Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount, Chapter 5 · Verse 31,32
Verse 31.
It hath beene said also, whosoeuer shal put away his wife, let him giuegive her a Bill of diuorcement.
32.
But I say vntounto you, whosoeuer shall put away his wife (except it be for fornication) causeth her to commit adulterie: and whosoeuer shall marie her that is diuorced, committeth adulterie.
Our Sauiour Christ proceeding further, to restore the seauenth commaundement to his perfection, doth here confute a false interpretation of a Politicke law of Moses, giuen by the Scribes and Pharises. For this ende, first he laies downe the wordes of Moses politicke law; but yet so, as containing in them the false interpretation of the Iewish teachers, ver. 31. then hee opposeth the truth of God, against their false interpretation, and maintaineth the first institution of mariage, v. 32.
For the first, Moses politicke law was, That hee which put away his wife, should giuegive her a Bill of diuorce. This law the Iewish Teachers did falsly interpret; for the better perceiuing wherof, these three points are to be handled, touching Moses politicke law: 1. what kinde of law it was: 2. the straitnesse of that law: 3. what effect and force it had. For the first, the law is set downe, Deut. 24. 1. when a man marieth a wife, and she finde no fauour in his eies, because he hath espied some filthinesse in her; then let him write her a bill of diuorce, and put it in her hand, and send her out of his house. This law was not morall, but ciuill, or politicke, for the good ordering of the common wealth. Now among their particular lawes, some were laws of toleration, and permission, which were such as did not approoue of the euill which they concerned, but did onelyonly tolerate and permit that euill which could not be auoided, for the preuenting of a greater euil, which otherwise would fall out. As when the sea hath made … breach into the land, if it cannot possibly be stopped, the best course is, to make it as narrow as may bee. Such was the law concerning vsurie, Deut. 23. 20. permitting the Iewes to exercise it vponupon a stranger, but not towards a brother: and the like was the law touching polygamie, Deut. 21. 15. If a man had two wiues, the one hated, the other loued, and they both hauehave borne him children; if the first borne be the sonne of the hated (though shee were maried to him the latter) yet her seed was legitimate, and her sonne had the right of the first borne. In both which lawes were tolerated, that which God condemned, onelyonly for the preuenting of a greater euill. VnderUnder this sort comes our law of vsurie, for taking tenne in the hundred, not approuingBellar. de Amiss. grat. & stat. pecc. lib. 2 cap. 18. Harding cō fut. of the Apolog. part. 4 chap. 1. div. 1. but permitting so much, for the auoyding of greater vsurie. VntoUnto this kind, the Papists would reduce their law of permitting Stewes, for the preuenting of greater sinnes; but that law can hauehave no title to such permission: for a law of permission, is to diminish that euill, which by man cannot possibly be cut off altogether: now that sinne which they would preuent by their Stewes, might be cut off among them, if they would giuegive allowance to Gods owne ordinance of lawfull mariage, vntounto all sorts and sexes. So likewise this law of Moses for diuorce, was a law of permission, not approouing of the giuing a bill of diuorce for eueryevery light cause, but tolerating of it, for the preuenting of greater mischeife, euen of murther: for the nature of the Iewes was this; if a man once tooke dislike to his wife, he would neuer be at rest till he had shed her blood, if they might not bee parted asunder. Now this law of diuorce, was giuen to restraine this great euill, for hereby a man was tolerated to put away his wife, when shee found no fauour in his eies, lest hee should kill her; yet so, as he gaue her a bill of diuorce, wherein hee must set downe the cause why hee put her away: whereby also, many were restrained from putting away their wiues, because it was a great shame, for a light occasion, so highly to transgresse Gods holy institution, who made them by mariage, one flesh. The truth of this may appeare by the Lords owne complaint, against his people, to whom he speaketh, as to a wife that had forsaken her husband, without a cause on his behalfe, Isay 50. 1. Where (saith he) is that bill of your mothers diuorcement, wherby I sent her away? As if he should say, I gaue her no bill, but her departure and separation from mee, is by her owne sinnes: which phrase sheweth what was the custome of the Iewes in this case.
II. Point. The straitnesse of this law appeares in this, that the man onelyonly was permitted to giuegive this bill vntounto his wife, but the wife might not giuegive it to her husband; for Moses saith, Whosoeuer shall put away his wife: neither is there any place in Scripture, to prooue that the wife had this libertie, so to deale with her husband. If it bee asked, whether the wife in a iust cause, as for adulterie, had not the like libertie: I answer, If we respect Gods institution touching mariage, the right of diuorce is equall to them both; for in regard of the bond of mariage, they are equally bound one to another. Here indeed this libertie is permitted onelyonly to the man, by this politicke law, not that he had more right, but to preuent the euill, of the hardnesse of his heart, who taking displeasure at his wife, would rather spill her blood, then continue with her. If it be alleadged, that ai. Cor. 11. 3a man is the womans head: I answer, that is for regiment and direction in her place, but not in regard of breaking the bond of mariage, whereby he is bound to his wife, as well as she to him, as the Apostle teacheth, 1. Cor. 7. 4.
III. Point. The force and effect of this law was this, It made the Bill of diuorcement for any cause giuen, to be tolerable before men; & mariage after such a diuorce, lawfull and warrantable in the Courts of men, Deut. 24. 4. But yet in the court of conscience before God, the diuorcement it selfe, and second mariages made thereupon, were both vnlawfull; for God hateth this separation, Mal. 2. 15. And whether partie soeuer marieth another vponupon this diuorce, commits adulterie, Matth. 19. 9. This must be remembred, for the true vnderstanding of this law of Moses; the first words whereof, are a permission, to this effect; If a man do conceiue such a dislike against his wife, as that he wil not abide with her, but will needes put her away, then he may; but yet so, as hee giuegive her a bill of diuorce: which doth not acquit him before God, but before men onelyonly.
Hauing thus shewed the true meaning of this law, it remaineth now to see what the Pharises taught touching diuorce. Their doctrine was this, that hee which gaue a bill of diuorcement vntounto his wife, for any light occasion, was thereby acquitted from her before God; and thereupon might marie another, without the guilt of adulterie: and also that another man might lawfully marrie her that was thus diuorced. That this was their meaning, may appeare by the contrarie answer of our Sauiour Christ, wherein he crosseth and confuteth this their interpretation, in the words following.