Commentaries, Commentary on Judges · Chapter 19 · Excursus 1
¶Of the reconciliation of the huſband & the wife after that adultery hath ben committed.
THe ciuil lawes are vtterly againſt the reconciliation of the huſband and the wife, after the one hath committed adultery.The ciuill lawes abhorre from reconciliation after adultery. For in the Code ad. l. Iuliam de adulteriis in the law Caſtitati noſtrorum temporum it is ordeined, that if a man maried againe a wife condemned of adultery, he incurreth the crime of being a bawd. And in the ſame title in the law Crimē, it is had, that he which retaineth ſtill in matrimonye a wife that hath played the adultereſſe, can not accuſe her of adultry. Although afterward by a new law it was otherwiſe prouided for. Neither was it a light thinge to be condemned is a bawde: but it was euen as greiuous as if a man had ben condēned of adultry. Yea and if a man retayn her that is condēned of adultry, he may him ſelf without an accuſer be condēned of adultry. And if a man marie agayn her whom yt he hath once repudiated, he cannot accuſe her of the adultry before committed. But if ſhe again commit adultry, he may. Bycauſe in marieng her againe he ſeemeth to hauehave allowed her acte. And if any woman be condemned of adultry, no man can take her to wife. Wherefore ye ciuil lawes do abhor from reconciliacion after adultry, ſo that it be conuict and condemned. For if it be onelyonly his ſuſpicion, it is lawful for the huſband to retayne and accuſe her whome hee ſuſpecteth: Who if hee afterwarde ſee that he was ledde by a vayne ſupicion to accuſe her, hee maye ceaſe from that which he hath begonne, ſo that he firſt obteine a releaſe of the Iudge.
Ierome vponupon the .19. chapter of Mathew may appeare to agree with the ciuil lawes. For he writeth: ſhe which hath deuided one fleſh into one or two, ought not to be retained, leaſt her huſbande be made ſubiect vntounto the curſe. For as it is written in the .18. chapter of the Prouerbes: He which retaineth an adultreſſe, is vngodly and a foole. In dede ſo hauehave the .70. interpreters turned it, but the verity of the Hebrewe hath it not. The ſame Ierome ſaith: If there happpen any ſin, it breaketh not matrimony. But if ther happen adoultery, then the wife is not lawfull. And in the .32. queſtion the firſt, ar rehearſed the words of Chriſoſtome. If a manne hauehave to doe with an adulterous wife, let him do penaunce. And the ſame Chriſoſtome vponupon the .26. chap. of Mathew: Euen as he is vniuſte whiche accuſeth an innocent, ſo is he a foole which retayneth an adultereſſe. The ſame thing is had in the decretals de Adult. in the chap. Si vir ſciens: And it was decreed at the counſell of Orleaunce. The huſband which retaineth an adultereſſe is partaker of the crime. And if a woman repudiated, marye an other, her laſte huſband being dead, ſhe can not return vntounto the firſt. For now ſhe is vncleane vntounto him, as it is written in the .24. of Deut.
But now omitting theſe thinges, let vsus ſee the reaſons which ſerue for reconciliation. God himſelfe which is onelyonly good, would be the huſbande of the church, and that not onelyonly in our time, but alſo in the times of the fathers. But the church, eſpecially the old church, oftentimes turned aſide to idolatry, and cō mitted whoredome with the Gods of the Gentiles, as euerye where appeareth in this booke, and alſo in the hiſtory of the kinges, and in the prophetes: Neuertheles yet Ieremy called it back againe in the name of God to return to her huſband. Which ſelfe thinge Hoſeah the prophet alſo did, & that with many words. And if god be redy to receaue his wife beynge an adultereſſe, man ought alſo to returne into fauor agayne with his wife, eſpecially if ſhe repent, and beginne a new life. For as many as are chriſtian men, profeſſe the imitation of God. Ther is alſo an example of Dauid, who toke agayne his wife Michol, although her father had placed her to an other man.Iuſtinian Iuſtinian alſo in his Authentikes, when he commaundeth that an adultereſſe ſhould be beaten & be ſhut vp in a monaſtery, yet hee geueth libertye to the huſbande to take her againe, if he will, within the ſpace of two yeares, & ſo he moſt manifeſtly alloweth reconciliation.
AuguſtineAuguſtine in his. 2 boke to Pollencius is very much in this, yt they ſhould be reconciled. For many in his time would not receaue their wiues which had cō mitted adultery, as ſuch, as which were now polluted & contaminated. Where fore he wrote: doeſt thou thinke her polluted, whom baptiſme and repentaunce hath purged? Whom God hath clenſed? She ought not to ſeme to thee polluted. And if ſhe be now recōciled vntounto the kayes of the church, & admitted into ye kingdome of heauen, by what right canſt thou put her from thee? Theſe thinges are had alſo in 32. queſtion .1. If ſhe hauehave fallen, thou muſt know it came of humayne nature, & mercy muſte be ſhewed her, if ſhe ariſe. For we woulde the ſame to be done vntounto vsus. And extreme right, is extreme wronge. In the decretals de adulteriis & ſtupris, in the chap. Si vir ſciens, it is had out of the counſel of Orleaunce. An adultreſſe if ſhe repent, ought to be receaued. The gloſe in that place demaū deth, by what right or dewty ſhe ought to be receiued. It anſwereth: Not by the lawe of neceſſitye, for if ye man wil not, he cannot be compelled to receaue her, wherfore he ought by the law of honeſty to take her agayne. But I woulde demaund whither it ought not alſo to be done by ye dewty of piety & by the ſtrēgth of the commaundement of God, foraſmuch as Paule to the Philip. ſaith, do theſe things, whatſoeuer ar honeſt and iuſt? Therfore it is alſo don by neceſſity of the commaundement. But the gloſer in that place intreated of the outward iudgemente, wherein no man can be compelled to receaue an adultereſſe. But in the Cannon now cited it is added: Not very often. For if ſhe fal often into adultry, ſhe ought not to be receaued. The Gloſe in the ſame place obiecteth vntounto it ſelf chriſt, who whē he was demaūded, how oftē we ſhuld forgeue our brother whē he offendeth againſt vsus, anſwered not onelyonly ſeuē times, but ſeuenty ſeuē times. To this he ſayth, that the words of the Cannō are to be vnderſtād, that when ye adultereſſe ſo oftentimes falleth, the church ſhall not entreate for her reconciliacion, partelye bycauſe there ſhoulde be opened a wyndowe to wyckednes,When the churche ought to entreate for thoſe that fall. and partly bycauſe ſhe might thinke that penaunce is but fayned and deſſembled. There is alſo added an other aunſwere, that that is ſpoken for a terrour, leaſt men ſhould more freely and careleſly commit ſinne. Hereby is gathered that the church oughte to entreate for the reconciliation of the repentant, that they may be reconciled. Wherfore an adultreſſe, either ſheweth ſignes of repentaunce, or els ſheweth not. If ſhe ſhew ſignes, the church oughte to entreate for her, that there may be a reconciliation made. But if ſhe ſhewe none, the churche ſhall not entreate for her: otherwiſe it ſhould ſeme to maintain ſinnes.
Now muſt we aunſwere vntounto the arguments which ſemed to be agaynſt reconciliation.Aunſweres vntounto the reaſons on the contrary part. The counſell of Orleance. The cauſe why the law of Moſes prohibited the returne of a wyfe repudiated vntounto her firſt huſbande. As touching the ciuill lawes they are to be corrected by the word of God. Ierome and Chriſoſtome do ſpeake of ſuch an adultreſſe whiche repenteth not, which ſelfe ſame thing is manifeſtly vnderſtand by the counſel of Orleance. For that it is there had: He whiche retaineth an adultreſſe, is partaker of the crime: but if ſhe repent, let her be receaued. But why the lawe of Moſes ſuffred not, that a wife repudiated ſhould not after the death of her latter huſbande returne vntounto her firſt, the cauſe may eaſely be aſſigned. For if he had permitted yt, then diuorſements would eaſely hauehave bene had, in hope ſomtimes to recouer agayne theyr wife. God would that ſhe that was repudiated, ſhoulde returne no more, to the ende that ſhee ſhoulde not eaſelye bee repudiated. There mighte alſo bee conſpiracies made agaynſte the latter huſbande, whereby the wyfe myghte, when hee were dyſpatched awaye, returne agayne vntounto her firſte huſbande. Wherefore the lawe of God was moſte iuſte, whiche pertayned not vntounto adultrous women, which by the commaūdement of God ought to be ſtoned. By theſe thinges now it is manifeſt that it is lawfull for the huſband to return into fauor with his wife being an adultereſſe, ſo that ſhe repent: who yet ought to accuſe his wife of adultry, if it be a publike crime, or if ſhe perſeuer in her wickednes, or els if ſhe bring forth any children by adultry, leaſt the lawful heires ſhould be defrauded: for vnleſſe ſhe be accuſed, the huſbande cannot depriue the ſon borne in adultry, but that he ſhall inherite. Farther, let the church entreate and work with him, that he would receaue againe the woman being repentāt. Wherfore our Leuite ought not to be reproued, bicauſe he receaued again into fauor his wife being an adultreſſe, ſo that ſhe repented her of her adultery. But now will I return to the interpretation.