The Buckler of the Faith, Part 2 · Article 35 · Subpart 5
Of the pretended Sacrament of Mariage.
Sect. 6 Our aduersaries call Marriage of Priests and Clergie men sacriledge, and neuerthelesse call the Marriage of lay men a Sacrament, which conferreth iustifying grace. By this deuice the Prelates hauehave drawne the knowledge of Matrimoniall causes to themselues, because (as they say) it belongeth to the Church to iudge of Sacraments. It is not knowne what great profit they reape thereby, and how many persons come to Rome for matrimoniall causes. The same auarice which forbad Marriage to Priests, thereby to preserue the goods of the Church, hath made Marriage a Sacrament, thereby to take the knowledge of matrimoniall causes from the Magistrate. Truth herein is so manifest, that vntruth finds no place wherein to hide it selfe. For our aduersaries say, that a Sacracrament is a sacred signe instituted by Iesus Christ, proper to the Christian Church, wherby iustifying grace is conferred to those which receiue it. But nothing of all this agreeth with Marriage.
1 EueryEvery Sacrament of the Christian Church was instituted by Iesus Christ. But Marriage was not instituted by Iesus Christ: for Marriage was vsed in the world before Iesus Christ was borne. If they answer, and say, that Iesus Christ changed the nature, or the vse, or the signification of Marriage, and that he ordained that from thence forward Marriage should be a Sacrament, then they must produce that ordinance of Iesus Christ. Which they could neuer yet do: it is a thing drawne from the vnwritten word.
2 Sacraments are remedies against sinne, & aides to our infirmities: Marriage therefore is no Sacrament, because it was ordained before sinne entred into the world, and then when there was no infirmity in man.
3 The Sacraments of the Christian Church are not vsed among Pagans. Marriage therefore is no Sacrament of the Christian Church, because it is vsed among Pagans, whose marriages are lawfull, as the Apostle teacheth vsus, 1. Cor. 7.13. For counselling a beleeuing wife not to leaue or forsake her husband that is an infidell, he presupposeth that their marriage is lawfull, although it was before the conuersion of the wife vntounto the faith.*Dist. 26. Can. Vna. Tantum ex Ambrosio. Ioannes Baptista dum Herodem ab incestu prohiberet, dicens, Non licet tibi habere vxorem fratris tui, euidenter ostendit inter infideles coniugia esse. Whereupon Ambrose noteth, that Iohn Baptist would not hauehave said to Herod, It is not lawfull for thee to hauehave thy brothers wife, if there had bene no Marriage among infidels. And if a man and a woman that are infidels become Christians, shall their Marriage which was not a Sacrament, become a Sacrament? Or if that be absurd, and that their Marriage is not a Sacrament after their conuersion, shall there be Ch…istians whose Marriages are lawfull, and yet it is no Sacrament?
4 The Church of Rome in effect acknowledgeth that Marriage is no Sacrament, by this that Marriages are there permitted to be made by a Proctor. For the Sacraments are not administred by a Proctor. To baptize a man for another man, and after a man hath for himselfe bene participant of the holy Supper, to participate the same againe for another man, is as much as to make a play of Christian religion.
5 In all Sacraments the word must be ioyned with the element, that it may be a Sacrament: but here there is no element: for neither the words nor actions are elements.
6 And when a Priest (not knowing it) hath maried two persons together, whereof one is defectiue and incapable of marriage by their rule, either he hath truly conferred a Sacrament, or he hath not conferred a Sacrament. If he hath not conferred a Sacrament, then marriage is a Sacrament which dependeth vponupon the integrity of the body of those which receiue it: and an action which to a man that is entire and sound is a Sacrament, but to a man that is defectiue is no Sacrament. And so it shall fall out, that the Priest doth that which he thought not to do, and thinking to administer a Sacrament, he administreth nothing. But if those persons hauehave receiued a Sacrament, what is it when the marriage within short time after is dissolued, by complaint made by one of the parties? That were an vndoing and defacing of a Sacrament, as if Baptisme should be frustrated, or the Lords Supper disanulled, being receiued by a man that is ill disposed.
7 Adde hereunto, that the Church of Rome holdeth, that Sacraments conferre iustifying grace, ex opere operato, that is to say, by bare action, without the necessary vertue and holinesse of him that conferreth it, or the attention of him which receiueth it. Then let them shew me what this action precisely is in Marriage which conferreth iustifying grace. Is a men regenerated by solemnizatiō of Marriage in the Church? If it be so, how cometh it to passe, that a man then becometh more licentious in superfluity of apparell, bankets, dancing, &c. Is that the iustifying grace which thereby is conferred?
8 If they will that Marriage since the institution made by Iesus Christ, doth conferre iustifying grace, then they must produce the promise made by the Sonne of God, which promiseth this iustifying grace to those that are married. This puts our aduersaries to a non-plus, and they are faine to send vsus to the vnwritten word.
9 By the Apostles counsell, 1. Cor. 7.37. one that is continent, and not tempted with euill desires, doth wisely not to marrie. Which should be false, if Marriage were a Sacrament conferring grace. For is it a commendable thing to abstaine from a Sacrament which conferreth grace and iustifieth?
10 But why should the Marriage of Patriarkes and Prophets be no Sacrament, and the Marriage of a vicious Christian, which marrieth incontinently, and against the will of his parents, be a Sacrament? What more holy or more mysticall things are there at this day in the marriages of Christians, then were in the marriages of the Prophets and Apostles? For if Marriage be at this day called a Sacrament, because it is a figure of the vnion of the Church with Iesus Christ, it signified the same in the old Testament, where that spirituall vnion is oftentimes represented vnderunder the figure of Marriage: as we see in the 45. Psalme, the Canticle of Salomon, the 16. of Ezechiel, and the first and second chapters of Osee. And if euer any Marriage was sacred and full of mysterie, it was the Marriage of Adam and Eue. For as God vsed the casting of Adam into a profound sleepe, in the meane time to forme a wife for him, so God vsed the sleepe of the death of the second Adam, to get him a wife, that is, the Church. Or if the Marriage of Christians be esteemed to be a Sacrament, because it is indissoluble, how doth the Church of Rome separate Marriages onelyonly because the parties married did both together present a child at Baptisme, or at Confirmation? Adde hereunto, that the inseparability doth not make a thing to be a Sacrament. If that were so, faith and repentance should be Sacraments, because they are inseparable. And it is not found that the Marriages of Christians are more indissoluble then the Marriage of Adam with Eua, or of Abraham and Sara. And when Iesus Christ, Matth. 19.8. abolished the liberty of diuorces vsed among the Iewes, saying, Whosoeuer puts away his wife, except it be in case of adultery, he draweth them backe to the first institution, and saith, In the beginning it was not so.
11 The Apostle Saint Paul, Rom. 4.11. calleth circumcision, The seale of the righteousnesse of faith, shewing thereby, that Sacraments serue not onelyonly to signifie some graces of God, but also to ratifie the same vntounto vsus, and to confirme the promises of God in vsus. If then they will hauehave Marriage to be a Sacrament, it must not onelyonly be a figure of the vnion of Iesus Christ with his Church, but also seale and confirme vntounto vsus some particular promise of God which is found in his word. But they say nothing to this, that is any thing likely.
12 Sacraments are tyed together by a naturall bond, one hindereth not the vse of the other: but the Church of Rome hath forged two discordant Sacraments, whereof the one impeacheth the vse of the other, that is, the Sacrament of Orders, by the which a man being made a Priest, becometh incapable to receiue the Sacrament of Marriage, and then that Sacrament of Marriage becometh sacriledge and an abhomination vntounto him. There are Ecclesiasticall functions which differ one from another, as seruing the tables, and preaching of the word, Acts 6.2, because of humane infirmity, which cannot attend diuers things at once. But it shall neuer be found, that a thing which is holy and sacred to some men, is profane and abhominable to others, and that the same which is a Sacrament to one man, is sacriledge & an abhomination to another.
13 And to conclude, this error doth wrap and intangle it selfe so many wayes, that this pretended Sacrament, is a Sacrament which men must diuine and presume of: in such manner, that in the Church of Rome no man can assure himselfe that he is married, although he hath had a dozen children by his wife.Sess. 7. ca. 11. For the Councell of Trent pronounceth excommunication and a curse against all those which shall say, that the intent of the Minister in conferring a Sacrament is not necessary. It is a doctrine generally receiued in the Church of Rome, that if he which baptizeth, or marrieth, or singeth Masse, hath not an intent to do that which the Church ordaineth, or hath not an intent to celebrate a Sacrament, Baptisme and Marriage solemnized by him are nothing, and neither Consecration nor Transsubstantiation is made. Now this intent must be diuined or presumed vponupon. Wherein neuerthelesse there is matter and subiect enough to doubt of: for the Church of Rome is full of Priests, which acknowledge and detest the abuses of the Church of Rome, & which condemne their owne actions: without speaking of Atheists, whereof the world is full, who in their hearts laugh and mocke at all that which is done in the Church.
Dur. in Sent. l. 4. Dist. 26. q. 3.14 For these causes or the like, Durand is of opinion, that to speake properly, Marriage is not a Sacrament. And which is more, Pope Leo the 1. in his 90. Epistle to Rusticus Bishop of Narbonne saith: Quod societas nuptiarum ab initio constituta est, vt praeter sexuum coniunctionem, haberet in se Christi & Ecclesiae Sacramentum: That the societie of Marriage was established from the beginning, that besides the coniunction of sexes, it might be a Sacrament of Christ and his Church. This Bishop saith, that Marriage hath bene a Sacrament of Christ and the Church, ab initio, from the beginning, and not onelyonly since the coming of Iesus Christ.
To be short, if we should say nothing, the thing it selfe would speake: for Marriage hath bene made infamous and abhominable to Priests, for the preseruation of Ecclesiasticall goods, lest they should take vponupon them to withdraw some part thereof from the Church for the benefit of their children,Vxor superstes & filij per quos Ecclesiastica solet perire substantia. as Pope Gregorie the 1. in the 28 Distinction, in the Canon De Syracusana, saith. But where it was profitable for the Clergie to exalt Marriage, Popes hauehave found meanes to aduance it so farre as to make it a Sacrament, conferring iustifying grace,Can. 3. Si quid dixerit eos tātùm consanguinitatis & affinitatis gradus qui Leuitico exprimuntur, posse impedire matrimonium contrahendum & dirimere contractum, nec posse Ecclesiā in nonnullis illorum dispensare, aut constituere vt plures impediant & dirimant, Anathema sit. to draw the knowledge of matrimoniall causes to themselues.
Which appeareth by dispensations and other practises, whereby in this matter the Pope exalteth himselfe aboue God. For the counsell of Trent in the 24. Session pronounceth all those to be accursed which say, that the Church can not dispence with degrees of consanguinitie prohibited by the word of God in Leuiticus. And that men may know that in those dispensations the Pope is ruled by humane respects and worldly considerations, in the same Councell, and the same Session, can. 5.*In secundo gradu nunquā dispensetur nisi inter magnos Principes & ob publicam causam. An. 1520. By Tonssains Denis rue S. Iaques pres S. Iues. Item etiam dispensare potest poenitentiaria in primo gradu, affinitatis in soro conscientiae; & litera vaenit duc. 9. gr. 9. prohibition is made, not to dispence with the second degree, but onelyonly betweene great Princes, and for publike causes. If marriage in the second degree be permitted by the word of God, why doth the Pope prohibite it? If it be prohibited by the word of God, why doth the Pope dispence with Princes for the same? HaueHave Princes priuiledges to offend God? This artificiall deuice also appeareth herein, that the Pope hath inuented degrees of imaginarie kinreds betweene godfathers and godmothers & the infant, which may not marrie without dispensation, and a great priuiledge. He hath extended the prohibition of marriage to the fourteenth degree of affinitie, but he dispenceth therewith and with the first degree of affinitie, alway paying for it. The taxe of the Romane Chancerie imprinted at Paris with priuiledge and approbation, in the 40 leafe hath these words. The penitenciary may dispence with the first degree of affinitie at the barre of conscience, and the bill is sold for 9 duckets and sixe grosse. That is, that the Pope may giuegive permission to a man to marrie the sister of the wife deceassed, against the expresse prohibtion thereof made Leuit. 18.16. and 20.21. Innocent the third did it, as Bellarmine acknowledgeth, in the 28 chapter of the booke of Marriage. The Almaine Doctor in the 12 chapter of the booke of spirituall and temporall power hath these words, saying,*Martinus quintus consilio maturo habito, dispensauit inter aliquos in secundo gradu consanguinitatis qui est lege diuina prohibitus. Similiter temporibus nostris Papa dispensauit cum aliquo quòd haberet duas sorores vnam post alteram contra legem Dei. Martin the fifth with ripe deliberation granted a dispensation betweene certaine perfons in the second degree of consanguitie, which is prohibited in the diuine Law. Likewise in our time the Pope gaue a dispensation to a certaine man to marrie two sisters one after the other, contrary to the Law of God. &c. Whereupon this Doctor produceth the authoritie of Panormitanus and Angelus, who maintaine that the Pope may dispence against the Law of God.
To make Marriage a Sacrament, our aduersaries produce Ephesians, 5.32. which in the vulgar translation is thus set downe, This Sacrament is great, but I say in Iesus Christ and the Church. But in Greeke it is thus, This is a great secret or a mysterie, but I speake concerning Christ, and concerning the Church. In this place the Apostle speaketh of the sacred vnion betweene Iesus Christ and his Church: which vnion he compareth to corporall Marriage betweene the husband and the wife. His intent was not to exalt the mysterie of Marriage, but the vnion of the Church with Iesus Christ. This mysterie then whereof he speaketh, is the mysticall vnion betweene Iesus Christ and the Church, and not the vnion betweene the husband and the wife. For hauing said, This is a great mysterie, that we should not thinke that he speakes of the mysterie which is in Marriage,foreign, Hauing regard to Iesus Christ and to his Church. he addeth, But I speake touching Iesus Christ and his Church.
But be it so, that Saint Paul calleth Marriage a mysterie or secret: and that the vulgar translation hath truly translated Mysterie by the word Sacrament, what is that to prooue Marriage to be a Sacrament of the Church? Will our aduersaries hauehave all those things which in the vulgar translation are called Sacraments, to be Sacraments of the Church of Rome? By that reckoning, the great whore shall be a Sacrament of the Romish Church: for in Apocalyps 17 7, according to the vulgar traslation, it is said, I will shew thee the Sacrament of that woman, and of that beast that beareth her. And the seuen starres in Apocalyps. 1.20. should be a Sacrament, for in the vulgar translation they are called so. And three times in Dan. 2. in the same translation dreames & visions are called Sacraments. And in 1 Tim. 3.16. Pietie is called a great Sacrament, in steed of a secret or mysterie. But most of all the fraud of this translation specially appeareth herein, that in the chapter following, verse 19. S. Paul prayeth the Ephesians to pray for him, that vtterance might be giuen vntounto him to open his mouth boldly to publish foreign, the mysterie, or secret of the Gospell. In this the vulgar translation, aith, Mysterium Euangelij, and not Sacramentum Euangelij. Here are two places one neare vntounto the other, in one Epistle, where one selfesame Greeke word in one place is translated mysterie, & in another Sacrament. Let them translate these two places both alike, and the difficultie is ended.Non habes ex hoc loco prudens lector à Paulo coniugium esse Sacramentum. Non enim aicet Sacramentum, sed mysterium hoc magnum est. Et verè mysterium ve…borum horum magnum est. Cardinall Caietan acknowledged the same in his Commentary vponupon this place, where he saith, Prudent Reader, here thou dost not learne of Saint Paul that Marriage is a Sacrament: for he saith not, this Sacrament, but this mysterie is great, and in truth the mysterie of those words is great. I confesse that Marriage is a figure of the vnion of Iesus Christ and his Church: but by the same reason, the vnion of the head with the members, and the stoeke of a vine with the twigs and branches thereof should be Sacraments. Adde hereunto, that Marriage prefigured the same in the old Testament, when Marriage was no Sacrament, if we beleeue our aduersaries. This might serue for an answer to the words which M. Arnoux addeth.
ARNOVX.
Sect. 7 Ephesians 5.32. speaking of Marriage, This Sacrament is great, I say in Christ and his Church. Then why do they receiue but two Sacraments onelyonly, seeing the Apostle calles Marriage a Sacrament, and a great Sacrament? But they perceiuing that this place ouerthroweth their doctrine, they hauehave corrupted the pl…ce, putting the word secret in steed of Sacrament, leauing the Greeke origina…l, and the Latine translation.
MOVLIN.
This hath already bene confuted. This man sheweth that he vnderstandeth not the Greeke, and that he hath badly read ouer the Bible. In the Greeke it is mysterie and in the Latine Bible it is translated so, in the chapter following, verse nineteene.