FOOTNOTES[9]Gen. ii. 18; Prov. xviii. 22.[10]Matt. v. 31, 32; xix. 9; John viii. 4, 5, of adultery; Heb. xiii. 4; Prov. xxii. 14; Hos. iv. 2, 3; Prov. ii. 17; 1 Cor. vi. 15, 19; Mal. ii. 15; Prov. vi. 32, 35; Deut. xxiii. 2; Lev. xxi. 9; xviii. 28; Numb. xxv. 9; Jer. v. 7-9; Gen. vi. 2, 3, &c.; xxxiv. 27; 2 Sam. xiii. 22; xii. 10; Judg. xx. 10; Jer. xxiii. 14.[11]Rev. xxi. 8; Prov. v. 20; 2 Pet. ii. 10, 12, 14. Read before part i. ch. 8. part 5. tit. 1.[12]1 Kings xi. 4; Acts v. 2. Eve is Adam's tempter. Job ii. 9.[13]1 Thess. v. 11; Heb. xii. 15; Col. ii. 19; Eph. iv. 16; 1 Cor. vii. 5; Gen. xxxv. 2, 4; Lev. xix. 17.[14]Numb. xvi. 27, 32.[15]Gen. ii. 18.[16]Matt. xxvii. 19.[17]Rom. xiii. 13, 14; Eph. v. 29, 31; Gen. ii. 18.[18]Gen. xxvii. 14.[19]Eph. v. 29, 31; Job xix. 17; ii. 9.[20]See Prov. xxxi; Gen. xxxi. 40; Tit. ii. 5; 1 Tim. v. 14; v. 8.[21]1 Sam. xxv. 25; Matt. xviii. 16; i. 19; 2 Sam. xi. 7; Prov. xxxi. 28; Eccl. vii. 3; Prov. xxii. 1; 2 Sam. vi. 20; Gen. ix. 22, 25.[22]1 Tim. ii. 4, 12; Gen. xviii. 19; xxxv. 2, &c.; Josh. xxiv. 14; Psal. ci.[23]Heb. xiii. 2; Gen. xviii. 6, &c.; Rom. xii. 13; 2 Cor. ix. 6; Luke xvi. 9; 1 Tim. iii. 2; v. 10; Prov. xi. 20, 28; Neh. viii. 1; Prov. xix. 17; Job xxix. 13; xxxi. 20; Acts xx. 35.
[9]Gen. ii. 18; Prov. xviii. 22.
[10]Matt. v. 31, 32; xix. 9; John viii. 4, 5, of adultery; Heb. xiii. 4; Prov. xxii. 14; Hos. iv. 2, 3; Prov. ii. 17; 1 Cor. vi. 15, 19; Mal. ii. 15; Prov. vi. 32, 35; Deut. xxiii. 2; Lev. xxi. 9; xviii. 28; Numb. xxv. 9; Jer. v. 7-9; Gen. vi. 2, 3, &c.; xxxiv. 27; 2 Sam. xiii. 22; xii. 10; Judg. xx. 10; Jer. xxiii. 14.
[11]Rev. xxi. 8; Prov. v. 20; 2 Pet. ii. 10, 12, 14. Read before part i. ch. 8. part 5. tit. 1.
[12]1 Kings xi. 4; Acts v. 2. Eve is Adam's tempter. Job ii. 9.
[13]1 Thess. v. 11; Heb. xii. 15; Col. ii. 19; Eph. iv. 16; 1 Cor. vii. 5; Gen. xxxv. 2, 4; Lev. xix. 17.
[14]Numb. xvi. 27, 32.
[15]Gen. ii. 18.
[16]Matt. xxvii. 19.
[17]Rom. xiii. 13, 14; Eph. v. 29, 31; Gen. ii. 18.
[18]Gen. xxvii. 14.
[19]Eph. v. 29, 31; Job xix. 17; ii. 9.
[20]See Prov. xxxi; Gen. xxxi. 40; Tit. ii. 5; 1 Tim. v. 14; v. 8.
[21]1 Sam. xxv. 25; Matt. xviii. 16; i. 19; 2 Sam. xi. 7; Prov. xxxi. 28; Eccl. vii. 3; Prov. xxii. 1; 2 Sam. vi. 20; Gen. ix. 22, 25.
[22]1 Tim. ii. 4, 12; Gen. xviii. 19; xxxv. 2, &c.; Josh. xxiv. 14; Psal. ci.
[23]Heb. xiii. 2; Gen. xviii. 6, &c.; Rom. xii. 13; 2 Cor. ix. 6; Luke xvi. 9; 1 Tim. iii. 2; v. 10; Prov. xi. 20, 28; Neh. viii. 1; Prov. xix. 17; Job xxix. 13; xxxi. 20; Acts xx. 35.
Hethat will expect duty or comfort from his wife, must be faithful in doing the duty of a husband. The failing of yourselves in your own duty, may cause the failing of another to you, or at least will some other way as much afflict you, and will be bitterer to you in the end, than if a hundred failed of their duty to you. A good husband will either make a good wife, or easily and profitably endure a bad one. I shall therefore give you directions for your own part of duty, as that which your happiness is most concerned in.
Direct.I. The husband must undertake the principal part of the government of the whole family, even of the wife herself. And therefore, 1. He must labour to be fit and able for that government which he undertaketh. This ability consisteth, 1. In holiness and spiritual wisdom, that he may be acquainted with the end to which he is to conduct them, andthe rule by which he is to guide them, and the principal works which they are to do. An ungodly, irreligious man is both a stranger and an enemy to the chiefest part of family government. 2. His ability consisteth in a due acquaintance with the works of his calling, and the labours in which his servants are to be employed. For he that is utterly unacquainted with their business, will be very unfit to govern them in it: unless he commit that part of their government to his wife, or a steward that is acquainted with it. 3. And he must be acquainted both with the common temper and infirmities of mankind, that he may know how much is to be borne with, and also with the particular temper, and faults, and virtues of those whom he is to govern. 4. And he must have prudence, to direct himself in all his carriage to them; and justice, to deal with every one as they deserve: and love, to do them all the good he can, for soul and body. II. And being thus able, he must make it his daily work, and especially be sure that he govern himself well, that his example may be part of his government of others.
Direct.II. The husband must so unite authority and love, that neither of them may be omitted or concealed, but both be exercised and maintained. Love must not be exercised so imprudently as to destroy the exercise of authority; and authority must not be exercised over a wife so magisterially and imperiously, as to destroy the exercise of love. As your love must be a governing love, so your commands must all be loving commands. Lose not your authority; for that will but disable you from doing the office of a husband to your wife, or of a master to your servants. Yet must it be maintained by no means inconsistent with conjugal love; and therefore not by fierceness or cruelty, by threatenings or stripes (unless by distraction or loss of reason, they cease to be uncapable of the carriage otherwise due to a wife). There are many cases of equality in which authority is not to be exercised; but there is no case of inequality or unworthiness so great, in which conjugal love is not to be exercised; and therefore nothing must exclude it.
Direct.III. It is the duty of husbands to preserve the authority of their wives, over the children and servants of the family. For they are joint governors with them over all the inferiors. And the infirmities of women are apt many times to expose them to contempt: so that servants and children will be apt to slight them, and disobey them, if the husband interpose not to preserve their honour and authority. Yet this must be done with such cautions as these: 1. Justify not any error, vice, or weakness of your wives. They may be concealed and excused as far as may be, but never owned or defended. 2. Urge not obedience to any unlawful command of theirs. No one hath authority to contradict the law of God, or disoblige any from his government. You will but diminish your own authority with persons of any understanding, if you justify any thing that is against God's authority. But if the thing commanded be lawful, though it may have some inconveniences, you must rebuke the disobedience of inferiors, and not suffer them to slight the commands of your wives, nor to set their own reason and wills against them, and say, We will not do it. How can they help you in government, if you suffer them to be disobeyed?
Direct.IV. Also you must preserve the honour as well as the authority of your wives. If they have any dishonourable infirmities, they are not to be mentioned by children and servants. As in the natural body we cover most carefully the most dishonourable parts, (for our comely parts have no need,) 1 Cor. xii. 23, 24, so must it be here. Children or servants must not be suffered to carry themselves contemptuously or rudely towards them, nor to despise them, or speak unmannerly, proud, or disdainful words to them. The husband must vindicate them from all such injury and contempt.
Direct.V. The husband is to excel the wife in knowledge, and be her teacher in the matters that belong to her salvation. He must instruct her in the word of God, and direct her in particular duties, and help her to subdue her own corruptions, and labour to confirm her against temptations; if she doubt of any thing that he can resolve her in, she is to ask his resolution, and he to open to her at home the things which she understood not in the congregation, 1 Cor. xiv. 35. But if the husband be indeed an ignorant sot, or have made himself unable to instruct his wife, she is not bound to ask him in vain, to teach her that which he understandeth not himself. Those husbands that despise the word of God, and live in wilful ignorance, do not only despise their own souls, but their families also; and making themselves unable for their duties, they are usually themselves despised by their inferiors: for God hath told such in his message to Eli, 1 Sam. ii. 30, "Them that honour me, I will honour; and they that despise me, shall be lightly esteemed."
Direct.VI. The husband must be the principal teacher of the family. He must instruct them, and examine them, and rule them about the matters of God, as well as his own service, and see that the Lord's day and worship be observed by all that are within his gates. And therefore he must labour for such understanding and ability as is necessary hereunto. And if he be unable or negligent, it is his sin, and will be his shame. If the wife be wiser and abler, and it be cast upon her, it is his dishonour; but if neither of them do it, the sin, and shame, and suffering, will be common to them both.
Direct.VII. The husband is to be the mouth of the family, in their daily conjunct prayers unto God. Therefore he must be able to pray, and also have a praying heart. He must be as it were the priest of the household; and therefore should be the most holy, that he may be fit to stand between them and God, and to offer up their prayers to him. If this be cast on the wife, it will be his dishonour.
Direct.VIII. The husband is to be the chief provider for the family (ordinarily). It is supposed that he is most able for mind and body, and is the chief disposer of the estate. Therefore he must be specially careful, that wife and children want nothing that is fit for them, so far as he can procure it.
Direct.IX. The husband must be strongest in family patience; bearing with the weakness and passions of the wife; not so as to make light of any sin against God, but so as not to make a great matter of any frailty as against himself, and so as to preserve the love and peace which is to be as the natural temper of their relation.
Direct.X. The manner of all these duties must also be carefully regarded. As, 1. That they be done in prudence, and not with folly, rashness, or inconsiderateness. 2. That all be done in conjugal love and tenderness, as over one that is tender, and the weaker vessel; and that he do not teach, or command, or reprove a wife, in the same imperious manner as a child or servant. 3. That due familiarity be maintained, and that he keep not at a distance and strangeness from his wife. 4. That love be confident, without base suspicions, and causeless jealousies. 5. That all be done in gentleness, and not in passion, roughness, and sourness. 6. That there be no unjust and causeless concealment of secrets, which shouldbe common to them both. 7. That there be no foolish opening of such secrets to her as may become her snare, and she is not able to bear or keep. 8. That none of their own matters, which should be kept secret, be made known to others. His teaching and reproving her, should be for the most part secret. 9. That he be constant, and not weary of his love or duty. This briefly of the manner.
Thewife that expecteth comfort in a husband, must make conscience of all her own duty to her husband: for though it be his duty to be kind and faithful to her, though she prove unkind and froward, yet, 1. Men are frail, and apt to fail in such difficult duties as well as women. 2. And it is so ordered by God, that comfort and duty shall go together, and you shall miss of comfort, if you cast off duty.
Direct.I. Be specially loving to your husbands: your natures give you the advantage in this; and love feedeth love. This is your special requital for all the troubles that your infirmities put them to.
Direct.II. Live in a voluntary subjection and obedience to them. If their softness or yieldingness cause them to relinquish their authority; and for peace they are fain to let you have your wills; yet remember that it is God that hath appointed them to be your heads and governors. If they are so silly as to be unable, you should not have chosen such to rule you as are unfit; but having chosen them, you must assist them with your better understanding, in a submissive, and not a ruling, masterly way. A servant that hath a foolish master, may help him without becoming master. And do not deceive yourselves by giving the bare titles of government to your husbands, when you must needs in all things have your own wills; for this is but mockery, and not obedience. To be subject and obedient, is to take the understanding and will of another to govern you, before (though not without) your own; and to make your understandings and wills to follow the conduct of his that governeth you. Self-willedness is contrary to subjection and obedience.
Direct.III. Learn of your husbands as your appointed teachers, and be not self-conceited and wise in your own eyes, but ask of them such instructions as your case requireth. 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35, "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted to them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law: and if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home." (Unless when the husband is so ignorant as to be utterly unable: which is his sin and shame. For it is vain to ask that of them which they know not.)
Direct.IV. Set yourselves seriously to amend all those faults which they reprove in you. Do not take it ill to be reproved: swell not against it, as if they did you harm or wrong: it is a very ill sign to "hate reproof," Prov. xii. 1; x. 17; xv. 10, 31, 32; xvii. 10. And what doth their government of you signify, if you will not amend the faults that are reproved in you, but continue impenitent and grudge at the reproof? It is a miserable folly to desire to be flattered and soothed by any, but especially by one that is bound to be faithful to you, and whose intimacy should make you as ready to hear of your faults from him, as to be acquainted with them yourselves; and especially when it concerneth the safety or benefit of your souls.
Direct.V. Honour your husbands according to their superiority. Behave not yourselves towards them with unreverence and contempt, in titles, speeches, or any behaviour: if the worth of their persons deserve not honour, yet their place deserveth it. Speak not of their infirmities to others behind their backs; as some twattling gossips use to do, that know not that their husbands' dishonour is their own, and that to open it causelessly to others, is their double shame. Those that silently hear you, will tell others behind your back, how foolishly and shamefully you spake to them against your husbands. If God have made your nearest friend an affliction to you, why should you complain to one that is farther off? (Unless it be to some special, prudent friend, in case of true necessity, for advice.)
Direct.VI. Live in a cheerful contentedness with your condition; and take heed of an impatient, murmuring spirit. It is a continual burden to a man to have an impatient, discontented wife. Many a poor man can easily bear his poverty himself, that yet is not able to bear his wife's impatience under it. To hear her night and day complaining, and speaking distrustfully, and see her live disquietedly, is far heavier than his poverty itself. If his wife could bear it as patiently as he, it would be but light to him. Yea, in case of suffering for righteousness' sake, the impatience of a wife is a greater trial to a man than all the suffering itself; and many a man that could easily have suffered the loss of his estate, or banishment, or imprisonment for Christ, hath betrayed his conscience, and yielded to sin, because his wife hath grieved him with impatiency, and could not bear what he could bear. Whereas a contented, cheerful wife doth help to make a man cheerful and contented in every state.
Direct.VII. In a special manner strive to subdue your passions, and to speak and do all in meekness and sobriety. The rather because that the weakness of your sex doth usually subject you more to passions than men; and it is the common cause of the husband's disquietness, and the calamity of your relation. It is the vexation and sickness of your own minds; you find not yourselves at ease within as long as you are passionate. And then it is the grief and disquietness of your husbands: and being provoked by you, they provoke you more; and so your disquietness increaseth, and your lives are made a weary burden to you. By all means therefore keep down passion, and keep a composed, patient mind.
Direct.VIII. Take heed of a proud and contentious disposition; and maintain a humble, peaceable temper. Pride will make you turbulent and unquiet with your husbands, and contentious with your neighbours: it will make you foolish and ridiculous, in striving for honour and precedency, and envying those that exceed you, or go before you. In a word, it is the devil's sin, and would make you a shame and trouble to the world. But humility is the health, the peace, and the ornament of the soul. 1 Pet. iii. 4, "A meek and quiet spirit is in the sight of God of great price." (Write those words in your bedchamber on the walls where they may be daily before your eyes.) Col. iii. 12, "Put on as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercy, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering, forbearing one another, and forgiving one another." If this be the duty of all to one another; much more of wives to husbands. 1 Pet. v. 5, "Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility;for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble." Proud women oft ruin their husbands' estates, and quietness, and their own souls.
Direct.IX. Affect not a childish gaudiness of apparel, nor a vain, or costly, or troublesome curiosity in any thing about you. Uncleanness and nastiness is a fault, but very small in comparison of this pride and curiosity. It dishonoureth your sex and selves to be so childish, as to over-mind such toyish things. If you will needs be proud, be proud of somewhat that is of worth and proper to a man: to be proud of reason, or wisdom, or learning, or goodness, is bad enough; but this is to be proud of something. But to be proud of fashions and fine clothes, of spots and nakedness, of sumptuous entertainments and neat rooms, is to be proud of your shame, and not your virtue; and of that which you are not so much as commendable for. And the cost, the time (oh precious time!) which themselves and their servants must lay out, upon their dressings, entertainments, and other curiosities, will be the shame and sorrow of their souls, whenever God shall open their eyes, and make them know what time was worth, and what greater matters they had to mind. If vain and empty persons like yourselves, commend you for your bravery or curiosity, so will not any judicious, sober person whose commendation is much worth. And yet I must here with grief take notice, that when some few that in other matters seem wise and religious, are themselves a little tainted with this childish curiosity and pride, and let fall words of disparagement against those whose dress, and dwellings, and entertainments, are not so curious as their own; this proves the greatest maintainer of this sin, and the most notable service to the devil: for then abundance will plead this for this sinful curiosity and pride, and say, I shall else be accounted base or sordid; even such and such will speak against me. Take heed, if you will needs be such yourselves, that you prate not against others that are not as vain and curious as you: for the nature of man is more prone to pride and vanity, than to humility, and the improvement of their time and cost in greater matters; and while you think that you speak but against indecency, you become the devil's preachers, and do him more service than you consider of. You may as wisely speak against people for using to eat or drink too little, when there is not one of a multitude that liveth not ordinarily in excess; and so excess will get advantage by it.
Direct.X. Be specially careful in the government of your tongues; and let your words be few, and well considered before you speak them. A double diligence is needful in this, because it is the most common miscarriage of your sex: a laxative, running tongue, is so great a dishonour to you, that I never knew a woman very full of words, but she was the pity of her friends, and the contempt of others; who behind her back will make a scorn of her, and talk of her as some crack-brained or half-witted person; yea, though your talk be good, it will be tedious and contemptible, if it be thus poured out, and be too cheap. Prov. x. 19, "In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin, but he that refraineth his lips is wise." You must answer in judgment for your "idle words," Matt. xii. 36. You will take it ill to be accounted fools, and made the derision of those that talk of you: judge by the Scripture what occasion you give them. Eccles. v. 3, 7, "A dream cometh by the multitude of business, and a fool's voice is known by a multitude of words: in the multitude of dreams, and many words, there are divers vanities." Eccles. x. 12-14, "The words of a wise man's mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself. The beginnings of the words of his mouth is foolishness; and the end of his talk is mischievous madness: a fool also is full of words." Whereas a woman that is cautelous and sparing of her words, is commonly reverenced and supposed to be wise. So that if you had no higher design in it, but merely to be well thought of, and honoured by men, you can scarcely take a surer way, than to let your words be few and weighty; though the avoiding of sin, and unquietness, should prevail with you much more.
Direct.XI. Be willing and diligent in your proper part, of the care and labour of the family. As the primary provision of maintenance belongeth most to the husband, so the secondary provision within doors belongeth specially to the wife. Read over and over the thirty-first chapter of Proverbs. Especially the care of nursing your own children, and teaching them, and watching over them when they are young; and also watching over the family at home, when your husbands are abroad, is your proper work.
May a wife give without the husband's consent.
Direct.XII. Dispose not of your husband's estate, without his knowledge and consent. You are not only to consider, whether the work be good that you lay it out upon, but what power you have to do it.Quest.But may a woman give nothing, nor lay out nothing in the house, without her husband's consent?Answ.1. If she have his general or implicit consent, it may suffice; that is, if he allow her to follow her judgment; or, if he commit such a proportion to her power, to do what she will with it. Or, if she know that, if he knew it, he would not be against it. 2. Or, if the law, or his consent, do give her any propriety in any part of his estate, or make her a joint-proprietor, she may proportionably dispose of it in a necessary case.[24]The husband is considerable, either as a proprietor, or as her governor. As a proprietor, he only may dispose of the estate, where he is the sole proprietor: but where consent or the law of the land doth make the woman joint-proprietor, she is not disabled from giving for want of a propriety. But then no law exempteth her from his government; and therefore she is not to give any thing in a way of disobedience, though it be her own: except when he forbiddeth that which is her duty, or which he hath no power to forbid. So that in case of joint-propriety she may give without him, so be it she exceed not her proportion; and also if it be in a case of duty, where he may not hinder her; as to save the lives of the poor in extreme necessity, famine, or imprisonment, or the like. 3. But if the thing be wholly her own, excepted from his propriety, and she be sole proprietor, then she need not ask his consent at all, any other way than as he is her guide, to direct her to the best way of disposing of it: which, if he forbid her instead of directing her to it, she is not thereby excusable before God, for the abusing of her trust and talents. 4. I conceive thatad aliquidas to certain absolutely necessary uses, the very relation maketh the woman as a joint-proprietor:[25]as if her husband will not allow her such food and raiment as is necessary to preserve the lives and health of herself, and all her children; she is bound to do it without or against his will, (if she can, and if it be not to a greater hurt, and the estate be his own, and he be able,) rather than let her children contract such diseases, as apparently will follow to the hazard of their lives; yea, and to save the life of anotherthat in famine is ready to perish: for she is not as a stranger to his estate. But out of these cases, if a wife shall secretly waste or give, or lay it out on bravery, or vanity, or set her wit against her husband's; and because she thinks him too strait or penurious, therefore she will dispose of it without his consent; this is thievery, disobedience, and injustice.
Quest.I. But as the case standeth with us in England, hath the wife a joint-propriety, or not?
Answ.Three ways (at least) she may have a propriety. 1. By a reserve of what was her own before; which (however some question it) may in some cases be done in their agreement at marriage. 2. By the law of the land. 3. By the husband's consent or donation. What the law of the land saith in case, I leave to the lawyers; but it seemeth to me, that his words at marriage, "With all my worldly goods I thee endow," do signify his consent to make her a joint-proprietor: and his consent is sufficient to the collation of a title to that which was his own. Unless any can prove, that law or custom doth otherwise expound the words, (as an empty formality,) and that at the contract, this was or should be known to her to be the sense. And the laws allowing the wife the third part upon death or separation, doth intimate a joint-propriety before.
Quest.II. If the husband live upon unlawful gain, as cheating, stealing, robbing by the high-way, &c. is not the wife guilty as a joint-proprietor, in retaining such ill-gotten goods, if she know it? And is she bound to accuse her husband, or to restore such goods?
Answ.Her duty is first to admonish her husband of his sin and danger, and endeavour his repentance, in the mean time disclaiming all consent and reception of the goods. And if she cannot prevail for his repentance, restitution, and reformation, she hath a double duty to perform; the one is to help them to their goods whom he hath injured and robbed (by prudent and just means); the other is to prevent his robbing of others for the time to come. But how these must be done is the great difficulty.
1. If she foresee (or may do) that either by her husband's displeasure, or by the cruel revenge of the injured party, the hurt of discovering the fraud or robbery will be greater than the good, then I think that she is not bound to discover it. But by some secret, indirect way, to help the owner to his own; if it may be done without a greater hurt.
2. To prevent his sin and other men's future suffering by him, she seemeth to me to be bound to reveal her husband's sinful purposes to the magistrate, if she can no other way prevail with him to forbear. My reasons are, because the keeping of God's law, and the law of the land, and the public order and good, and the preventing of our neighbours' hurt by robbery or fraud, and so the interest of honesty and right, is of greater importance than any duty to her husband, or preservation of her own peace, which seemeth to be against it. But then I must suppose that she liveth under a magistrate, who will take but a just revenge. For if she know the laws and magistrate to be so unjust, as to punish a fault with death, which deserveth it not, she is not to tell such a magistrate, but to preserve her neighbours' safety by some other way of intimation.
If any one think that a wife may in no case accuse a husband, to the hazard of his life or estate, let them, 1. Remember what God obliged parents to do against the lives of incorrigible children, Deut. xxi. 2. And that the honour of God, and the lives of our neighbours, should be preferred before the life of one offender, and their estates before his estate alone. 3. And that the light of reason telleth us, that a wife is to reveal a treason against the king, which is plotted by a husband; and therefore also the robbing of the king's treasury, or deceiving him in any matter of great concernment. And therefore in due proportion, the laws and common good, and our neighbours' welfare, are to be preserved by us, though against the nearest relation; only all due tenderness of the life and reputation of the husband is to be preserved, in the manner of proceedings, as far as will stand with the interest of justice, and the common good.
Quest.III. May the wife go hear sermons when the husband forbiddeth her?
Answ.There are some sermons which must not be heard; there are some sermons which may be heard, and must, when no greater matter doth divert us; and there are some sermons which must be heard, whoever shall forbid it. Those which must not be heard are such as are heretical, (ordinarily,) and such as are superfluous, and at such times when greater duties call us another way. Those which may be heard, are either occasional sermons, or such lectures as are neither of necessity to ourselves, nor yet to the owning of God and his public worship. One that liveth where there are daily or hourly sermons, may hear them as oft as suiteth with their condition, and their other duties; but in this case, the command of a husband, with the inconveniences that will follow disobeying him, may make it a duty to forbear. But that we do sometimes publicly own God's worship and church ordinances, and receive ministerial teaching for our edification, is of double necessity; that we deny not God, and that we betray not, or desert not, our own souls. And this is especially necessary (ordinarily) on the Lord's days, which are appointed for these necessary uses. And here the husband hath no power to forbid the wife, nor should she (formally) obey his prohibition. But yet as affirmatives bind notad semper, and no duty is a duty at every season; so it is possible that on the Lord's day it may extraordinarily become a duty to forbear sermons or sacraments, or other public worship. And when any greater duty calleth us away; as to quench a fire; and to save men's lives; and to save our country from an enemy in the time of war; and to save our own lives, (if we knew the assembly would be assaulted,) or to preserve our liberty for greater service. Christ set us to learn the meaning of this lesson, I will have mercy and not sacrifice. In such a case also a mischief may be avoided, even from a husband, by the omission of a duty at that time, (when it would be no duty,) for this is but a transposition of it. But this is but an act of prudent self-preservation, and not an act of formal obedience.
Quest.IV. If a woman have a husband so incorrigible in vice, as that by long trial she findeth that speaking against it maketh him worse, and causeth him to abuse her, is she bound to continue her dissuasion, or to forbear?
Answ.That is not here a duty which is not a means to do some good; and that is no means which we know beforehand is like, if not certain, to do no good, or to do more harm. We must not by weariness, laziness, or censoriousness, take a case to be desperate, which is not; nor must we so easily desist with so near a relation, as with a stranger or a neighbour. But yet Christ's indulgence of not exposing ourselves to be torn by dogs, and his word trodden in the dirt by swine, doth extend to relations as well as others. But then you must observe that she that is justly discouraged from sharp reproofs, may yet have hope that gentle and humble persuasionsmay succeed. And she that is discouraged from open, or frequent, or plain reproofs; may yet have hope that secret, or more seldom, or more distant and general admonitions may not be lost. And she that is discouraged from one way of doing him good, may yet have many other ways (as to set some minister whom he reverenceth to speak to him; to put some suitable book into his hand, &c.) And she that is discouraged at the present, ought not totally to despair, but may make some more attempts hereafter; either in some sickness, or time of mortality, or danger, or affliction, or when possibly time and consideration may have better prepared him to hear. And in the mean time she is to continue all conjugal affection and duty, and a convincing, winning course of life; which may prove the most effectual reproof.
Quest.V. What should a woman do in controverted cases of religion, when her judgment and her husband's differ?
Answ.1. Some make a controversy of that which with all good christians or sober persons should be past controversy; and some controversies are indeed of real, if not insuperable difficulty. 2. Some controversies are about important, necessary things, and some about things of lesser moment. 3. Some are about mere opinion, or other men's practice, and some about our own practice.
(1.) In all differences of judgment the wife must exercise such self-suspicion, and modesty, and submission, as may signify her due sense, both of the weakness of her sex, and of her subjection to her husband. (2.) In things indifferent she must in practice obey her husband; unless when any superior powers do forbid it, and that in cases where their authority is greater. (3.) She may modestly give her reasons of dissent. (4.) She must not turn it to an unpeaceable quarrel, or matter of disaffection, or pretend any differences against her conjugal duties. (5.) In dark and difficult cases she should not be peremptory, and self-conceited, nor importunate; but if she have faith (that is, some more knowledge than he) have it to herself, in quietness and silence; and seek further information lest she err. (6.) She must speak no untruth, nor commit any known sin, in obedience to her husband's judgment. (7.) When she strongly suspecteth it to be sin, she must not do it merely in obedience to him, but seek for better satisfaction. For she is sure that he hath no power to force her to sin; and therefore hath no more assurance of his power in that point than she hath of the lawfulness of the thing. (8.) But if she prove to be in the error, she will sin on either side, till she recover. (9.) If a husband be in dangerous error, she must wisely, but unweariedly, seek his reformation, by herself or others.
Quest.I. Is it lawful for husband and wife to be long absent from each other? and how long, and in what cases?
Answ.It is lawful to be absent either in the case of prayer, which Paul mentioneth, or in case of the needful affairs of their estates, so long as may be no danger to either of them as to mental or corporal incontinency, nor to any other hurt, which will be greater than the benefits of their absence, nor cause them to be guilty of the neglect of any real duty. Therefore the cases of several persons do much differ according to the different tempers of their minds, and bodies, and affairs. He that hath a wife of a chaste, contented, prudent temper, may stay many months or years in some cases, when, all things considered, it tendeth to more good than hurt: as lawyers by their callings are often necessitated to follow their callings at terms and assizes; and merchants may he some years absent in some weighty cases. But if you ask, whether the getting of money be a sufficient cause? I answer, that it is sufficient to those whose families must be so maintained, and their wives are easily continent, and so the good of their gain is greater than any loss or danger that cometh by it. But when covetousness puts them upon it needlessly, and their wives cannot bear it, or in any case when the hurt that is like to follow is greater than the good, it is unlawful.
Quest.II. May husband and wife be separated by the bare command of princes, if they make a law that in certain cases they shall part: as suppose it to ministers, judges, or soldiers?
Answ.You must distinguish between the bare command or law, and the reasons and ends of that command: and so between a lawful command and an unlawful. In some cases a prince may justly command a separation for a time, or such as is like to prove for perpetuity, and in some cases he may not. If a king command a separation without sufficient cause, so that you have no motive but his authority, and the question is, whether formally you are bound to obedience: I answer, No; because what God hath joined no man hath power to put asunder. Nor can either prince, pope, or prelate dispense with your marriage covenant. In such a case it is as a private act, because God hath given them no authority for it; and therefore their commands or laws are nullities: only if a prince say, he that will be a judge or a justice shall part with his wife, it is lawful to leave the office, and so obey the law. But if he say to all ministers of the gospel, you shall forsake your wives or your ministry, they should do neither, because they are divinely obliged to both, and he hath no power to forbid them, or to dispense with that obligation.
But it may fall out, that the ends of the command may be so great as to make it lawful, and then it must be obeyed both formally for the authority of the prince, and finally for the reasons of the thing. As if the safety of the commonwealth should require, that married persons be soldiers, and that they go far off; yea, though there be no likelihood of returning to their families, and withal they cannot take their wives with them, without detriment or danger to their service; in this case men must obey the magistrate, and are called by God to forsake their wives, as if it were by death. Nor is it any violation of their marriage covenant, because that was intended or meant to suppose the exception of any such call of God, which cannot be resisted when it will make a separation.
Quest.III. May ministers leave their wives to go abroad to preach the gospel?
Answ.If they can neither do God's work as well at home, nor yet take their wives with them, nor be excused from doing that part of service, by other men's doing it who have no such impediment; they may and must leave their wives to do it. In this case, the interest of the church, and of the souls of many, must overrule the interest of wife and family. Those pastors who have fixed stations, must neither leave flock nor family without necessity, or a clear call from God. But in several cases a preacher may be necessitated to go abroad; as in case of persecution at home, or of some necessity of foreign or remote parts, which cannot be otherwise supplied; or when some door is opened for the conversion of infidels, heretics, or idolaters, and none else so fit to do that work, or none that will. In any such case, when the cause of God in any part of the worldconsideratis considerandisdoth require his help, a ministermust leave wife and family, yea, and a particular flock, to do it. For our obligations are greatest to the catholic church, and public good; and the greatest good must be preferred. If a king command a subject to be an ambassador in the remotest part of the world, and the public good withal requireth it, if wife and children cannot be taken with him, they must be left behind, and he must go. So must a consecrated minister of Christ for the service of the church refuse all entanglements, which would more hinder his work than the contrary benefits will countervail. And this exception also was supposed in the marriage contract, that family interests and comforts must give way to the public interest, and to God's disposals.
And therefore it is, that ministers should not rashly venture upon marriage, nor any woman that is wise venture to marry a minister, till she is first well prepared for such accidents as may separate them for a shorter or a longer time.
Quest.IV. May one leave a wife to save his life, in case of personal persecution or danger?
Answ.Yes, if she cannot be taken with him; for the means which are for the helps of life, do suppose the preservation of life itself: if he live, he may further serve God, and possibly return to his wife and family; but if he die, he is removed from them all.
Quest.V. May husband and wife part by mutual consent, if they find it be for the good of both?
Answ.If you speak not of dissolving the bond of their relations, but withdrawing as to cohabitation, I answer, 1. It is not to be done upon passions and discontents, to feed and gratify each other's vicious distempers or interest; for then both the consent and the separation are their sins: but if really such an uncurable unsuitableness be between them, as that their lives must needs be miserable by their cohabitation, I know not but they may live asunder; so be it, that (after all other means used in vain) they do it by deliberate, free consent. But if one of them should by craft or cruelty constrain the other to consent, it is unlawful to the constrainer. Nor must impatience make either of them ungroundedly despair of the cure of any unsuitableness which is really curable. But many sad instances might be given, in which cohabitation may be a constant calamity to both, and distance may be their relief, and further them both in God's service, and in their corporal concernments. Yet I say not that this is no sin; for their unsuitableness is their sin: and God still obligeth them to lay down that sin which maketh them unsuitable; and therefore doth not allow them to live asunder, it being still their duty to live together in love and peace: and saying they cannot, freeth them not from the duty. But yet that moral impotency may make such a separation as aforesaid, to be a lesser sin than their unpeaceable cohabitation.
Quest.VI. May not the relation itself be dissolved by mutual, free consent, so that they may marry others?
Answ.As to the relation, they will still be related as those that did covenant to live in conjugal society, and are still allowed it and obliged to it, if the impediments were but removed; and it is but the exercise which is hindered. And they may not consent to marry others: 1. Because the contracted relation was for life, Rom. vii. 2, and God's law accordingly obligeth them. Marriagespro tempore, dissoluble by consent, are not of God's institution, but contrary to it. 2. They know not but their impediments of cohabitation may be removed. 3. If he that marrieth an innocent divorced woman commit adultery, by parity of reason (with advantage) it will be so here. If you say, what if either of them cannot contain? I answer, he that will not take heed before, must be patient afterwards, and not make advantage of his own folly, to the fulfilling of his lusts. If he will do what he ought to do in the use of all means, he may live chastely. And, 4. The public interest must overrule the private, and that which would be unjust in private respects, may for public good become a duty: it seemeth unjust here with us, that the innocent country should repay every man his money, who between sun and sun is robbed on the road; and yet because it will engage the country to watchfulness, it is just, as for the common good: and he that consenteth to be a member of a commonwealth, doth thereby consent to submit his own right to the common interest. So here, if all should have leave to marry others when they consent to part, it would bring utter confusion, and it would encourage wicked men to abuse their wives, till they forced them to consent. Therefore some must bear the trouble which their folly hath brought on themselves, rather than the common order should be confounded.
Quest.VII. Doth adultery dissolve the bond of marriage, or not? Amesius saith it doth: Mr. Whateley having said so, afterward recanted it by the persuasion of other divines.
Answ.The difference is only about the name, and not about the matter itself. The reason which moved Dr. Ames is, because the injured person is free; therefore not bound: therefore the bond is dissolved. The reason which Mr. Whateley could not answer is, because it is not fornication, but lawful, if they continue their conjugal familiarity after adultery: therefore that bond is not dissolved. In all which it is easy to perceive, that one of them taketh the wordvinculumor bond in one sense, that is, "for their covenant obligation to continue their relation and mutual duties." And the other taketh it in another sense, that is, "for the relation itself as by it they are allowed conjugal familiarity, if the injured person will continue it." The firstvinculumor bond is dissolved, the second is not. In the matter we are agreed, that the injured man may put away an adulterous wife (in a regular way) if he please; but withal that he may continue the relation if he please. So that his continued consent shall suffice to continue it a lawful relation and exercise; and his will, on the contrary, shall suffice to dissolve the relation, and disoblige him. (Saving the public order.)
Quest.VIII. But is not the injured party at all obliged to separate, but left free?
Answ.Considering the thing simply in itself, he is wholly free to do as he please. But for all that accidents or circumstances may make it one man's duty to divorce, and another's duty to continue the relation; according as it is like to do more good or hurt. Sometimes it may be a duty to expose the sin to public shame, for the prevention of it in others; and also to deliver oneself from a calamity. And sometimes there may be so great repentance, and hope of better effects by forgiving, that it may be a duty to forgive: and prudence must lay one thing with another, to discern on which side the duty lieth.
Quest.IX. Is it only the privilege of the man, that he may put away an adulterous wife? or also of the woman, to depart from an adulterous husband? The reason of the doubt is, because Christ mentioneth the man's power only, Matt. v. and xix.
Answ.1. The reason why Christ speaketh only of the man's case is, because he was occasioned only to restrain the vicious custom of men's causeless putting away their wives; having no occasion to restrain women from leaving their husbands. Men having the rule did abuse it to the woman's injury; whichChrist forbiddeth. And as it is an act of power, it concerneth the man alone; but as it is an act of liberty, it seemeth to me to be supposed, that the woman hath the same freedom; seeing the covenant is violated to her wrong. And the apostle in 1 Cor. vii. doth make the case of the man and of the woman to be equal in the point of infidelity and desertion. I confess that it is unsafe extending the sense of Scripture beyond the importance of the words upon pretence of a parity of reason (as many of the perjured do by Lev. xxx. in case of vows); lest man's deceitful wit should make a law to itself as divine, upon pretence of interpreting God's laws: but yet when the plain text doth speak but of one case, (that is, of men's putting away their wives,) he that will thence gather an exclusion of the woman's liberty, doth seem by addition to be the corrupter of the law. And where the context plainly showeth a parity of reason, and that reason is made the ground of the determination in the text, there it is safe to expound the law extensively accordingly. Surely the covenant of marriage hath its conditions on both parts: and some of those conditions are necessary to the very being of the obligations, though others are but needful to the well-being of the parties in that state. And therefore though putting away be only the part of the husband, as being the ruler, and usually the owner of the habitation, yet departing may be the liberty of the wife. And I know no reason to blame those countries, whose laws allow the wife to sue out a divorce, as well as the husband.
Quest.X. May the husband put away the wife without the magistrate, or the wife depart from the husband, without a public legal divorce or license?
Answ.Where the laws of the land do take care for the prevention of injuries, and make any determination in the case, (not contrary to the law of God,) there it is a christian's duty to obey those laws: therefore if you live under a law which forbiddeth any putting away or departing, without public sentence or allowance, you may not do it privately upon your own will. For the civil governors are to provide against the private injuries of any of the subjects. And if persons might put away or depart at pleasure, it would introduce both injury and much weakness into the world. But where the laws of men do leave persons to their liberty in this case, they need then to look no further than to the laws of God alone. But usually the sentence of the civil power is necessary only in case of appeal, or complaint of the party injured; and a separation may be made without such a public divorce, so that each party may make use of the magistrate to right themselves if wronged. As, if the adultery be not openly known, and the injuring party desire rather to be put away privily than publicly, (as Joseph purposed to do by Mary,) I see not but it is lawful so to do, in case that the law, or the necessity of making the offender an example, require not the contrary, nor scandal or other accidents forbid it not. See Grotius's learned notes on Matt. v. 31, 32, and on Matt. xix. and 1 Cor. vii. about these questions.
Quest.XI. Is not the case of sodomy or buggery a ground for warrantable divorce as well as adultery?
Answ.Yes, and seemeth to be included in the very word itself in the text, Matt. v. 31, 32, which signifieth uncleanness; or at least is fully implied in the reason of it. See Grotius ibid. also of this.
Quest.XII. What if both parties commit adultery? may either of them put away the other, or depart; or rather must they forgive each other?
Answ.If they do it both at once, they do both forfeit the liberty of seeking any compensation for the injury; because the injury is equal (however some would give the advantage to the man): but if one commit adultery first, and the other after; then either the last offender knew of the first, or not. If not, then it seemeth all one as if it had been done at once. But if yea, then they did it either on a supposition of the dissolution of the matrimonial obligation, as being loosed from the first adulterer, or else upon a purpose of continuing in the first relation: in the latter case, it is still all one as if it had been done by them at once, and it is a forfeiture of any satisfaction: but in the former case, though the last adulterer did sin, yet being before set at liberty, it doth not renew the matrimonial obligation: but yet, if the first offender desire the continuance of it, and the return of the first injured party; shame and conscience of their own sin, will much rebuke them, if they plead that injury for continuance of the separation.
Quest.XIII. But what if one do purposely commit adultery, to be separated from the other?
Answ.It is in the other's power and choice, whether to be divorced and depart, or not, as they find the good or evil consequents preponderate.
Quest.XIV. Doth not infidelity dissolve the relation or obligation; seeing there is no communion between light and darkness, a believer and an infidel?
Answ.It maketh it unlawful for a believer to marry an infidel (except in case of true necessity); because they can have no communion in religion. But it nullifieth not a marriage already made, nor maketh it lawful to depart or divorce; because they may have mere conjugal communion still. As the apostle purposely determineth the case, in 1 Cor. vii.
Quest.XV. Doth not the desertion of one party disoblige the other?
Answ.1. It must be considered what is true desertion. 2. Whether it be a desertion of the relation itself for continuance, or only a temporary desertion of cohabitation, or congress. 3. What the temper and state of the deserted party is. 1. It is sometimes easy, and sometimes hard to discern which is the deserting party. If the wife go away from the husband unwarrantably, though she require him to follow her, and say that she doth not desert him, yet it may be taken for a desertion, because it is the man who is to rule and choose the habitation. But if the man go away, and the woman refuse to follow him, it is not he that is therefore the deserter.
Quest.But what if the man have not sufficient cause to go away, and the woman hath great and urgent reasons not to go? As suppose that the man will go away in hatred of an able preacher, and good company, and the woman if she follow him, must leave all those helps, and go among ignorant, profane, heretical persons, or infidels; which is the deserter then?
Answ.If she be one that is either like to do good to the infidels, heretics, or bad persons whom they must converse with, she may suppose that God calleth her to receive good by doing good; or if she be a confirmed, well-settled christian, and not very like, either by infection, or by want of helps, to be unsettled and miscarry, it seemeth to me the safest way to follow her husband. She must lose indeed God's public ordinances by following him: but it is not imputable to her, as being out of her choice; and she must lose the benefits and neglect the duties of the conjugal ordinance, if she do not follow him. But if she be a person under such weaknesses, as make her removal apparently dangerous as to her perseverance and salvation, and her husband will by no means be prevailed with to change his mind, the case then is very difficult, what is her duty, and who is the deserter. Nay, if he did but lead her into acountry where her life were like to be taken away, (as under the Spanish Inquisition,) unless her suffering were like to be as serviceable to Christ as her life. Indeed these cases are so difficult, that I will not decide them; the inconveniencies (or mischiefs rather) are great which way soever she take: but I most incline to judge as followeth: viz. It is considerable first, what marriage obligeth her to, simply of its own nature; and what it may do next, by any superadded contract, or by the law or custom of the land, or any other accident. As to the first, it seemeth to me, that every one's obligation is so much first to God, and then to their own souls and lives; that marriage as such, which is for mutual help, as a means to higher ends, doth not oblige her to forsake all the communion of saints, and the place or country where God is lawfully worshipped, and to lose all the helps of public worship, and to expose her soul both to spiritual famine and infection, to the apparent hazard of her salvation (and perhaps bring her children into the same misery); nor hath God given her husband any power to do her so much wrong, nor is the marriage covenant to be interpreted to intend it. But what any human law or contract, or other accident which is of greater public consequence, may do more than marriage of itself, is a distinct case which must have a particular discussion.
Quest.But what if the husband would only have her follow him, to the forsaking of her estate, and undoing herself and children in the world (as in the case of Galeacius Carracciolus, Marquis of Vicum); yea, and if it were without just cause?
Answ.If it be for greater spiritual gain, (as in his case,) she is bound to follow him; but if it be apparently foolish, to the undoing of her and her children without any cause, I see not that marriage simply obligeth a woman so to follow a fool in beggary, or out of a calling, or to her ruin. But if it be at all a controvertible case, whether the cause be just or not, then the husband being governor must be judge. The laws of the land are supposed to be just, which allow a woman by trustees to secure some part of her former estate from her husband's disposal; much more may she beforehand secure herself and children from being ruined by his wilful folly: but she can by no contract except herself from his true government.
Yet still she must consider, whether she can live continently in his absence; otherwise the greatest sufferings must be endured, to avoid incontinency.
2. Moreover, in all these cases, a temporary removal may be further followed, than a perpetual transmigration, because it hath fewer evil consequents.
And if either party renounce the relation itself, it is a fuller desertion, and clearer discharge of the other party, than a mere removal is.
Quest.XVI. What if a man or wife know that the other in hatred doth really intend by poison, or other murder, to take away their life? May they not depart?
Answ.They may not do it upon a groundless or rash surmise; nor upon a danger which by other lawful means may be avoided (as by vigilancy, or the magistrate, or especially by love and duty). But in plain danger, which is not otherwise like to be avoided, I doubt not, but it may be done, and ought. For it is a duty to preserve our own lives as well as our neighbours'. And when marriage is contracted for mutual help, it is naturally implied, that they shall have no power to deprive one another of life (however some barbarous nations have given men power of the lives of their wives). And killing is the grossest kind of desertion, and a greater injury and violation of the marriage covenant than adultery; and may be prevented by avoiding the murderer's presence, if that way be necessary. None of the ends of marriage can be attained, where the hatred is so great.
Quest.XVII. If there be but a fixed hatred of each other, is it inconsistent with the ends of marriage? And is parting lawful in such a case?
Answ.The injuring party is bound to love, and not to separate; and can have no liberty by his or her sin. And to say, I cannot love, or my wife or husband is not amiable, is no sufficient excuse; because every person hath somewhat that is amiable, if it be but human nature; and that should have been foreseen before your choice. And as it is no excuse to a drunkard to say, I cannot leave my drink; so it is none to an adulterer, or hater of another, to say, I cannot love them: for that is but to say, I am so wicked that my heart or will is against my duty. But the innocent party's case is harder (though commonly both parties are faulty, and therefore both are obliged to return to love, and not to separate). But if hatred proceed not to adultery, or murder, or intolerable injuries, you must remember that marriage is not a contract for years, but for life, and that it is possible that hatred may be cured (how unlikely soever it may be). And therefore you must do your duty, and wait, and pray, and strive by love and goodness to recover love, and then stay to see what God will do; for mistakes in your choice will not warrant a separation.
Quest.XVIII. What if a woman have a husband that will not suffer her to read the Scriptures, nor go to God's worship public or private, or that so beateth or abuseth her, as that it cannot be expected that human nature should be in such a case kept fit for any holy action; or if a man have a wife that will scold at him when he is praying or instructing his family, and make it impossible to him to serve God with freedom, or peace and comfort.
Answ.The woman must (at necessary seasons, though not when she would) both read the Scriptures, and worship God, and suffer patiently what is inflicted on her. Martyrdom may be as comfortably suffered from a husband, as from a prince. But yet if neither her own love, and duty, and patience, nor friends' persuasion, nor the magistrate's justice, can free her from such inhuman cruelty, as quite disableth her for her duty to God and man, I see not but she may depart from such a tyrant. But the man hath more means to restrain his wife from beating him, or doing such intolerable things; either by the magistrate, or by denying her what else she might have, or by his own violent restraining her, as belongeth to a conjugal ruler, and as circumstances shall direct a prudent man. But yet in case that unsuitableness or sin be so great, that after long trial there is no likelihood of any other cohabitation, but what will tend to their spiritual hurt and calamity, it is their lesser sin to live asunder by mutual consent.
Quest.XIX. May one part from a husband or wife that hath the leprosy, or that hath the French pox by their adulterous practices, when the innocent person's life is endangered by it?
Answ.If it be an innocent person's disease, the other must cohabit, and tenderly cherish and comfort the diseased; yea, so as somewhat to hazard their own lives; but not so as apparently to cast them away, upon a danger not like to be avoided, unless the other's life or some greater good be like to be purchased by it.
But if it be the pox of an adulterer, the innocent party is at liberty by the other's adultery; and thesaving of their own lives, doth add thereto. But without adultery, the disease alone will not excuse them from cohabitation, though it may from congress.
Quest.XX. Who be they that may or may not marry again when they are parted?
Answ.1. They that are released by divorce upon the others' adultery, sodomy, &c. may marry again. 2. The case of all the rest is harder. They that part by consent, to avoid mutual hurt, may not marry again; nor the party that departeth for self-preservation, or for the preservation of estate, or children, or comforts, or for liberty of worship, as aforesaid; because it is but an intermission of conjugal fruition, and not a total dissolution of the relation; and the innocent party must wait to see whether there be any hope of a return. Yea, Christ seemeth to resolve it, Matt. v. 31, 32, that he is an adulterer that marrieth the innocent party that is put away; because the other living in adultery, their first contracted relation seemeth to be still in being. But Grotius and some others think, that Christ meaneth this only of the man that over-hastily marrieth the innocent divorced woman, before it be seen whether he will repent and reassume her; but how can that hold, if the husband after adultery free her? May it not therefore be meant, that the woman must stay unmarried in hope of his reconciliation, till such time as his adultery with his next married wife doth disoblige her. But then it must be taken as a law for christians; for the Jew that might have many wives, disobligeth not one by taking another.
A short desertion must be endured in hope; but in case of a very long, or total desertion or rejection, if the injured party should have an untamable lust, the case is difficult. I think there are few but by just means may abstain. But if there be any that cannot, (after all means,) without such trouble as overthroweth their peace, and plainly hazardeth their continence, I dare not say that marriage in that case is unlawful to the innocent.
Quest.I. Is it lawful to suffer or tolerate, yea, or contribute to the matter of known sin in a family, ordinarily, in wife, child, or servant; and consequently in any other relations?
Answ.In this some lukewarm men are apt to run into the extreme of remissness; and some unexperienced young men, that never had families, into the extreme of censorious rigour, as not knowing what they talk of.
1. It is not lawful either in family, commonwealth, church, or any where, to allow of sin, nor to tolerate it, or leave it uncured, when it is truly in our power to cure it. 2. So that all the question is, when it is or is not in our power? Concerning which, I shall answer by some instances.
I. It is not in our power to do that which we are naturally unable to do. No law of God bindeth us to impossibilities. And natural impotency here is found in these several cases. 1. When we are overmatched in strength; when wife, children, or servants are too strong for the master of the house, so that he cannot correct them, nor remove them. A king is not bound to punish rebellious or offending subjects, when they are too strong for him, and he is unable, either by their numbers or other advantages. If a pastor censure an offender, and all the church be against the censure, he cannot procure it executed, but must acquiesce in having done his part, and leave their guilt upon themselves.
2. When the thing to be done is an impossibility, at least moral. As to hinder all the persons of a family, church, or kingdom from ever sinning: it is not in their own power so far to reform themselves; much less in a ruler so far to reform them: even as to ourselves, perfection is but desired in this life, but not attained; much less for others.
3. When the principal causes co-operate not with us, and we are but subservient moral causes; we can but persuade men to repent, believe, and love God and goodness. We cannot save men without and against themselves. Their hearts are out of our reach; therefore in all these cases we are naturally unable to hinder sin.
II. It is not in our power to do any thing which God forbiddeth us. That which is sinful is to be accounted out of our power in this sense. To cure the sin of a wife, by such cruelty or harshness as is contrary to our conjugal relation and to the office of necessary love, is out of our power, because forbidden, as contrary to our duty; and so of other.
III. Those actions are out of our power, which are acts of higher authority than we have. A subject cannot reform by such actions as are proper to the sovereign, nor a layman by actions proper to the pastor, for want of authority. So a schoolmaster cannot do that which is proper to a patient; nor the master of a family that which is proper to the magistrate (as to punish with death, &c.)
IV. We have not power to do that which a superior power forbiddeth us (unless it be that which God indispensably commandeth us). The wife may not correct a child or servant, or turn him away, when the husband forbiddeth it. Nor the master of a family so punish a sin, as the king and laws forbid on the account of the public interest.
V. We have not power to do that for the cure of sin, which is like to do more hurt than good; yea, perhaps, to prove a pernicious mischief. If my correcting a servant would make him kill me, or set my house on fire, I may not do it. If my sharp reproof is like to do more hurt, or less good, than milder dealing, if I have reason to believe that correction will make a servant worse, I am not to use it; because we have our power to edification, and not to destruction. God hath not tied us just to speak such and such words, or to use this or that correction, but to use reproofs and corrections only in that time, measure, and manner as true reason telleth us is likest to attain their end. To do it, if it would do never so much hurt, with afiat justitia etsi peruit mundus, is to be righteous over-much.
Yea, great and heinous sins may be endured in families sometimes, to avoid a greater hurt, and because there is no other means to cure them. For instance, a wife maybe guilty of notorious pride, and of malignant deriding the exercises of religion, and of railing, lying, slandering, backbiting, covetousness, swearing, cursing, &c. and the husband be necessitated to bear it; not so far as not to reprove it, but so far as not to correct her, much less cure her. Divines use to say, that it is unlawful for a man to beat his wife: but the reason is not, that he wanteth authority to do it; but, 1. Because he is by his relation obliged to a life of love with her; and therefore must so rule, as tendeth not to destroy love: and, 2. Because it may often do otherwise more hurt to herself and the family, than good. It may make her furious and desperate, and make her contemptible in the family, and diminish the reverence of inferiors, both to wife and husband, for living so uncomely a life.
Quest.But is there any case in which a man may silently bear the sins of a wife, or other inferior, without reproof, or urging them to amend?
Answ.Yes: in case, 1. That reproof hath been tried to the utmost: 2. And it is most evident by full experience, that it is like to do a great deal more hurt than good.
The rule given by Christ, extendeth as well to families, as to others; not to cast pearls before swine, nor to give that which is holy to dogs; because it is more to the discomposure of a man's own peace, to have a wife turn again, and all to rend him, than a stranger. As the church may cease admonishing a sinner, after a certain time of obstinacy, when experience hath ended their present hopes of bringing the person to repentance, and thereupon may excommunicate him; so a husband may be brought to the same despair with a wife, and may be disobliged from ordinary reproof, though the nearness of the relation forbid him to eject her. And in such a case where the family and neighbourhood know the intractableness and obstinacy of the wife, it is no scandal, nor sign of approbation, or neglect of duty, for a man to be silent at her sin; because they look upon her as at present incorrigible by that means: and it is the sharpest reproof to such a one, to be unreproved, and to be let alone in her sin; as it is God's greatest judgment on a sinner, to leave him to himself, and say, Be filthy still.
And there are some women whose fantasies and passions are naturally so strong, as that it seemeth to me that in many cases they have not so much as natural free will or power to restrain them; but if in all other cases they acted as in some, I should take them for mere brutes, that had no true reason; they seem naturally necessitated to do as they do. I have known the long profession of piety, which in other respects hath seemed sincere, to consist in a wife, with such unmastered, furious passion, that she could not before strangers forbear throwing what was in her hand in her husband's face, or thrusting the burning candle into his face; and slandering him of the filthiest sins; and when the passion was over, confess all to be false, and her rage to be the reason of her speech and actions; and the man, though a minister, of more than ordinary wit and strength, yet fain to endure all without returns of violence till her death. They that never knew such a case by trial, can tell how all might be cured easily; but so cannot they that are put upon the cure.
And there are some other women of the same uncurable strength of imagination and passion, who in other respects are very pious and prudent too, and too wise and conscionable to wrong their husbands with their hands or tongues, who yet are utterly unable to forbear any injury of the highest nature to themselves; but are so utterly impatient of being crossed of their wills, that it would in all likelihood cast them into melancholy or madness, or some mortal sickness: and no reason signifieth any thing to debate such passions. In case of pride, or some sinful custom, they are not able to bear reproof, and to be hindered in the sin, without apparent danger of distraction or death. I suppose these cases are but few; but what to do in such cases when they come, is the present question.
Nay, the question is yet harder, Whether to avoid such inconvenience, one may contribute towards another's sin, by affording them the means of committing it?
Answ.1. No man may contribute to sin as sin, formally considered. 2. No man may contribute to another's sin, for sinful ends, nor in a manner forbidden and sinful in himself. 3. No man may contribute to another's sin, when he is not naturally or morally necessitated to it, but might forbear it.
But as it is consistent with the holiness of God to contribute those natural and providential mercies, which he knoweth men will abuse to sin, so is it in some cases with us his creatures to one another. God giveth all men their lives and time, their reason and free will, which he knoweth they will abuse to sin: he giveth them that meat, and drink, and riches, and health, and vigour of senses, which are the usual means of the sin and undoing of the world.
Object.But God is not under any law or obligation as we are.
Answ.His own perfection is above all law, and will not consist with a consent or acting of any thing that is contrary to holiness and perfection. But this I confess, that many things are contrary to the order and duty of the creature, which are not contrary to the place and perfection of the Creator.
1. When man doth generate man, he knowingly contributeth to a sinful nature and life; for he knoweth that it is unavoidable, and that which is born of the flesh is flesh.[26]And yet he sinneth not by so doing, because he is not bound to prevent sin by the forbearance of generation.