But are they rather permitted to keep a dishonourable mistress? why need we wonder at this? Hath not "the Spirit said express ly, that in the latter times some should depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, forbidding to marry?" 1 Tim. v. 1, 3. Although we have all of us a right to marry, we may nevertheless not commit incest, which we do, when we marry with a person who is too near akin to us: the Lord hath strictly forbidden this. The Canaanites defiled their land so by incest, that it vomited them out, as the Lawgiver saith, and he hath also precisely defined the kindred who may not converse carnally with one another, Lev. xviii. It is an abominable conduct of the Pope, that he presumes, as above, and in opposition to the law of God, to allow a dispensation to marry kindred, in certain cases, and he manifests thus that he is "that wicked one, that man of sin, that son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped (as God) so that he sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God," as Paul hath foretold, 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4, 8. He exalteth himself indeed above the high God, when he dissolves his laws, and enacts others instead of them, by constituting a spiritual affinity between godfathers and godmothers, so that they may not marry each other, although they be not even the most distant kindred, and he "binds thus heavy burthens, and grievous to be borne, and lays them upon men's shoulders," as the Saviour saith of the Pharis sees, Matt. xxiii. 4. "We may not add to the law of God, neither may we diminish aught from it," according to Deut. iv. 2. We are therefore at liberty to marry with any one whom we please, provided he be not our kinsman, The children of Adam were obliged to marry each other; but this law, which forbids incest, could not oblige at that time. God had indeed commanded, that when the elder brother died without children, the younger should marry his widow, and raise up seed to his brother: but this was a dispensation of the law of incest for that time, agreeably to God's absolute sovereignty, in order to maintain the name and privileges of the firstborn among the Israelites. No man may believe that he hath a right in the free state of the New Testament church to enter into marriage with his kindred, as if the law of incest were now abolished with the ceremonial, or churchlaws of Israel: for the law which forbids incest, obliged the heathens also, who were cast out of the land of Canaan, on account of their abominable mixtures: there fore Paul, who was so zealous against introducing the ceremonial VOL. II. 2 Q law into the Christian church, would not suffer the incestuous per son, who had his father's wife, in the church, 1 Cor. x. 1—13. "Think before you begin," saith the proverb. "With the welladvised there is wisdom," saith the wise king, Prov. xiii. 10. He who will marry must oblige himself for life; he may not repent afterward, and dissolve his marriage; for he is become with his wife one flesh, which he may not rend. This is nevertheless done too often by a faithless desertion of one another, or by adultery. It is a dissolving of marriage, and acting contrary to the first instituof it, when a man separates from his wife, or a wife from her hus band. Hear what the Saviour saith, Matt. xix. 4-6, from Gen. | ü. 21-24, "Have ye not read, that he which made them from the beginning, made them male and female? and said, for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Therefore although the man or woman should be wicked, or a heathen, and not guilty of adultery, we may not separate. Are we faithlessly deserted, we must bear it patiently, if we cannot effect a reconciliation: but let not a person, who is deserted in this manner, marry again, which the Lord forbids by Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 10-16. "He committeth adultery,” saith the Lord, Matt. xix. 9, “who marrieth her that is put away, except for adultery.” See also the apostle's words, Rom. vii. 1-3* As it is abominable to desert a wife faithlessly, so it is unlawful for a man and his wife to agree upon a separation, though one party should give more occasion to it than another, and should compel his consort to a separation; for both render themselves thus guilty of breaking wedlock. We must also look upon those to be guilty of breaking wedlock, who have engaged to be married, and afterwards rashly discharge each other, although their marriage have not been publickly confirmed; for the publick ceremony doth not This is to be understood so, that a person may not marry again, when he is faithlessly deserted, unless his consort proceed to carnal conversation with another person; for that, although committed during a state of separation, must be considered as adultery, which is the only offence that can ordinarily sunder married persons, and entitle the injured party in any situa tion to marry again. The word of God also permits a Christian, who is faithlessly deserted on account of his religion by a consort who is an unbeliever, to marry again, if he cannot by any proper means persuade his consort to live with him, 1 Cor. vi. 15, as it also forbids a Christian to marry an unbeliever. By an unbeliever we may reasonably understand in the passage alleged, not only a heathen, but also any person, who either rejects the Christian faith, or denies the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. constitute marriage, but the mutual engagement: "Moses indeed suffered the Jews to give their wives a bill of divorcement, and to put them away; but this was only on account of the hardness of their hearts; for from the beginning it was not so," as the Saviour saith, Matt. xix. 7, 8. The Jews who were a difficult people, acted with so much lightness in this affair, that they gave their wives a bill of divorcement, and put them away for every cause, and even for a trifle: Moses did not however permit this, but only, when the woman "found no favour in the eyes of her husband, because he had discovered some uncleanness in her," as we read Deut. xxiv. 1. But a person renders himself guilty of breaking wedlock, not only by separating, but also when he remains with his wife, and yet defiles himself with adultery; which adultery, as some describe it, is " a violation of another's bed:" and so this sin is committed, not only when a married, but also when an unmarried person converseth carnally with another's consort. But I conceive that adultery consists also in violating any person's marriage-bed, and is therefore committed also by married persons with the unmarried; for the Saviour saith, Matt. xix. 9, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another," and therefore an unmarried woman, "committeth adultery." This abomination may also be committed by persons who are betrothed to each other, although they have not yet been confirmed in wedlock, as "Israel's brides* committed adultery," Hosea, iv. 14. We must refer also to this abomination having more than one wife at the same time. A man may be the husband of only one wife, which is required especially in "a bishop, that he may be blameless," 1 Tim. iii. 2. To have more than one at the same time militates against the first marriage, and the first institution of marriage. The last prophet hath also an eye to this, when, reproving the Jews for their polygamy, he saith, Mal. ii. 15, "Did he not make one? yet had he the residue of the Spirit and wherefore one? that he might seek a godly seed." As if he should say, that God had created but one man, and out of him but one woman, although he could have made more: but one man with one woman was sufficient to propagate a holy seed. Unless we would rather understand by that one person, Abraham, who took besides Sarah, Hagar also, that he might obtain the promised seed by her, and this was therefore in some measure excusable in him, as he did not do it from wicked lewdness, nor to afflict Sarah: and therefore Abraham's conduct could not justify the Jews' desire of many wives, as • This is agreeable to the Dutch translation. they imagined. Even "the king of Israel might not take many wives," according to the divine prescript to him, Deut. xvii. 17, and no man ventured to do that, before that proud and revengeful Lamech, Gen. iv. 19. Is a man obligated to love his wife as his own flesh, how is that po sible, when he hath many wives, and thus divides his love? The jealousy and domestic quarrels, which arose from a plurality of wives in the families of the patriarchs, demonstrates the inconvenience of this conduct. It is true, God suffered it in them, and did not punish it severely; but neither did he visit other sins of those holy persons severely: yet he did not therefore approve of them, neither are they to be imitated: it was then, as Paul saith, Rom. iii. 25, the time of "God's torbearance," and the church was then yet in her state of childhood, which inclined God to wink at many things. II. As the head of this sin is, so also are the members; for we sin against this commandment, not only in the married state, but also, (though not so grievously) when we commit the same deeds out of the married state, to wit, when two unmarried persons abuse one another by fornication The adultery of a married woman, on account of which she may be put away, is also called fornication by Jesus, Matt. xix. 9. But it is usually distinguished from adultery. The " spouses among the people of God "committed adultery," but "the daughters committed whoredom," (or fornication,) Hosea iv. 14. It is a vile conduct to keep a mistress; but it is also exceedingly base, when the fornicator converseth with every one, who will submit to be abused by him. Neither is it excusable, that persons, who have been betrothed to one another, have carnal communication one with another before their marriage hath been rendered Jawful, according to the law of the land; if this be proper, why then do we suffer our marriage to be confirmed by the magistrates, or the church? it is true, this is only a human institution, but we ought to be subject to that also for the Lord's sake, as Peter requires, 1 Peter ii. 13. If the betrothed bride should become pregnant, and should lose her bridegroom by death, before her marriage was consummated, how would the children be considered by the civil law, as legitimate, or illegitimate? Holy persons, like Joseph and Mary, abstained from such conduct: although they were betrothed, they came not presently together, Matt. i. 18. And men sin against this commandment also very grievously both in and out of the married state, 1. By stealing women, carrying either unmarried, or married women away, with, or against their mind, in order to defile them. We may consider this as a kind of manstealing, for which the Lord ap pointed the punishment of death, xod. xxi. 16. The magistrates have also watched of old against this misconduct, by annexing the same punishment to it. To this we must also refer the behaviour of young men, in stealing the affections of young women, and rendering them pregnant without the knowledge of their parents, that they may compel the parents to consent to the marriage of their children, as Shechem defiled Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, for which both he and his father with all his fellowcitizens suffered very grievously, Gen. xxxiv. The parents are however not obliged to give their daughter to such a dishonest person, and they may compel him to satisfy for his crime, according to the law of Moses, Exod. xxii. 17. 2. It is a still greater sin to force women and maids, or to overpower them by violence, that we may commit abomination with them, God appointed no less a penalty for this sin than death, Deut. xxii. 25. Amnon, after he had forced his sister Tamar, was slain by Absalom, not without the righteous avenging providence of God, 2 Sam. xiii. 3. The sin of the Sodomites, which was punished by God with fire from heaven, Gen. xix. This unnatural and more than beastly sin we will not mention, it is justly called the dumb sin. The sins of adultery and fornication are exceedingly wicked and detestable in whatever situation they are committed. They are abominable in themselves, and men dare not speak of them: “It is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret," Eph. v. 12. There is no sin that disgraceth a person more than adultery and fornication; "He who is joined to a harlot is one body with her: every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body," ac cording to 1 Cor. vi. 16, 18. This sin transforms a man into a beast, and makes him "like a fed horse," Jer. v. 8, yea, it disgraces the generation of them, who defile themselves with it; the Lord requi red that "the daughter of the priest, who played the whore, should be burned with fire, because she had profaned her father," Lev. xxi. 9. Add to this, that these iniquities are attended with many evil consequences. The adulterer dissolves marriage, and withal the strictest bond of the most agreeable love and friendship, that ought to subsist between married persons. Fornication, as well as adultery, consumes our estate: "By means of a whorish woman a man is brought to a piece of bread," saith Solomon, Prov. vi. 26, and "he |