Defense of Perkins Book Called a Reformed Catholic, Point 8

Defense of Perkins Book Called a Reformed Catholic · Point 8

p. 469The eighth point. Of Vowes. Our consent.

speaker W. P. Touching vowes this must bee knowne, that wee do not condemne them altogether, but onelyonly labour to restore the purity of doctrine touching this point: which by the Church of Rome from time to time hath beene corrupted and defaced. We hold therefore that a vow is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed vntounto him: and it is twofold, generall, or speciall. The generall vow is that which concernes all beleeuers: and it is made in the couenant both of the law, and of the Gospell. I will here onelyonly speake of the vow which is made in the couenant of the Gospell, in which there be two actions: one of God, the other of man. God in mercy on his part promiseth to men the remission of sinnes and p. 470life euerlasting: and man againe for his part promiseth to beleeue in Christ, and to obey God in all his commaundements. All men euer made this vow vntounto God, as the Iewes in circumcision: which also they renewed so often as they receiued the Passeouer: and in the newe Testament all that are baptized doe the like. And in baptisme this vow is called the stipulation of a good conscience whereby wee purpose to renounce our selues, to beleeue in Christ, and to bring forth the fruites of true repentance: and it ought to be renued so oft as wee are partakers of the supper of the Lord. This vowe is necessarie and must bee kept as a part of the true worship of God; because it is a promise, wherein wee vowe to performe all duties commaunded of God either in the law or in the Gospell. It may be demaunded, considering wee are bound to obedience, how wee binde our selues in baptisme thereto. Answ. Though we be alreadie bound partly by nature and partly by the written word, yet may wee renew the same bond in a vowe, and he that is bound may further binde himselfe, so it be for this end, to helpe his dulnes for want of zeale, and to make himselfe more forward in duties of louelove to men and the worship of God: to this end Dauid sware to keepe the law of God. Psal. 119. 116. though he were bound vntounto it by nature and by the written law it selfe.

The speciall vowe is that, which doth not reach to the person of al beleeuers, but onelyonly concernes some speciall men vponupon some speciall occasions. And this kind of vow is twofold. The first, is the vow of a ceremonial duty in the way of seruice to God: and it was p. 471in practise in the Church of the Iewes vnderunder the old Testament: examples hereof are two especially, the first was the vowe of the Nazarites, whereto no kind of men were bound by Gods commaundement, but they bound thēselues: God only prescribing the maner and order of keeping the same with rites pertaining thereto, as abstinence from wine, the not cutting of their haire, and such like. The second example is of the Iewes, when of their owne accords, they vowed to giuegive God house or land, sheepe, or oxen, or any like things for the maintenance of the legall worship: and of this also God prescribeth certaine rules, Leuit. 27. Now these vowes were part of the Iewish pedagogie or ceremoniall law, wherein God trained vp the Iewes in the old testament: and beeing obserued of them they were parts of Gods worship: but now vnderunder the Gospell they are not: beeing all abolished with the ceremoniall law, to which Christ put an ende at his death vponupon the crosse. It is true Paul made a vowe, and since kept the same, in in the time of the new Testament. Act. 18. yet not as a part of Gods worship: but as a thing indifferent for the time, wherein he only condescended to the weakenes of the Iewes, that by this meanes he might bring them the better vntounto Christ. And whereas Christ is called a Nazarite, Matth. 2. 23. we may not thinke he was of that very order, because he did not abstaine from wine: but he was so tearmed because hee was the veritie and accomplishment of this order. For by it was signified that Gods Church was a peculiar people seuered or chosen out of the world: and that Christ in respect of holines was also p. 472separated from all sinners. And the words in Saint Matthew, he shall be called a Nazarite, are borrowed from the booke of Iudges, cap. 13. where they are properly spoken of Sampson, and in type or figure of Christ. For as Sampson saued Israel by his death, so did Christ saue his Church. And as Sampson killed his enemies more by death then by life, so did Christ. It is plaine therefore that this kind of vowe bindeth not vsus: for there are no more ceremonies to bee kept vnderunder the Gospell for partes of Gods worship, but the outwarde rites of Baptisme and the Lords Supper. Vovves concerning meates, and drinkes, attire, touching, tasting, times, place, daies, were proper to the Iewes.

The second kinde of speciall vowe is that whereby a man promiseth freely to performe some outward and bodily exercise, for some good ende: and this vow also (if it be made accordingly) is lawfull, and belongs both to the Church of the olde and new Testament. In the olde wee hauehave the example of the Rekabites, Ier. 35. who by the appointment of Ionadab their father abstained from strong drinke, and wine, from planting vineyardes and orchardes: whereby Ionadab intended onelyonly to breake them before hand, and to acquaint them with their future condition and state, that they should be strangers in a forraine land; that so they might prepare themselues to indure hardnes in the time to come. And now in the new testament wee hauehave warrant in like manner to vowe: as if a man by drinking of wine or strong drinke, finde himselfe prone to drunkennes, he may vowe with himselfe to drinke no more wine p. 473nor strong drinke for so long time, as hee feeles the drinking thereof will stirre vp his infirmitie, and minister occasion of sinning. Of this kind also are the vowes in which we purpose and promise to God, to keepe set times of fasting, to taske our selues in prayer and reading of holy Scriptures, and to giuegive set almes for special causes knowne to our selues, and to doe sundrie like duties. And that wee be not deceiued in making such vowes, certaine rules must be remembred: I. that the vowe be agreeable to Gods will and word: for if it be otherwise, the making as also the keeping thereof is sinne. Vowes must not bee the bondes of iniquitie. II. It must so be made, that it may stand with Christian libertie. For wee may not make such things necessary in conscience, which God hath made free. Now Christian liberty allowes vntounto vsus the free vse of all thinges indifferent, so it be out of the case of offence. Hence it followes that vowes must be made and keept or not keept, so farreforth as in conscience they may stand or not stande with our libertie purchased by Christ. III. The vowe must be made with consent of superiors, if we be vnderunder gouernment. Thus among the Iewes the vowe of a daughter might not stand vnlesse the consent of Parents came thereunto. IV. It must bee in the power and abilitie of the maker thereof, to do or not to doe. A vowe made of a thing impossible, is no vowe. V. It must be agreeable to the calling of him that maketh it: that is, both to his generall calling as he is a Christian, and to that particular calling wherein he liueth. If it bee against either one or both, it is vnlawfull. VI. It must be made with deliberation. page missing

p. 476no better things performed then God by his lawe hath bound vsus to, else man could deuise better obedience, or more acceptable seruice to God then he himselfe hath appointed. If by better good, you meane be a greater measure of obedience then is commonly performed, I doubt whether any man can do more then the law of God hath required of him, which is the rule of perfect obedience. If you vnderstand the meanes of stirring vp our selues to the doing of our dutie to God, Master Perkins acknowledgeth that, and compriseth it in the later part, though he do not expresse it. Secondly, you say, that it must proceede from our owne free choise and libertie. The promise doubtlesse must hauehave our owne will for the ground of it, and so much the word imports, but the good must be a dutie commanded, or at the least allowed by warrant out of the word of God in the scriptures, or out of the light of true reason, and the law of nature, or out of Reuelation before the scriptures.

speaker D. B. P. The second point of our supposed consent is, that Vowes vvere some part of Gods vvorship in Moses Law, but are not so in the Gospell, which vve also deny, M. Perkins proues his assertion thus. Vovves belonged to the ceremonies of Moses Lavv, but all those Ceremonies are abolished, by Christs Passion.

Ans. That Vovves in themselues vvere no part of the Ceremonies of Moses Lavv, but true parts of the vvorship of God in all estates; as vvell in the state of Nature and the Gospell, as in Moses Lavv: but this point M. Perkins handleth againe in the first point of our difference, vvhere it shell be discussed. Thirdly he saith, that speciall Vovves may be made in the Nevv Lavv, to performe some bodily exercise for some good end, as to fast, to taske our selues to prayer, or study of holy Scripture, and such like: but many rules must then be obserued: that vve Vovv an honest thing agreeable to Gods vvord: this vve allow.

speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not say as you conceiue, that all vowes belonged to the ceremonie of Moses law, but that the vow of a ceremoniall duty in the way of seruice to God, apperteined thereto, whereof he brings two examples of the Nazarites, and of the people generally at their choyse.

speaker D. B. P. Secondly, that it be so made, that it may stand vvith Christian liberty: that is, that it make not such things necessary in conscience, vvhichwhich Christian religion leaues at libertie: This rule of his is flat repugnant to the nature of a Vovv, and contrary to himselfe. For he saith a little before; that a Christian may Vovv Fasting, Prayer, almsdeeds. I then demaund, p. 477hauing Vovved these things; is he not bound to performe them? Yes, or else he breakes his Vovv, vvith vvhichwhich God is highly displeased. An vnfaithful promise displeaseth God. Then is it manifest, that all Vows Deut. 83. Eccles. 50.Sir 50do abridge vsus of our libertie, and make that vnlawfull for vsus, vvhichwhich before our Vovv vvas lavvfull: vvhichwhich is so euiden… of it selfe, that I maruaile vvhere the mans vvit and memorie vvas, vvhen he vvrote the contrarie.

speaker A. W. He speaketh agreeably to the truth, without any contrarietie to himselfe, for the vow alters not the nature of the thing in it selfe, but only layeth a dutie vponupon the vower, which also is so to be performed, as that by the performance of it he be not alwayes depriued of his christian libertie, but that vponupon occasion, he may do against his vow, without any iust scruple of conscience for so doing, though he hauehave vowed otherwise in generall.

speaker A. W. His other rules, that a Vovv be made with good deliberation, and with D. B. P. Do you then allovv all, that is taken out of your Doctors? Quest. 88.consent of our Superiours; and not only of things possible, but also of the better sort, vve allovv, for they are taken out of our Doctors: See S. Thom.

Your cotation is somewhat with the shortest, naming nothing but the xxTho. 2^a, …, q. 88. art. 8.question; so is also the determination of your DD. vponupon it; for, although they graunt in generall, that we must hauehave the consent of our superiors to vowing, yyArt. 9.yet they exempt vsus in this case from subiection, as soone as we are out of our noneage, and that they draw vsus out of very quickly, that a maide of 12. or 14. yeeres old may vow herselfe a Nunne, and so a youth at 18. or 20, or perhaps sooner, may vow himselfe a Frier, without any consent of their parents, yea directly contrary to their expresse will and commandement.

The dissent or difference.

speaker W. P. The points of difference betweene vsus touching vowes are specially three. I. The Church of Rome teacheth that in the new Testament wee are as much bound to make vowes, as was the Church of the Iewes, and that euen in externall exercises. We say p. 478no: considering the ceremoniall law is now abolished: and wee hauehave onelyonly two ceremonies by commaundement to bee obserued, Baptisme, and the Supper of the Lord. Againe wee are not so much bound to make or keepe vowes as the Iewes were: because they had a commaundement so to doe, and we hauehave none at all.

speaker D. B. P. First, the Church of Rome (saith M. Perkins) teacheth, that in the New Testament, we are as much bound to make Vowes, as was the Church of the Iewes, we say no; Considering that the Ceremoniall Law is now abolished, and we hauehave only two Ceremonies by commaundement to be obserued for parts of Gods worship: Baptisme, and the Supper of the Lord.

Ans. What, is not your Holy-day seruice (which you call diuine seruice) any part of Gods worship in your owne opinions? Can a publike assemblie instituted to honour God by prayer and thankesgiuing vvith externall ceremony of time, place, apparrell, kneeling, standing and sitting, be no part of Gods worship? In your irreligious Congregations, assembled together against Christ and his Catholike Church, be it so. But admitting as you do, your seruice to be good; it could not truly be denied to belong vntounto the worship of God.

speaker A. W. Whereunto belongs this idle question? is it a ceremonie thinke you to assemble our selues for the seruice of God? all outward seruice of God is not ceremoniall, though the vse of it be in part to expresse our inward affection.

speaker D. B. P. But to the matter of difference, you grow very carelesse in your reports of our doctrine: for we hold that neither in the Old nor New law, any man is bound to Vow, but that it is and euer vvas a counsell, and no commandement, neuerthelesse, a thing of great deuotion & perfection in both states, **O strange eloquence not to be vnderstood!intrinsecallie belonging and much furthering the true worship of almightie God, vvhichwhich vve proue in this sort. In a Vovv are two things, the one is the good vvhichwhich is Vovved, called the materiall part: as for example, Fasting, &c. The other, the promise it selfe made to God, which is the forme; the materiall parts do belong vntounto their seuerall vertues: but this promise and performance of it be substantiall parts of Gods vvorship. For by promising of any good thing vntounto God, The performance is no part of the Vow …rither the matter nor the forme of it.vve acknovvledge and professe that God is the soueraigne goodnesse it selfe, and taketh great pleasure in all good purposes and determinations: therefore, to honor and vvorship him, vve make that good promise. Againe, In performing that good seruice of God, vve testifie, that he is most maiesticall, reuerend, and dreadfull. And consequently, that all p. 479promises made to him, are to be accomplished most diligently, and without delay, wherein vve honor and vvorship him, as contrarivvise they do much dishonor him vvho breake vvith him, as if he were of no better account then to be so deluded. This thing in it selfe is so certaine and cleere, that he vvho denies it, must needs either be ignorant in the nature of a Vovv, or not knovv wherin the true …orship of God consisteth: for according vntounto the holy Scripture itself, all good deeds done to the glorie of God, be acts of the true vvorship of God. And S. Anne did worship Luk. 1. Philip. …. Iac. 5.Luke 1Jas 5God, by fasting and prayer: And almes bestovved on Gods prisoners, is called a sacrifice pleasing and acceptable vntounto God: And it is said, to be a pure religion before God to visite Orphanes and vviddovves: If then all other vertuous duties done to the glory of God, be parts of his true worship; much more Vovves, vvhichwhich by speciall promise dedicate a good deed to Gods honour: they then being of their ovvne nature, speciall parts of his true vvorshippe of God: it follovveth necessarily that at all times they vvere and may be vsed to the true vvorship of God.

speaker A. W. If we be bound to vow in neither, as indeed we are not, yet are we as much bound in the one, as in the other, which is all Master Perkins saith. But indeed (as I conceiue) hee meanes, bound to it, as a seruice of God. Wee graunt that you say of a vow, and withall confesse, that it is a meanes of Gods seruice; but not properly a part, otherwise then all obedience, whereby we glorifie God; and all helps, by which we fit our selues to obedience, are parts of his worship. But those actions onelyonly are held to be properly the parts of his worship, which are performed immediatly for seruice to him, not vsed for the better performance of it.

speaker D. B. P. That they were in practise before Moses Law is euident, by that Vovv Gen. 28.Gen 28which Iacob made of setting vp a stone, which should be called the house of God, and the paying the tenthes of all his goods. Out of which Vow, we also gather, that God holdeth for agreeable, any kind of good seruice offered vntounto him out of our owne deuotion: albeit he hath not commaunded it, for no such thing as Iacob there Vowed was commaunded him, but he being well assured that it would be wel taken by God, which was offered of good will to his greater honor, he Vowed it, and is in holy Scripture commended for it.

speaker A. W. Againe, that when S. Paul seemeth to disallow voluntary worship, he Colos. 2. As most oral… of your c…r…m… ni…s are.Col 2must be vnderstood to speake either of erroneous, or of friuolous and foolish things, promised to God, which do not properly serue to the setting forth of his honor.

zzGen. 28. 2….Gen 28:2Iacobs action was directed immediatly to Gods seruice, not intended, or vsed as a helpe to further him in the worship p. 480of God. That which you gather out of his example, is not warrantable by it, vnlesse you restraine those words (good seruice) otherwise, than you Papists commonly doe. For it doth not follow, that because God accepted of t… vow, therefore he will like whatsoeuer a man shall promise him, so it be (as he imagines) to the greater honor of God. The former of these two was (in likelihood) inioyned Adam by God, and so continued among the true worshippers of God: the latter is grounded vponupon that principle, that we must glorifie God in our soules, bodies and goods, though the manner be left free to eueryevery mans discretion, according to his abilitie and opportunitie: but no man may conclude hereupon, that God in his solemne worship allowes of whatsoeuer wee out of our deuotion inuent, and appoint to serue him by. That aaCol. 2. 18.Col 2:18of Paul must needes be vnderstood of such things; but such are all that are deuised by man to worship God by, without warrant from the word of God, either generally or particularly, expresly, or by necessarie consequence. For all such seruing of God, is worship, depending wholy vponupon the will of man, and so will-worship. The ceremonies of your Romish Church are generally foolish and ridiculous, yea those in your Masse: your Doctrines, besides Scripture, erronious, as I shewed in the last article.

speaker W. P. But they alleadge to the contrarie the Prophet Esay, cap. 19. 20. who speaking of the time of the Gospell, saith, the Egyptians shall know the Lord, and shall vowe vntounto him and keepe it. I answere two waies: first, that the Prophet in this place expresseth and signifieth the spirituall worship of the new Testament by ceremoniall worship then vsed: as hee doth also in the last chapter where he calleth the ministers of the new Testament Priests and Leuites. Secondly, we graunt, the Church of the new Testament makes vowes vntounto God, but they are of morall and euangelicall p. 481duties: which must not be left vndone: and if vowing will indeede further them, it is not to bee neglected. And therefore so oft as wee come to the Lords Table, wee in heart renew the vowe and promise of obedience. And though vowes be made of thinges and actions indifferent, yet are they not any parts of Gods worship, which is the point to bee prooued.

speaker D. B. P. Now that Vowes should be frequented in the s…e of the …pell, besides Act. 1…. Esay. 19. 18.Acts 1Isa 19:18the euidence of S. P…, Vo… and diuers other … … …e Prophet Esay did foretell, in th…se word…: … … … … … sacrifice and gifts, and they sh…ll Vo… Vo…s … our…. To which M. Perkins answereth first, that by such cere… as th…n was in vse, the Prophet doth expresse the spirituall … … the new Testament. This exposition is voluntary and nothing …: For what is more vild and absurd, than (…o declare that Christians shal make … proper a… so…re.no Vowes) to say that they shall make Vovves, as though one contrarie vvere fit or vvould serue to expresse the other. This exposition being very vnmeete, M. Perkins adioyneth a second, that in the nevv Testament, vve hauehave Vovves of Morall and Euangelicall duties, but such are not any part of Gods vvorship: …o that first you shall hauehave no Vovves at all: Secondly, the vvind being changed, you shall hauehave them, but as no parts of Gods vvorship, as though Morall and Euangelicall duties vndertaken and performed to Gods greater glory bee not the very synevves and substance of his seruice and vvorship.

speaker A. W. That bbAct. 18. 1….Acts 18:1S. Pauls vow maketh nothing for you, Master Perkins hath shewed. It is marueile you would name the example, and not refute his answere. Belike the truth of it was too euident. And yet it had been no hard matter perhaps, to finde as good a shift for that place, as you hauehave for the other ccEsay. 19 2….Isa 19:2of Esay. Master Perkins answered to it, that the Prophet signifieth the spirituall worship of the new Testament by the ceremonies of the old, then in vse: and he prooues his interpretation by the Prophet himselfe; who ddEsay. 66. 21.Isa 66:21afterwards calles the Ministers of the new Testament, Priests, and Leuites, which were offices and names proper to the old. You slip ouer the reason, and …ell vsus, that it is vile and absurd to say, that Christians shall make vowes, to declare, that they shall make none. But the Prophet meanes to de- page missing

p. 484from Senacherib. The generall doctrine ensuing from it is this, that we are to be thankefull to God, when he hath deliuerd vsus out of any extraordinary danger.

Your second reason is of lesse force, for first, by the Kings of the earth, the uuLyra ibid.Kings bordering vponupon Ierusalem, and those parts, are signified, who should be driuen into a feare of God, that had so destroyed the Assyrians. Secondly, if it be generall, it followes not that therefore the vowes he speaketh of there may be made of any sort of men, but that all men must performe the dutie of thankefulnes vponupon like occasions.

speaker D. B. P. Thirdly, because the auncient Fathers take it to extend vntounto vsus Christians, aswellas vntounto the Iowes; let one S. Augustine serue in his Commentarie vponupon this Psalme 75. Because vve hauehave handled those things (saith he) pe…ture thou vvho vvast vvilling before, but novv vvilt not Vovv: but m…ke vvhat the Psalme said vntounto thee: It saith not, Doe not Vovv, but Vovv and pay it: vvilt thou not Vovv? Therefore vvouldest thou hauehave Vovved, but not hauehave fulfilled it …ay rather do both: Let the one be of … ovvne promise, the other shall be performed by the helpe of God: He then tooke these words to belong vntounto his Auditors vvho were no levves.

In the same place, he doth highly commend Christians for Vovving, some Chastitie, some Hospitality some Pouerty.

speaker A. W. xx…. ibid.Theodoret, auncienter then Austin, and not inferiour to him, in expounding the Scripture, applyes it to bringing of gifts, as also the yyPsalm. 76. …Ps 76Psalme it selfe in the later part of the verse, and the zz2. …. 32. 2…practise of the people at that very time warrant him. So also may aaAu ust. ad Psalm. 75.Ps 75Austin himselfe, for all those words, be vnderstood. For what do they import, but an exhortation to thankefulnes, vnderunder the legall termes of vowing? If Austin, or any man else will ground other doctrine vponupon it, he deliuers his owne conceipt, not the Prophets meaning. I thinke there is no man that readeth those Commentaries of Austins vponupon the Psalmes, but finds, that he mistakes the sense very commonly, which is to be imputed to his want of knowledge in the tongues, especially in the Hebrew.

speaker D. B. P. But because contraries being set together, each doe more liuely appeare in his kind: Let vsus vvith this Exposition, compare M. Perkins …his Commentary vponupon this place: vvho saith, that the Prophet speaketh of Vovves, of Prayer and thankesgiuing: For so (saith M. Perkins:) doth p. 485he expound himselfe, My Vovves are vponupon me, J vvill offer prayses vntounto Psalm 56. 1….Ps 56:1God: Well aymed I vvarrant you; The Psalme fiftie sixt, vvritten first, is the Exposition of the Psalme seuenty fiue, which was conceited and vttered after: Again, in the Psalme seuenty fiue Dauid speaketh to others: in the other he speaketh of himself. Thirdly, the Prophets vvords in Psalme fiftie sixe, confirme rather that vvhichwhich he taught before, that all considerate Vovves are prayses and parts of Gods vvorship, or as the vvords do more literallie …ound, because his Vovves, that is, his prayers and desires vvere by God accomplished, therefore he would praise and thanke him.

speaker A. W. That by vowes in this place prayer is meant, not only the bbHebr…i in…e…p. 70. foreign.Heb 1Septuaginta, and ccAmbr. orate.Ambrose witnes, but ddEsai. 38. 9. 10Isa 38:9Isa 38:10Hezekiahs practise confirmes. To deny that thankefulnes is vrged, is not to vnderstand the occasion of the Psalme, and the end of the exhortation, which requireth vowes, be they what they may be, but only in that respect. Master Perkins therefore needed not any further proofe, then the text it selfe: but, for the better auowing of his exposition, he brought eePsalm. 56. 22Ps 56:22another place of the Psalmes, where vowes do signifie praise or thanksgiuing. Now whereas he saith, that Dauid expounds himselfe, and you refute that by the placing of the Psalmes, your answere is not sufficient. For any man may see, the Psalmes were not set in order, as they were penned in time; and if that 75. Psalme were a prophesie of Senacheribs ouerthrow, as I shewed ffTheodoret. ad Psalm. 75.Ps 75Theodoret thinks, it might well be written before Psalme 56. But Master Perkins had no such meaning; onelyonly he expounds the word Vowes, vsed in this place by the certaine sense of it in another, which course is agreeable to the rules of interpreting the scripture.

But in the one you say Dauid speaketh of himselfe, in the other he speaketh to other. What then? is it not more then likely that he exhorts others to the duety he practised himselfe? If in his owne person he meane by vowes praise, what else should be vnderstood by exhorting other men to vow, especially vponupon the like occasion, that is, as you say afterward, vponupon hauing their prayers & desires accomplished?

Your collection, that Dauid should proue, that all considerate vowes are praises, and part of Gods worship, hath no likelyhood of truth in it. For the Prophet declares by that speech, that he had vowed to praise God, as the next verse p. 486before sheweth in part, and the practise of Dauid, and the rest of the godly eueryevery where in scripture confirmeth. And this is a sacrifice of speciall honor to God, as by the ggPsal. 50. 23.Ps 50:23Psalme 50. appeares, by which hhLyra ad Esai. 19.Isa 19Lyra expounds that of Esai, whereof before. See iiHieronym. & Theodor. ad Psalm. 49 & 56. & 65.Ps 49Ierome on Psalme 49. and 56. and 65. and Theodoret on the same places.

speaker W. P. II. Point of difference. They also hold that vowes made euen of things not commaunded, as meates, drinkes, attire, &c. are partes of Gods worship, yea that they tend to a state of perfection, in that the keeping of them brings men to an higher estate then the keeping of the law can doe. We flatly say, no: holding that lawfull vowes bee certaine **Adminicula cultus diuini.staies and props of Gods worship, and not the worship itselfe. For Paul saith plainely, 1. Tim. 4. 8. Bodilie exercise profiteth little, but godlines is profitable for much. Againe, as Gods kingdome is, so must his worshippe be: and Gods kingdome standeth not in outward things, as in eating, drinking, and such like actions: and therefore his worship standeth not in outwarde thinges.

speaker D. B. P. Here M. Perkins setteth vp a rotten prop or two, to vphold his ruinous 1. Tim. 4.1 Tim 4building, saying, S. Paul saith plainly, Bodilie exercise profiteth little, …t godlines profiteth much. Where are you good Sir? We treat here of Vowes, vvhichwhich are formally actions of the mind: vvhat do you novv about bodilie exercises? Vovves are principall parts of that godlines, vvhichwhich is so profitable. And if by bodily exercise, Fasting, and other corporall paine or labour be vnderstood, then vve say, that such things of themselues vvould profitlittle; but being directed to the chastising of the rebellious flesh, to the end vve may lesse offend, and better serue God, then they may much profit vsus.

speaker A. W. The reason why Master Perkins brings this place, is, because, as it should seeme, some Papists alleage it, to prooue the lawfulnes of vowing bodily exercises, to honor God by them. You answer, that vowes are actions of the minde. What of that? if the performance of the vowes be of small p. 487profit, doubtlesse the vowing of them is a poore piece of seruice to God. Yet may there be good vse of fasting, and such like, to vsus, in that they may be made good meanes to further our seruice to God, though of themselues they be no worship.

speaker D. B. P. Bu… let vsus heere M. Perkins his second reason against such Vovves. Gods kingdome standeth not in outvvard things, and therfore his vvorship standeth not in outvvard things.

Ans. Gods kingdome in itselfe standeth not in outvvard things, and as it is in vsus also, it doth consist chiefly in inward worship, by faith, hope, charity, and religion, in vvhose kingdome Vovvs hold a honorable ranke: but a great part of this vvorship among vsus, depends of outvvard things; for be not the tvvo only parts of Gods vvorship among Protestants (as M. Perknis saith in this question) Baptisme and our Lords Supper, both vvhichwhich partly consist in outvvardly, both speaking and doing. And is not faith (vvhichwhich is the roote of all Christian Religion) gotten by outvvard preaching and hearing? But it vvould vvearie a vvilling man to trayle after all M. Perkins his impertinent errors.

speaker A. W. The kingdome of God stands not in such outward actions, as eating, drinking, &c. Master Perkins denyes not, that we are to performe outward worship to God, which consists among vsus in prayer, prayse, thanksgeuing, and such like duties, not onelyonly, as you would hauehave your followers falsely imagine of vsus, in administring, and receiuing the sacraments. You that would seeme so vnwilling to traile after Master Perkins errors, are glad to make some of your owne, and father them vponupon him, least ofttimes you should hauehave nothing to say. I hauehave shewed diuers particulars of this kind in the course of my answere to your cauils against him.

speaker W. P. III. Point of difference. They maintaine such vowes to be made, as are not agreeable to the rules before named: and herein also wee are to dissent from them. The first and principall is, the vowe of continencie, whereby a man promiseth to God to keepe chastitie alwaies in single life, that is, out of the estate of wedlocke. This kind of vowe is flat against the word of God: and therefore vnlawfull. For Paul saith, 1. Cor. 7. 9. If they cannot conteine let them marric. p. 4881. Tim. 4. 1. It is a doctrine of deuills to forbid to marrie. Heb. 13. 4. Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed vndefiled.

speaker D. B. P. This kind of Vovv, is flat against the vvord of God, as hesaith vvhichwhich he proueth first out of S. Paul, If they cannot containe, then let … Marrie: True, if they hauehave not Vovved Chastitie before, as the common 1. Cor. 7.1 Cor 7Christians of Corinth, (to vvhom S. Paul there speaketh) had not. For such, …f they cannotliue othervvise chastly, it is better they marry then be burned that is, defiled vvith incontinencie. But to them vvho had Vovved chastitie before, S. Paul vvriteth in another stile, That if they but desire to marrie, they incurre domnation, because they hauehave made frustrate and broken their former faith and promise made vntounto God of their 1. Tim. 5.1 Tim 5chastiue: So that this first text is a Furlong vvide at the least from the marke.

speaker A. W. The text is generall, and implies no such exception. kkEpiphaniusholds it to be a better course for them that hauehave vowed, to marry, then to continue in sinne against God. And llAug de bono viduit. ca. 9. 10Austin saith, that the marriages of such men are not to be condemned, as if they were no marriages at all, which opinion that they are no marriages he there refutes. And indeede who can thinke in any reason that it is more displeasing to God for a man to breake the promise he hath made, then by making a shew of keeping it, to liue in vncleannes? It is but one fault to breake a vow, though it be neuer so lawfull, but it is a double fault both to do against the vow, by continuing subiect to such lusts, and to refuse the remedie that is afforded. In which respect mmEpiphan. vbi supra.Epiphanius saith, it is better to hauehave one sinne, then many sinnes. Therefore nnCyril. in Leuit. lib 3.Cyrill giueth councell to marry euen after the vow of single life, and to confesse our sinne in so doing, if we cannot liue chastly. Yea oo22. q. 4. I… malis.the Common law bids a man not to do that which he hath vowed vnaduisedly. It is no doubt a fault not to keepe our vow, but to make such a vow as a man is not sure he shall be able to keepe, is a greater fault. If the case fall out to be so, ppHieron. ad …. … act. … 34.Ierome and q Austen hold it the lesse euill to marry.

It cannot be prooued out of the text, that the Apostle speaketh there of any votaries, but only of such widowes as hauing for a time employed themselues in the seruice of p. 489the Church, at the last left both the Church and Christ, and followed Sathan by marrying with Infidels. But take it as you will, we hauehave already seene the iudgement of the Auntients, who for all their high conceipt of virginitie, allow marriage euen after vowes.

speaker D. B. P. The second is much like: It is a doctrine of diuels, to forbid to marie: 1. Tim. 4. VVhat reuerence vvhen you thinke it defiles your Priests? Ephes. 5. They are soone of yeeres ripe enough in your account. Lib. 3. contra Faust. manich. cap. 6.1 Tim 4Eph 5truth, if one should hold mariage in it selfe to be wicked, and therefore condemne it in all sorts of persons, as Montanus, and the Manichees did. But we hauehave a more reuerend opinion of marriage, than the Protestants themselues. For we with the Apostle hold it to be a great Sacram…: they, that it is a morail contract only. Notwithstanding, we maintaine, that such persons, who being of ripe yeeres, hauehave aduisedly Vowed chastitie, may not marry; not because marriage is not honorable, but for that they hauehave solemnly promised to God the contrarie which we also hold to be better, thā if he had maried. And so to vse S. Augustines words, H. forbiddeth to marry, vvho sayeth it to be euill, but not be vvho before this good thing, preferreth a better. And a little after, you see (saith he) that there is great difference betweene persvvasion to Virginity, by preserring the greater good before the lesse, and forbidding to marrie, by accusing lying togither for issue. The first is, the doctrine of the Apostles, which we teach, the latter only of diuels.

speaker A. W. The rr1. Tim. 4. 1.1 Tim 4:1Apostle speaketh of all forbidding marriage at the least as an vncleane thing, but so it is forbidden by you, because it defiles your priests, that they cannot be fit to offer vp ther maker, yea that they cannot pray, as ssHarding against the Apology in Juel. sol 210.Harding saith. You take marriage for such a Sacrament that it is too base for your holy priesthood. We acknowledge it to be ttGen. 1. 18. 19. &c.Gen 1:18Gen 1:19the ordinance of God, of another manner of bond then a morall contract only. We deny not that single life is in some respects to be preferred before marraige, but that marriage is to be forbidden any sort of men, as if of it selfe it made them lesse holy.

speaker D. B. P. The strength of this place lyeth in a double corruption of the text: For this verbe (is) is not in the text, nor cannot by the courle of the Apostles speech, requiring a verbe of the Imperatiue Mood, as both the sent nces before and after do conuince.

speaker A. W. The sentences before and after prooue no such thing, rather the opposition in the uuHebr. 13. 4.Heb 13:4later part of the verse shewes that it should be [is] marriage is honorable, but whoremongers and adulterers God will iudge: whereas if it had bin so intended p. 490as you would hauehave it, the other part must hauehave bin, for God will iudge, by way of a reason, as your vulgar translation reades it without ground. If we corrupt the text, by adding the verb is, what do xxTheodoret. Chrysost. Theophyl. Oecum. Heuten. ad Hebr. 1….Heb 1Theodoret, Chrysostome, Theophylact, Oecumenins, and Heutenius the Papist that translated him, yyHesych. in Leuit. lib. 5. cap. 1….Hesychius, zzFulgent. ad Galla. de statu. viduit. cap. 2.Fulgentius, aaDamasc. Orthod fidei. lib. 4. cap. 26.Damas…en, who so expound it. bbPrimas. ad Hebr. 13.Heb 13Primasius giues the reason why the Apostle speaketh so, because some at that time condemned mariage as vncleane.

speaker A. W. Againe, if you will hauehave the Apostle say, that Marriage is honorable among all men; we must also needs take him to say, that the bedde is also vndefiled among all, which was not true. Also, that their conuersation was without couetousnes, &c. For there is no reason why this word (is) should be ioyned with the one more than with the other. And nothing but passion doth cause them to make the middle sentence an affirmatiue, when they turne both the other into exhortations.

speaker D. B. P. There is great reason why it should be ioyned with the one, as hath been shewed. With the other, as you ioyne it, it is absurd: but it must thus be ioyned, that, is honorable, be repeated; and the bed vndefiled is honorable. In the sentence following it cannot be vnderstood, with any reason; and therefore the ccVulgar Latin, sint.vulgar Latin puts in sint, and the ddRhemis. English, Let be. foreign.Rhemists English, let be: which in the former verse neither of them doth. You so interpret it.

The second corruption is in these words (among all) when they should translate (in all) and the adiectiue being put without a substantiue, must in true construction hauehave this word (things) ioyned with it, and not (men) wherfore the text being sincerely put into English, it would carrie no colour of their error: For the Apostles saying is: Let marriage be honorable in all things, and the bed vndefiled: Here is no willing of any man to marrie, but only a commandement to them that be married to liue honestly in marriage, to keepe (as he else where saith) their vessels in sanctification, and not in dishonor, and then shall their marriage be honorable in all things, that is, in all points appertaining to Matrimonie: So that now you see that M. Perkins is not able to bring any one place out of Scripture to disproue the Vow of chastitie.

speaker A. W. The Adiectiue may be as well the Masculine, as the Newter; and that which followeth in the other part of the verse, of whoremongers and adulterers, directs vsus to expound it of the persons. So doth eeTheophyl. ibid.Theophyl. vnderstand it. In all (saith Theophylact) is not onelyonly in men of riper age, and not in young p. 491men also, but in all men, or in all meanes and times: not in affliction onelyonly, and in rest otherwise; not honourable and pretious in this part, in that part otherwise; but the whole throughout is honourable. So that both your cauils at the translation are vaine, and the sense is wholy for vsus.

speaker D. B. P. The Scripture being so barren for him, he shall be like recompence it with the abundant testimony of antiquitie, in fauour of his cause: but oh vnhappy chance, he hath cleane forgotten in this question the record of the auncient Church: What was there not one Father? who vvith You know what is wont to be said of pro…ered seruice.some one broken fragment of a sentence or other, would releeue you in this your combate against the Vow of Chastitie? I will help you to one, but I feare me, you will scarse thanke me for my paines: It is such a one, as is neither holy nor father, but the auncient Christian Epicure Jouinian, who as S. Augustine hath recorded, and Saint Ierom did hold that Haeres. 82. ad Quodvult. Lib. 1. cont. Ioui.Virginity of professed persons, men and women was no better then the continencie of the married. So that many professed Virgins beleeuing him did marrie, yet himselfe did not marrie, as Fryer Luther did; not be cause he thought chastitie should be rewarded in the life to come, with a greater crowne of glory; but because it was fit for the present necessity, to auoid the troubles of marriage; see iust the very opinion of M. Perkins and our Protestants. But this heresie saith S. Augustine in the same This vvas ansvvered in the Epistle. Lib. 2. retract. 22.place, was quicklie suppressed and extinguished; it was not able to deceiue any one of the Priests: And in another place thus he speaketh of Iouinian: Holy Church most faithfully and valiantly resisted this monster: So that no maruaile, if that M. Perkins could find smal reliefe in antiquitie for this his assertion, which the best of them esteemed no better than a monstrous sacrilegious heresie.

speaker A. W. But the Fathers are not for vsus. What then? is nothing true, that cannot be confirmed by their testimonie? Then are there very many vntruths in Poperie. Indeed it is one of the blemishes of the ancient writers, that they were too highly conceited of single life. The vse whereof a kinde of necessitie bred at first, by reason of persecution, experience of constant profession confirmed, and opinion of holinesse thereupon at the last perfected: so that it is not to be lookt for, that antiquitie should affoord vsus any testimonie against the practise and iudgement of those daies. And yet it is apparant in those places I alleaged before, and diuers other, that neither the Clergie (as you call it) was bound to make any such vow, and that after it was made, it was held a lesse sinne to breake it, than to continue it in vncleannes: which page missing

p. 494tained then to vow; but first to vow, and then to looke for strength from God to fit vsus for the keeping of our vow, is against all Diuinitie and reason. And therefore the perswasion to vow, vponupon presumption of abilitie to performe that which is vowed, shewes (at the least) zeale without knowledge; and can be no matter of commendation to the ancient Church, if they simply allowed it. Howsoeuer, they were farre better than you, because they enioyned breach of vow, rather than encrease of sinne.

speaker D. B. P. But to the further confirmation of this point, let vsus heare what the holy Fathers teach touching the possibilitie of this Vow.

speaker A. W. You labour to disprooue Master Perkins Antecedent, by the testimonie of the ancient writers. To which I answere in generall, that as wee freely acknowledge their authoritie, where there is nothing but mēs authoritie to be waighed; so we account it lighter than nothing, in all cases contrarie to Scripture: such as we can prooue this to be.

speaker D. B. P. Tertullian neere the end, expounding these words: He that can take, let him take, Chuse (saith h…) that vvhichwhich is good: if thou say thou canst not, it is Lib. de monog. Matth. 19.Matt 19because thou vvilt not, for that thou mightest if thou vvouldest, he doth declare vvho hath left both to thy choise.

speaker A. W. ggTertullia. de Monogam. cap. 14.Tertullians testimonie is not worth the answering. Not only because (as I shewed before out of Hilary) his heresie discredited all his writings, but because this is the booke wherein he chiefly maintaines that his heresie, and blasphemie too; accompting Montanus the holy Ghost, and Comforter, whom our Sauiour promised to send. VponUpon his authoritie doth Tertullian forbid second marriages as vncleane, and brings hhMath. 19. 22Matt 19:22this place, you alleage, to that purpose. Such conscience make you of citing authorities against the truth. But I answere Tertullian, that our Sauiour hath left it to no mans choise, but to his that hath receiued the gift.

speaker D. B. P. Origen vponupon the same place, He that vvill take this vvord that is set dovvne of chastitie, let him pray for it, beleeuing …m that said, aske and it Matth. 19.Matt 19shall be giuen you, and he shall receiue it; which doth plainely confute M. Perkins. Who saith, that although we aske neuer so much, we cannot obtaine this gift.

speaker D. B. P. To Tertullian Origen may well be ioyned, a man condemned of heresie, or rather of many heresies, by Ierome, Austin, p. 495Epiphanius, Theophilus, and a whole Councill. Further, it is strange that he should be reported to hauehave offered such violence to his owne bodie, if he thought the gift of continencie so easie to be obtained. More especially I say that iiOrigen. in Matth. 19. Tract. 7.Matt 19Origen mistakes the matter. For our Sauiour Christ bids not eueryevery man pray for it that will hauehave i…, but him to take it that can; implying that eueryevery one cannot. The promise is of things needfull, such is not continencie; nor conuenient for all.

speaker D. B. P. With Origen agreeth S. Ierome vponupon the same place, who saith, It is giuen vntounto them vvho hauehave requested it; vvho hauehave desired it, and trauayled that they might receiue it.

speaker A. W. kkHieronym. in Math. 19. lib. 3Matt 19Ieromes authoritie is in it selfe more worth; in this case not much; because hee goes directly against our Sauiours words, who makes it a gift particular to some, and not once mentions any meanes of comming by it, but bids them take it that can. His reason is the same with Origens, and answered before: yet euen there he wils all men to consider their strength, whether they be able to goe thorough with it, or no.

speaker D. B. P. The same Song chanteth Gregory Nazianzen which is of three kinds Orat. 31.of Eunouchs.

llNazianzen. in Matth. 19. orat. 36.Matt 19Nazianzen goeth somwhat further, making it no more but a matter of a mans owne inclination. When thou hearest (saith he) to whom it is giuen, adde, it is giuen to them mmValentibus.that are able, and to them who are so carried by the inclination of their minde. As if our Sauiour had said, Take it who will, not who can; as if nothing wanted but resolution.

speaker D. B. P. S. Chrysostome saith, it is possible to all them who make choyse of it: and further addeth, that our Sauiour Christ himselfe doth proue it there after this sort: Thinke vvith thy selfe if thou haddest bin by nature an Eunuch, or by the malice of men made one, vvhat vvouldest thou then hauehave done, vvhen thou shouldest both hauehave been depriued of that pleasure, and yet not hauehave had any recompence for thy paine. Therefore thanke God, because thou shalt hauehave a great revvard, and a glittering Crovvne, if thou liue so as they must doe vvithout any revvard: yet (saith he) thou maiest do it more easilie, safely, and pleasantly, both, because thou art fortifi…d vvith hope of recompence, and also comforted vvith a vertuous conscience.

speaker A. W. nnChrysost. in Matth. 19. honul. 63.Matt 19Chrysostoms Rhetorike is better in this place than his Logicke: Our Sauiour exhorts them, that can, to take it; he p. 496saith not, eueryevery man that will may. Those are they which hauehave made themselues chast, who hauing the gift of continencie from God, vse it accordingly, and forbe are marriage, that they may with more cheerefulnes, and lesse incumbrance, serue God: yet is there no shadow of any proofe in this place, that eueryevery one may vow continencie.

speaker D. B. P. We will wrappe vp this point with S. Augustine, who directly confuteth M. Perkins by many reasons and exampl… Lib. 2. De ada…erinis coning. cap. 12. Et de bono vid…. …ap. …0.

speaker A. W. And vponupon the Psalme, an hundreth thirtie seauen, he yeeldeth another reason, why God will more really a… them, saying. He that exhorteth thee to Vo…, will helpe thee to fulfill it. All which heauenly Doctrine, because it is spiritually iudged, (as the Apostle speaketh) the Carnall man cannot vnderstand: And therefore M. Perkins being perswaded that few can liue chastly except they marrie, auoucheth that this Vovv, doth bring forth innumerable abhominations in the World: Not the hundreth part, so many as the fleshly Heretikes imagine, and out of flying and lying tales report and bru…te abroad: Nay, I dare affirme, that VVhence came that olde prouerbe: Priests and Doues make foule houses? See the Ploughmans tale in Chavv…er.let the authenticall Records of our Realme be well perused, and you shall find more lewde filthie Lecherie, to hauehave been practised by Ministers and their Wiues this last age, than was in a thousand yeere before, by all the Catholike Priests and Religious persons of the Land.

There is not a word of this place, either ooAug. de a…ulter. coniug. cap. 12.in that twelfth Chapter, or in any part of that booke: how then doth Saint Austin directly confute Master Perkins by many reasons and examples? The question propounded by Pollentius, and there handled by Austin is, whether the Apostle 1. Cor. 7. forbid her to marrie, who is departed from her husband, though not because of fornication.

In ppAug. de bono viduit. c. 20the other place Austin shewes no more but this, that it is possible to refraine from fornication and adulterie: which it neuer came into our minde to denie. But this is not enough to chastitie and continencie. If the ancient Fathers hereto fore, and you now, count al them chast, that defile not their bodies with outward vncleannes of that kinde, monstrous filthinesse may bee chastitie. But admit (which wee grant may be, and like enough hath been in many carnall men, yea is perhaps at this day in some Turkes and other Heathen) that the outward act should be vtterly for borne; yet may they, that so forbeare, burne in continuall lust, and p. 497liue in the breach of Gods Commandements. What doth this discourse of Austins then concerne that which Master Perkins affirmes, when he is readie to grant as much as Austin saith, and yet holds his former conclusion, that chastitie and continencie are vertues of Gods speciall gift, and not matters to be attained to by eueryevery one that wil vow to continue vnmarried, in hope to prooue able to keepe his vow?

qqAugust. in Psalm. 137.Ps 137This third place is like the first, alleaged by you, without any ground at all. For there is no such speech in that Commentarie, nor any occasion of it in the Psalme. The likeliest place for it, in his exposition of the Psalmes, is vponupon the rrPsalm. 75.Ps 7575. Psalme, where hee discourses of the vow of continencie at large. But there it is not; so that it is not to be taken for Austins, till you bring better proofe that it is his. If I would answere at aduenture, I could say, that God exhorts none to this vow, but them on whom he hath bestowed the gift, and they hauehave his helpe to fulfill that they hauehave vowed.

We enuie not this your speciall iudgement, nor respect your slanderous challenge: onelyonly this I answere, that if all the Ministers and their wiues, had been as lewd, as your malice can imagine, they could not hauehave come neere the thousand part of that filthines, which your Bishops, Priests, Friers and Nunnes committed in this land, by record of popish histories. Yea let iust triall be made, and we will aduenture our liues, that time for time, there hauehave been, since the renewing of the Gospell, more and more beastly vncleane persons, among your Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Monkes, Friers, and Nunnes, in that one Citie of Rome, than among al the Ministers, and their wiues, in this whole realme of England.

speaker W. P. Yet here marke in what manner we doe it. First of all, though wee mislike the vowe; yet wee like and commend single life. Marriage indeed is better in two respects: first, because God hath ordained it to bee a remedie of continencie to all such persons as cannot containe: secondly, because it is the seminarie p. 498both of Church and Common-wealth; and it bringeth forth a seede of God for the inlarging of his kingdome. Yet single life in them that hauehave the gift of continencie, is in some respects to bee preferred. First, because it brings libertie in persequution. Thus Paul saith, 1. Cor. 7. 26. I suppose it to be good for the present necessitie for a man so to bee. Secondly, because it frees men from the common cares, molestations, and distractions that bee in the familie, vers. 2. 28. Such shall hauehave trouble in the flesh, but I spare you. Thirdly, because single parties doe commonly with more bodilie ease and libertie worship God: it beeing still presupposed, that they hauehave the gift of continencie. vers. 34. The vnmarried woman careth for the things of of the Lord, that shee may be holy both in bodie and spirit.

Againe, though wee mislike the vowe, yet wee hold and teach, that men or women being assured that they hauehave the gift of continencie, may constantly resolue and purpose with themselues to liue and lead a single life. 1. Cor. 7. 38. Hee that standeth firme in his owne heart that hee hath no neede, but hath power of his owne will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keepe his virginitie, he doth well. And wee imbrace the saying of Theodoret on 1. Tim. cap. 4. for he doth not (saith he) blame single life, or continencie, but he accuseth them that by law enacted compel men to follow these. And men made themselues chast for the kingdome of heauen, Matth. 19. 12. not by vowe, but by a purpose of heart, which is farre lesse then a vow, and may be changed vponupon occasion, where as a vow cannot, vnlesse it doe euidently appeare to bee vnlawfull.

p. 499Thirdly, for such persons as are able to containe, to liue single for the endes before named, indeede we hold it to bee no counsell of perfection; yet doe wee not denie it to bee a counsell of expedience, o… outward ease: according to that which Paul saith, vers. 25. I giuegive mine aduise,—and, 35. I speake this for your commoditie not to intangle you in a snare.

Lastly, we thinke that if any hauing the gift of continencie, doe make a vow to liue single, and yet afterward marrie (the said gift remaining) they hauehave sinned. Yet not because they are married, but because their vowe is broken. And thus said Augustine of widowes that married after their vow. lib. de bono viduit, c. 9.

speaker D. B. P. This may serue for a reproofe of all that M. Perkins obiecteth against the Vovv of chastitie: aftervvard, the man vvould somewhat reason the matter by shevving hovv he condemneth not chastitie: yet saith, that Marriage is better than it, in two respects. If Iouinian was reputed by the learnedst and holiest Fathers (a Christian Epicure and a Monster) because he durst make marriage equall vvith Virginitie: What shall this A good shift, when you know not hovv to ansvvere.man be who saith it is better? His reasons are so childish, that by the like you may proue, durt to be better then gold: vvherefore I vvill not stand vponupon them.

He neuerthelesse aftervvard concludeth, that one may purpose constantly vvith himselfe to lead a single life, but so as he may change vponupon occasion, and this to be a counsell of expedience, but not of perfection.

Lastly, that if any hauing the gift of continencie, do Vovv, and atfervvard mar…ie (the gift remaining) they hauehave sinned, vvhichwhich is flat against his ovvne second rule, vvhichwhich prohibits vsus to leese our libertie, and to make any thing vnlavvfull in conscience, vvhichwhich Christian Religion leaueth at libertie.

Novv to supplie M. Perkins his default, vvho vvas accustomed to rehearse, although many times vntowardly, yet lightlie alvvaies some reasons for the Catholike partie; vvhichwhich in this question he hath vvholie omitted.

speaker A. W. He that will but reade what Master Perkins writes, and what you answere, shall see a true image of popish dealing, whereby you slubber ouer the matter, to which you know not what to say. Is it a wrong to single life, or virginitie, to p. 500hold that marriage in some respect is better then it? I will go further then Master Perkins hath done, and not doubt to affirme, that it is simply better then virginitie: my reason is, that it belongs to the perfection of humaine nature, that there should be continuance and multiplying of the kind by propagation: beside, God appointed it as an especiall blessing for Adam, when he was in Gods especiall fauour But if that estate be worse then the single life, in which he liued before, God did not blesse, but punish him rather by that change: therefore marriage simply is better. But that virginitie might hauehave his due, Master Perkins sets downe presently after, three respects, wherein it is to be preserred before marriage, all which you do not once name.

Those Christian Fathers dealt vnchristianly with Iouinian, who ascribed as much to virginitie as our Sauiour Christ, or his Apostles gaue to it in any place of Scripture, according to that conclusion of ssTheodoret. Decret. diuin. de virginit.Theodoret, who ends his discourse of virginitie with these words, Such things we hauehave receiued, being appointed and decreed by men endued with the knowledge of heauenly things, which are such, as do not accuse marriage, but exhort vsus to a life void of cares. This Iouinian acknowledged, and worthily denied all difference of merit betwixt a married and single life, which no enemy of Iouinian can disproue, no more can you Master Perkins reasons, though you disgrace them all you can.

speaker D. B. P. I vvill briefelie proue by an argument or tvvo, that it is both lavvfull and verie commendable for men and vvomen of ripe yeeres, and consideration VVho denieth this?hauing vvell tried their ovvne aptnesse to Vovv virginitie; if by good inspirations, they be thereunto invvardly called. My first reason is this, that vvhichwhich is more pleasant and gratefull vntounto God, may verie vvell be Vovved to him, but Virginitie is more acceptable to God then marriage. The first proposition is manifest, and hath no other exception against it, but that vvhichwhich before is confuted, to vvit, if vve be able to performe it. The second is denied by them, vvhichwhich vve proue in expresse tearmes out of S. Paul. He that ioyneth his Virgin doth vvell, but he that ioyneth her not, doth better: and againe of Widdowes: They shall be more 1. Cor. 7. Esai. 56.1 Cor 7Isa 56happie by S. Pauls iudgement, if they remaine vnmarried: This may be confirmed our of Esay, Where God promiseth the Eunuch that holdeth greatlie of the thing that pleaseth him, that he vvill giuegive him in his houshold, and vvithin his vvalles a better heritage and name, than if they had bin called p. 501sonnes and daughters. I vvill (saith God) giuegive them an euerlasting name. And also, out of the booke of Wisdome, Blessed is the Eunuch which hath Cap. 3.vvrought no vnrighteousnesse, &c. For vntounto him shall be giuen the speciall gift of faith, and the most acceptable portion in our Lords Temple: for glorious is the fruit of God: Which is also plainlie taught in the Reuelations, Where it is said, that no man could sing that song but 14400. and the cause Reuelat. 14.is set dovvne, These be they vvhichwhich hauehave not been defiled vvith vvomen, for they are Virgins. To these latter places, M. Perkins anivvereth page 24…. that to the Eunuch is promised a greater revvard; but, not because of his chastity, but because he keepeth the Lords Sabbath and couenant. but this is said vnaduisedly; for to all others that keepe Gods commanments; shall be giuen a heauenly revvard: but vvhy shall they hauehave a better heritage, and more acceptable portion than others, but because of their speciall prerogatiue of chastity?

speaker A. W. What needs that be prooued which wee graunt? it is questionles lawfull for such as being free, find themselues fitted by God to single life, to resolue vponupon the continuance of it as long as they shall be in that case. But I doubt your reasons are scarce good. The first hath a suspitious assumption, because it implies that single life of it selfe should please God better then marriage, which ttTheodoret. Decret. diuin. de virginit. & ad 1. Cor. 7.1 Cor 7I hauehave shewed to be false. To your proofe I answere, that the happines the Apostle speakes of is that which uuTheodoret. vbi supra.Theodoret names, viz. being without care, and hauing more free liberty to serue God, as he prooues out of the Apostle himselfe, who sheweth by his whole discourse, that he prefers that single life before the married, only in regard of the present times, and opportunitie of seruing God generally. This xx1. Cor. 7. 26. Vers. 28. Vers. 32. 33.1 Cor 7:26(saith he) is good for the present necessitie, vers. 26. such shall hauehave trouble in the flesh. I would hauehave you without care. The vnmarried careth for the things of the Lord. That of yyEsai. 56. 4. 5.Isa 56:4Isa 56:5Esay prooues nothing to the purpose, for the Prophet speakes not of them that had made any vow of continencie, but of such as were made Eunuches by men against their wils, to whom he makes promise, not for their continencie, which was no way voluntary, but for their keeping of his Sabbaths, and choosing the thing that pleaseth him, and taking hold of his couenant. The Eunuch, and the Gentile (saith zzLyra ad Esai. 56.Isa 56Lyra) comming to faith, shall obtaine as much grace and glory (other things alike page missing

p. 504Now these young Widdows, if the Protestants doctrine were true, not hauing the gift of continencie, did very well to marrie, and were in no sort bound to keepe their Vowes, which vvas not in their povver: But the Apostle doth not acquit them of their Vow, but teacheth that they were bound to keepe it; in that he pronounceth damnation to them if they marry.

speaker A. W. It must be prooued that there was such a vow made to Christ, before it can be truly affirmed that the oo1. Tim. 5. 12.1 Tim 5:12Apostle speakes of it in this place. The first faith, or vow of a Christian to God, is that generall promisse of obedience in Baptisme, or the vndertaking of the profession of Christianitie, as it appeareth by ppHieron. in prooem. in epist. ad Tit.Ierome speaking of Marcion and Basilides, two infamous hereticks, they are not worthie of credit (saith Ierome) they hauehave forsaken their first faith. But if you will needs referre this to the matter there particularly in question, the fault is, not leauing to be a widow, but forsaking the calling in the Church, which they had of their own will vndertaken. This necessarily ensued vponupon their marriage, because only widowes had that office of looking to the poore and diseased. It is farther to be obserued, that the Apostle seemes to lay the fault vponupon their wilfull wantonnes, and not to graunt that there was any necessitie of vsing marriage for a remedie: when such a case falls out, it is the iudgement of the auntient writers, that it is better to marry, then to continue in vncleanes. Wee must (saith qqAd Demetriadem virginem.Ierome) plainely charge vowed virgins, whose behauiour defames, and shames the holy purpose of virgins, and the glory of the heauenly and angelicall family, that either they marry if they cannot conteine, or conteine, if they will not marry. They marry not (saith rrDe sancta virginit cap. 34.Austin) because they cannot without rebuke, yet better were it for them to marry, then to burne. It may happen (saith ss2^a. 2^ae. q 88. art. 10.Thomas) that in some case a vow may be either vtterly ill, or vnprofitable, or an hinderance vntounto some other good thing of greater waight. And therefore it must of necessitie be determined, that in such a case a vow ought not to be kept. An adulterers case (saith ttLib. 4. epist. 2Cyprian) is worse then his that hath betrayed the faith. And Ambrose, when he had said that a vowed virgin, if she hauehave a mind to marry, committeth adultery, and is made the p. 505handmaid of death; yet addes afterwards, that she is twice an adulteresse, which is defiled with secret and priuie filthines, faining her selfe to be that which indeed she is not.

speaker D. B. P. Thirdly, the example of our heauenly Sauiour, who would neuer marrie: Aug. cap. 44. de virg. Bed. 1. Luc. Cle. Alex. lib 3 strom. lib. 1. cont. louin. In apol. 2. ad Aut. Tertul. ap. 2. cap. 9.and of the blessed Virgin S. Mary, vvho Vovved perpetuall Virginitie. And of the glorious Apostles, as who S. …rome vvitnesseth, vvere in part Virgins; and all after their follovving of Christ, abstained from the company of their Wiues. And of the best Christians in the purest antiquitie, vvho as Iustinas, one of the auncientest Greeke Authors among Christians: And Tertullian his peere among the Latins, doe testifie, did liue perpetuall Virgins.

Out of these examples, vve frame this Argument.

Our Captaines and ring-leaders, vvho knew well which vvas the best vvay; and whose examples vve are to follovv as neere as vve can, Vovving Virginity: vve must needs esteeme that state for more perfect, speciallie, vvhen as the single man careth only hovv to please God, that to be holy in bodie and mind (as the Apostle writs) vvhen as the married are choked vvith cares of this vvorld. And vnlesse a man had made a league vvith hell, or vvere as blind as a Beetle, hovv can he euer persvvade himselfe, that to vvallovv in fleshly pleasure and satisfying of the beastly apperites, is as gratefull to God, as to conquere and subdue them by Fasting and Prayer.

speaker A. W. Our captaines and ringleaders say you vowed virginitie, therefore we must needs thinke the state of virginitie more perfect then that of marriage. First I denie your antecedent, neither our Sauiour, nor his mother, nor his Apostles vowed virginitie; prooue it of any of them if you can. Indeede our Sauiour was neuer married, and all men may easily see it was no way fit he should be. His mother was, and therefore questionles neuer made any such vow of single life, though we beleeue that (as it was very fit it should be) she continued a virgin till her death. That some of the Apostles had wiues, it is apparant by scripture; that they kept them after their office vndertaken, it is more then likely, by uu1. Cor. 9. 5. Vxorem saith Vatablus, as indeed the order of the …ords requires.1 Cor 9:5the like warrant of scripture, whatsoeuer some hauehave thought, without any sufficient ground of reason or authoritie to the contrarie. Peter and Philip (saith xxStromat. lib. 3. pag. 97.Clement of Alexandria) had children; Philip also bestowed his daughters in marriage; and Paul yyNon veretur suam appellare coniugem.is not afraid in a certaine Epistle of his to mention his wife, whom he did not leade about with him, because he zzNon ma…no ei opus esset ministerio.had no p. 506neede of any great seruice. Your consequence also is very weake. They were virgins, therefore it was a state of greater perfection. It was more fit for those times, and their occasions; yea we graunt it is a freer kind of life for Gods seruice, and therefore they that can liue so, do well to vse that their libertie: but this prooues not, that single life is simply better then marriage. That which you adde, of wallowing in filthie pleasure, and satisfying of the beastly appetites, bewraies the beastlie opinion you hauehave of marriage, and shewes, that you would be filthy, though you were married: what you are now as I know not, so I will not iudge. But this I will say, that few or no married men liue so vnchastlie and abhominablie, as aaSee D Downame of Antichrist, lib. 1. c. 6 §. 4. 5. 6. 1. Cor. 7.1 Cor 7many of your vowed virgins hauehave done, by record of your owne stories.

speaker D. B. P. Finally, if S. Paul giuegive counsell to the married, to conteine during the time of Prayer, Priests and religious (that must alvvaies be in a readines to minister the Sacraments, and to thinke vponupon such things as belong vntounto our Lord) are therefore vponupon a great consideration bound to perpetuall chastitie.

speaker A. W. The Apostle giueth no such counsaile, but forbids the married the restraining of each others companie, except it be for a time, that they may giuegive themselues to fasting and prayer. The reason is, that at such speciall times, speciall humiliation is requisite, to which the forbearing all kind of lawfull pleasure is a principall furtherance; otherwise, the moderate vse of marriage is no hinderance to any dutie either of Christianitie, or the Ministrie, but a speciall meanes to preserue necessarie Chastitie.

speaker D. B. P. We vvill close vp this point vvith some sentences taken out of the auncient Fathers, in praise of Virginity, vvhichwhich Master Perkins in all this question vouchsafeth scarce once to name, as though Virgins and Virginitie vvere no English vvords, or not as plaine as continencie.

speaker A. W. Wee acknowledge that virginitie, where it is pure, as it ought to be, is worthie of very singular commendation: but it consists not onelyonly in abstaining from the outward act of marriage. Master Perkins did very well approue both of the thing and the word: but because it was not general enough for this question, as not reaching to all that were single, he p. 507rather chose to vse the word continencie, being of larger extent.

speaker D. B. P. S. Cyprian, De habitu Virginum: Intitleth Virgins to be the most noble and glorious person of Christs flocke: and addeth, that they shall receiue of God the highest revvard and greatest recompence.

Saint Chrysostome saith, Virginitie to be the top of perfection, and the Lib. 3. cont. vitup. vit. neces….highest typ of vertue.

And Athanasius, De Virginitate; in the end bursteth out into these vvords: O Virginitie, a treasure that vvasteth not, a garland that wythereth not; the Temple of God, the Palace of the Holy Ghost, a pretious stone, whose price is vnknown to the vulgar, the ioy of the Prophets, the glory of the Apostles, the life of Angels, the Crovvne of Saints.

S. Ambrose Lib. 1. de Virginibus paulo post init. Virginity is a principall vertue, and not therefore commendable that it is found in Martyrs, but because it maketh Martyrs: Who can with humane vvit comprehend it vvhichwhich nature doth not hold vvithin her lavves, it hath fetched out of Heauen that it might imitate on Earth: neither vnsitly hath it sought a manner of life in heauen, vvhichwhich hath found a spouse for her in heauen.

This surmounting the clouds, the starres and Angels hath found the vvord of God in the bosome of his Father; &c. See vvho list to reade more to this purpose the rest of the Fathers in their vvorkes of Virginitie; of vvhichwhich most of them hauehave vvritten. And S. Ierome, who is behind none of the rest, in his bookes against Iouinian and Heluidius, all vvhichwhich doe most diligently exhort to Vovv Virginitie; do teach hovv to keepe it, and most vehemently inueigh against all them that do breake it. And if any be so mad as to credit rather our fleshly ministers, than all that honorable and holy senate of the auncient Fathers, he deserueth to liue and die in perpetuall darknesse.

speaker A. W. In this matter I hauehave stayed some-vvhat longer, because our carnall He calleth the estate of mariage, …l…shly and beasily libertie.teachers, vvith the levvde example of their dissolute Disciples, hauehave corrupted ourage vvith fleshly and beastly libertie: In the other points, I vvi…l recompence it with breuitie.

These hyperbolicall commendations of virginitie shew the opinion of some ancient writers concerning it, but prooue nothing. We disswade no man from continuing a single life, so hee bee able to ouercome that burning, which the Apostle condemnes: yea rather wee exhort them, that hauehave the gift, to vse it. But we denie, either that all hauehave it, or that they which hauehave it doe please God any more by the vse of it, that they that hauehave it not; but as they employ it to the better, and more free seruing of God.

p. 508speaker W. P. The second, is the vow of pouertie and Monasticall life, in which men bestow all they hauehave on the poore: and giuegive themselues wholy and onelyonly to prayer and fasting. This vowe is against the will of God. Act. 20. 35. It is a more blessed thing to giuegive then to receiue. Pro. 28. 7. GiueGive me neither riches nor pouerty. Deut. 28. 22. Pouertie is numbred among the curses of the law: none whereof are to be vowed. And it is the rule of the holy Ghost, 2. Thess. 3. 10. He that will not labour, namely, in some speciall and warrantable calling, must not eate. And vers. 12. I exhort that they worke with quietnes and eate their owne bread. Now when as men liue apart from others, giuing themselues onelyonly to prayer and fasting, they liue in no calling. And it is against the generall vowe made in Baptisme, because it freeth men from sundrie duties of the morall law, and changeth the proper ende of mans life. For eueryevery man must hauehave two callings. The first is a general calling of a Christiā, by vertue of which he performeth worship vntounto God, and duties of louelove to men. The second is a particular calling, wherein according to his gift, he must doe seruice to men in some function, pertaining either to the Church or Common-wealth, whereof he is a member. And the first of these twaine must be performed in the second: and the second in and with the first. The end of mans life is, not onelyonly to serue God by the duties of the first table, but by seruing of man in the duties of the second table to serue God. And therefore the louelove of our neighbour is called the fulfilling of the whole law. Rom. 13. 10. because the law of God is practised not apart; but in and with the louelove p. 509of our neighbour. This beeing so, it is manifest that vowed pouertie in Monkish life makes many vnprofitable members both of Church and Commonwealth.

speaker D. B. P. Concerning the Vovv of pouertie and monasticall life, in vvhichwhich, as M. Perkins acknovvledgeth, men bestovv all they hauehave vponupon the poore, and giuegive themselues to Prayer and Fasting: yet he is not ashamed to auouch that this Vow is against the vvill of God, and assaieth to proue it: Act. cap. 20. vers. 35. It is a more blessed thing to giuegive, than to receiue.

Ans. As the verie proposition (that it is displeasing to God to cut off all cares of the vvorld, and to betake our selues vvholy to his holy seruice and contemplation of heauenly matters) is in it selfe profane and vngodly, so the proofe thereof is deuoid of naturall wit and sense. Marke the Argument: It is against Gods vvill to giuegive avvay all, because it is more blessed to giuegive, than to receiue: Why, if it be a more blessed thing to giuegive, then they please God better that giuegive. So that this his proofe, improues flatly his ovvne assertion: But the dreamer meanes perhaps, that if you giuegive all at once, you shall not be able to giuegive aftervvard, but rather stand in need to receiue.

Reply. But no such humane prudence can be dravven out of that sentence, vvhichwhich encourageth rather to giuegive for the present, then to prouide for hereafter.

speaker A. W. The true meaning of the place, is to exhort Christians to labour and trauaile, at vacanttimes to get their ovvne liuing, and to prouide some thing also to bestovv vponupon them vvho stand in need rathēr then to be idle, and to stand in need of almes, as S. Paul himselfe did: vvhichwhich they did best performe, vvho had sold all they had and distributed it to the poore, as the example of Paul himselfe, and the first Christians doth sufficiently declare, vvho sold all, and laid the price at the Apostles feete.Act. 4.Acts 4

The proposition is true, that it is displeasing to God for a man to seuer himselfe from all cares of the world, to serue him in contemplation, without respect of any dutie to his brethren. For the cares of the world are part of eueryevery mans lot in this life, and the bbPhil. 1. 23, 24. 25.Phil 1:23Phil 1:24Phil 1:25good of our brethren is to be preferred for a time, before our owne happinesse in heauen: neither is any seruice of praying and fasting continually, so much to Gods glorie, as a Christian carriage in some lawfull calling.

The argument is good: For he that giues away that vponupon which he should liue, as your Votaries doe, brings himselfe into a lesse blessed estate, to liue on other mens almes, than page missing

p. 512spirit. The like is to be said of hungring and thirsting, being full and satisfied, which followeth in the same place.

speaker D. B. P. Thus M. Perkins his texts of Scripture against pouerty failing him, he fetcheth about another vvay, saying, that it is a rule of the holy Ghost: He that vvill not labour (namely, in some speciall and vvarrantable calling) must not eate.Thes. 2.

Ans. I allow both the text and the glosse, and finde nothing there against religious persons, whose calling is speciall perfect, and therefore best warrantable; not so (saith he) because they giuegive themselues to prayer and fasting: What a profane stupiditie is this? Is not a life giuen to praier and fasting agreeable to the wil of God, and Laws of his Church? albeit many religious men doe ouer and besides very great seruices to Gods Church, in preaching, teaching, & writing of most learned books. But suppose they did nothing else but fast and pray, did they not verie well deserue their sustenance? yes much better than they which trauaile To fast and pray, is the generall dutie of all Christians.all the yeere about the prouiding of it: For in vaine do men labour, if God blesse not their worke, with seasonable weather, which he doth rather at the prayer and instance of such good innocent soules, that are to be fed with it, than for the Plough-mans owne labours sake. And if by their Fasting, Watching, and such like afflictions of their bodies, they do partly satisfie for our superfluous pampering of the flesh, and teach vsus by their good example to bridle and correct it: doe they not deserue at our hands bodily sustenance? And who better performes all duties of the second Table than they, being most obedient to all their Superiours, and not hurting their neighbour in life, persons, or any manner of their goods? And so in their seuerall callings offend no honest men, and doe much good both vntounto the Church and common-wealth.

speaker A. W. It is no lawfull calling, nor agreeable to the will of God, that any man should liue in the Church without any charge, or meanes to profit the Church by. Fasting and praying are both lawfull and acceptable; but they are generall duties of all Christians, and may not therefore be made proper callings of certaine men. For callings differ, as other things, by their speciall forme; but their praying and fasting is diuers from the same exercise practised by other Christians, onelyonly in quantitie more or lesse. The seruices these men doe beside, are meerely voluntarie, and not lying vponupon them by any dutie of their calling: which is onelyonly I know not what stinted deuotion, after the lawes of each seuerall order of Monkes, Friers, Nunnes, and such like.

They no way deserue their sustenance, since they hauehave p. 513vowed to take no course whereby they may prouide for it. Their prayers do no good, no not so much as to themselues, being made with a proud opinion, to merit, by a conceited perfection. A poore husbandman, that labours all the week for his liuing, and vseth the best meanes he can to grow in knowledge and obedience to God, may looke for a greater blessing from God, vponupon his bodily and spirituall labours, by his owne poore prayers, and the supplications of the Congregation in which he liueth, than by all the fasting and praying of the holiest Couent, Abbey, or Nunnerie in the countrie.

As for their satisfactions, they are like a broken reede, which will not onelyonly faile him that trusts to it, but hurt him also. I hauehave shewed, that we neede no other satisfaction, being deliuered by our Sauiour Christs sufferings: and there are few or none, except perhaps the begging Friers, that had not more neede to satisfie for their owne idlenesse and gluttonie, than ordinarily any other kinde of men whatsoeuer; if wee may beleeue either the reports of trauellers, or the records of your owne histories.

Can they be said to be obedient to their Superiours, that in the very making of their vow oftentimes, wilfully disobey their fathers and mothers? Or may they be thought to hurt none, who liue idle vponupon the sweate of other mens browes? and are onelyonly a charge to the state, whereof they are vnprofitable members? But not to hurt, is a kindnes perhaps, to be commended in theeues: what due praise it can hauehave in a state of perfection, for my part I cannot see. Which I speake vponupon supposition, that they are not so hurtfull to men and women, as it is commonly thought.

speaker W. P. And though we mislike this vow also, yet we doe it, holding these conclusions. First, that a man may forsake all his goodes vponupon speciall calling, as the Apostles did, when they were sent to preach the Gospell through the whole world. Secondly, goodes may bee forsaken, yea wife, children, parents, brethren, p. 514and all, in the case of confession, that is, when a man for the religion of Christ is persecuted and constrained to forsake all he hath. For then the second table giues place to the duties of the first. Mark. 10. 29. II. That, for the time of persecution, men may withdraw themselues (iust occasion offered) and goe apart to wildernesses or like places, Hebr. 11. 37. yet for the time of peace I see no cause of solitarie life. If it bee alleadged, that men goe apart for contemplation and spirituall exercises, I say againe that Gods grace may as wel be exercised in the familie as in the cloister. The familie is indeede as it were a schoole of God, in which they that hauehave but a sparke of grace may learne and exercise many vertues, the acknowledgement of God, inuocation, the feare of God, louelove, bountifulnes, patience, meekenesse, faithfulnes, &c. Nay here bee more occasions of doing or taking good, then be or can be in a cloister. III. That, wee condemne not the old and ancient Monks, though we like not eueryevery thing in them. For they liued not like idle bellies, but in the sweate of their owne browes, as they ought to **Zozom. lib. 1. cap 13. Epiph. bar. 78. August. de Mon. Eccl. li. 2. c. 31. & de opere Monach. cap. 17.Sir 51:2doe: and many of them were married: and in their meat, drinke, apparrell, rule, vow, and whole course of life, differed from the Monks of this time, euen as heauen from earth.

speaker D. B. P. After all this wast-wind, M. Perkins confesseth, that a man may vponupon a speciall calling, s…ll all his goods, as the Apostles did. What then (good Sir) shal become of your former arguments? May one then Vow a curse of the Law, and leaue off prayer for neither pouertie nor riches, and say that it is not a blesseder thing to giuegive, then to receiue?

All these arguments which were whilom of great force, must now be nothing worth: because it pleaseth M. Perkins, the wind now sits in an other corner, such weather-cockes surely are to be much respected.

speaker A. W. Master Perkins speakes not a word of selling all a man hath, but of forsaking it, when hee hath some calling from p. 515God, which requireth such a course for the following of it, as will not affoord a man leisure to looke to his worldly affaires. But this is no wilfull casting away the care of our estate, but preferring the duties especially laid on vsus by God, before our owne businesse. Neither is it any vowing of pouertie, with a fond conceit of perfection, but a faithfull labouring in our necessarie calling, with neglect of the world, in comparison of our dutie. In such a case a man must relie on Gods prouidence, and vse the best meanes he can to prouide for himselfe, that he may not be chargeable to other, but helpfull rather: not renouncing all propriety in worldly things, but carefully sauing, and thriftily spending that, which it pleaseth God to send by any good meanes whatsoeuer. This ouerthrowes no peece of any argument Master Perkins brought before.

speaker D. B. P. He faith further; in time of persecution, a man may also leaue all: he should rather hauehave said, he must leaue all, or else loose all; for the persecutor will not spare him. Lastly, he doth not condemne old auncient Monks, who liued by the sweat of their browes, and were married, many of them, as he saith, but his authors cited, saith not so, neither shall he be able to cite one auncient allowed and approued writer, who saith that the auncient Monkes liued with their wiues, if perhaps they had been married before. But no maruaile if fleshly Ministers thinke it no life without their fleshly mates. As for labouring at vacant times, it was alwaies, and is to this day in practise among many religions. If other do in good studies, writing or teaching, imploy that time of labour, no doubt but they do farre better.

speaker A. W. He may and must leaue all, if need be. It was sufficient for Master Perkins purpose, to shew that our goods, in some cases, might bee forsaken, though pouertie might not bee drawne vponupon vsus, by any proud vow of supposed perfection.

He doth not condemne those Monkes, though he thinks many things they vsed not warrantable. The report was (as kkLib. 1. cap. 14.Zozomen saith) that Ammon the Monk of Egypt, by the importunitie of his friends, married a wife, though hee neuer companied with her. Which how he might with good conscience refuse, being married, let them iudge that reade what the ll1. Cor. 7. 3. 4. …1 Cor 7:31 Cor 7:4Apostle writes of this matter; yet (as they say) p. 516he liued with her eighteene yeeres in that course, before she was brought into the liking of a Monkish life. But belike it was lawfull then for them to marrie, and no man can excuse this Ammon of great sinne, that would aduenture to marrie one, of whose continencie and willingnes to conteine, hee could hauehave no knowledge before marriage. Other Monkes that were married ere they became Monkes, could not vow without consent of their wiues.

If labouring at vacant times be in practise among many religions (as indeed there is a multitude of religions among you Papists) it is but a worke of supererogation aboue their calling; for their profession is idlenesse. But that this will not serue the turne, mmDe oper. monach. c. 17.Austin sheweth directly, enioyning it as a matter of necessitie.

speaker D. B. P. In defence of the Catholike party, M. Perkins hath not a word, wherfore I will briefly supplie his want and proue it to be very gratefull to God to sell all, and giuegive it to the poore.

I omit the example of our blessed Sauiour, (who would not hauehave any poore cottage of his own, so much as to rest his head in, but would wholy liue of almes) and come vntounto his heauenly doctrine. He teacheth a yong man whom he loued, in flat words, That if he would be perfect, he should Matth. 19.Matt 19go and sell all he had, and giuegive it to the poore, and come and follow him, and then should hauehave a treasure in heauen. These words are so expresse and euident, that there can be but one way to shift from them, which M. Perkins fl…eth vntounto pag, 244. to wit, that these words were only meant vntounto that young man, and not to be applied vntounto any others, no more than those words to Abraham of sacrificing his sonne Isaac. But this seely shift of our poore Protestants is confuted, manifestly in the same Chapter of S. Matthew, where a little after S. Peter saith. Lord, behold we hauehave left all things, and hauehave followed thee, what reward shall we therefore hauehave: We hauehave done (as S. Ierome expoundeth it, and the very sequele of the text doth plainly require) that which thou commandest in the words before, to that yong man. What answere made our Sauiour? That his commandement was only meant vntounto that young man, and that they had done foolishly in so doing? nothing lesse, but promiseth that they shall therefore sit with him in twelue seats, iudging the twelue tribes of Israel. And that whosoeuer would forsake Father, Mother, Lands, Goods, &c. for his sake, should receiue an hundreth fold, and possesse life euerlasting. Can any thing be more plaine out of the word of God it selfe, than that, not this or that man, but whosoeuer shall forsake all for Christ, doth verie blessedly?

speaker A. W. If this be the best supplie that can be made, who can iustly p. 517blame Master Perkins for saying nothing in defence of your Popish partie? For if all you offer to prooue were granted you, all were nothing to the purpose. Say it bee gratefull to God to sell all and giuegive it to the poore: doth it follow hereupon, that therefore it is lawfull to vow wilfull pouertie, as a state of perfection? I trow not. But that is the question betwixt vsus.

You might hauehave done well to omit it indeede, being so little to the matter. For what kinde of conclusion call you this? Our Sauiour would not hauehave any poore cottage of his owne: Therefore pouertie may be vowed as a state of perfection: or therefore it is greater perfection to hauehave no house, than to hauehave one. Our Sauiour being to trauell from place to place, both for the preaching of the Gospell, and his owne safetie, thought it not conuenient to hauehave any certaine dwelling place: yet your Monkes, Friers and Nunnes hauehave, and those the pleasantest and richest for the soile and ayre, that can be found in the whole countries where they are. But what did our Sauiour sell, that he might thereby fall into wilfull pouertie?

His example helps you not: let vsus see his doctrine, he teacheth a yong man, you say, whom he loued, that if he would be perfect, he should sell all he had and giuegive it to the poore, and follow him, and then he should hauehave treasure in heauen. First for our Sauiours louing him, which yet nnMatth. 19. 21Matt 19:21Matthew records not, but ooMarc. 10. 21.Mark 10:21Marke, who leaues out that clause of being perfect, it is more then plaine, that this cannot be vnderstood of any speciall louelove. For neither did the man beleeue in him, as the Messiah, and he was falsely conceited of his owne righteousnes, than which nothing is a greater hinderance to saluation, and therefore nothing lesse beloued by our Sauiour Christ. This louelove therefore signifies not an approbation of his vaine brag, or a desire of making him perfit, but either a pittying of his conceit, or some kind gesture vsed towards him: which later signification especially both the ppSee …nius on Marc. 10. 21.Mark 10:21Greeke and Syriake words will well admit. Secondly I answere, that our Sauiour doth not intend to shew him how he may p. 518be perfect, but by vrging him to sell that he had, meanes to discouer his want of louelove to God, and his neighbour. That he meant not to perswade him to any perfection, it is euident. First, because no man, without true faith, which this Iusticiary wanted, can come any thing neere to perfection. Secondly, for that a man may qq1. Cor. 13, 2.1 Cor 13:2sell all that he hath, &c. and yet not be perfect. For single life, in your account, is a matter of no small perfection. But our Sauiour would make his vanitie in the opinion of his owne righteousnes, apparant to him and other, as it fell out indeed. For refusing to obey him in that matter, he bewrayed his couetousnes, which he preferd before following our Sauiour, whom he acknowledged to be a worthie teacher, and before the louelove of his brethren. Lastly I say, the chiefe point of perfection here mentioned is not selling of our goods, but following of Christ, which is a dutie rrLuc. 9. 23.Luke 9:23belonging to all Christians, so that without it no man is a Christian. In the following of Christ by the works of charity (saith your ssLyra ad Matth. 19. 21.Matt 19:21glosse) perfection consists principally in wilfull pouertie, but as in the beginning, by way of renouncing that which hinders, and disposing of vsus, because by it the care of temporall things is taken away, which hinders the soule from the louelove of God, and the soule is fitted to free contemplation of God. To sell all and giuegive to the poore sufficeth not to perfection (saith ttLibr. 3. ad Matth. 19.Matt 19Ierome) vnlesse after the despising of riches we follow Christ, that is, leauing euill do good. And after, Many leaue riches, but not follow our Lord. He followes our Lord who doth imitate him, and treads in his steps. And againe afterward, Because it sufficeth not to leaue, he addes that which is perfect, and hauehave followed me. So that this is no state of perfection, but rather a remedie against our being drawen away from following Christ, which was as necessary to saluation both before and vnderunder the law, as it is now in this light of the Gospell: and if without wilfull pouerty it cannot be done, doubtles neither those worthies of the former ages, Abraham, Moses, Dauid, &c. could follow Christ in duties of charitie, and we not only may, but must sell all we hauehave, that we may follow him.

p. 519It was spoken and intended only to that yong man; neither doth Peter say that the Apostles had sold all, and giuen it to the poore, which is no where recorded of them in the scriptures, but that they had forsaken all and followed him, that is, had left their ordinarie callings (by which in likelyhood they might hauehave thriuen) to attend vpō our Sauiour, and to be employed in his seruice. And to the following of Christ either only or specially doth that of Ierome belong. Peter speakes confidently (saith uuLibr. 3. ad Matth. 19.Matt 19Ierome) we hauehave left all. And because it is not sufficient only to leaue, he addes that, which is perfect, And hauehave followed thee, we hauehave done that xxQuod iussisti. Mat. 4. 19. 22.Matt 4:19Matt 4:22thou commaundest, that is, we hauehave giuen ouer the hope of our increase in worldly riches rather then we would not serue thee. But by the way let me put you in mind, if you will needs hauehave that speech of Ieromes belong to wilful pouerty, you must needs make it a commandement by your owne interpretation.

It is not only a counsaile but a commandement, that eueryevery man should forsake his goods rather then his profession of Christianitie, or any speciall dutie, to which God shall call him. If any man (saith our yyLuc. 14. 26.Luke 14:26Sauiour) come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, and his owne life also, he cannot be my disciple.

speaker D. B. P. And if need were, I could cite most of the auncient Fathers, teaching those words of Christ, Goe and sell all, to be an heauenly counsell giuen generally vntounto all. S. Antonie tooke them spoken to him, In vita eius apud Athanas. S. Augustine to him: Ad Hilarium. To omit latter religious Epist. 89.men, I will only cite S. Jerom who doth briefely both declare our Catholike doctrine, and shewes also who was the Author of the Protestants opinion, saying thus: To that vvhichwhich thou affirmest, that they do better, who Lib. cont. Vigilant.vse their goods, and doe by little and little distribute to the poore, the profits of their possessions, then others vvho selling them, giuegive all at once, not I, but our Lord shall ansvvere: Jf thou vvilt be perfect, goe and sell all thou hast and giuegive it to the poore. Christ speaketh to him that vvill be perfect (not to the young man only) vvho vvith the Apostles, forsooke both Father shippe and nettes: That which thou Vigilantius commendest, obtaineth the second and third degree: so that the first (which is to sell all at once) be preferred before the second and third: Which is, to giuegive by little and little, the fruit of our reuenues to the poore.

speaker A. W. The authoritie of the antient writers is lessened by the p. 520knowledge of the ground they built vponupon, which was a misconceit of our Sauiours speech, begun at the first by some man, who did not sufficiently waigh the place, and continued from one to another, without any due examination, till it had got such strength, that it carried away the best learned, who contemning the world, were easily perswaded to thinke themselues to be in an estate of perfection.

speaker D. B. P. I might confirme this sormer argument with the example of the sore…ide best Christians, who hauing possessions and lands, sold all and Act. ….brought the price of them, and laid it at the Apostles feete: and more yet enforce it by the fact of Ananias and Saphira, his wife, who hauing sold all theirs, presented but part of the money vntounto the Apostles, and reserued the rest vntounto themselues. Belike they were of M. Perkins his minde, that it is better to giuegive then to receiue, and therefore kept part to that purpose; but they therefore were both punished with present death: Which proueth inuincibly, both how laudable it is to sell all, and how dangerous to halte in such holy workes.

But to auoid prolixitie, I do but point at the places: And that Ananias; as the …est had promised this to God (which is a Vow) it appeareth in the text, where it is said, that he lyed not vntounto men, but vntounto God, in not per…orming his promise.

And here we deduce very cleerely, that such a Vow is much pleasing vntounto God, thus: That which is commended by our Sauiours owne both example and doct…ine, and was practised by the Apostles and most holie Christians, that may be Vowed verie laudablie: but to sell all and giuegive it to the poore is such.

speaker A. W. The example of those Christians is nothing to the purpose, who vponupon speciall occasion made their goods common to the vse of the whole Church in Ierusalem; yet zzAct. 2. 4.Acts 2:4is it not said of them, that they sold all they had; yea the contrary may reasonably be gathered by the facts of aaAct. 4. 37.Acts 4:37Barnabas and bbAct. 5. 1.Acts 5:1Ananias, of whom it is recorded, that they sold each of them a possession that he had, and laid downe the money at the Apostles feete. Now to imagin that they had no other goods and chattels but that land, nor any moueables, is a conceit vnwarrantable by any reason.

Ananias and Sapphiras mind was to make a shew of more bountie then they had any will to performe. That they had made any vow, or promise to God of any such sale, cannot be prooued by the text, but rather the contrary, because the p. 521Apostle Peter saith, that it was in his choyce before he sold it, whether he would sell it or no, and that after he had sold it, it was in his owne power, viz. to giuegive all, or halfe of it as he thought good. The lye he made was to say that he had brought in all the money he sold it for, whereas he kept back part.

I hauehave stood the longer vponupon this argument, because you bring no more but this, and thinke this vnanswerable. Therefore also beside your custome you draw it into a Syllogisme now at the last.

That (say you) which is commaunded by our Sauiours owne example and doctrine, and was practised by the Apostles, and most holy Christians, that may be vowed very laudably:

But to sell all, and giuegive it to the poore is such:

Therefore it may be vowed very laudably.

I denie your proposition, because some things hauehave bin commended and practised by our Sauiour, his Apostles, and other holy Christians, of which a man may not make a vow. For example, both he and they hauehave commended, and indured persecution for the Gospell: yet doth it not follow that therefore a man may wilfully by a vow bring persecution vponupon himselfe, as by the vow of pouertie you cast your selues into a state of beggery.

Your assumption also is false. Neither our Sauiour, his Apostles, nor other holy Christians (I speake of the examples you bring out of the Acts) hauehave practised any such matter, as in my former answers it hath appeared. To which I adde yet further, that they in the Acts so gaue that they did giuegive, that themselues had their reliefe out of it, if neede required, as well as any other.

Of the conclusion I say, that it containes not the whole matter in question betwixt vsus, though it be rightly drawne from the premisses. For though we should graunt that vowes of selling all and giuing it to the poore may laudably be made (which is false) yet is it not proued, that a man may vow wilfull pouertie, and refuse to possesse any worldly goods. They in the Acts, if they gaue all away, which is al- page missing

p. 524made in our Creation, we remember nothing of it, nor neuer heard speake of it by any good author, not that we make, or renew any Vowes when vve receiue the blessed Sacrament. These be but nouelties of words, and the rauing of some decayed wits.

speaker A. W. You vtterly mistake Master Perkins, for he makes not comparison betwixt your accompt of baptisme, and ours, but betwixt your estimation of the vow in Baptisme, and these other 3. vowes deuised by your selues. And though with you the couenant in baptisme be no vow, yet with ccAd Psalm. 75Ps 75S. Austin it is. What must we vow? saith he vponupon that place which you alleage to prooue the lawfulnes of vowing. He answers, to beleeue in him, to hope for euerlasting life of him, to liue well, according to a common manner of liuing well.

The vow in our creation Master Perkins calls the bond, by which we are tyed to obedience in respect that we hold all we hauehave of God by creation. As the benefits sealed to vsus in Baptisme are renewed in the Lords supper, eueryevery time we receiue it; so by vsus in like sort the promise or vow made in baptisme is also to be renewed, which is implied in that name of the sacrament, which signifieth ddforeign.thanksgiuing.