their people, and difentangle many confciences from a miferable and perilous condition, to a chafte and honeft life.

To thofe recited caufes wherefore a wife might send a divorce to her husband, Juftinian added four more, Conftit. 117; and four more, for which a man might put away his wife. Three other caufes were added in the Code" de repudiis, 1. Jubemus." All which caufes are fo clearly contrary to the firft intent of marriage, that they plainly diffolve it. I fet them not down, being eafy to be found in the body of the civil law.

It was permitted alfo by chriftian emperors, that they who would divorce by mutual confent, might without impediment. Or if there were any difficulty at all in it, the law expreffes the reason, that it was only in favour of the children; fo that if there were none, the law of thofe godly emperors made no other difficulty of a divorce by confent. Or if any were minded without confent of the other to divorce, and without thofe caufes which have been named, the chriftian emperors laid no other punishment upon them, than that the husband wrongfully divorcing his wife fhould give back her dowry, and the ufe of that which was called "Donatio propter nuptias;" or if there were no dowry nor no donation, that he should then give her the fourth part of his goods. The like penalty was inflicted on the wife departing without juft caufe. But that they who were once married fhould be compelled to remain fo ever against their wills, was not exacted. Wherein those pious princes followed the law of God in Deut. xxiv, 1, and his exprefs charge by the prophet Malachi, to difmifs

from

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 foon as true affection ceafes and is loft) fhould be added murder, which is already committed by either of them who refolvedly hates the other, as I thowed out of 1 John XV: "Whofo hateth his brother, is a murderer."

CHAP. XLI.

Whether the husband or wife deferted may marry to another.

THE wife's defertion of her husband the christian emperors plainly decreed to be a juft caufe of divorce, whenas they granted him the right thereof, if the had but lain out one night against his will without probable caufe. But of the man deferting his wife they did not fo determine: yet if we look into the word of God, we fhall find, that he who though but for a year without juft caufe forfakes his wife, and neither provides for her maintenance, nor fignifies his purpofe of returning, and good will towards her, whenas he may, hath forfeited his right in her fo forfaken. For the fpirit of God speaks plainly, that both man and wife have fuch power over one another's perfon, as that they cannot deprive each other of living together, but by confent, and for a time.

Hither may be added, that the holy fpirit grants defertion to be a caufe of divorce, in thofe ufwers given to the Corinthians concerning a brother or fifter deferted by a mifbeliover. "If he depart, let him depart, a brother or a fister is not under bondage in fuch cafes." In which words, who fees not that the Holy Ghoft openly pronounced, that the party without caufe deferted is not bound for another's wilful defertion, to abftain from marriage, if he have need thereof?

But fome will fay, that this is fpoken of a mifbeliever departing. But I befeech ye, doth not he reject the faith of Christ in his deeds, who rathly breaks the holy covenant of wedlock inftituted by God? And befides this,

the holy spirit does not make the mifbelieving of him who departs, but the departing of him who disbelieves, to be the just cause of freedom to the brother or fifter.

Since therefore it will be agreed among Christians, that they who depart from wedlock without just caufe, do not only deny the faith of matrimony, but of Chrift alfo, whatever they profefs with their mouths; it is but reafon to conclude, that the party deferted is not bound in cafe of caufelefs defertion, but that he may lawfully feek another confort, if it be needful to him, toward a pure and blameless converfation.

CHAP. XLII.

The impotence of body, leprofy, madness, &c. are just caufes of divorce.

Of this, because it was not difputed in the Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, him that would know further, I commend to the Latin original.

CHAP. XLIII.

That to grant divorce for all the caufes which have been hitherto brought, difagrees not from the words of Chrift, naming only the caufe of adultery.

NOW we must see how thefe things can ftand with the words of our Saviour, who feems directly to forbid all divorce except it be for adultery. To the underftanding whereof, we must ever remember this: That in the words of our Saviour there can be no contrariety: That his words and anfwers are not to be ftretched beyond the question propofed: 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