Expositions Upon Matthew 1-10, Treatise · Chapter 5 · Section 24 – Section 25
Means to pluck out the abuſe of the eye, and to cut off the hand.
1 Mortifie our earthly members. Though corruption be in you, let it be like a dead carkaſs. 1 God works habitual or inward mortification, not onelyonly by raiſing up thoſe that are dead in ſin, but by ſtirring up the affections of the ſoul to a deſire of raiſing, and then crucifying ſinfull affections or luſts in us. 2 For outward actual mortification, that is our work, hereby we reſiſt temptations and keep in inordinate affections.
Theſe ſinful affections are call'd members, as corruption is called a body, Rom. 6.6. and becauſe it puts forth its power in all the members of the body, and as our natural members perform our natural actions, ſo our corruption uſes theſe ſinfull affections as inſtruments to fulfil the deſires thereof.
2 Look upon every allowed luſt as that which ſevers betwixt God and us, Eſa. 59.1. we are eagerly affected againſt thoſe who endeavour to ſever betwixt us and our deareſt friends.
3 Look upon your old man as crucified with Chriſt, Rom. 6.6.
4 Get renovation in the imagination, for want whereof there are ſo many filthy luſtings in the eye, and liſtnings in the ear.
5 Look upon theſe as thoſe which will deſtroy the ſoul, as in the text.
V. 30. It hath been ſaid, Whoſoever ſhall put away his wife let him give her a writing of Divorcement; But I ſay unto you, whoſoever ſhall put away his wife, ſaving for the cauſe of fornication, eauſeth her to commit adultery, and whoſoever ſhall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Chriſt further clears the ſeventh Commandement, aſſerting that this command is broken if a man ſhall put away his wife except for fornication; the Law allowed divorce in divers caſes, but Chriſt onelyonly in the caſe of fornication.
It hath been ſaid] 1 By Moſes, from divine inſpiration, not upon his own private fancie; for the commandements and ſtatutes which Moſes taught them, the Lord commanded him for to teach them, Deut. 6.1. for he that would not determine in a matter of inheritance (as in the caſe of the daughters of Zelophehad) without firſt asking God, in a matter of greater moment, would not do any thing without Gods command: and though Chriſt Matth. 19.8. aſcribes divorce unto Moſes, yet thoſe things which came from God are aſcribed to Moſes, Matth. 8.4. Mark 1.44.7.10. Luke 5.14.
Now this divorce was made for ſome kind of filthineſs, as for leproſie, ſcolding, &c. Deut. 24. 1 For it was ſcarcely uſed in caſe of fornication, for if the wickedneſs of fornication appeared, the adultereſs was ſtoned, Levit. 20.10. and if ſhe were ſuſpected ſhe was purged with the waters of jealouſie, Numb. 5.27. and God diſpenſing with the Jews for to put away their wives for ſundry cauſes, they did not ſin herein in my opinion. Ob. But Mat. 19.8. Moſe becauſe of the hardneſs of your hearts ſuffered you to put away your wives, therefore it was onelyonly a permiſſion. Anſw. This their hardneſs was the cauſe why God granted the Jews liberty herein, leſt the Jews ſhould kill their wives whom they could not put away, yet this grant did make their putting away lawful, becauſe God for the hardneſs of the Jews did diſpenſe with them in the law of matrimony: by this putting away of wives, God typified the putting away of the Jews, and the betrothing of the Gentiles.
Whoſoever ſhall put away his wife] For onelyonly the husband by the Jewiſh law might put away the wife. The Phariſees corrupted this law of divorce: the original law was, Deut. 24.1. That if a man hated his wife for ſome filthineſs, giving her a bill of divorce he might put her away, but might never take her any more after he had put her away. Now the Scribes and Phariſees depraving this law, the Jews for every ſmall matter put away their wives, ſhowing the ſeventh Commandement was not violated if they gave them a bill of divorce; hence Chriſt reprehends this interpretation.
Now the form of this putting away, as the Lawyers tell, was, Tuas res tibi habeto, tuas res tibi agito, that is, look to thy own affairs, conditione tua non utar, in ſevering the betrothings placuit renunciationem interv enire.
Let him give her a writing of divorcement] This was a writing whereby the husband commanded his wife to depart from him. The form whereof was (as Grotius mentions) this, Of my own accord and no mans compulſion, I have decreed to leave, refuſe and put away from me thee, hitherto my wife, and even now do ſend thee away, forſake and refuſe thee, and caſt thee away from me, that thou mayeſt be in thy own power; and mayeſt depart whither thou liſteſt at thy own will and pleaſure, neither let any man at any time forbid it, and ſo be thou let go, that it may be lawful for thee to mary to what man thou wilt.
Now that it was lawfull for a man to put away his wife without bringing the cauſe to the judge, appears by Chriſts words; for Chriſt ſaith, It was ſpoken of them, he that putteth away his wife let him give her a writing of divorcement. Beſides elſe how could Joſeph have put away Mary privily. The ancient Gaules and other nations granted the huſbands power of life and death over their wives. Grotius.
Queſt. Whether did Moſes grant divorce onelyonly in caſe of fornication?
Anſw. No, for Chriſt ſaith that grant was made for the hardneſs of their hearts, Mat. 19.8. Mark 10.5.
But I ſay unto you, Whoſoever ſhall put away his wife except for the cauſe of fornication] Qu. What if a wife be a witch, or one that endeavours to murther her husband, &c. what then? may ſhe not be put away? Anſ. yes, but Chriſt names fornication, becauſe it is the proper cauſe of divorce, and directly repugnant to mariage, whereas other cauſes are general, excluding from all civil ſociety.
Queſt. But what if the adulterous wife repent, may not the husband take her again to bed and board.
Anſw. He may pardon it, becauſe the offence is principally committed againſt himſelf, but he is not bound, becauſe Chriſt here gives him liberty to put her away, 1 Sam. 25.44 compared with 2 Sam. 3.14, 15, 16.
Queſt. Whether divorced perſons may marry again to one another after divorce?
Anſw. No: Jer. 3.1. If a man put away his wife and ſhe become another mans, ſhall he return unto her again? ſhall not the land be polluted? The reaſon was leaſt under pretence of divorce they ſhould lend one another their wives, as the Lacedemonians and Cato did.
Queſt. Whether divorced perſons may mary at all, without committing adultery?
Anſw. The innocent perſon doubtleſs may, for why ſhould a chaſte perſon ſuffer for the Adultery of his yokefellow?
2 God hath provided Mariage a Remedy againſt Incontinency, for all ſort of perſons. 1 Cor. 7.2. but if parties lawfully divorced might not mary again, then they ſhould want this Remedy, and be expoſed to a neceſſity of ſinning.
Queſt. Whether putting away in any caſe be lawfull, ſeeing Mal. 2.15, 16. The Lord hates putting away.
Anſw. The Prophet ſpeaks not of any putting away, but of that which was done to innocent Women, onelyonly for Barrenneſs, upon which cauſe Divorce firſt began at Rome: and yet the Romans were an hundred and twenty years without an Example of putting away. Abraham, though Sarah was barren till ninety nine years of age, never put her away.
Cauſeth her to commit Adultery] How could this be?
A. She that was put away being branded with the Reproach of Divorce could not get another Husband, and ſo being hopeleſs of marying, as being counted defiled (as Moſes phraſes it) turn'd Strumpet, now Chriſt caſts the fault hereof upon him, who for a ſlight cauſe would put away his Wife. This is to expoſe the frail age of a young Woman to temptation. Hence M.T. Cicero was blamed, becauſe for light cauſes he put away his Wife Terentia.
And whoſoever marieth her that is divorced committeth Adultery] Chriſt means it (as Grotius thinks) of one that is of the ſame Faith and Profeſſion, ſo that we may underſtand it of them who received thoſe that were put away before there were Endeavours of Reconciliation uſed of one of them to the other. 1 Cor. 7.11. But if ſhe depart, let her remain unmaried, or be reconciled to her Husband. Alſo it's meant of thoſe who being greedy of other mens Wives, by Divorce made way to mary them. Hence Matth. 19 9. the former Husband is ſaid to commit Adultery, if he ſhall mary another, ſo that the Crime of Adultery falls on him, he hath taken away all hope of agreement betwixt the former yoke-fellows, ſo that hereby Chriſt would eſtabliſh hope of Reconciliation.
Otherwiſe Moſes Law ſtanding in force as it did then, it had been hard that they that had maried a Woman put away ſhould be counted for Adulterers.
Queſt. What do you think of this caſe when a Husband remains a certain time from a Wife, whether another man may mary with her?
Anſw. The abſent party is either beyond ſeas, or in his own countrey. If beyond ſeas, there muſt be a greater time granted to hear of him. By the Law of Conſtantine if the Wife did not hear of the ſafety of the Husband in four years ſhe was permitted to mary to another.
To give my opinion, there muſt be a preciſe time ſet down, wherein if the Wife do not hear of the Husband it may be lawfull to mary, as if being in the ſame Nation he do not ſend to her in two years, or if being in a foreign Nation he do not ſend to her in four years, for in ſuch a ſpace of time it may be ſuppoſed a man may write from any part of the Earth; unleſs he be in captivity: ſuch a Man not ſending to his Wife in ſuch a ſpace of time may be ſuppoſed to put her away, howbeit I think in theſe caſes to conſider ſeriouſly what the Laws of the Nation are is moſt expedient, and ſo far as they concur with lawfulneſs and expediency to follow them.
For Application, 1 Caution, Not to put away Wife or Husband: there are four Miſchiefs in it, 1 Such an one is a Murderer, becauſe he hates his Wife. If Chriſtians are comma…ded to love their Enemies, how much more then their yoke-fellows, who may have vitia, but not flagitia, per…ps faults, but not heinous offences.
2 Such an one is guilty becauſe he hath put away one who hath not committed Adultery. For this cauſe onelyonly putting away ought to be; for though there be other failings, yet ought there to be reconciliation. Lactantius ſaith, He is an Adulterer who hath maried her that is put away; and he is an Adulterer who hath put away his Wife, except for Fornication, that he may mary another.
3 He is guilty, becauſe he makes her commit Adultery.
4 Becauſe he that takes her that is put away becomes an Adulterer.
2 Exhort. To keep the Bond of Matrimony inviolate, in no wiſe to break it, as being the Covenant of God, Prov. 2.17.
3 Learn, not to put away a Wife or Husband for Idolatry, Infidelity, 1 Cor. 7.12, 13. onelyonly if the Idolater will depart, and put the Believer away, the Believer is free: Nor for Errour in perſon, as if a man think he mary a Virgin and doth not, becauſe ſhe hath done nothing ſince his Wife; nor for Errour of Eſtate, as ſuppoſing to mary one rich but ſhe is poor; nor for Idolatry, Ezra 10.2, 3. Compare Rom. 7.1, 2, 3, 4. nor Hereſie, 1 Cor. 7.12. no nor yet for poverty is a perſon to put away his Wife, no nor for frigidity or coldneſs, becauſe not able to perform the duty of Mariage, nor for ſome incurable Diſeaſe, theſe may hinder a Mariage from being, but not break it after it is ſolemnized, 1 Cor. 7.10, 11. Let not the Wife depart from her Husband, and let not the Husband put away his Wife.
Queſt. But what if the Wife be of contrary Religion, as a Papiſt, and will not live with her Husband in ſuch Countreys where the Husband may ſafely profeſs the Faith?
Anſw. It was the judgment of Calvin and the other Helvetian Preachers, that there might be a Divorce, whereof there were two Examples; one of Pizarro, who maried a Wife who would not live with him, ſave in the Roman Territories, where he muſt either deny the Faith, or loſe his life. After Divorce he was maried, as I remember, for I have not the Book by me, to one Magdalen Moor. The other is of Galeazeus Caracciolus, whoſe Wife refuſing to live with him ſave in Italy, where he was either in danger of denial of Chriſt, or loſs of life, he was divorced from her and maried to a Gentlewoman of Roan, who fled for the Goſpel ſake. 1 Cor. 7.15. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart, a Brother or Siſter is not in bondage in ſuch a caſe, but God hath called us to peace, that is, to peace of conſcience herein, as Martyr expounds it. Now the reaſon is, becauſe ſuch a perſon totally puts away ſuch a yoke-fellow for doing his duty, or if retained it is with an intention to murder him.
4 Exhort. To be wary in choice of yoke-fellows, ſeeing the Bond of Mariage is an indiſſoluble Bond, it cannot be broken ſave for Adultery, beware how you chuſe, let Women beware how they conſent: if it were as common Bargains, that a man might be rid of them loſing his Earneſt, or if they were taken as ſome take Apprentices, upon liking, or as ſome buy Horſes to loſe ſo much, if they diſlike and return them, but this is an eternal Bond, therefore ought to be done with much deliberation, as being onelyonly once to be done. Beware then how you chuſe for Beauty, Portion. Many Women are ſoon won, for perſon, kindred, riches, becauſe he that hath her is able to deck her in fine Apparel and Jewels, never looking what ability ſuch a man hath to inſtruct her, and to bring up the Children they ſhall have in Gods fear.
And ſo much more ought we to be adviſed, becauſe Mariage is that point upon which depends in a great meaſure our eternal Eſtate, for the Eſtate it ſelf it is but for a few years, but eternal things both of our ſelves and poſterity much depend upon it.
How angry was God for his peoples matching themſelves with Idolaters, Nehem. 13.23, 24, 25, 26, 27. Ezra 9.2, 3. ſuch kinde of mariages are in danger of turning us from God, Deut, 7.3, 4.
5 To ſtabliſh the conſciences of competent Judges in granting divorces; when one of the perſons is a fornicator, it is of the light of nature that he that keeps not the conditions of a contract or bargain ſhould loſe the benefit of it, and the contract be made void; that whoredome was a juſt cauſe of divorce in Moſes time, was in reſpect of gentle husbands who would not have their wives put to death; ſuch an huſband was Joſeph to Mary: or in reſpect of ſuch husbands, who though they believed their wives were ſtrumpets, and perhaps found them ſo, yet they were not able to prove it in judgement, the proper puniſhment thereof was death, either burning, Gen. 38.24. or ſtoning, Levit. 20.10. Joh. 8.5. but now Chriſt warrants any Judge to proceed to divorce in this caſe of adultery.
But for other caſes, as for a woman againſt her husbands will to go to the banquers of ſtrangers, or without juſt cauſe to lye out all night, or to go into the Baths with men, theſe are no ſufficient grounds of divorce, though they may be grounds of ſuſpicion.
6 To reſt contented in the ſtate of marriage wherein God hath placed us, and hate putting away, Mal. 2.16. as God hates it ſo ſhould we. And ſo much more, becauſe God joyns perſons in mariage, Matth. 19.6. What God hath joyned together, let no man put aſunder. Beſides, they are one fleſh.
V. 33. Again, ye have heard that it hath been ſaid by them of old time, Thou ſhalt not forſwear thy ſelf, but ſhalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:
V. 34. But I ſay unto you, Swear not at all, neither by heaven, for it is Gods throne, nor by the earth for it is his footſtool, &c.
In the words are two propoſitions, 1 Thou ſhalt not forſwear thy ſelf, Levit. 19.12. Ye ſhall not ſwear by my name falſely.
2 Thou ſhalt perform to the Lord thine oaths, Numb, 30.2. If a man ſwear an oath to binde his ſoul with a bond, he ſhall not break his word, he ſhall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth. Out of theſe two places are the words of this text taken: in the bare words there appears no corruption, but in Chriſts anſwer the depravement appears in three particulars.
1 Thou ſhalt not forſwear thy ſelf] that is, ſwearing by the name of God, but if thou forſwears by creatures thou mayeſt.
2 For the latter, but ſhalt keep or perform thy oaths, that is, oaths made by the name of God, but to break oaths made by the creatures is no perjury.
3 They taught that raſh and needleſs ſwearing was no prophanation of the name of God, ſo that they ſwore truly.
In oppoſition to theſe corruptions Chriſt ſaith, Thou ſhalt not forſwear thy ſelf, that is, thou ſhalt perform that thou haſt ſworn to the Lord, or by the Lord that thou wilt do. Thou ſhalt perform thy oaths, as all other oaths, ſo in particular vows confirmed by an oath. Beſides to perform to the Lord thine oaths, ſignifies, that if we will ſwear, we muſt ſwear by the true God, not by idols. From this thus explained obſerve,
Obſ. Perjury is an heynous ſin before God. There's a flying rowl of curſes that goes out againſt falſe ſwearers, Zach. 5.2, 3. It's called a rowl, becauſe the Jews books were not diſtinct by leaves as we have, but one piece of parchment wrapt upon a ſtick like a map, which was called a rowl, becauſe rowled together. In this was writ their perjuries, and the puniſhments of them; it's ſaid to be flying, to ſignifie the ſwift vengeance that hangs over impenitent perſons, it hangs as it were in the ayr waiting for Gods command to fall down like an Eagle, or Hawk upon the prey. They went as ſwift in their ſins as wilde Aſſes or Dromedaries, but as the Aſs is found in her-moneths in her ſilthineſs, when ſhe is big that ſhe cannot run, men wait for her, Jer. 2.23, 24. ſo doth the rowl of judgement wait for other ſinners, in particular for perjured perſons. The length of this rowl was 20 cubits, the breadth but ten, ſignifying that it went over all Judaea, which was twice as long as broad, as Hierom obſerves: the length of it from Dan to Beerſheba was 160 miles, the breadth from Joppa to Bethlem was 46 miles. This rowl was writ on both ſides, on one ſide of it were curſes for the thief, on the other ſide curſes for the ſwearer.
Laſtly, this curſe is ſaid to remain in the midſt of his houſe, and ſhall conſume it with the timber thereof and the ſtones thereof. This was fulfill'd, Matth. 23.27, 28.24.1. in that there was not left one ſtone upon another, not onelyonly the Temple deſtroyed, but alſo every private mans houſe, Luke 19.44. ſo that they were laid even with the ground, and not one ſtone left upon another.
This ſin is condemned, Hoſ. 10.4. Levit. 19.12. Zach. 8.17.
Examples of perſons puniſh'd for falſe ſwearing, are Zedekiah, Ezek. 17.16, 17, 18, 19, 20. the Lord threatens for the oath that Zedekiah ſwore to the King of Babylon and brake, that he ſhould dye. Shimei was put to death for the oath he brake which he had ſworn to Solomon, 1 Kings 2.42, 43, 44, 45. For Saul his breach of the oath which Joſhua and Iſrael had ſworn to the Gibeonites, ſeven of his ſons were hanged in the dayes of David, 2 Sam. 21.1. to v. 10. Famous was Gods judgement on Ladiſlaus King of Poland, who, upon the Popes Counſel and diſpenſation, broke his oath which he had ſworn to Amurath the ſecond, Acts and Mon. vol. 1. p. 968.
But ſhalt perform to the Lord thine Oaths] An oath is the affirming or denying a thing, with the calling on the name of God to witneſs and avouch the truth of the thing affirmed, denied, or promiſed, that they to whom we ſwear may not doubt of the truth of our words.
1 Oaths are lawful, 1 Becauſe practiſed by God and Chriſt, Pſal. 95.11. Pſal. 110.1. Eſai 45.23. and by Saints, by Jonathan, and David, by Paul, Rom. 1.9. 2 Cor. 1.23. 2 Cor. 11.31. Gal. 1.20.
2 Oaths are of the Law of nature, Gen. 21.23, 24. Abraham and Abimelech, or at leaſt Phicol his Captain, ſwore one to another.
3 The uſeful need thereof, as to bring forth a truth, Exod. 22.10, 11. as if a man deliver a beaſt to keep and it be ſtole, then was he that had the beaſt to keep, to purge himſelf by oath, and the owner was to accept his oath. Alſo that things done privily may come to light, Numb. 5.19. ſo the Prieſt ſwore the woman ſuſpected of incontinency, to finde out whether ſhe were guilty or innocent.
Properties in ſwearing.
1 Look to a right call, as 1 When the Magiſtrate miniſters an oath, to anſwer ſo far as Law requires, otherwiſe non tencor reſpondere, I am not bound to anſwer. 2 When the glory of God and edification of his Church requires it, 2 Cor. 1.23. Rom. 1.9. 3 For mutual peace and ending of controverſies. So Jacob and Laban ſwore one to another, Gen. 31.53. ſo an oath is an end of ſtrife, Heb. 6.17.
2 Look to the thing thou ſwears, that it be lawfull, not as Herod's oath to Herodias, nor as the forty, who ſwore to kill Paul. Such an oath was Davids, who ſwore to deſtroy all Nabals houſe, 1 Sam. 25.22.
3 Look the thing thou ſwears be in thine own power. It's raſhneſs to ſwear a thing that is not in thine own power, as to ſwear to live a ſingle life, &c.
4 Swear in truth, judgement and righteouſneſs. 1 In truth, which excludes all equivocation. Words are to be taken as men commonly underſtand them. An oath is called foreign, an hedge, to ſignifie that when a man ſwears he ſets an hedge about himſelf, which he may not break; this excludes all ſwearing of things we know not, and things we doubt of. 2 In judgement, not lightly or raſhly, but weighing all due circumſtances. Eleazar, Gen. 24.3. when Abram ſwears him not to take a wife of the Canaanites for his ſon, but of his kindred; before Eleazar ſwears, he propoſes his exceptions, viz. What if the woman will not go with me? To which Abram anſwers, If the woman be not willing to follow thee, thou ſhalt be free from this mine oath. Eccleſ. 5.2. Be not raſh with thy mouth and let not thy heart be haſty to utter any thing before God. None muſt ſwear ſave thoſe who have judgement to diſcern what an oath is. 3 In righteouſneſs; That you affirm nothing againſt conſcience, neither for malice, nor favour, as thoſe ſons of Belial did againſt Naboth, who ſwore, That Naboth blaſphemed God and the King, 1 Kin. 21.13. This property of an oath excludes all ſwearing for cuſtome, as many do that are choſen into publick places, and are choſen into ſocieties, who ſwear not becauſe they mean to keep their oaths, but becauſe elſe they cannot be enfranchiſed.
2 Reprehenſion of prophane ſwearing, which is ſo common: for this ſin God hath a controverſie, Hoſ. 4.1. Lands mourn, Jer. 23.10. and the ſinner becomes guilty, Exo. 20.
Obj. But if I ſwear not, men will not believe me?
Anſw. They would ſooner believe thee if thou forbareſt it. He that hears thee make no conſcience of ſwearing, will think thou makes no conſcience of lying; beſides better be ſuſpected of men, then condemned of God and conſcience.
Obj. It's a fooliſh cuſtome I have got.
Anſw. This renders thee ſo much more guilty, that it's thy cuſtome; if a thief or murtherer at the bar ſhould plead that it hath been his cuſtome to thieve and murther, would not this make him more guilty?
Object. My oaths are ſmall, as, by my faith and troth.
Anſw. Conſider againſt what a great majeſty they are committed. If any ſin ſeem little, let hell fire ſeem great. To uſe faith and truth cannot be leſs then an appearance of evill.
Object. But I ſwear by a good thing.
Anſw. The goodneſs of a good thing aggravates the offence when abuſed, as we ſee in wine and beer, when abuſed to drunkenneſs.
Object. All the country uſe it.
Anſw. We muſt not follow a multitude to do evil. Exod. 23.2. the ſinfulneſs of multitudes brought the flood upon the old World, and fire upon Sodome.