Defense of Divorce and Remarriage, Chapter 2
THE SECOND CHAPTER.
The places of Scripture alleaged by the adversaries to disproove the Lawfull liberty of Marriage after Divorcement for Adulterie, are Proposed, Examined, and Prooved not to make agaynst it.
SAinct Austin in his learned bookes of Christian Doctrine, wherein hee geves rules how to finde the right and true sence of Scriptures, doth wellaDe doct…, Christ lib. 2…. cap. 9. aduise the faithful, First to search and marke those things which are set downe in the Scripturs plainly, and then to goe in hande with sifting and dis…ussing of the darke places: that the darker speeches may be made evident by Patterns and examples of the more playne & manifest, and the records of certayne & vndoubted setences may take away doubt of the ūcertayne.
This wholsome and iudicious Counsaile of S, Augustin if our adversaries had bene as carefull to follow, as they are willing to shew they follow him in these things which he hath written lesse advisedly: they would not have alleaged and vrged the places of Scripture, which they doe agaynst the poynt of doctrine hith…rto prooved out of the niententh chapter of S. Mathew. For Christ in that place doth open the matter and decide the question most plainly and fully: of purpose answering the Pharises. In others, either it is not handled of purpose, incidently touch…d; or in gen…rallity sett downe more briefly, and soe more darkly and obs…urely. Wherefore if any of the other places had seemed vntounto them to rayse vp a scruple, and shew of some repugnancie: they should have taken paynes to explayne and levell it by that in S. Mathew the darker by the clearer, the brieffer by the larg…r, the vncertaine and ambiguous by the vndoubted and certayne. But seeing they have chosen to follow S. Austins oversights rather thē his best advises in like sorte asbCicero lib. 2. de o…at. Furius, an orator of Rome did imitate Fimbria whose force of speech and arguments hee attained not to, but pronoun…ed broadly and set his mouth awry like him: wee must say of thē as Christ of the PharisiescMatt 15. 14. Let them alone, they are blynd leaders of the blynd: and ourselves endevour to follow S. Augustin in that he followed Christ, who cleareddMatt 19, vers… the darker place of Moses byevers 4. et 8. the playner word and ordinance of God. The which if wee doe, wee shall (by Gods grace) easily perceive, that none af all the places alleaged by our adversaries, doth make agaynst the doctrine already prooved and concluded.
For the first of them is in the fifth of Mathew fMatt 5, 32Whosoever shall putt away his wife, except it for whordome, doth cause her to commit adulterie, And whoso marrieth her that is put away doth committ adulterie, These words (sayth Bellarmin; and looke what Bellarmin sayth the pamphletter sayth with him, so that one of their names may serve for both and reason Bellarmin have the honour) These words. And whoso marrieth her that is put away doth commit adulterie, must be either generally taken without exception, or with the exception. Except it bee for whoredome. If generally, Then he who marrieth her that is put away, even for whoredome too, doth committ adulterie. The band then of Marriage is not d…solved and loosed by her putting away: but company debarred onelyonly. For hee that marrieth her should not commit adulterie vnlesse shee were bound yet to her former husband. And thus farr Bellarmin sayth well; but superfluously. For the words may not bee generally taken, sith they have relation to the former sentence, whereto they are coupled; and that sentence speaketh of her which is put away except for whore dome. Their meaning then must n…edes bee that hee who marrieth her which is so put away doth commit adulterie. Neither could Bellarmin bee ignoraunt hereof, or doubt with any likely hoode, but that this is our iudgment, and would bee our answer. Wherefore his two forked dispute about the words, was a flourish onelyonly to make vsus a frayde: as if hee fought with a two hand sword, which would kill all that came in his way. But now hee goeth forward vponupon his enemies pike, & layeth about him on the other side. If the words must bee taken with the exception: then hee that marrieth a whore put away from her husband, committeth not adulterie. And consequently the whore is in better case then the innocent and chaste. For the whore is free and may be married, wheras the innocent that is vniustly put away, can neither have her former husband, nor marrie another. But this most absurd, that the law of Christ beeing most iust, would have her to bee in better case and state, that is iustly put away, then her that is vniustly. For answer vntounto which reason of Bellarmin, I would spurr him a question, whether by the Popes law, which forbiddeth a man that gExtra de bigamis cap. Super eo.hath bene twise maried, orhc de big amis. hath maried a widow, to take H. orders & admitteth on thereto that hath kept or happely keepeth many concubines, a whormonger bee in better case then an honest man: and if a whoremonger bee so by the Popes law,ic, Quia circa whether wee ought to iudge that this is most absurd or noe. Here if hee should answer mee that the Popes law is not most iust and therefore noe marvell if it have some such things as were most absurd to bee imagined by Christs law: I must acknowledge hee spake reason. Well, I would spurre him then another questiō, whether hee thinke that I am in better case then any Iesuit, yea, then the best of them all. Phy hee will answer, there is noe cō parison. The best? nay the worst of them is in better case then I am: Yet I may marry if I list: and none of them may because of their vowe. Belike this Vow-Doctrine was not established by the law of Christ, which is most iust, but bykExtra. c. me minimus. Quiclerici velvoventes. the Popes lawe rather. Or it is most absurd that a poore Christian should bee in better case, then the proudest Iesuit. But heere peradventure the man will say rather that wee are Heretiques, and they Catholiques, and the meanest Catholique is in better case, even for his faiths sake, then any Heretique whatsoever: which if he doe as it is likely, neither can hee say ought with probability but to this effect, then hath hee confuted and overthrowen his own argument. For by this answere hee cannot chuse but graunt that the simplest woman being put away vnjustly from her husband is in better case for her chastities sake, though shee may not marrie, then whatsoever whore that may. And I hope hee wil not say that the stewes and curtizans at Rome are in better case then honest matrons there, divorced from their husbands. Yet may none of these, while their husbands live bee ioyned to others: whereas the curtizans are free to marrie whom they will, if any will marrie them, who are soe free. Howbeit, lest any place of cavelling bee left him, and of pretending a difference betweene those, who having had the vse of marriage lose the benefit of it, and those who lose it not, having never had it: I will sett before him a playne demonstration therof in married persons. Seianus (as thelCorn. Tacitus Annal. lib 4 Di…. lib. 7. Romaine Historie recordeth) did putt away his wife Apicata vnjustly: thereby to winne the rather the favour of Livia, which was the wife of Drusus. Livia being carried away with the wicked entisements of Seianus was not onelyonly nought of her body with him, but consented also to make away her husband Drusus with poyson, Now let Bellarmin tell vsus whether of these two were in better case Apicata or Livia; Livia the adulteresse & murderesse of hir husband, being free to marry, or chast Apicata, being bound to live solitary. If hee say Livia should have bene put to death by themLege Pompeia de Parricidis Romaine law because of her murder and then had shee not bene in better case then Apicata for liberty to marrie: I reply that likewise by the law ofnLevit 20. 10 Moses the woman whom Christ speaketh of, should have bene put to death, because of her adultery, and soe the doubt here ceased too. But the law of Moses being left vnexe…ut…d on the adulterous woman, as the Romain was for the tyme of Livia: let Bellarmin āswer to the poynt, not as of Livia onelyonly, but of any whore that hath wrought her husbands death, and for want of proofe, or through the Magistrats fault is suffered to live, whether shee be in better case then an honest, chast, religious matron, that is put away from her husband vnjustly. Which if hee dare not say, considering on the one side the plagues thatoDeut 28 15. in this life, andpRevel, 21. 8 in the life to come are layd vp for such mis…reants, on the other, the blessedq1, Tim, 4, 8 promises of them both assur…d to the Godly: then hee hath noe refuge, but hee must needs confesse that his argument was fond. For the murdering whore is not an adulteresse by the law of Christ, though shee take another man, her husband being deade: and yet the chast matron were an adulteresse if shee married while her husband liveth, who hath vnjustly putt her away. Wherein this notwithstāding is to be weighed, that a chast womans case is not so hard in comparison of the whores.
No. Not for marriage neither, as Bellarmin by cunning of speech would make it seeme, to …ounten…unce therewith his reasō. For he frameth hisrNam F…rmearia libera est er nubere potest: innocens autem in iustè dimissa, nec Priorem virum habere potest, nec al… nubere. words so, as if the …hast had no possibility of remedy at all, neither by having her former husband, nor by marrying another: & therefore were in worse case thē the whore who is free to marrie, whereas the truth is, that by Christs lawe shee notr1. Cor 7. ver 11. onelyonly may, butsvers, … ought to have her former husband.
And why should not shee bee as likely to recover her husbands goodwill, to whom shee hadd bene faithfull: as a faythlesse whore and infamous strumpett to get a newe husband?
Chiefly seing that it is to bee presumed they loved ech other wh…n they married: and experience sheweth thattTerenc. Andr. Falling out of Lovers is a renewing of love. But if through the frowardnes of men on the one side, & foolishnes on the other, the chaste wife could hardly recōcile her husbād, the whore get easily a match: it suffic…th that the law of Christ cannot bee justly charged with absurdity, though it doe enlarg the vnchast and lewd in some outward thing, in which it enlargeth not the chast. No more thenuIer 17. 1. the providence of God may bee controlled and noted of iniquity thoughxpsal 73. 5. the evill & wicked enioy certaine earthly blessings in this life, which are not graunted to the vpright & godly. Wherefore the first place of Scripture out of S. Mathew enforcrd by Bellarmin, with his2Dilemma Cornutus Syl logismus. horned argument (as the Logitions tearme it) doth serve him as much to annoy our cause: a… the Iron hornes made in Achabs favour by Zedechiah the falce prophet did stand him in stead to push and consume the hoste of the Aramites
The second place is written in the tenth of Marke. yMark 10. 1…Who so putteth away his wife and marrieth another committeth adulterie agaynst her: and if a woman put away her husband, and be married to another shee committeth adulterie. The like whereof is also in the sixteenth of Luke zLuk 16. 1…whosoever putteth away his wife and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband, committeth adultery. These words (sayth Bellarmin) doe teach generally, that marriage cōtracted & perfected betweene the faithfull, is never so dissolved that they may lawfully ioyne in other wedlocke. And whereas wee answer that these general sentences are to be expounded with a saving of the exception mentioned inaMat 19, 9. Mathew, because one Evangelist doth add oftentymes that another omitteth; & Mathew els where contrary vntounto Marke and Luke, which (sith they all wrote as they were moved by the holy spirit of truth) is impossible: Bellarmin replieth that the Evangelists in deed omitt or add somewhat now and than, which other EEvangelists have not omitted or added; but they doe never omitt in such sorte that the sentence is made false. A straunge kinde of speeche As if all generall sentences were false from the which some spetialtie, though not expressed in the same place, yet by conf…rēce with others, is vnderstood to bee expressed. Sure the Civill Lawe which in learned mens opinions hath much truth, will then bee stayned foully with vntruthes and lyes. For how many sentences and rules are set downe in it with full and generall tearmes, whereof notwithstāding there is nonebL …mmis definitio D. de regul. jur…s lightly but suffereth an exception. The Canon law also (whose creditt and authority Bellarmin must tender, howsoever he doe the Civill) hath store of such axiomes, andcEod▪ tit in Sex… c Generi per Speciem derogatur E Dig: l…in toto jure. teacheth accordingly That a particular doth derogate from the generall. But what speake I of mens lawes? In the Scripture it self Iob sayth thatdIob 20, 7 The hipocrite shall perish for ever, like the dung: and David, that the ePsal 9, 17wicked shall turne into hell, all nations that forgett God. & Salomon that fProv 16, 5Everie provd-harted man is an abomination to the Lord; though hand ioyne in hand hee shall not bee vnpunished. These sentences of Iob & David and Salomon, are true in the belief of Christians; yet forasmuch as they must bee vnderstood with an exception, according to the Doctrine ofgLuk. 13, 3 Christ andhEsay, 16, et 55. 7 Luk, 3, 8. Act 2, 8. his servants, saying vntounto sinners Except Yee repent Yee shall all perish: in the Iesuits iudgement they are made false. And Ionas semblablie, when hee preached to the Ninivits, iIonas 3, 4Yet forty days, and Niniveh shalbe overthowen, abvsed thē with an vntruth: thoughkAben Ezra on …er 18, 7 Nic Lyranus. 10. Ferus. Trein … et Iun. in …onam. learned men doe finde a trueth in his speech, as being to be thus taken that Niniveh should bee over throwen except it repented. Or if Bellarmin also acknowledg the same, which hee may not choose, vnlesse of a Iesuit hee will become a Iulian, and quite renounce the Christian fayth: then acknowledgeth hee that hee playeth the parte of a guilefull Sophister or a malitious Rhetoriciā, in signifying that the sentēce of Christ is made false, if it bee expounded and vnderstoode with an exception otherwhere expressed. And withall by consequence hee acknowledgeth farther, that it is an idle & braynsick amplification whi…h herevppon he… lavisheth out Iesuit like and vaynely mispendeth paynes and tymes about it, by saying, that els (if the sentence forsooth were false) the Evangelists had deceived men to whom they delivered their Gospells making noe mention of other Evangelists and that when Marke wrote his gospel at Rome received by the preaching of Peter, hee did not send the Romaeines backe to Mathews gospel, as to a commentary: Nay if Mathews gospel hadd bene then at Rome in the hands of the faythfull, it may be wel thought that Marke would not have written, and that Marke wrote not to add ought to Mathew, as Iohn did afterward, but onelyonly that the Romaines might the better remember that which Peter taught: For llib 3 cap …Irenaeemlib 2. hist. cap. 15 Eusebius and nlib de viris illustrib us in Marco.Ierom geve this cause; and that Luke wrote his Gospel for those nations to whom Paul had preached, and vntounto whō the booke of Mathew and Marke were not yet come, but certayne false writings of False Evangelists onelyonly: as oLuk. 1. 1.himself sheweth briefly, and it is more clearly gathered out of pCommen in Luc cap 1.Ambrose,qlib 3. hist. cap 24. Eusebius and rl…b de viris illustribus in Luca.Ierom.
And in conclusiō, that the things th…refore which Marke and Luke say, must be absolutely true, & not depend of Mathews words, vnlesse our meaning bee that they were deceived, who did read Marke or Luke without Mathew. For by this reason of Bellarmin the words of Iob, David, Salomon and Ionas, must bee absolutely true, and not depend of Christs words in Luke or by Esay: vnles our meanig be, that they were deceived, who read the Psalmes of David or Salomons proverbs, or heard Iob or Ionas speake without Christ: which likewise might receive a gay shewe by saying that els (if these sentences were false) these holy men had deceived them to whom they spake or wrote, making noe mention of other holy teachers: and that when Iob. and David, and Salomon, and Ionas did either write or speake, they did not put mē over vntounto Luke or Esay as to a comentarie; Nay Iobs words were vttered, before either of them, or any of Christs pen-men of the whole Scripture wrote, assOrigen in Iob lib 5. Athanas in synops. sacr. script August de civitat. Dei lib 18. cap. 4…. Theodore… in Ier Q…ae … 92 Chrysost poly chron sundry of the Fathers doe probably teach: &tIona… 4. 5. Ionas did looke that Niniveh should be over throwē according to his absolute speech, so farre was he of from sēding the Ninivites to such as specifie the exception, besides that, had hee sent them, whither should they have gone, who neither knewe the Scriptures, andu2. King 14. 25 lived before the tyme of Luke and Esay both? David too, and Salomon, were their auncients farre and ech did sett forth the one his Psalmes, the other his Proverbs (even those which they did writ) not all at once but by partes; and partlyxpsal 9 8. 30 5 et …o. Prov …o et. 25. … et. 3 … their owne titles, andy2 Chron 16 … 1 King. 4. …1. other Sciptures argue, partlyzSynops. Sacr Script, Athanasius, aArgum in Psalm. David…Theodoret, andbcomment. in psalm. praesat. Bede signifie: neither did Luke or Esay write to add ought to the Psalmes or Proverbs, or to the words of Iob or Ionas, ascIn the bookes of Ghronicles. Ezra did to the booke of Kings; But Esay to publish onelyonly his owne Prophecie, and the storie touching it, Luke the Gospel of Christ, and Acts of the Apostles. Here were a trimme tale, which might be very forcible with a man forlorne, like Iudas Iscariot, to perswade him, that the sentences of Iob, of David, of Salomon, of Ionas concerning the distruction of hypocrits and all the wicked, are not to bee expounded out of Luke or Esay, with an exception of Repentance. Yea, this should of reason have greater force and weight then Bellarmins of the same spinning. For he sayth that Marke did not write his Gospell to add ought to Mathew. Which thing beeing graunted, yet Marke notwithstanding might be expounded by Mathew, and soe much the rather, Mathew having specified an exception, that Marke omitteth: asdL. Regula est. D. de reg. …uris, the Lawiers teach that their Generall rules were not written to add ought vntounto the former, yet must bee expounded with the exceptions touched in the former Lawes. But in the spider-webb that I have woven after Bellarmins patterne, it is contrariewise; that Esay and Luke did not write to add ought to the Psalmes or Proverbs, or to the words of Iob or Ionas; which hath greater colour to prove that their sayinges should not bee absolutely true, and not depend of exceptions mentioned so long after, neither meane to bee ioyned to them: Chiefly for alianes from the Common-wealth of Israell, such as they that heard Iob and Ionas were, who lived not to read the Doctrine of Christ in his Prophets and Apostles. Wherefore seeing Bellarmin is forced to acknowledg it were a lewd parte to reason and conclude this on generall sentences of Iob, David, Salomon, that an hypocrite, a wicked, a proud-harted man, shall not bee forgiven & saved though hee repent: much more must hee acknowledg a fault, in his disputing and gathering out of Marke & Luke that a man having put awaye his wife maye not marrye another, though hee have put her away for whoredome. And hereby wee may see what honour they both, himself and the pamphlet ter, who in this whole discourse goeth with him soote by foote, save that by enterlacing more fond vnsavory words, h…e over-runneth him sometymes: a cover well beseeming and worthy such a cuppe, onelyonly somewhat broader; but hereby wee may see what honour they have doneeDe adulterin conjug. li. 1. cap. 9. S. Austin in knitting vpp their tale with his words, Who are wee, that wee should say, Some putting away their wives, and marrying other, commit adulterie: and some doeing soe commit it not, whereas the Gospel sayth, that every one committeth adultery, who doth so? Even as much honour as themselves should gayne, if in the forlorne mans case, which I spake of they were his ghostly Fathers, and put him in this comforte Who are wee that wee should say, some wickedmen shall goe to hell, (namely the vnrepentant) some (the repentant) shall not goe, whereas the Scripture sayth that everie wicked man shall goe to Hell. Lett this kinde of dealling in refuting matters bee once allowed for currant: and every priest and Iesuit as well as the Pope will have more Royall power, even over Princes: what should I say over common Christians? For whereas it is written in the Epistle to the CollosiansfCol 3. 20 Children obey your Parents in all things: & Prophets were honoured with the name of Fathers, not onelyonly by theirg2 King 2. 12 schollers, the children of the Prophets, but also by the h2 Kin. 6. 21. et 13, 1….Kings of Israel: theiBell. tom… cont 3, lib, 2. cap, 31. title of Father gevē to all priests though not in such degree as tokPapa pater patrum. …0: Andr in Clementinar, procem. the Pope, yet to all priests and to Iesuits especialy, insomuch that alAllen in his Apologie of the English seminaries chap, 6, great person of Rome doth terme them not Fathers onelyonly with the people, but the Reverend Fathers, the Catholique Fathers, the good Fathers of the society of the holy name of Iesus: this title then applied and geven to them all will quickly winne their schollers to thinke that themHeb 13. 17 Allen Apologie chap 4. obedience commaunded towards them is obedience in all things. Now we protestants teach that neverthelesse supposing they were in deed Fathers not caterpillers of the Churche, yet if Priest or Iesuit or the Pope himself should commaund a man to commit murder or whoredome, or theft, hee might not bee obeyed, because it is written in the Epistle to the EphesiausnEphes, 6. … Children obey your Parents in the Lord, whence that to the Collosians ought to bee expounded, that Parents must bee so farre forth obeyed, in all things as standeth with the dewty which children owe to God, and in pietie they may. But if some Catholique Father should denie this, and say (like Father Robert) that S. Paule in deed ommitteth or addeth somewhat in one Epistle, which hee hath not omitted or added in another, but hee doth never omit in such sorte that the sentence is made faulse: for els S. Paule hadd deceived the Collossians to whom hee sent that Epistle, making no mention of that other to the Ephesians: And surely when hee wrote to the Collosians from Rome, he did not send them back to his Ephesian Epistle as to a commentary; nay if that Epistle had bene in their hands, it may bee well thought, that hee would not have written to them. Eor hee did not write the Epistle to the Collossians thereby to add ought to that which he had writtē vntounto the Ephessians, as hee did the later to the Corinthians, or Thessalonians, after the former, but onelyonly to reclayme the Collossians from their errour, that man is reconciled, and hath accesse to God by Angels, and to corect their Iewish and Heathenish observations; for oH…m. … in epist ad colloss.Chrysostō pArgument, epist,Theophylact, and qArgum. 2 e Theodore….Oecumenius geve this cause. That which Paule therefore sayth to the Collossians must bee absolutly true, and not depend of that he sayth to the Ephesians, vnlesse our meaning bee that they were deceived, who read the Epistle to the Collossians without the other. If some Catholique Father (I say) should speake thus, agaynst our interpreting of Scripture by Scripture, would not his children (trow yee) thinke it strongly & invincibly proved, that they must obey him absolutely in all things? Chiefly, if as Father Robert bringeth Austin, soe he broughtrMonast. in stitut lib. 4. cap. 27. … F…r so the Syriaque word Abba (whence Abbat cometh) doth signifie Rom 8. …5. Cassianus S. Chrisostoms scholar in, who prayseth one Mutius (a novice of an Abbey in Egypt) as a most worthy paterne of obedience to his Abbat or, Father, as you would say, for that he was ready to cast his owne natural sonne a litle child, into the River at his commandemēt & soe as much as lay in him did murder his son, but that some by the Abbats appoyntement did receive him beinge caste out of his Fathers hands towards the River, and saved him from drowning. For heescassian li 4 cap 2…. who extolleth this Novices fayth and devotion to Heavē, affirming that the Abbat was by revelation straightway advertised, that Mutius hadd performedtGenes…. 10 Abraham the Patriarks worke by the obedience, as if there were noe difference between thevGenes. 22. 2 Lords commandement and an Abbats might have formed a sent…n…e like Austins in defence thereof: Who are wee that wee should say, Children in some things must obey their Parents, and in some they must not, whereas the Scripture sayth. Children obey your Parents in all things. By the which construction whatsoever a mans mother should command him, must bee obeyed too, shee being comprehended in the name of Parents: and what soever a mansx2. King …. 1 Maister should command, hee beeing also a Father, and whatsoeverygen 45. 8. Iob. 29. 16. …, Tim 5. 1. Act. 7. 2 et. 22. 1. any Governour should cōmand, or frend that hath done good, or an olde Gray-headed mā they being Fathers all, though not by nature, yet by office, benefit, or age. And then had Kingz2 chron. 15. …6. Asa done evill in putting downe his mother Maachah from her state, because shee hadd made an Idole in a grove; & in breaking downe her Idoll; and stamping it, & burning it. Anda1. Sam. 22. 17. Doeg the Edomite had deserved greater prayse then Sauls servants: sith they Would not move their hands to fal vpom the Lords Priests, when their Maister bidd them: which Doeg did and ex…cuted his wrath to the vttermost. And thebAct. 4. 5. et. … 29. Apostles hadd overseene themselves, when they disobeyed the high Priest, and rulers and Elders of Israel; and gave this reason of it Wee ought rather to obey God then men. Yea that wrecthed impious & execrable fryer, who did more then barbarously murder his Soveraigne Lords the*HENRIE the third 1589. August 2. French King the annoynted of the HIGHEST, may then bee excused, excused! nay commended and praysed by trayt…rous papists, as having done that which hee ought: seing it is likely that either Pope or Priest, or Iesuit or Abbat, or some of his superiours commanded him to doe it. Such absurd consequents of Bellarmins affirming that Markes and Lukes words must bee absolutely true, and not depend of Mathew, doe shew what great reason hee had soe to speake. For it is written of the Cittie of Ierusalem, compared with the Canaanites, Amorites, and Hittites c…zek. 6. 44.Such mother, Such daughter: in like sort may it be sayd of this constructiō of the holy Scripture compared with Bellarmins. Such consequēce, such antecedent. And thus farre of his second place.
The third is in the Epistle to the Romaines the sevēth chap. dRom. 7. 1.Knowe yee not bretheren (for I speake to thē that knowe the law) that the law hath Dominion over a man as long as hee liveth? For the woman, which is in subiection to a man, is bound by the law to the man while hee liveth: but if the man bee dead, shee is delivered from the law of the man. So then if while the man liveth, shee take another man, shee shalbe called an adulteresse: but if the may be dead shee is free from the law, soe that shee is not an adulteresse, though shee take another man. Out of which place and e1. cor. 7. 39the like in the seaventh of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, Wee gather (saith Bellarmin) that the band of marriage is never loosed but by death: and that seing it is not loosed, it remayneth after divorcement too, for whatsoever cause the divorce bee made. This doth Bellarmin gather: but gathering soe, hee reapeth that which the holy Ghost sowed not. For S. Pauls meaning in those words to the Romains and Corinthians was, that the band of marriage is not loosed comonly and ordinarily while both the parties live; not that absolutely, it is never loosed till one of thē die. As in the like case (to open the matter by his owne examples) heef1 Cor 9. 7 sayth Who goeth to Warrfare any tyme at his owne cost? Now some have servd at their owne charges without pay sometymes. For soe did thegDionys, Halycarn ant Roman li. 9. Romā stocke of the Fabij agaynst the Vientians andhHerod li. 8 Clinias an Athenian Citizen agaynst the Persians. But men for the most parte are waged publiquely therevnto. And that is the poynt which S. Paule respected. Againei1. Cor 9, 7 4. Aneaeus or Agape…or, Isac Tzerz in Lycopht. Who planteth a Vineyard, & eateth not of the fruite thereof? … Hee on whō they father the first occasion of that proverb Many things doe happen between the cupp and the lipp; is sayd not to have drunke of the fruite of the Vineyard which himselfe had planted, nor to have eaten thereof belyke. At least seingkCic. de senectu…e. old men plant trees for their posterity, neither mightlLevit 19. 23. the Iewes eate of their fruite in certayne yeares: It is more then likely that many of them did not. Some did not questionlesse: they namely, who sustained the curse which God denounced vntounto them by Moses. mDeut 28. 30Thou shelt plant a Vineyard, and shalt not vse the fruite thereof. Yet S. Paule sayd wel, because such as plant Vines doe enioy them commonly. Agayne n1. Cor. 9. 7who feedeth a flocke and eateth not of the milke of the flocke? They eat not of the milke, who doe not milke their sheepe at all: andoVarr lib. 2. c. 2 de re Rust Columell. l. 7. c. 4. there bee who doe not, for feare of impayring thereby the lambs or woole. But it is sufficient for S. Pauls purpose, & the truth of his speech, that men in mostpDeut 3…. 14 Hom odyss. li 9. Arist. de hist a…alium lib. 3. Cato de re rust. cap 13. virgil. Elag. 3. cuntreis are wont to have thē milked: & they who vndertake the paines of feeding flockes, are accustomed to eate of the milkes of the flockes. AgaineqEphes 5, 29 No man ever hated his owne flesh but nourisheth & cherisheth it▪ Cato the yonger, who slewe himself at Vtica, rPlutarc Catowas so farr from nourishing and cherishing his body, that when his bowels being gushed out thereof, hee was not yet dead, hee tore them in pieces with his owne hands ass2 Machab. 14. 46. Rasias also did. Neither would S. Paule have denied this: who knewe thatt1, Sam 31, 4 2. Sam▪ 7. 23. Mat 27. 5. many hadd killed themselves, and taken away all ioyes of life frō their flesh. OnelyOnly he meant that noe man hath ever lightly hated it, but every one doth nourish and cherish it rather. u2. Tim …. 4.Noe man that warreth entangleth himself with the affaiers of life, because he would please him that hath chosen him to be a Souldier. What? is this false, because xPlutare. Crassus.the rich Crassus being chosen by the Romains to bee their Generall in Syria, did without all care of pleasing them, who chose him, plaie the marchant man and occupied himself in councels & money matters? Or because ayPoly. lib …. band of Campanian souldyers, who served the king of Sicilie gave themselves to citizens trades and occupations, having by treachery seazed on Messana, dispossessed the townesmen, devided their wives, goods and lands among thē, & a bād of Romans did the like in Rhegiū, to the discōtentmēt of such as chose thē to be soldiers, No. for the Apostle who exhorted Timothy z2 Tim ca. 2. …to behave himself as a good & honest sould yer of Christ, was not to learn that there are some vnhonest sould yers & retchlesse of their duty. But his meaning was, that soldyers vsually do employ thēselves on warrlike exercises, not on civill affayers, or domesticall busines, whē they are chosen once to serve, & in the same sence did he likewise say, that a married womā is bound by the law vntounto her husbād while he liveth: because the band of marriage is not vsually and ordinarily loosed, but by death, though it may bee loosed, and is sometymes otherwise, on rare vnwontted causes. Which is apparant to have bene his meanning by that hee teachetha1 Cor 7, 15 that if an vnbeleeuing man, who hath a Christian wife, doe forsake her, then 5Lu ded…culo tas Eleutera estin.shee is not in bondage. For if she be not in bondage, shee isbinnocent. ta. …, c. quant… extra de divortijs, free to marrie: as the words of Scripture imply by the contrary, and the6vers. 39. Pope declareth. If shee bee free to marrie the band of the former marriage is loosed, els were shee bound and not free. Wherefore sith the popes authenticall record doth prove out of S. Paule, that a wife in some case is free to marrie another while her husbād liveth, the Papists must acknowledg that S. Paul meant, the band is not comonly loosed but by death, not that it is never at all loosed otherwise absolutely and simply. Bellarmin to frustrate and avoyde this answere, sayth that it may bee proved by foure reasons: which hee bringeth forth poore, vnarmed, weake ones of his owne mustering, and with a strong hand putteth them to flight: that soe men imagining these are all that can be alleaged on our side for the proofe thereof, might thinke that our whole force is quite discomfited and Bellarmin hath wone the feilde. I have heard say that there is cunning in daubing. Surely there is cunning in this kinde of dealing. Neither is it for nothing that cBirstow, Motive. 31.one of their Glorious Champions doth vaunte that the cōmon sorte of Catholiques are able to say more for vsus, thē wee can for our selves. In deede they would beare the cōmō sorte in hand, that their learned men in handling of questions and controversies of religion doe set downe all obiectiōs that can be made of our parte. And I graunt, they set downe more then ofte tymes themselves can soundly answere. Yet they vse discretion therein by their leave: and many a strong reason which would trouble them fowly if it came in place, they are content to winck at and say nothing of it, whereto they joyne this policy now and thē also, that they take vponupon them to bee as it were our proctours and at turneys, in shewing what may bee sayd for vsus. VnderUnder which pretence they bring in such things as having a ready solution with the obiection, and proving vnsound, may turne to out causes discredit and to ours. So the Iesuit here his argument being grounded vppon two places, the one to the Romans, the other to the Corinthyans, wee countermyning the whole with one answere: hee sayth that our answere may bee proved by foure reasons, which hee gathereth out of circumstances of the former place, all such as the later hath neither any kinred with, and discoverceth them to be of no valew. But of the reasons, which I have brought to prove our answere fitting both the places, and partly confirming that S. Paule might well meane the same in these, which in the like hee meant; partly demonstrating that certaynly hee did soe, because it were not true els that hee teacheth of the libertie of Christians forsaken by the vnbeleevers; these reasons Bellarmin doth, not touch. No marveil: for they are too hot. And it is likely that he studied not what might be most stronglie said in our defence, but rather what most weakely: that so he might seeme to ioyne battaile with vsus, and yet might bee sure to doe himself no harme, Letting passe therefore the help which he offreth in like sorte to vsus as thedEzra 4. …. Sa …ritanes did vntounto the Iewes: I come vntounto the vniust and false accusation, wherewitheEzr…. …. 9. they sought to hinder the buylding of the Temple, I meane to the reasons which hee vntruely sayth, doe witnesse our answer and exposition to bee faulse. Those hee draweth to three heads, whereof the first hath two braunches: one that S. Pauls words are playne; the other that they are oft repeated. For what is more playne (sayth hee) then thet fRom 7. ….if while the man liveth, the woman take another man, shee shall be called an adulteresse? and that g1, …. 7. …9.the woman is bound by the lawe as longe as her hus…and liveth? Playne I denie not. But this proofe how pithy & strong soever hee thought it to set it his fore-front, is already shewed to bee no proofe at all: sith there are as playne words in like sentences, which neverthelesse must bee expounded, as these are by vsus. For what more playne then thath1 cor, 9, 7. Who goeth a warrefare any tyme at his owne Cost? and that, Who planteth a Vineyard, and eateth net of the fruite thereof? and that Whofeadeth a flocke and eateth not of the milke of the flocke? and that,iEphes. 5. 29. No man ever hated his owne flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it? & thatk2. Tim. 2. 4. No Warre-faring man entangleth himselfe with the affayres of life? &lMark. 2. 22. Luk. 4. 24. Iohn. 2. 10. Gal. 3. 15. many other such, that might bee aleaged, if in a thing so cleare it were not superfluous? Nay in these sentēces the words are more playne, then in those wee speake of, because those have noe such marke of generality expressed as these have. Wherefore if soe great playnnesse of words signed with generall tokēs as it were importing that they are true in all yet convinceth not that they are meant of all without any exception, fully and vniversally: how can a lesser playnnesse wanting such efficacie, convince the same of those in question? Or if it should elswhere by reason of some difference which might supplie, by other weight that this wanteth: Yet here it cannot possibly, because S.m1. cor. 7. 15. Paule himself as I have declared sheweth that in one case the sayings could not so bee true Moreover thencap. verum. Extra. de con…vers. conjug c. commissum. despō …a… … bus. Cōcil. Tridēt. Sess. 24 can. 6. Bell. tom. 1. cont. 5 lib. …. cap. 3…. Papists hold that if a married man become a monke before he know his wife carnally, shee may lawfully take another husbād, while he liveth. Perhaps further, also that the Pope for any very weighty cause, maye vponupon the same circumstance dispense, and loose the band of Marriage. At least oCovarru. epet in 4. decre tal. par 2. cap. 7. 9. 4. Catharin. de … mo… quart. utrum matrimō. ante cop. sit Sacramentum et alibi quae in arch… typo.them-selves tell vsus that sundry Popes have done so: andpHosticus. Panormita…. et ali… …. in. c. expublicode convers. co njugator. Card. Cajet. opusculo de mattim Mec. Medium. de Sacror hom. contin. lib. 5. Mar…in Navar. Consilior lib… 3. … convers. infid. cons. 1. their great Doctors hould wee may. Yet is the woman his wife who hath wedded her, or espoused her onelyonly, though shee hath not entred into his bed-chamber. For shee that is betrothed, is accounted a wife by the lawqDeut 22. 24. Matt 1. 20 of God: and consent, not carnall company maketh Marriage as the civillrL. cuifuerit D de condits et domōstrat. L Nuptiarum D. de reg sa…. Lawiers,sAmbros institut virg cap▪ 6 Aug. de nupt et▪ concup. lib. 1. cap. II. Chrysostō, Isodor Gregot. c omnis, … conjugo c qui desponsatam. 27. 4. 2. Fathers, &tsi inter Extra desponsalib. c licet, c. tuas dudum. despons. duotum. Popes doe teach. The Papists then of all men may worst enforce the playnesse of S. Pauls words agaynst our exposition thē selves condescending in cases more then wee doe, that a woman may take another man while her husband liveth, and bee noe adulteresse. Whereby agayne appeareth how wisely & discreetly the Iesuit Triumpheth with.De adulter. …njug. lib. 2. cap. 4. S. Austins words, These words of the Apostle so oftentymes repeated, so oftentymes inculcated, are true, are quick, are sound, are playne. The woman beginneth not to be the wife of any later husband, vnlesse shee have ceased to bee of the former, and shee shall cease to bee of the former, if her husband die, not if he playe the whoremonger. The wife then is lawfully putt away for whordom, but the band of the former lasteth; in somuch that hee becometh guilty of adulterie, who marrieth her that is put away even for whoredom.
For if these words of Austin bee quick and sound against vsus, then touch they Poperie at the quick: sith it may be sayd by the same reason: The woman beginneth not to bee the wife of any later husband, vnlesse shee have ceased to bee of the former: and shee shall cease to bee of the former if her husband die, not if hee waxe a Monke.
Admitt then that the wife bee put away for monkery, yet the band of the former lasteth: insomuch that hee becometh guilty of adulterie, who marrieth her that is put away even for monkery. And likewise whatsoever those weighty causes were, for which soxMartin thee 5 Eugenius▪ the 4. Alexander the 6 Iulius the third. Paul the 4. & Pius the 4. as Covarru. Catharin. Cajetan, and Navat doe …. many Popes have loosed the bande of Marriage, they are all controlled by the same censure The woman beginneth not to be bee the wife of any later husband unlesse shee have ceased to bee of the former; and shee shall cease to bee of the former if her husband die, not if a better match be offered, or some mislyke bee conceived, or the Pope dispense and bee well freed from it. Nay S. Paul himself must fall within the cō passe of Austins reprofe, by construing his words so without exception, because they are true, and quick, and sound, and playne. For against his doctrine towching a Susters liberty to marry, if shee be forsaken of her vnbeleeving husband, the force of S. Austins consequence would inferre in like sorte: The woman beginneth not to bee the wife of any later husband, vnlesse shee have ceased to be of the former: and shee shall cease to bee of the former, if her husband die, not if hee forsake her. The Iesuit, who vseth so often to repeat, so often to inculcate the testimonies of the Fathers, should deale peradventure more considerately, more charitably out of doubt, if, before hee cite them, hee weighed their words better, whether they may stand with the truth of Scripture, & with his owne doctrine. For els asyGen. 9. 22. Cham discovered the nakednes of Noah, so doth hee their blemishes: hee, who aleageth them; not wee, whom hee enforceth to shewe why wee dissent from them: least our Saviours sentence bee pronounced agaynst vsuszMath. 10. 37 Hee that loueth Father or Mother more then mce is not worthy of mee. But the Iesuites meaning (you wil say) was not to discredit them by laying a necessitie on vsus to refute them, what? was his meaning then by their credit to discredit the Scripturs, with the truth whereof their sayings doe not stand? For (I trust) hee meant not to overthrowe the poynts of his owne doctrine, which their sayings crosse, vnlesse hee bee of that mynde whichaP…o. Dejo… 10. Tullie condemneth as barbarous and savage expressed in an heathnish verse LET OVR FRIENDS FALL, SOE THAT OVR FOES DIE WITHALL. Howsoever it be, it is plain that the plaines of S, Pauls words neither doth prove the sence thereof to be simply & absolutely general, the Scripture noting an exception, neither cann bee sayde by Papists to prove it whose doctrine both alloweth that exception of Scripture. & addeth more thereto. Thus one braunch of Bellarmins first and principall reason being cutt of: the other, and the rest of his reasons also are cutt of with the same labour and instrument. For whereas hee sayth Certes it were marvell that the Apostle should never ad the exception of whoredom, if it were to be added, seing hee repeated and inculcated these things so often. Certes wee may say as well of those exceptions which himself approveth that it Were marvell the Apostle should never add them, if they were to bee added. Though what marvell is it, if S. Paul omitted the exception of whoredom in all those two places, which hee Hath repeated and inculcated these things so often, as Bellarmin so often telleth vsus: when the thing is mentioned in thebRom. 7. vers. 2, former of them by way of acvers 4. similytude, wherein it had bene fond and beside the purpose to speake of any exception: and, for thed1 cor. 7. vers 39. later S. Paul hath omitted the same exceptionevers. 10. et. … twise, where thefMath 5. 32. et. 19. 9. Scripture sheweth and Bellarmin. confesseth, it should have bene added▪ or (to speake more properly) where although it needed not to bee added, yet must it needs bee vnderstoode. Now to that Bellarmin doth next alledg the FathersgIn utrum que locum Pauli. Ambrose, Chrysostome, Theophylact, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Primasius, Anselmus and others over and besideshLoco citato Austin, iIn math 19.Origen, andkIn epist. ad Amand. Ierom, all as bearing witnesse that wee expound the places falsly: I could reply that some of these whatsoever they witnesse, have small credit with Bellarmin, as Ambrose specially: some, namely Chrysostō, Theophylact, Theodoret, Oecumenius, and Primasius doe not witnesse that no more then Paul himself doth: Nay they all save one are contrary minded rather, as shall appeare inlin the third Chapter. due place: But that which I have sayde already touching Austin, may serve for answer to the rest: chiefly sith the Papists in whose behalf they are aleaged, will rather yeald that all the Fathers might erre, thē any of their Popes,mAlexander … third Pius the fourth &c. in the canōs above cited out of the decretals & the councell of Tren…. who yet must have erred in more, thē one Canon, if this were true which Bellarmin fathereth on the Fathers. Finally, concerning that for the vpshoote hee vrgeth Pauls similytude as if thenRom. 74 drift of it did absolutely require that the man and wife can not bee made free from the band of Mariage by any seperatiō but by death onelyonly, because while the law had life as it were and stoode in force till Christ the Iewes could never shake off the Yoke thereof from them, although they endevored to seperate them-selves from it by committing whoredom with sundry lawes of salfe Gods: the rest of S. Pauls similytudes which I mencioned, doe bewray the lamenesse and halting of this inference: seing that the drift of thē requireth absolutely by the same reason that noe man went to warfare at his owne cost, or planted Vynes, or fedd sheepe, without relief thereby, becauseo1 Cor 9. vers 6. all they pvers. 14Who preach the Gospel are allowed to live of the Gospel. And likewise that no man did ever hurt his owne body, becauseqEphes 5. 3…. Every husband ought to louelove his owne wife rEphe…. 5. 25.as Christ loved the Church: and likewise that no souldier hath ever entangled him-self with the assayres of life because Tymothee should bees2 Tim. 4. 2. still about those actions, whereto the Lordt2. Tim. 2. 3. who choose him to hee a souldier, did call him. Nay to goe no farther then the drift it self of the samilytude, which Bellarmin doth vrge, if it requier absolutely that the band of Marriage may bee no way loosed but onelyonly by the husbands or the wives death: then neither is it loosed, if the vnbeleever doe for sake the Christian: neither if the husbād become a Monke or the wife a Nunne; neither if the Pope see cause to dispence with either of them. And will not this fansie of his about that drift drive him into greater inconvenience yet: to weet, that every woman, whose husband is dead, ought to marry another, because the Iewes were bound to become Christiās after the death of the Lawe? or of the other side, that the Iewes are not bound vnderunder payne of damnation to become Christians, because no widowe is bound vnderunder payne of death to take another husband? or (if these absurdities bee not great enough) that dead men ought to marry, becausevRom 7. 4. The Iewes by duty should bee vntounto Christ, when they were dead to the Lawe? or that the men of Rome to whom S. Paul wrote, should rather not beleeve in Christ, becausex1, Cor. 7. 8. he wished widowes rather not to marry? Of the which consequences if some bee esteemed erroneous by Papists some not esteemed onelyonly, but are so in deede, the most have impious folly ioyned with vntruth: Let Bellarmin acknowledg that similitudes must not bee sett vponupon the racke, nor the drift thereof bee stretched and pressed in such sorte, as if they ought iust in length bredth and depth to match and fitt-that whereto they are resembled. It sufficeth if in a generall analogy and proportion of the principall poynt wherein things are matched, and compared together, they bee eche like to other, and both agree in one qualitie. Which here is observed in S. Pauls comparisō of the state of Marriage, with the state of man before and after regeneration: becauseyRom. …. vers. 2. 3. as a wife her husband being dead doth lawfully take another, and is not an adulteresse in having his company to bring forth fruite of her body, to him: soezvers. …. regenerate persons, their naturall corruption (provoked by the law to sinne) and flesh being mortified, are ioyned to the Spirit (the force of Christ working in them) as it were to a second husband, that they should bring forth fruite (the fruites of the Spirit) vntounto God. And thus seing neither the drift of the similytude, nor the iudgment of the Fathers, nor the playnnesse of the wordes so oftentymes repeated, doe disprove our answer and exposition of the place: our answer proved by Scripture standeth firme and sure and therefore the third place vrged by our adversaries, is sutable to the former.
So is the fourth & last; taken out of the first▪ to the Corithians the seaventh Chaptera To them who are Married, it is not I that give commandement, but the Lord: Let not the wife depart from her husband: but if shee depart too, let her remayne vnmarried. or bee reconciled vntounto her husband. Wherein (as Bellarmin reasoneth) the words of S. Paul, If, shee depart, and so forth are meant of a woman, which parteth from her husband vponupon a cause of iust divocement, as namely for whordom, haeresie, and the rest whatsoever they be, & not of her which parteth without any such cause. But concerning her of whom the words are meant, S. Paul sayth most playnely shee may not marrie another. Therefore even a cause of iust divorcement looseth not the band of Marriage neither is it lawfull for married folckes to marry others, although they beesevered and put asunder by iust divorcemēt.
And of this argument Bellarmin doth say that it is altogether insoluble. In saying whereof hee seemeth to confesse that none of the former arguments were so, but might bee answered and confuted. His confession touching them hath reason with it: I must needs approve it. But his vaunt of this is like that ofb1 King. 20. 10▪ Ben hadads that the dust of▪ Samaria would not bee enough to all the people that followed him for every man an handfull. To whom the King of Israel sayde, Let not him that girdeth his harnies, boast himself as hee that putteth it off. Bellarmin hath skarcly girt his harneis yet, & that which hee hath girt, is vnservisable bad harneis too.
For the formost parte thereof, his proposition a vouching that the words If shee depart, and so forth, are meant of her onelyonly which parteth from her husband vponupon a iust cause of divocement, as namely for whordom heresie, and such like, is faulty sundry wayes: seing they are neither meant of her onelyonly which parteth for a iust cause; and though▪ they bee also meant of her which parteth for any other iust cause, yet not of her which for whoredom.
Moreover the conclusion knitting vpp his argument with Therefore even a iust cause of divorcement looseth not the band of Marriage, is guilfully sett downe: being vttered in the forme of a particular, and true so, taking divorcement as hee doth; but intended to carry the force of a generall, so by fraude and faulshood to beare away the poynt in questiō. Of both the which to treat in ordre, his proposition hee presumeth of as most certayne, because in (his iudgment) Paule would not have sayde of her who departed without some such cause, Let her remayne vnmarried, or bee reconciled vntounto her husband; but hee would have sayde, Let her remayne vnmarried till shee bee reconciled vntounto her husband, & let her come agayne vntounto her husband in any case. And why doth Bellarmin thynke so? His reasons follow. For Paul could not permitt an vniust divorcemnt agaynst the expresse commandement of the Lord.
And, if in the same Chapter Paul permitteth not the man and wife to refrayne from carnall company for prayers fake, and for a tyme, except it bee with consent: How should bee permitt the wife to remayne seperated from her husband agaynst his will, without any cause of iust divorcement. In deede if it had lyen in S. Pauls power to stay & refraine the wife from remayning so: no doubt hee neither would, nor might have permitted it. which himself sufficiently shewed inc…, 1. Corn. vers. … & 10, forbidding her to depart at all, much more to continue parted from her husband. Butdvers. …. if notwithstanding this charge and prohibition she did leave her husband vponupon some lighter cause; or perhaps weightyer, though not weighty enough for a iust divorcement: then Paul in duty ought and might (I hope) with reason requier and exhorte her to remayne vnmarried, and not to ioyne her selfe in wedlocke with another, a thing thateDi…dor, Sicul. lib. 12. Greekes andfIuvenal. Satyr 6. Sic fiunt octo mariti. Quinque per autumnor. Romayns (whose of-spring thegStrabe Geograph lib. 8. Pausanias Corinth. Corinthians were) vsed to doe. as (to make it playner by the like examples (S. Paul neither might neither would have allowed a man to bee rashly angry with his brother: forhMath. 5. 22. Christ forbiddeth it. But if one were suddenly surprised with rashe anger S. Paul would advise himiEphes. 4, 26. not to let the sunne goe downe vponupon his angry wrath. neither might hee therevpon bee iustly charged with permitting wrath vntill the sunne sett, agaynst Christs commandement.
No more might hee with graunting liberty to lust, because hekCalat 7. 16 willeth men not to fulfill the lusts of the flesh: whereaslMath, 5 28 Christ commandeth them not to lust at all. For S. Paul alsomRom. 7. 8. condemneth all lusting of the flesh as sinne. But seing thatnGal 5. 17. the flesh will lust agaynst the Spirit, as long as wee are in this mortality: he sturreth vp the faythfull that theyoRom. 6. 12. let not sinne raigne in their mortall bodyes, nor doe fulfill the lust of the flesh. In the same sort therefore hee giveth charge with Christ that the wife departe not from her husbād. Yet in consideratiō of humaine infirmity he addeth, But if shee departe too, let her bee vnmarried. And to meete with a doubt which herevpon might rise, sith in the next words before hee had affirmed that they who hauehave not the gift of continence should marry, and what if shee have it not? hee adioyneth farther.p1. Cor. 7. 9 or let her be reconciled vntounto her husband. So that although the words may seeme to bee vttered in the same sorte, as if they did imply and import a permission, yet are they not permissive, but imperative in truth, and an expresse precept, that the wife having forsaken her husband & therein done evill1Moneto agamos. forbeare to marry another, for that were farre worse, yea though shee can not containe: in respect where of or of any thing els, if shee mislike to live vnmarried, shee may not vse the libertye that single folke may, who rather ought to marrie then burne, but shee2…. must reconcile her self vntounto her husband, whose wife shee is by duty still. And I may say likewise doubtles vntounto Bellarmin that hee and his pamphletter should not have mayntained their error in writing: but sith they have done it, let thē write no more in defence of it, or let them acknowledg that in this poynt they were deceived. For whereasqWhich Bollocmin doth not onelie in this quaestion cap. 16 but also in the next before, cap. 14 they gather of the disjunctive particle Let hor remayne vnmarried, or bee reconciled, that S. Paul hath put it in the womans choyse & left her at liberty, either to live seperated still from her husband, or to be reconciled vntounto him: they might as well ground vponupon Christs words to the angell of the church of the Laodiceans rRevel. 3. 15.I would thou werest colde or 3Zestos,hot that hee hath put it in our choise and left vsus at libertie either to bee colde in faith and love, as flesh is, or to bee fervent in the spirit. Yet Christ had no such meaning. For he commaundeth vsus to bee4Zeontes. Rom 12. 11. servent and that verie angell hee saith to everie faith full men5Zeloson. Rev. 3. 19. Be hot & Zealous. But because the partie was luke warme, a wordlingsMath. 13. 22. who had receyved the seede of the word but bare not fruite, whotLuk. 12. 47. knew his maisters will, but did it not & there by sinned most grievously: Christ wisheth that he were colde and sinned lesse; sith hee did sinne; or that hee were hot and free from both these faults, the later wishe made simply the former in comparison. After the which manner seing Paul might well, & did by all likelyhood of circumstāces of the text, wishe simply and chiefly that the wife estranged were reconciled to her husband, next that shee continued rather parted from him, then married to another as a lesse evill in comparison: the vttering of his sentēce with a disjunctive particle Let her remayne vnmarried, or bee reconciled, doth not prove hee put it in the womans choyse and left her at liberty to doe whether shee listed. And thus it appeareth how certaine and vndoubted that principle is, which6L…quitu… ergo sine vil… dubio &c. vponupon this proofe Bellarmin avoucheth to bee most certaine & vndoubted: that S. Pauls words touching the wife If shee depart, are ment of her onelyonly which parteth from her husband vponupon a iust cause of divorcement. Howbeit if they had bene meant of her onelyonly: yet must they have touched such wives as leave their husbands for any other just cause, & not for whoredom, An other and greater oversight of Bellarmin, that in exemplising the causes of divorcement to which in his opinion the words should bee restrayned, hee nameth whoredom first, as prncipally comprised in S. Pauls precept; whereas S. Paule meant that it and it alone, should bee excluded and excepted.
For these are his words. v1. …or. 7. 10.To them who are married, it is not I that geve commandement but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband; but if shee departe too, let her remaine vnmarried, or bee reconciled vntounto her husband; and let not the husband put away his wife.
Where in the last braunch Let not the husband put away his wife, must needes bee vnderstood except it bee for whoredom because S. Paule saith it is the Lords commandement, andxMat. 5. 32. & …9. 9. the Lord gave it with that expresse exception. This Bellarmyn doth graunt. Well. Then as the last braunche so the first too, Let not the wife depart from her husband. For the analogie is all one: and yeche having interest in the others bodie, shee may as lawfully departy1. cor. 7. 4. from an adulterer, as hee from an adulteresse. And this doth Bellarmin graunt also. But the middle braunche is to be vnderstood of the same departing, and likewise qualified as the first. Therefore. If shee depart too, is meant, except it be for whoredome. Nay, not so, quoth Bellarmin: for the same departing is not meant in both, but a farre different, in the first an uniust departing, in the next a just; and this must be the sense of the Apostles wordes. Not I, but the Lord geve commandement, let not the wife depart from her husbād, to weet without a just cause: but if shee goe away, to weet having a just cause, let her remaine vnmarried, & so forth. In the refutation of which wrong & violence done vntounto the sacred text, what should I stand? whē the onelyonly reason, whereby out of scripture hee assayeth to prove it, is the disiunctive particle, which as I have shewed alreadie, hath no ioynt or sinew of proofe to that effect. AndzAugust … de a…ult con j…g cap, 1. 2, 3 et 4. the onelyonly father, whose testimony, hee citeth, for it, doth ground it on that disiunctive particle of Scripture: So that his reason being overthrow…n, his …reditt and authoritie, byaAugust epi. … Hecion his ownebDict. … c. Eg… s…lis. approved rule may beare no sway. And on the contrarie parte,c… many other fathers doe expound the second braunche as having referēce to the same departing that is forbidden in the first. And (which is the chief point) the naturall drift and meaning of S. Paules words doth enforce the same. For the tearmes;7…an de …ai But, if, too, importe that doing also of that which in the sentence before he had affirmed ought not to be done: AsdCor 7 ver. 9. … 3… et 39 the like examples in the same discourse (to go no farder) shewe, yea some having one8Namely. Kai. particle lesse then this hath to press… it therevnto. It is good for the vnmarried and widowes, if they abide even as I doe: 9Eide.But if they doe not conteine, let them marry. The woman which hath an vnbeleeving husband, and hee consenteth to dwell with her, let her not put him away: 1Eide,but if the vnbeleeving depart, let him depart. Art thou loosed from a wife? seeke not a wife: 2Ean de kai.But thou marrie also, thou sinnest not, This I speake for your profitt, that you may doe that which is comely? 3Eide.But if anie man thinke it vncomely for his virgin if shee passe the time of Marriage, let him doe what he will. The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth: 4Ean de.but if her husband be dead, she is at libertie and so forth. In all the which sentences sith the clauses brought in with those coniunctiōs have manifest relation to the things spoken of before, and tou…h thē in the same sense, the braunche that is in questiō having like dependance, must in all reason be conserved of the same departing that the former. Thus it being proved that S. Paul commanding the wife to remanie vnmarried if shee departed from her husbād, did meane. Except it were for whoredom it followeth that Bellarmins proposition is faultie even in this also that he nameth whoredom among the iust causes of the wives departing here meant by S. Paul. Now in his conclusion inferring herevpon that even a iust cause of divorcement looseth not the band of marriage, hee is as deceitfull▪ as he was false in his proposition. For the word Divorcement, being vnderstoode, as it is by him, for anie seperation and parting of the man and wife, though from bedd onelyonly, & for a certaine time: There may be sundry causes why, such a seperation should be allowed or tollerated, whē as the band of marriage shall neverthelesse endure still. And so the simple reader were likely to imagine that Bellarmin had cōcluded a truth & to purpose. But the point where with he should have knitt vp his dispute, and whi…h he would have men conceyve & beare away as if these words implyed it, is that no iust cause at all of any divorcement doth loose the band of marriage, and therefore neither whoredo. The falsehood whereof would have bene as cleare as the sunne shine at nooneday, the proposition being so evidently false whereon it is inferred. And this is the argument that Bellarmin set his rest on5Argumentū plané insolubile. the insoluble argumēt, evē altogether insoluble, the ground whereof hee tearmeth 6Invictissima demonstratioa demonstratiō a most invincible demonstratiō: against the which nothing (he saith) can be obiected, but an insufficiēt reply, made by, Er…smus, to weet, that Paul speaketh of ā 7Vnum et tā tum quodobijci pusset.adulterous wife, who therefore being cast out by her husband is charged to stay vnmarried, the innocent partie not so charged. Which speeches of the Iesuite come frō the like veine of a vaunting spirit as those did of his complices, who boasted that8In the yeare of Christ 1588 the Spanyards Armadoes & navy should finde but weake & seely resistance in England; and called their army sent to conquere vsus, an invincible army. For as they diminished by vntrue reportes the forces prepared: To meete & encoūter with the Spanish power: so Bellarmin by saying that nought can be obiected beside that hee specifieth; yea farder by belying and falsifying of Erasmus, eAnnot. in 1. Cor 7.who contrariwise replieth that Paul doth seeme to speake9De leviotibus offensis non de gravibus Flagit. …s. of lighter displeasures for which divorcements then were vsuall, not of such crimes as adulterie. Moreover by the substance & weight of my replie to his insoluble argument, the godly wise indifferent eye will see (I trust) that the knots & strings thereof are loosed and broken: even as the invincible armie of the Spanyards was by Gods providence shewed to be vincible without great encountring; the carkeises & spoiles of their shipps & mē vp ōthe English, Scottish, & Irish coasts did witnesse it.f So let all thine enemies perish, O Lord, and let them who love him be as the sunne when he goeth forth in his strength.