Popery Anatomized, Section 16
SECTION XVI. Concerning Matrimony, and whither it be a Sacrament?
Master Gilbert Brown.
EIghtly, our doctrine is, that Matrimony is a bond undiſſoluble, becauſe our Savior ſaith, That which God hath joyned together, let no man ſeparat, Matth 19.6. And ſuch like he ſaith, That whoſoever demits his wife and marries another▪ commits adultery upon her, Mark 10.11.12. And in S. Luke 16.18. we have the ſame. And S. Matthew 5.35. & 19.9. is of the ſame opinion (albeit one may put away his wife by him for fornication) this is the doctrine alſo of the Apoſtles of Jeſus Chriſt: for it is written in S. Paul, That a woman that is under a husband, her husband living, is bound to the law; but if her husband be dead, ſhe is looſed from the law of her husband. Therefore her husband living, ſhe ſhal be called an adultereſs, if ſhe be with another man, and ſo forth. And in another place, he ſaith, Rom 7.2.3 1. Cor. 7.39. and 7.10.11. To them that be joyned in matrimony, I give not command, but our Lord, that the wife depart not from her husband: and if ſhe depart, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband. And let not the husband put away his wife. Now this is our Religion of matrimony, and plain repugnant to the doctrine of the Miniſters of Scotland, that will licence a man to put away his wife, and marry another. And they call the doctrine of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, the Popes cruelty againſt the innocent divorced, in their negative faith.
Maſter John Welſch his Reply.
As for your 8. and 9 points of doctrine concerning Marriage: the firſt, that it is undiſſoluble for no cauſe: the other, that it is a Sacrament. As to the firſt, I would ſcarcely have underſtood this point of your doctrine. if your Council of Trent, and others of your Clergy who write of it had not been more plain then ye. And I think, that there are few that knows not this point of your doctrine otherwiſe, who can take it up by this your writing. I wonder why ye are ſo dark in ſetting down your own doctrine. But wherefore ſhould I wonder: for darkneſs may not bide to ſee the light? Your doctrine then is this. Firſt, you make many cauſes of ſeparation and divorcement, beſides adultery, Concil. Trid ſeſs. 24. Can. 8. Bellarm. lib. 1. de matrim cap. 14. (expreſs againſt the doctrine of Jeſus Chriſt, He that ſhal demit his wife, except for fornication, &c.) he makes her to commit adultery. As 1. for the vow of continency to enter in a Monaſtery, or Nunry. 2. For hereſie. 3. And for peril of offending of God. Next, your doctrine is, That ſuppoſe there be many cauſes of ſeparation betwixt the man and the wife, from bed and boord (as we ſpeak) yet the bond of marriage contracted and perfected betwixt the faithful, can no ways be broken, as long as they both live together, no not for adultery. So that the party innocent divorced, may not lawfully marry another, during the life of the guilty party: And if they marry▪ they call it adultery; and they will have the ground of this to be, becauſe it is a Sacrament, Bellar. lib. 1. c. 12. So one error follows and leans upon another. For if marriage be not a Sacrament, then the bond may be looſed, by their own doctrine. But marriage is not a Sacrament, as ſhal be proved hereafter: therefore the bond is ſoluble. Our doctrine is, that the bond of marriage contracted and perfected between two Chriſtians, is broken by the adultery of either of the parties; ſo that the innocent divorced may lawfully marry another. As for our doctrine, it is plain in the Scripture, in the 19. and 5. of Matthew: where there the Lord in plain termes excepts the cauſe of fornication, ſaying, Whoſoever demits his wife, except it be for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery. So then by the contrary, he that demits his wife for fornication (which is adultery there) and marries another, commits not adultery. And ſeeing the Apoſtle commands, 1. Cor 7.2. That every man have his own wife, and every wife her own husband, and that for the avoiding of fornication: and it is better to marry then to burn. Therefore the firſt marriage being diſſolved by divorcement juſtly according to Gods Word, it is lawful to the party innocent at leaſt to uſe the remedy of marriage for the avoiding of fornication. Otherwiſe if he might not uſe it, divorcement were not a benefit, but rather a puniſhment, and the innocent ſhould be puniſhed without a fault.
Now, as to the Scriptures which ye quote, Matth. 19.6. and 5.31 they have that exception of fornication, expreſly mentioned. And as for the places of Mark 10.11.12. and Luke 16.18. and Romans 7.2.3. and 1. Cor. 7 39. they are all to be underſtood with that exception of fornication, that our Savior expreſly ſets down in the former two places, otherwiſe Scripture ſhould be contrary to Scripture, which is blaſphemie to think, and our Savior is the beſt exponer of himſelf. And as for the 1. Corinth. 7.10.11. the Apoſtle ſpeaks not of that ſeparation for adultery, but of a ſeparation for a ſeaſon, for other cauſes or variances, in the which caſe the parties ſeparated, are to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled together. And becauſe ye will not credit us, nor the Son of God ſo expreſly ſpeaking in his Scripture, yet I think ye will give ſome credit to your own Doctors, Councils, Canons, and Popes, whom if ye be a right Catholick, ye think that they cannot err. Cajetanus a Cardinal, in comment. Matth. 19. Ambroſius Catarinus, lib. 5. annot. in comment. Cajetani, Papiſts, hold this doctrine with us againſt the Religion of your Church, That adultery breaks the bond of marriage, and that the innocent divorced may marry another. Pope Zachary, Decret. cauſa 32. quaest. 7. cap. Concubuisti. And the Concil Triburienſe, ibidem cap. Si quis, and another Canon ſaith, That inceſtuous adultery breaks the bond of marriage, ſo that the party innocent may marrie another, Ibid. cap. quaedam. And Pope Gregory the third, ſuppoſe in a Canon he will not have adultery to break the bond of marriage, Ibid. cap. Hi vero. ſo that the party innocent may marry another, contrary to the doctrine of Chriſt our Savior, yet he permits a man to marrie another, if his former wife being taken with ſome diſeaſe, be not able to render due benevolence unto her husband, Ibid. cap. Quid propoſuiſti. So ſuppoſe this Pope will not admit that true cauſe which our Savior ſets down of adultery, yet he ſets down cauſes himſelf, which wants the warrant of the Word. And Pope Celeſtin the third, ſet forth a decree, that when of married perſons one falleth into hereſie, the party Catholick is free to marry again, cap. laudabilē de converſ. infidelium, confeſſed by Alphonſus a Papiſt, lib. 1 c. 4. adverſ. haereſ. So then either your Doctors, Canons, Councils, & three Popes err, or elſe the bond of marriage may be broken, and the innocent partie divorced may marrie another. Your Religion of Matrimonie therefore is not only repugnant to ours and Jeſus Chriſts, but alſo to your own Canons, Councils, Doctors, and Popes. Let them therefore condemn your cruel ju…gement againſt the innocent divorced. And therefore Bellarmin confeſſes, Bellarm. de mat. lib. 1. cap. 15. That in this point they have many againſt them, not only us whom he calls hereticks: but alſo Latins, Greeks, and Catholicks.
Maſter Gilbert Brown.
Ninthly, with S. Paul, Eph. 5.23. we make it a Sacrament, as ſundrie of the learned Proteſtants do, as Zuinglius, lib. de vera & falſa rel. cap. de matrimonio. Melancthon, in locis aeditis 1552. & 1558. and chiefly young Merchiſton, in his 22. Propoſition of his diſcourſe upon the Revelation, whoſe words are theſe. Thirdly, bodily marriage is by S. Paul, called a ſymbol and a Sacrament of the union of Chriſt and his Church. And yet our new Confeſſion deteſts the ſame, and will have it but a baſtard. Such concord is betwixt Chriſt, his Apoſtles, and our new preachers of the Goſpel, and alſo among themſelves.
M. John Welſch his Reply.
The ninth point of your doctrine is: you will have Marriage a Sacrament of the New Teſtament, and that properly, and that according to the inſtitution of God, unto the which the promiſe of the grace of juſtification is annexed: ſo Bellarmin, lib. 1. de matrim. cap. 2. and the Council of Trent ſaith. But mark, Chriſtian Reader, their ground of this their doctrine. They ſay, the bond of marriage among infidels may be broken: but ſay they, the bond of marriage among the faithful cannot be broken. And they make the cauſe of this difference to be this, becauſe the marriage of Chriſtians is a Sacrament. So they reaſon. Marriage among Chriſtians is a Sacrament; therefore ſay they, it cannot be broken. But what is their principal ground now, whereby they prove marriage to be a Sacrament? Becauſe (ſay they) the marriage of Chriſtians is a bond indiſſoluble; therefore it is a Sacrament which hath the grace of Juſtification joyned with it. So mutually one error upholds another. Upon the which, I reaſon: If the bond of marriage may be broken for adultery then it cannot be a Sacrament: this your Church grants▪ becauſe they make that the ground of this: but the bond of marriage may be broken for adultery, as hath been proved before, both by the Scriptures, and alſo by your own Canons, Councils, Doctors, and Popes: therefore marriage is not a Sacrament.
Secondlie, in the Sacraments of the New Teſtament, there are earthly elements: as the water in Baptiſm, the bread and wine in the Supper, and an expreſs form of words preſcribed in the New Teſtament: as in Baptiſm, I baptize thee, &c. and in the Supper, This is my body, &c. Matth. 26. They have their expreſs inſtitution by Chriſt in the ſame, and have the promiſes of remiſſion of ſins, and juſtification annexed to them. But none of theſe things are to be had in marriage. Firſt, no earthly element: next, no form preſcribed in the Word of God: thirdly, no expreſs inſtitution of it as of a Sacrament: fourthly, no promiſe of the remiſſion of ſins, and ſalvation annexed unto it. Therefore it cannot be a Sacrament of the New Teſtament properly.
Thirdly, if marriage were a Sacrament, and ſuch a Sacrament that ſignified and gave the grace of juſtification with it, that is, remiſſion of ſins, then wherefore ſhould your Church forbid all your Clergie from the ſame? And wherefore ſhould ye abſtain from that Sacrament, which is inſtituted of God, to give remiſſion of ſins to you, and to make you acceptable to God? as your doctrine ſaith, Bellarmin lib. 1. de matrim. cap. 5. pag. 67. Why ſhould ye deprive your ſelf of that thing which may place you in Gods favor, and purchaſe to you remiſſion of ſins? (as ye ſay marriage may do) it is a token that either ye believe not your own doctrine, or elſe prefers whoredom and adultery, which is condemned of God, to marriage which is Gods ordinance, and honorable among all men.
Fourthly, I ſay, if the marriage of Adam and Eva in Paradiſe, and the marriage of all the Patriarchs, and Prophets, and Prieſts, and people in the Old Teſtament, was not a Sacrament, neither is the marriage of Chriſtians in the New Teſtament a Sacrament. For they were ſymbols that repreſented our ſpiritual conjunction with Chriſt, as well as the marriage of Chriſtians in the New Teſtament doth: the which you will not deny. And Pope Leo ſaith, Epiſt. 92. That marriage was inſtituted from the beginnning, that they might have in themſelves a Sacrament of Chriſt, and his Church: but the firſt you grant your ſelves was not a Sacrament, therefore neither is the ſecond a Sacrament.
Fifthly, that which is filthineſs and pollution, cannot be a Sacrament to give forgiveneſs of ſins: but Pope Syricius calls marriage pollution and uncleanneſs, Diſt. 82. cap. Propoſuiſti, &c. Plurim. 8. Therefore it cannot be a Sacrament, if he ſpeak true.
Sixthly, if marriage be ſuch a Sacrament, as ye ſay, to give remiſſion of ſins, then it ſhould be more excellent then virginity, becauſe virginity hath not this promiſe: but this ye will not grant, therefore it is not a Sacrament.
Laſt of all, Durandus a great Doctor of your Church, ſaith, Ut Capreolus refert in 4. diſt. 26. quaeſt. unica, artic. 3. That marriage is not properly a Sacrament.
As for that place in the fifth of the Epheſians which ye quote, where the Apoſtle ſaith, This is a great myſtery, ſpeaking of the mutual du…ies of man and wife. I anſwer: firſt, he calls not marriage this great myſtery, but that band of our conjunction with Chriſt, as he expones himſelf: This is (ſaith he) a great myſtery: and then he ſubjoyns, I ſpeak of Chriſt and his Church. Secondly, ſuppoſe the old Interpreter doth tranſlate this word myſtery, a Sacrament; yet you know (if you know the Greek language) that foreign, is called a ſecret. Thirdly, will you have all theſe to be Sacraments properly, which are called myſteries in the New Teſtament, and which the old Interpreter and your Rhemiſts, tranſlats Sacraments? then ſhal you not only make marriage a Sacrament, but alſo the chief articles of our faith, 1. Tim. 3.16 and the Goſpel, Col. 1. Eph. 3 & 1. 2. Theſſ 27 and the ſeven ſtars in the Revelation, chap. 1.20 and the whore o Babel, and the iniquity of the Antichriſt. Rev. 17 5 all Sacraments. For they are called foreign in the Greek, and ſome of them are tranſlated Sacraments by the old Interpreter, and your Rhemiſts, as marriage is. I wonder that ye quote Melancthon, as though he were of your opinion, ſeeing Bellarmin acknowledges plainly, lib. 1. de matrim. cap. 1. & 5. (that he denyes it to be a Sacrament properly, as Baptiſm and the Lords Supper is:) but only grants that it is a Sacrament in ſome reſpect. But you regard not what ye write, ſo being it may carry any ſhow againſt us The ſame we anſwer to you of Zuinglius and Merchiſton. They call it a Sacrament, but not in that ſenſe that Baptiſm and the Lords Supper are called Sacraments, taking the word improperlie, and more amply, as Bellarmin confeſſes of Melancthon. So here is no diſcord neither betwixt us and Chriſt, neither among our ſelves But in very deed, you are they who are at diſcord both with Chriſt, and among your ſelves. For beſide this that Bellarmin and Innocentius, calls the marriage of the Gentils Sacraments, becauſe you may anſwer that they call them Sacraments improperly as Melancthon, Zuinglius, and Merchiſton calls marriage a Sacrament improperly. So if they be at variance with us for calling marriage a Sacrament, ſo is Bellarmin lib. 1. de ſacram. matrim. c. 3 and Pope Innocent cap. gaud. de divort. at variance with your Church, for calling the marriage of infidels a Sacrament. For as we deny marriage to be a Sacrament at all properly, ſo doth your Church deny the marriage of infidels to be a Sacrament properly. But to let this paſs, I ſay, becauſe I will not deceive the Reader, as ye do, with appearances of contradictions through the ambiguity of the words, Alphonſus de Caſtro, lib. contra haereſ. verbo nuptiae. haereſ 3. Petrus a Soto lectio 2. de matrimonio. two of your Doctors, and ſundry others ſay, That marriage is not a proper Sacrament of the New Teſtament: And yet the Council of Florence and Trent, and ſundry others of your Church, ſay the contrary. 2. Durandus a great Doctor of your Church, ſaith, in 4. dist. 26. quaeſt. 3. That marriage is not a Sacrament properly. 3. Some of your Church held, that carnal copulation in marriage is a part of the Sacrament: ſome the contrary, that it is neither a Sacrament, nor a part of the Sacrament: ſo Bellarmin teſtifies, lib. 1. de ſacram. matrim. c. 5. pag. 88. 4. Durandus and your Canoniſts hold, That the Sacrament of marriage doth not confer grace unto them that receive it. And yet our common doctrine is contrary this, as Bellarmin grants, ibidem. Laſt of all, Canus a learned Papiſt, affirms, That every marriage lawfully contracted among Chriſtians, is not a Sacrament; but only that which is made by the Miniſter in a certain form of words: the which Bellarmin, and ſundry others deny. And you are of great diverſity concerning the matter of that Sacrament among your ſelves. Theſe are not now ſhows of diſorders and contradictions, but they are ſo true and manifeſt, that Bellarmin your chief campion, hath confeſſed them, de ſacram. matrim. lib. 1. Judge thou now, Chriſtian Reader, whither is it we or they that is at variance among our ſelves. And this for the ninth point of your doctrine.