Commentary on Genesis and Exodus

QUEST. I. Why this precept is set before the other that follow.

1. AS the former Commandment exacteth and requireth to do good, and to perform our duty unto man: so these following concern our innocence, in doing of no hurt unto our neighbors and brethren. Pelarg. Lyranus. 2. And they are propounded negatively: Quia negativa sunt majoris obligationis, & gravioris transgressionis: because negatives do bind more strongly, and the transgression is more grievous: for it is a greater sin, to do evil, than not to do good. Tostat. quaest. 21. 3. There are two rules and Canons in Scripture, upon the which these precepts of the second Table depend: the one is, Quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris, That which thou wouldest not be done unto thee, do not to another: Hic canon omnes tollit injurias: This rule taketh away all injuries and wrongs: the other is, Whatsoever you would that men should do unto you, even so do you to them, Matth. 7.12. Hic canon ad omnem similiter nos cohortatur beneficentiam: This rule likewise doth exhort us to all beneficence and doing of good. Procopius. 4. Now whereas injury is done three ways unto our neighbor: Perversitate operis, falsitate sermonis, improbitate voluntatis: by the perverseness of the deed, falseness of speech, and badness of the mind: and the perverseness of the deed, is either offered to ones person, or substance: and his person is two ways considered, as it is simplex, his single person, or conjuncta, his coupled person, in his wife: therefore these three Commandments, which forbid murder, adultery, theft, are set first. Pelarg. 5. And because the greatest hurt, which can be done unto a man, is touching his life: Quia mors tollit esse simpliciter, because death taketh away a man's being simply, as other wrongs do not: therefore this precept is set before the other, as forbidding the greatest wrong. Tostat.

QUEST. II. Whether it be here forbidden to slay any beasts.

THou shalt not kill. Some have imagined, that all kind of killing is here forbidden, yea even of brute beasts. But this foolish opinion may be diversely confuted. 1. Augustine thus reasoneth: If it be not lawful to slay beasts, Cur non etiam & herbas, why also is it not unlawful to pull up herbs and plants? which, although they have no sense, yet they are said to live, and so also may die: as the Apostle saith, That which thou sowest, is not quickened, except it die, 1. Cor. 15.36. And this indeed was the mad opinion of the Manichees, that thought it unlawful to pull up a plant. If then this, Thou shalt not kill, be not meant of plants, because they have no sense; then neither is it understood of brute beasts, Quia nulla nobis ration • sociantur, because they are not partakers of reason with us: thus August. lib. 1. de civitat. Dei, cap. 20. 2. Thomas useth this reason, Non est peccatum uti illis, quae sunt subdita hominis potestati, &c. It is no sin to use those things, which are subject to man's power, and made for man's use: for there is a certain natural order, that plants are for the nourishment of beasts, and beasts feed one upon another, Omnia in nutrimentum hominum, &c. and all are appointed for the nourishment of man: and the Lord hath given unto man this liberty, As the green herb, have I given you all things, Gen. 9.3. The Apostle also showeth the Lawfulnesse hereof: Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, eat ye, and ask no question for conscience sake, 1. Cor. 10.25. Thom. in opuscul. 3. Cajetan addeth further, that it is lawful to kill beasts, Vt vescamur eis, vel ne molesta sint nobis: To feed upon them, or that they be not noisome unto us. 4. And the word ratzach here used, in the opinion of the Hebrews, signifieth properly to kill a man: and therefore there need to be no doubt made of the lawfulness of killing other creatures for man's use. Simler. Cajetan.

QUEST. III. Of the divers kinds of killing.

THou shalt not kill. There are divers kinds of killing: some do kill the soul only, some the body only, some both the body and soul. 1. They kill the soul, which seduce and pervert it: as therefore the Devil is said to be a murderer from the beginning, John. 8. In quantum traxit ad peccatum because he dr • w our first parents into sin. 2. The body and soul is killed two ways, occidendo pragnantes, in killing of women with child: for so the infant conceived, is deprived both of body and soul: Secundo interficiendo seipsum, secondly when one killeth himself: for beside the death of the body, they bring their soul into danger. Thom. in opuscul.

3. The body is killed also divers ways: for Homicidium est internum, externum, murder is either inward or outward: the inward is of two sorts, either conceptum conceived, as in anger, hatred, desire of revenge, which our Savior forbiddeth, Matth. 5.22. or, permissum, when it is permitted or suffered, when one consenteth unto another man's death, Rom. 1.31. They do not only the same things, but favor them that do them. Pelarg. Thom. The external is committed three ways, manu, by the hand, as in beating, wounding, and lastly killing: or, ore, with the mouth, in railing, reviling, giving evil counsel: and, adjutorio, by ministering help, and so being accessory in killing. Thom. This external murder, is either, Verbis ex • ptatum, gestu attentatum, opere designatum: wished in word, attempted in gesture, or designed in deed. Pelarg.

QUEST. IV. How the soul is killed by evil persuasion.

FIrst then, the seducing and perverting of the soul, is a principal breach of this Commandment: as Piscator well observeth, that seductio animae, the seducing of the soul, is one of the transgressions of this precept.

1. Augustine's reason is taken from the practice of the Devil: Homicida Diabolus, non gladio armatus, &c. verbum malum seminavit & occidit: The Devil is a murderer, he came not unto man with armor or weapons, he sowed evil seed by tempting them, and so slew them. In John. tract. 42.

2. Thomas useth this reason, Occidunt animam auferendo vitam gratiae: They slay the soul by taking away the life of grace: So Augustine concludeth, Si fratri tuo mala persuades, occidis: If thou persuade evil unto thy brother, thou killest him, ibid.

QUEST. V. That it is not lawful for a man to kill himself.

SOme think, that by this precept man is forbidden to kill another, but not himself: But that it is a special offense against this law, for any man to lay violent hands upon himself, it may be thus shown. 1. Augustine's reason is: Ne{que} enim qui se occidit, aliud, quàm hominem occidit: Neither he which killeth himself, doth any other than kill a man. 2. Pelargus useth this reason, Praeceptum eum ipsum comprehend • , cui praecipitur, A precept being simply propounded without any other addition, comprehendeth him also to whom the precept is given: in that it is said therefore, Thou shalt not kill, it is insinuated, that thou shalt not kill thyself. 3. Because our life is the gift of God, it cannot be taken away from whomsoever, without great impiety, and Facit injuriam humano generi, he that killeth himself, doth wrong unto human society, in depriving the Commonwealth of a member thereof. Basting. 4. The same reasons, why a man should not kill his neighbor, because he is the image of God, he is our flesh and one of Christ's members, for whom he died; are strong to persuade one not to kill himself, for no man ever hated his own flesh. Ursinus. 5. Whereas it is objected that Sampson killed himself, the answer is, he did it, Instinctu Spiritus Dei: By the instinct of God's Spirit: so that he did it Authoritate Dei: By God's authority. Thomas.

QUEST. VI. The inward murder of the heart forbidden.

NOt only the external act of murder is here forbidden, but the internal also, by hasty rage, malice hatred, envy and such like. 1. Lex Dei spiritualis est: The law of God is spiritual, and therefore i • , bindeth not only the hands and tongue, but the heart also and affections: as our blessed Savior, the best interpreter of the law, teacheth: If one be angry with his brother unadvisedly, he shall be culpable of judgment, Matth. 5.22. Gallas. 2. Another reason is: because, he, qui irascitur sine causa quamum ad volu ••• tem, homicidium fecit, which is angry without a cause, in respect of his own will and purpose, hath committed manslaughter: Chrysost. hom. 11. in Matth. Therefore the Apostle saith, He that hateth his brother is a manslayer, 1. John. 3.15. 3. Bonus medicus non solum tolli • malum, quod apparet, sed etiam radicem removet infirmitatis: A good Physician doth not only take away the evil, that is apparent, but also removeth the very root of the disease: Thomas. Therefore our Savior biddeth not only to take heed of murder, but of anger also: ex ira enim homicidium generatur: for homicide or murder is engendered by anger and rage: Chrysostom. 4. And where the effect is forbidden, there also the cause and occasion thereof is restrained: as God would not have us to hurt our brother, so he would have all occasions thereof to be cut off. Ursinus.

QUEST. VII. What things are to be taken heed of in anger.

COncerning anger and rage, which is the inward killing, five things are here to be taken heed of▪ 1. Ne cito provocatur, that it be not soon provoked: as S. James saith, Loe every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, and slow to wrath, chap. 1.19. And there be two reasons why anger should not be soon provoked, because rage is a sin before God, and so deserveth punishment; and for that every man desireth liberty: but he that is given to anger, is not Dominus sui ipsius, Master of himself. 2. He must take heed, ut 〈◊〉 in ira permaneat, that he continue not long in anger: Psal. 4. Be angry, and sin not: Ephes. 4. Let not the Sun go down upon your wrath. 3. Men must be careful, ne procedat primo in cord, that anger proceed not first in the heart, for then it turneth to hatred: and he that hateth his brother, is a manslayer: for, Se interficit, spoliando se charitate & alium: He killeth himself, by spoiling himself of charity, and another also. 4. Ne procedat in verbo: It must not proceed in word: for he which calleth his brother fool, is in danger of hell fire, Matth. 5. 5. Ne procedat in opere: It must not proceed unto the deed: for in every work we must consider two things: Facere justitiam & misericordiam: To do justice, and show mercy: but he which is angry can do neither. For the first the Apostle saith, that the wrath of 〈◊〉 doth not accomplish the righteousness of God, I am. 1.20. It is reported of Plato, that he should say to his servant, that had offended him: Punirem te, nisi essem iratus: I would punish thee, if I were not angry. And he that is angry, can show no mercy: as it is said of Simeon and Levi, in their rage they killed a man, Gen. 49. Thom. in opuscul.

QUEST. VIII. Of railing and reviling.

NExt unto the inward rage and heat of the affections followeth the outward indignation expressed by words, gesture, and other signs: and the third degree is when men fall to plain railing, backbiting, slandering, threatening: as these three are thus expressed by our blessed Savior: Whosoever is angry with his brother unadvisedly shall be culpable of judgment: and whosoever saith unto his brother, racha, shall be worthy to be punished by a counsel: and whosoever shall say, thou fool, shall be worthy to be punished with hell fire, Matth. 5.22. 1. Here our Savior maketh three degrees of anger, or rage: the one in the sudden heat and boiling of the affection inwardly without cause: the second, in the showing of this indignation outwardly by any disdainful words: as in calling one, racha, that is, idle head, light brain: for so rik in the Hebrew, to the which this Syrian word agreeth both in sound and sense, signifieth, light, value, Iun. Matth. 5.22. As also this indignation may be expressed by other signs, as by grinning, frowning, spitting, and such like, Simler. Then the third degree followeth, in open railing, as calling one fool, with other terms of reviling. 2. As our Savior maketh difference of the sins: so also he showeth divers degrees of punishment: alluding unto the politic form of judgment: for first there was the session or judgment of three, who judged of small causes; then of 23. who determined more weighty matters; then of 71. before whom the high Priest, or a false Prophet, and sometime a whole tribe was convented and judged: Beza. So he that is angry shall be censured in the secret judgment of God; he that showeth his indignation by opprobrious words, shall be held guilty before all the assembly of the heavenly Angels and Saints: he that raileth and revileth, shall be judged worthy of hell fire, that is, of the greatest punishment, Marlorat. For they used four kinds of punishments among the Jews, whereby they put malefactors to death: strangling, the sword, stoning, and fire: of the which the last was the worst, Beza. 3. For he that raileth and revileth, tres, quasi uno ictu occidit, killeth three as it were with one blow: himself, him that giveth credit, and the third, whom he slandereth and revileth, Basting.

QUEST. IX. Whether beating and wounding, though there be no killing, be not forbidden here.

THe external act followeth, not only of killing, but in offering any other violence with the hand, in beating, wounding, striking, and such like. 1. Here cometh to be examined the opinion of R. Solomon ; that in this precept only murder is forbidden: but other violent wrongs, in maimes, wounds, shedding of blood, beatings and such like, he thinketh only afterward to be restrained in the Judicials. 2. Against this opinion these reasons are enforced: 1. The Judicials only concerned the Israelites, and did not bind the Gentiles: but even among them these kind of violent assaults were unlawful, therefore they are forbidden not by the Judicials only, but by the Moral law, Tostat. qu. 21. He also urgeth this reason: The things which were forbidden by the Judicials of Moses only, it was no sin for the Israelites to do, before those Laws were given them, that is, before they came to Mount Sinai: but it was unlawful before for them one to smite another, as for the same cause Moses reproved an Hebrew, that did his brother wrong, and smote him, Exod. 2.13. therefore these wrongs were not only prohibited by the Judicial law. 3. Burgensis giveth this reason: Quia facit contra charitatem: Because he that smiteth or woundeth, though he kill not, doth against charity, as he also doth which killeth, though in an higher degree. So also Lippoman. 4. Tostatus further giveth this rule: Omnia quae pertinent ad idem genus reducuntur ad idem pr • ceptuum All that belongeth to the same kind, is to be referred to the same Commandment: as all wounding, beating, smiting, tendeth to the hurt of our brother in his body, as killing likewise doth.

QUEST. X. Why actual murder is such an heinous sin before God.

NOw followeth the greatest transgression among the rest, which is the taking away of a man's life: 1. For if hatred, envy, railing, wounding, and the like, are counted murder before God, in respect of the will and purpose, much more murder it self, which is the scope and end, whereat all the former wrongs and injuries drive; for if those things are displeasing unto God, because they often bring forth murder, the effect it self must needs be more heinous, Basting. 2. Another reason, which amplifieth the sin of murder, is, because the Lord by this means seeth Imaginem suam violari, that his image is violated, which is given as a reason of this precept, Gen. 9.6. Calvin. 3. And again, it is an unnatural sin, because man is as our own flesh: as the Prophet saith, Isai. 58.7. Hide not thyself from thine own flesh: but no man ever hated his own flesh, as the Apostle saith▪ Calvin. Yea, the murderer herein is crudelier Lup • , more cruel than the Wolf: for as Aristotle writeth, 4. Animalium: Give unto a Wolf the flesh of another Wolf, and he will not eat it: yet one man preyeth upon another, and devoureth another, Thomas. 4. Hominum societas violatur, by this means the society of man is violated: which, that it may be preserved, the Lord forbiddeth all shedding of blood, Galas. 5. Polluitur & foedatur terra, yea the land it self is polluted and defiled with blood, Numb. 35.36. Galas. 6. Mans body is the temple of the holy Ghost, 1 Cor. 6.16. If any then destroy the temple of God, him will God destroy, 1 Cor. 3.17. 7. The murderer also sinneth against Christ, whose member his neighbor is, whose life he hath sought. So reasoneth the Apostle, but in a divers case: that he which causeth the weak brother to perish, for whom Christ died, sinneth against Christ himself: 1 Cor. 8.11.

QUEST. XI. How diversely murder is committed.

THis kind of external and actual murder is committed two ways; either by a man himself, or by another: 1. The first is done two ways, either by the cruel shedding of man's blood, which is the most grievous sin of all: or by neglecting the means, and not preserving our neighbors life either by help or counsel, when it is in our power: as the rich man suffered Lazarus for want of relief to perish at his gate, Luk. 16. So the Priest and Levite passed by the man that had been wounded of the thieves, and was left for half dead, and had no compassion of him, Luk. 10. So the Wiseman saith in the Proverbs, chap. 24.11. Deliver them that are drawn to death, and wilt thou not preserve them that are led to be slain? Isidore saith: Qui incurrit in nudum & esurientem, &c. He that meeteth with a man ready to perish for hunger and cold, if he do not give him meat and raiment, homicida tenebitur, shall be counted a murderer. So Gloss. interlinear. A man committeth murder, manu, vel mente, vel subtrahendo auxilium, aut consilium, &c. with his hand, with his heart, and when he withdraweth his help and counsel.

2. A man killeth by another two ways; consensu, by giving consent: as Saul did, when Stephen was put to death, keeping their garments that stoned him, Act. 7.58. And the people crucified Christ, calling unto Pilate, Crucify him: Mandato & voluntate, By willing and commanding ones death: as David did contrive Uriah death, and Jezebel Naboth's, Bastingius.

QUEST. XII. Of the divers kinds of murder.

THere are divers kinds of killing: 1. There is a lawful killing or taking away of the life by the Magistrate; as either in putting malefactors to death, or in just war where much blood is shed. 2. There is another kind altogether unlawful, and inexcusable, which is called willful murder: when any of hatred smiteth a man, that he die, or of purpose lie in wait for him: Numb. 35.20. So Joab willfully killed Abner and Amasa. 3. There is a third kind of involuntarie murder, when a man lieth not in wait, but God offereth him unto him, Exod. 21.13. For though such things seem to us to fall out by chance, yet all things are ordered and disposed by God's providence, and with him nothing happeneth by chance: of this kind there are three sorts: 1. When two do of a sudden, having no purpose before, fight together, and the one killeth the other: as striving upon the way, or falling out upon any other sudden and unthought of occasion: this is called manslaughter; as Abner killed Asahel, that met him, and pursued him in battle: this kind is not so heinous as willful murder, yet it far exceedeth these other kinds that follow. 2. Sometime one is killed by chance, which is of two sorts, either a chance which falleth out by mere oversight and negligence: as if a Physician, through carelessness mistake the medicine, and so kill his patient, which might by his care have been prevented: or it falleth out by mere chance, which could not be helped; as when one heweth wood, and the axe-head flieth off, and killeth one that standeth by. 3. But that kind which deserveth most favor, and may best be excused, is, when one is forced to kill another, se defendendo, by defending of himself: which was the woman's case, that with a millstone pashed out cruel Abimelech's brains, when he attempted to set fire upon the tower, and to burn the woman, and all the rest of the people there, Judge. 9.

QUEST. XIII. Magistrates are not guilty of murder in putting malefactors to death.

ALl kind of killing is not then unlawful: whereof there are three sorts: there is divina vindicta, heroica, ordinata: divine revenge, heroical, ordinary. 1. The divine is, which is directly and immediately commanded by God: as Abraham at the Lord's bidding would have sacrificed his son: Abraham non solum non est culpatus crud • litatis crimine, sed laudatus est pietatis nomine: Abraham was not only 〈◊〉 blamed for his cruelty, but commended for his piety therein. So Joshua had commandment from the Lord to destroy the Canaanites.

2. The heroical kind of killing is, when any being inflamed with the zeal of God's glory, and extraordinarily stirred by his spirit, do take revenge of the Lord's enemies: as Sampson upon the Philistines in his death, Phineas in zeal killed the adulterer and adulteress▪ and Samuel hewed Agag the King of Amalek in pieces, Marbach.

3. The ordinary killing is by the Magistrate, who by direction of the word of God, and according to wholesome laws grounded upon the same, doth give sentence of death against malefactors, or wageth just battle: upon these occasions the Magistrate sinneth not in shedding of blood. The reasons are these:

1. Jerome saith: Homicidas punire, non est sanguinis effusio, sed legis ministerium: To punish murderers, and other malefactors, it is no effusion of blood, but the execution of the law: in Ieremiam, c. 22. So Gloss. interlinear. Index non occidit reum, sed lex quae jubet: The Judge killeth not the guilty party, but the law which commandeth.

2. Thomas saith, Id quod licitum est Deo, licitum est & ministro ipsius per mandatum ejus: That which is lawful unto God the author of the law, is lawful unto God's Minister by his Commandment. But the Magistrate is God's Minister, Rom. 13.4.

1. Doct. Of the general contents of this Commandment.

THou shalt not kill. This Commandment consisteth, 1. Partly in prohibiting all kind of hurt or wrong to our neighbor, either in leaving or forsaking him, or in doing him hurt, either outwardly, by murder, railing, reviling, or by any injury whatsoever; or inwardly, by anger, hatred, desire of revenge.

2. Partly in commanding the preservation of our neighbors life, either in not hurting, whether provoked, or not provoked: or in helping, either by the depulsion of wrongs and injuries offered, or by the collation of benefits.

2. Doct. The particular virtues here commanded.

THe virtues then prescribed in this Commandment, are of two sorts, either such as do not hurt, or such as are beside helping also.

Of the first kind are: 1. A particular justice and equity, in all our acts and doings, not to hurt or molest any, in word or deed, by violence, fraud, or negligence, or by any other means: such an one was Nathaniel, a true Israelite, in whom there was no guile, John. 1.47. he was a just, harmless and innocent man.

Contrarie hereunto are all kind of hurting or harming others by violence, oppression, of purpose or negligence: of such speaketh the Wiseman, They cannot sleep, unless they do evil, Prov. 4.

2. Another virtue is gentleness, mildness, not to be apt to quarrel upon every occasion, but to be patient in bearing of wrongs, and ready even to forgive our enemies; as David spared the life of Saul, and endured with patience the reviling of Shimei.

Contrarie hereunto are: 1. Stupiditie ▪ not to be angry, or moved at all, no not for manifest and notorious wrongs and injuries: as Saul saved Agag alive, whom Samuel through a just indignation for the great wrongs which that nation had done to the people of God, hewed in pieces. 2. Anger, rage, desire of revenge, wherein David offended in purposing to put Nabal and his house to the sword, in his fury and rage, 1 Sam. 25.

3. A third virtue is, Peaceablenesse, to be careful to avoid all offenses and occasions of contention: and to end and compound strifes and contentions, being once risen: as Moses did between the two Hebrews, Exod. 2. and as Abraham moved to have a separation between him and Lot, their servants, and their cattle, for avoiding of further contention, Genes. 13.

Contrarie hereunto it is, to be turbulent and unquiet, to move sedition, discord, enmity: such were the seditious in Israel, Core, Dathan and Abiram, Numb. 16.

Virtues furthering and helping our neighbor, are: 1. Just severity in punishing of offenders, which is the office of Magistrates, who are the Ministers of God in that behalf: as David worthily put to death those two Captains that had murdered Ishbosheth, 2 Sam. 4.

Contrarie hereunto are: 1. Injustice, rigor and cruelty, as Herod beheaded James, and laid hand on Peter also, Act. 12. 2. Connivence and remissness: as God was angry with Ahab, because he had let Benhadad escape, 1 King. 20.41.

2. Zeal and indignation for the wrongs and injuries offered to men: as Abraham armed his household to go and rescue Lot, Gen. 14.

Contrarie hereunto is, carelessness of others miserable and afflicted estate, as in Pharaohs Butler, that remembered not Joseph's afflictions.

3. Mercy and commiseration, to be grieved for the miseries of others: as David and his company wept when the Amalekites had smitten Ziklag, 1 Sam. 30.4.

Contrarie hereunto is hardness of heart: to have no feeling compassion, as the rich Glutton had not of Lazarus, Luk. 16. Ex Ursinus.

1. Confut. Against the Stoics, that denied any passion at all to be in a wise man.

WHereas it is shown before, that even rash and unadvised anger is forbidden in this precept, according to the doctrine of our blessed Savior, Matth. 5.22. The Stoics are confuted, whose opinion was, that the passions of anger, and of other such like affections, were not incident unto wise men: but the opinion of the Peripatetikes was that Ira cadit in sapientem, sed moderata, that anger is incident to a wise man, but moderate and temperate: which opinion cometh nearer the truth. Et primo patet authoritate ; And this first is evident by the authority of the Gospel, which showeth anger to have been in our blessed Savior. Secundo, ration: Again, it is manifest by reason: for if all the passions of the mind were contrary to virtue, there should be some powers of the soul in vain: Imo essent homini in nocumentum, they should be to a man's hurt, as the faculty of anger, and desire: but God made nothing in vain. Further, anger is taken three ways; Primó prout est in solo judicio rationis abs{que} commotione animi: first, as it is in the judgment only, without any commotion of the mind: and so the Lord in Scripture is said to be angry. Secondly, it is taken for the passion of the mind, which sometime is ordered and ruled by reason, as when one is angry, Quando debet, quantum debet, & pro quo debet: When he ought, as much as he ought, and for what he ought to be angry: and then it is a note of zeal. Thirdly, there is a kind of anger, Qua refugit judicium rationis, which refuseth and rejecteth the judgment and direction of reason, and this is always sin, Thomas in opuscul.

2. Confut. Against those that think no anger to be forbidden.

THere are some further, that do hold, that anger is not at all forbidden in this precept: 1. Because it is natural. 2. We read that God himself in Scripture is said to be angry. 3. Christ himself was, and the holy Saints and Prophets, as Moses, and Paul. 4. The Apostle forbiddeth not to be angry, but only to persevere and continue in it, Ephes. 4.26.

Answ. 1. Natural and moderate affections are the work of God in the nature of man, and so they are not forbidden: but those affections which were perfect and good in the nature of man, before sin entered, are now through the sin of man perverted and corrupted, and refuse to be subject to reason, and so had need to be reformed by grace: these violent and intemperate affections are forbidden, and so anger, not simply: for to be angry with that▪ which is evil, is commendable. So our Savior condemneth not all anger, but when a man is angry with his brother unadvisedly, Matth. 19.22.

2. God is not said to be angry as man is: it is no passion or perturbation in God, but the Scripture so speaketh of God, according to our capacity: for, Ira est appetitus ultionis, anger is a desire of revenge: and therefore because man cannot punish without anger, God is said to be angry, quando punit scelera, when he punisheth sin: ultio ejus ira dicitur, his revenge is called anger.

3. These natural affections and passions of the mind, were otherwise in Christ than in us: in him they were temperate and moderate without sin, as they were first created in man: and such kind of anger we grant is not forbidden.

4. The last reason showeth, that all anger is not forbidden, but that only which exceedeth measure, as to be too much inflamed with anger, and to continue long therein: which we also grant, ex Simler.

3. Conf. Against the Anabaptists, that it is lawful for Christians to bear armor, and to make war.

WHereas out of this prohibition, Thou shalt not kill, is excepted the lawful Magistrate, which either putteth to death, or maketh just war; we are here to deal against the Anabaptists, who hold it unlawful for Christians to bear armor or weapons, or to wage battle. Their reasons and arguments are these:

1. Our Savior in the Gospel biddeth, that we should not resist evil, but whosoever will smite thee on the left cheek, turn to him the right also, Matth. 5.39.

Answ. 1. It is evident, that our blessed Savior doth not here bring in a new law, but only freeth the law from the corrupt glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees: he therefore giveth the true sense of the law given them by Moses, which allowed lawful war to be made: Therefore Christ's meaning cannot be, that evil and injuries can no way be resisted. 2. It must be considered, that Christ here speaketh unto private men, not unto Magistrates, that they were not to seek revenge, which belonged unto the rulers and governors. 3. Our blessed Savior's meaning is to restrain men's corrupt affections, and grudges, in seeking revenge, and to exhort them to patience: for according to the very letter, our Savior himself did not perform this precept: for being smitten with a rod, he did not turn the other cheek, but answered for himself, John. 18.23. So also did S. Paul, when the high Priest commanded him to be smitten on the face, Act. 23.

2. S. Paul would not have Christians to go to law one with another, 2 Cor. 6. much less it is lawful to make war.

Answ. S. Paul simply findeth not fault with their going to law, but because they one convented another before Heathen Judges, and for that they were impatient of wrongs, and would put up nothing one at another's hand.

3. Our Savior biddeth Peter to put up his sword, adding further, that they which take the sword shall perish with the sword, Matth. 26.52.

Answ. It is plain, that our Savior speaketh of the private use of the sword, not of the public in lawful battle, when as the soldier doth not take the sword into his hand by his private authority, but it is committed unto him by the commandment of the Magistrate.

4 The parable of the tares is objected, which our Savior would have grow until the time of harvest.

Answ. The end and scope of this parable must be considered: which is to show the state and condition of Christ's Church in this world, that therein the wicked and hypocrites are mixed among the faithful: and so it shall be till Christ shall come in the end of the world to purge his floor, and take away all the chaff: for otherwise, if it were not lawful to take away the evil, there should be no place, neither for Civil nor Ecclesiastical discipline: and so Saint Paul should have been contrary to his master, who willed the incestuous young man to be excommunicate, 1 Cor. 5. and so the tares to be weeded out of the corn.

5 The Apostle saith, The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, &c. 2. Cor. 10.4. we must not then use carnal and outward weapons.

Answ. 1. The Apostle speaketh there only of such weapons which we are to use against spiritual evils, which indeed are only spiritual: not of those which are used against men. 2. After the like manner S. Paul saith: Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, 1 Cor. 2.17. yet he baptized some: his meaning is, he was not sent chiefly to baptize, but to preach: so the chiefest armor of Christians are spiritual: but they may use carnal and external also, Simler.

But now on the contrary side, that it is lawful for Christian Magistrates to wage battle, it may be thus shown by the authority of the word of God: 1. Deut. 20. there are divers laws prescribed, whom they shall make choice of to go to war, how they should be exhorted by the Priests, and other orders are there expressed: which had been superfluous, if it were a thing simply unlawful to enterprise war.

2. In the New Testament, when the soldiers came to John, to know of him what they should do, he biddeth them not to lay aside their weapons, or to forsake their calling, but not to do wrong, and to be content with their wages, Luk. 3.14. We read in the Gospel of a Centurion that believed in Christ, Matth. 8. and in the Acts of a Centurion converted by Saint Peter, Act. 10. who retained that office and calling still.

3. Further, seeing it is the office of the Magistrate, that beareth not the sword for naught, to take vengeance on him that doth evil, Rom. 13.4. And it may fall out, that not one or two, or a few, but a multitude may do evil and commit some outrage, who cannot be resisted but by force of arms: the Magistrate then is herein to do his duty, to suppress the evil, and to take vengeance on them.

4. But whereas it will be objected, that there are no precepts in the New Testament, concerning this matter, but only in the old: we answer, 1. That it is sufficient that we find it there: for whatsoever is prescribed in the Old Testament, not repugnant to, nor reversed in the new, Christians are to receive and obey: it was the wicked opinion of the Marcionites, and Manichees, which rejected the Old Testament. 2. And the reason why no mention is made in the New Testament of waging of battle, and making of war, is, for that there was then no Christian Magistrate, by whose authority war must be taken in hand. And because there was then no such civil power in the Church, the Lord gave unto his Apostles an extraordinary power in punishing the wicked, as S. Peter did strike Ananias and Sapphira with sudden death, Act. 5. So they needed no schools then, because they were furnished with extraordinary gifts of the Spirit: but now they are needful, those extraordinary gifts being ceased: and so it is necessary now that the Magistrate should use the material sword; that spiritual sword of vengeance, which the Apostles had, being now no more exercised.

5. Briefly somewhat shall be added here, what conditions are required, and ought to concur to make just war; which are these three: 1. By whose authority. 2. Upon what occasion. 3. In what manner war must be taken in hand.

1. War must not be attempted without the authority of the Magistrate: for he beareth the sword, Rom. 13.4. If the examples of Sampson and Abraham be objected: for the first we answer, that he was moved by the Spirit: for the second, that he was no private man, or subject to any other, but free, and at his own command: beside, he was not without the direction of God's Spirit. And further, if a true man shall defend himself against a thief by the sword, or a City being suddenly besieged, or invaded of the enemy, the Magistrate being absent: in these cases it is lawful to use the sword, because though in particular they have not the express consent of the Magistrate, yet in general the laws permit, that it shall be lawful for everyone in such desperate cases to defend themselves.

2. The causes of just war are these three: 1. When as any battle is enterprised by the special Commandment of God: as Saul was sent against Amalek. 2. To rescue and recover such things as are unlawfully taken away: as David pursued the Amalekites that had burned Ziklag, and carried away their goods, and their wives, and redeemed them again, 1 Sam. 30. 3. To deliver the oppressed, and to bridle the insolency and cruelty of the wicked: as Abraham followed after the four Kings that had taken Lot prisoner, and delivered him out of their hands, Gen. 14.

3. The manner also must be considered, that although the cause of war be just, yet that it be not rashly set upon, but all other means must first be tried: as Hezekiah, before he would by force resist the King of Assyria, sought to have pacified him by paying a certain tribute, 2 King. 18.14. So the children of Israel, before they assaulted their brethren the children of Benjamin by open war, because of the wickedness of the Gibeonites committed against the Levites wife, first required of them that those wicked men might be delivered into their hands: which when they willfully refused, then they resolved to set upon them, Judge. 20.13. Ex Simlero.

4. Confut. Against the Romanists, that make difference between counsels and precepts.

IN the next place the Romanists are to be dealt withal: and here cometh first to be examined that assertion: that whereas we affirm, that even in this Commandment, Thou shalt not kill, that duty of charity is prescribed, even in loving our enemies: they affirm, that this is no precept, which we are bound to keep, but a counsel of perfection, and a work of supererogation: Thom. Aquin. 2.2. qu. 25. art. 9.

Contra. 1. This derogateth from the authority of Christ, to say that he gave counsel to his Disciples, and did not by his authority command them. 2. Seeing all the duties of charity are required by the law (for love is the fulfilling of the law) it followeth that even this duty also in loving our enemies is enacted by the law, and not left free. 3. Our Savior adding further as a reason hereof, that ye may be children of your Father which is in heaven, showeth that we cannot otherwise be the true children of our heavenly Father, unless we be like him herein, even in loving of our enemies: then it will follow, that it is not a counsel of conveniency, but a precept of necessity: Ex Bastingio. See more of this popish distinction of counsels and precepts, Synops. Centur. 1. err. 84.

5. Confut. Against the Popish distinction of mortal and venial sins.

ANother assertion of the Romanists here to be taxed is, that anger, si sit talis motus, ut deducatur ratio, est peccatum mortal, &c. If it be such a motion, as that the reason is drawn to consent, it is a mortal sin: Si usque ad consensum non pervertitur ratio, est peccatum venidle, &c. But if reason be not perverted to consent, then it is a venial sin: but if it be not a mortal or deadly sin in the nature and kind thereof, as is murder, and adultery, then although there be a consent, it is no mortal sin. Sic Thom. in opuscul.

This distinction of sins venial, and not venial, in their own nature, in respect of the greatness or smallness of the sin, is not to be admitted for these reasons: 1. In the respect of the nature of sin, which of it self deserveth death: Rom. 6.23. The wages of sin is death: and sin is the transgression of the law, 1 John. 3.4. and every transgression of the law is under the curse, Galath. 3.10. 2. In respect of the infinite Majesty of God, which to violate, can be no venial sin of it self: considering also the perfect and absolute righteousness of God, which cannot abide the least blemish or imperfection: therefore in regard of the perfect righteousness and infinite Majesty of God, no sin committed against God can in it self be venial. 3. And concerning this motion and passion of anger, even when it is sudden, and unadvised, though there be no further purpose or intendment to hurt, it is guilty of judgment, Matth. 5.22. Where, by the way, it shall not be amiss to note the difference here between Thomas Aquin, and Bellarmine: for Thomas holdeth this anger here spoken of to be a deadly sin, in that he saith, He that is angry with his brother, shall be guilty of judgment, it must be understood d • matu tendente in nocumentum, &c. of a motion tending to hurt, where there is consent, and so that motion is deadly sin. Sic Thomas in opuscul. Ex Lippoman. But Bellarmine affirmeth that this is a venial sin, and so deserveth not everlasting damnation, because hell fire is only due unto the last, to call one fool, Bellarm. lib. 1. de purgator. cap. 4.

Contra. 1. Every mortal sin deserveth damnation: but in Thomas Aquins judgment, as is shown before, this anger here spoken of is a mortal sin. Ergo. 2. The naming of hell fire only in the last place, showeth not a divers kind of punishment from the rest, but a divers degree of punishment: for otherwise, judgment in Scripture, • s taken for damnation: as Psal. 143.2. Enter not into judgment with thy servant, for no flesh is righteous in thy sight. So Rom. 2.1. In that thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself. Here to judge and condemn are taken for all one: to be culpable then of judgment, is to be guilty of damnation.

4. Yet we admit this distinction of venial and mortal sins, if it be understood, not in respect of the nature of sin, but of the quality of the persons: for unto those that believe, all sins are venial, and pardonable through the mercy of God: Rom. 8.1. There is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Jesus: but to the wicked and unbelievers, all their sins are mortal: Rom. 6.23. to them the stipend and wages of sin is death. See more also hereof, Synops. Papis. Centur. 4. err. 6.

1. Observ. Not to be hasty to anger.

THou shalt not kill. Our blessed Savior expounding this Commandment, Matth. 5.22. showeth, that even he which is angry unadvisedly transgresseth this precept: which may be a caveat unto furious, cholerike, and hasty men, that they should bridle their intemperate affections, and not give place to rage: for as Chrysostom saith, Si concedatur licentia irascendi, datur & causa homicidii faciendi: If liberty be granted unto anger, even cause many times will be given of murder. But if any man shall say, when he is angry with a man for railing and reviling, that he is angry with his sin; let him consider, that when he heareth the name of God blasphemed, he is not so much moved, which showeth that he is angry in respect of his own name and person, which is called in question, and not simply for the sin, Simler.

2. Observ. The challenging of one another into the field forbidden.

ANd if it be simply unlawful to kill, then let such look unto it, that take it to be their honor and estimation to challenge one another into the field, whereupon often ensueth murder: for we have otherwise learned in the Scriptures, Omnem cupiditatem seipsum ulciscendi vetitam esse: That all desire for a man to revenge himself is unlawful: Simler. For such do usurp the Lord's office. The Wiseman saith, Say not thou, I will recompense evil, but wait upon the Lord, and he shall save thee, Prov. 20.12.

3. Observ. Surfetting by e • cesse forbidden.

FUrther, by this precept they are condemned, qui luxu se occidunt, &c. which kill themselves with surfeiting and drunkenness, riot and excess: Basting. whereupon often ensueth also quarrelling, and wounds, as the Wiseman showeth: To whom is woe, to whom is strife, &c. to whom are wounds without cause, to whom is redness of the eyes? to them that tarry long at wine, Prov. 23.29, 30.

QUEST. I. Of the order and negative propounding of this Commandment.

THou shalt not commit adultery. 1. This Commandment very fitly followeth after the other, Thou shalt not kill, Quia post injuriam, quae infertur personae, nulla est major, quàm illa quae infertur conjunctae: Because next after the injury done to the person, there is none greater, than that which is offered unto the joint person; for they two shall be one flesh, Thom. in opuscul. So also Lyranus. 2. This Commandment is propounded negatively, rather than affirmatively: because the negative is more general than the affirmative, Tum quoad temp • ra, quàm personas, both in respect of the time and persons: for at all times, and in all places it is unlawful to kill, to commit adultery, &c. but at all times, and in all places we must not honor our parents: and for the persons, we must not offer violence or wrong unto any; but for the affirmative, it is impossible to do good to all, Thom. in Epist. ad Roman. cap. 13. See before quest. 1. upon the sixth Commandment.

QUEST. II. Whether the unclean desire of the heart be forbidden in this precept.

IN this Commandment, not only the impurity of the body, but of the soul also is forbidden, and chastity commanded in both: Gregory's opinion is, that God Per hoc praeceptum, non peccata cogitationis, sed operis resecuit, &c. Doth not by this precept cut off the sinful thoughts, but the sinful act: and that Christ afterward in the law, Cogitationes hominum religavit, Did bind also the thoughts of men, In Ezech. homil. 13. Augustine also is of opinion, that in this precept, Ipsum opus notatum est, The work of uncleanness it self is noted: but in the other, Thou shalt not covet, Ipsa concupiscentia, the very concupiscence: because, saith he, sometimes it may fall out, that a man may commit adultery, cùm non concupiscat illam, when he doth not covet her, but upon some other cause doth company with her: Aliquando eam concupiscat, nec ei misceatur, poenam timens : Sometime he may covet her, and not company with her fearing the punishment, in quaest. 71. in Exod.

Contra. 1. Our Savior Christ doth not add anything to the law of Moses, or bringeth in any new interpretation, but doth free and clear the law from the gross and corrupt glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees, delivering the true sense and meaning thereof, as it was first given unto the people: And therefore Chrysostom well saith: Vt per concordiam mandatorum ipse inveniatúr author legis fuisse & gratia : That by the agreement of the Commandments, in the old and New Testament, the same may be found to be the author of the law, and of grace, in Matth. hom. 11. And that even the inward concupiscence and desire was forbidden in the Old Testament, it is evident by Job's practice, in whose heart the moral law was written, I have made a covenant with mine eyes, why then should I think on a maid? chap. 31.1.

2. Concerning Augustine's opinion: the concupiscence, which is joined with a full purpose, only wanting opportunity, and being restrained by fear from the external act, is a breach of this Commandment, and not of the last, as our blessed Savior expoundeth, Matth. 5.28. What kind of concupiscence is prohibited in the last precept, and how it differeth herein ftom this, shall be shown afterward, when we come to that place. 2. And that commixtion which hath no concupiscence, nor consent of will, being violent and forced, as in them which are ravished, it is no adultery at all, which always proceedeth out of the heart.

3. But that the inward sanctimony and purity of the mind is here commanded, and the contrary forbidden, it is thus proved: 1. By the definition of purity, and chastity, which is to be holy both in body and spirit, as S. Paul describeth a true Virgin, 1 Cor. 7.34. So the same Apostle, 1 Thess. 5.23. That your whole spirit, soul and body, may be kept blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2. Both the souls and bodies of the faithful are the Temples of the Spirit, and therefore ought to be kept holy, 1 Cor. 3.16. Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? if any destroy the Temple of God, him shall God destroy, Basting. 3. Chrysostom urgeth these four reasons: first, from the interpretation of our blessed Savior, who showeth that this Commandment is broken in the very inward lust and concupiscence, Matth. 5.28. 4. Secondly, from the analogy and correspondency, which it hath with other Commandments: that Irasci proximis sine causa, to be angry with our neighbors without cause, is a breach of the precedent Commandment, Thou shalt not kill: So Concupiscere mulierem alienam, &c. to desire a strange woman, though the act of concupiscence follow not, is against this precept. 5. Thirdly, in respect of God, Qui non tantum opus hominis aspicit, quantum cor; Who doth not so much look unto the work of man, as to his heart. 6. Fourthly, because concupiscence is the cause of adultery: Omne adulterium ex concupiscentia, All adultery proceedeth from concupiscence, as our blessed Savior showeth, Mark. 7.21. Even from the heart of man proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, &c. Quomodo ergo tolletur adulterium, nisi pracisa fuerit concupiscentia, &c. How then shall adultery be taken away, unless concupiscence be first cut off? Homil. 12. in Matth. Seeing then that the effect, that is, adultery, and outward uncleanness is forbidden in this precept, it followeth also, that the very cause thereof, which is concupiscence, should be restrained.

QUEST. III. Other acts of uncleanness beside adultery here forbidden.

COncerning the external act of uncleanness, which is in the very letter of this precept prohibited, the Hebrews are of opinion, that only concubitus adulterinus, the adulterous act is here forbidden. But this opinion is easily convinced: 1. Tostatus urgeth this reason; Qui prohibit minus malum, à fortiori prohibit majus, &c. He that forbiddeth the less evil, doth much more prohibit the greater evil: for there are more unlawful acts of uncleanness, than adultery, as those unnatural sins, committed either with another kind, as with brute beasts, which is monstrous, or with the same kind, and with the same sex, as Sodomitry, and abusing of the male, or with the same sex, but in degrees forbidden, such is incest, with those that are nearly joined in affinity and consanguinity: and though none of these fall out, yet if by violence any be forced to uncleanness, as in the ravishing and deflowering of wives or Virgins: all these are more odious than adultery, and therefore they are likewise forbidden. 2. Ursinus thus reasoneth; The end and scope of this precept is to be considered, which is to preserve chastity, and to maintain matrimony: whatsoever then is contrary hereunto, is forbidden; and therefore all acts of uncleanness, as well adultery as others, which are against chastity, and matrimonial sanctity, are here restrained. 3. Calvin addeth further, Lex est juste vivendi perfecta regala, The law is a perfect rule of righteous living: therefore not one kind of uncleanness, but all whatsoever are in this precept restrained, which are against righteous and upright living: as all unnatural uncleanness, incest, fornication, all pollutions, wherewith the body is defiled.

QUEST. IV. Of the sins of unnatural lust.

THe unnatural sins of uncleanness are of three sorts: 1. Those which are committed with another kind, as with brute beasts, Levite. 18.23. Thou shalt not lie with any beast to be defiled therewith: which enormous and monstrous sin doth violate the law of nature, and bringeth a great infamy upon mankind, in that any should be found among them, of such beastly and vile inclination, Tostat. qu. 23. And herein is discovered the wickedness and corruption of man's nature, which without God's grace is prone even unto the most vile, monstrous and ugly sins.

2. Another kind of unnatural lust, is that which is committed with that sex, which is not for that natural use; which was the sin of the Heathen, When man with man wrought filthiness, Rom. 1.27. Such were the Sodomites, which with one consent came from all quarters of the City, and beset Lots house, and would have offered villainy unto the two young men (which were indeed two Angels) whom Lot had received into his house, Genes. 19. These, whom the Apostle calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , liars with men, with others there named, are without their great repentance, excluded the Kingdom of heaven, and inheritance of God, 1 Cor. 6.9.

3. The Apostle in the same place nameth also the third unnatural sin of lust, of those whom the Apostle calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , effeminate, wanton, and lascivious persons: molles, as the Latin Interpreter translateth, who do commit uncleanness with the same kind, with the same sex, and with the same person, that is, with themselves, in the voluntary emission of their nature, such as was in part the sin of Er and Onan, the sons of Judah, whom the Lord destroyed for their wickedness, Gen. 38. these are so called molles, tender, delicate, effeminate, Quia nullam tristitiam tolerare possunt, because they can endure no grief in resisting of carnal concupiscence, Tostat. quast. 22.

QUEST. V. Why some kind of uncleanness is not forbidden by human laws.

BUt here the question will be demanded, what the reason is, seeing this kind of filthiness is odious before God and man, and by the Word of God condemned, yet the laws of men make no provision against it.

Hereof two reasons may be rendered: 1. Because this kind is committed secretly, so that it cannot be proved by witness, and so by due proof be censured: such sins the laws of men specially provide for, as may be by witness or other evidence manifested: now this uncleanness can hardly be brought to light, but by the parties themselves, who are not so impudent, as to act any such thing in open view: as the Priest of Priapus standing aloft upon the stairs, used to show his privy parts unto the people, to provoke their beastly lust: So also other secret sins, as the adultery and murder of the heart, men's laws cannot meet with, unless they be such as are against the state of the Prince and Commonwealth; for then, even such thoughts and purposes, though they take no effect, yet if they can be discovered, as by the confession of the parties, or by their fellow conspirators, are worthily punished, Tostat. quaest. 22.

2. Another reason is, because Solos actus justitiae mandat humana lex, human laws only command the acts of justice: and forbid all such acts whereby one hurteth another, and so human society is hindered: hereof it is, that intemperance, prodigality, pride, cowardliness, and such like, are not censured by human laws, because they are no acts of injustice tending to the hurt of others. So other acts of uncleanness, as of adultery, incest, rape, are by law restrained, because the hurt and disgrace of others is thereby procured: but this mollicies, licet sit actus intemperantia, non est tamen actus injustitia, &c. This effeminate pollution of the body by it self, though it be an act of intemperancy, yet it is no act of injustice, because none other is hurt thereby, which thing human laws especially provide for, Tost • . qu • st. 22.

QUEST. VI. Of the greatness of the sin of adultery.

THou shalt not commit adultery. Here by the very letter of the law, that grievous and heinous sin of adultery is forbidden: the greatness of which sin is thus amplified, and set forth. 1. Ambrose thus describeth the sin of adultery: God made two in the beginning, and commanded that they two should be as one flesh, Quod unum separas corpus, &c. naturae adulterium est: In that thou doest separate one body, &c. thou doest adulterate nature, &c. First therefore by adultery, the holy institution of God is violated, which maketh man and wife but one flesh: Ambrose. Hexemer. lib. 5. cap. 7. 2. Chrysostom multiplieth many reasons together, Qui capta uxore post hoc carnis remedium alie •• injuriatur, nullam veniam consequitur: hoc jam lascivia est, &c. He that having taken a wife, wrongeth another woman, shall hardly find pardon: for this is a sin of wantonness. 3. Si suam repudiare & alii vacare non licet, &c. If it be unlawful for a man to put away his wife, and use another, (which is a kind of adultery) how much more is he to be blamed, qui suae aliam addit, which joineth another to his wife? 4. Again, the greatness of the sin of adultery appeareth, by comparing it with other great sins: it is so heinous before God, Vt si • xor ab Idolatra viro, ipso nol • nte, discedat, pu •• atur; sin ab adultero, minime ; That if the wife depart from an husband that is an Idolater, against his will, she is punished; if from an adulter •• , she is not: the first the Apostle showeth, that it is unlawful for a woman to depart from an unbelieving husband, being willing to dwell with her, 1 Cor. 7.13. but for adultery, the wife may be dismissed, Matt. 5.32. 5. Further, by comparing of the effects together, this sin appeareth what it is: Qua cum infideli habitat, non est immunda, &c. she which dwelleth with an infidel, is not polluted or unclean: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, 1 Cor. 7.14. But the fornicator, and much more the adulterer, maketh the members of Christ, the members of an harlot, 1 Cor. 6.14. 6. In hac vita secum innumera mala trahit ; This sin of adultery and fornication, bringeth an innumerable company of evils with it in this life, beside the punishment of the next: Cogitur vitam miseram & infoelicem vivere, he liveth a miserable and unhappy life: Alienam domum trepidus ingreditur, omnis timet, liberos & servos: he entereth trembling into another's house, he is afraid of everything, of the servants, and the children, &c. Sic fere Chrysost. super John. hom. 62.7. Thom. Aquin. A woman committeth three great sins in the sin of adultery: she is first Sacrilega, she committeth sacrilege in going against God's ordinance, in parting that asunder, which God hath coupled: secondly, she is Proditrix, she sinneth by betraying her husband, under whose government she is, and giving her self over to another, for the woman hath no power over her own body, but the man, and so likewise of the man, 1 Cor. 7.4. Thirdly, she is furatrix, she committeth theft: Ex alieno viro sibi constituit filios, she getteth her children by another man, Thom. in opuscul.

8. This sin of adultery is one of those which excludeth out of the Kingdom of heaven, 1 Cor. 6.9. and whoremongers among the rest shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone, Revel. 22.8. And in this world, though adulterers and adulteresses should escape the censure of men, as often they do, yet God will not suffer such to go unpunished: he will judge them himself, Heb. 13.4. Therefore the Wiseman setting forth the adulterous woman, saith, that she forsaketh the guide of her youth, and forgetteth the covenant of her God, Prov. 2.17. God therefore will take revenge of such, as transgressors of his covenant. This made Joseph that he would not consent to the unlawful desire of his Mistress, saying, How can I do this great wickedness, and so sin against God? Gen. 39.4.

QUEST. VII. Adultery as well forbidden in the husband as in the wife.

FUrther, it will here be inquired, whether this precept, Thou shalt not commit adultery, doth not indifferently bind both the man and the woman, that as well the husband as the wife, if he go unto any strange flesh, committeth adultery. In Augustine's time men took unto themselves great liberty herein, and it was grown to be such a general custom, ut jam & mulieribus fere persuasum sit licere hoc viru, sed non licere mulieribus ; That women are almost now persuaded, that it is lawful for men, but not for women: for it is often heard, that the wives have been brought to the market place to be punished, quae facto cum servis invent a sunt, which have been found with their servants: but it was never heard of, that a man was set in the market place, qui inventus est cum ancilla, which was found with his maid. Augustine by divers reasons overthroweth this wicked custom, showing, that it was par peccatum, a like sin both in the husband and wife: and in the like sin, that the man seemeth more innocent, facit non divina veritas, sed humana perversitas: not the divine verity is the cause, but human perversitie. Then he useth these persuasions:

1. From the faith that is made mutually by both the husband and the wife unto Christ: Quod à me exigis, red mihi: fidem tibi debeo, fidem mihi debes: fidem Christo ambo debemus, &c. That which thou exactest of me, render unto me: I have plight thee my faith, and thou hast plight me thy troth: we both have plight our faith unto Christ, &c.

2. He reasoneth from the like: Noliteire vos, quo ease sequi non vultis: Ye men, got not that way, wherein you would not have your wives to follow: say not, I go not to another man's wife, I go unto my maid: Vis ut dicat tibi, uxor tua, &c. Wouldest thou thy wife should say unto thee; I go not to another woman's husband, I go unto my man or servant?

3. From the preeminence and superiority of man: Say not, we cannot: Quod potest foemina, vir non potest? Can a woman forbear, and cannot a man? For what, illa carnem non portat, &c. is not she also flesh and blood? was not the woman first beguiled of the Serpent? But you will say, that the woman may easily avoid adultery, because she is held in by the watchfulness of her husband, and by the terror of human laws: Multa custodia faciunt foeminam castam, virum castum faciat ipsa virilitas: Many keepers make a woman chaste: and let manhood it self make the man chaste: nam ideo mulieri major custodia, quia major infirmitas: for therefore a woman had need of more strait keeping, because she is the weaker: her husband and the terror of laws watch over her, and God watcheth over thee. To this purpose Augustine.

4. Further, the very letter of the precept, which in the Hebrew is put in the Masculine, to tineaph: Thou, that is, the man, shall not commit adultery. Augustine well inferreth: that although it be only expressly forbidden to the man, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife: Ista lex non solum viris, sed & foeminis data est: Yet this law is not only given unto men, but unto women also: and so this precept as well bindeth women, as men, as all the rest of the Commandments do: Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, &c. August. qu. 71. in Exod.

5. Lastly, the Apostle showeth, that as the woman hath no power of her own body, but the husband, so neither hath the husband power over his own body, but the wife, 1 Cor. 7.4. and therefore as well the one as the other are restrained of all carnal liberty to go unto strange flesh.

QUEST. VIII. Whether adultery be a more grievous sin in the man or the woman.

BUt this being agreed upon, that adultery is a sin as well in the husband as in the wife, it will further be demanded, in which of them it is a greater sin, or whether it be not equal in both.

1. Augustine thinketh, as is shown before, that it is par peccatum, a like sin whether in the husband, or in the wife. And Thomas addeth further, that in the time of the law there was not an equality: for the man among the Jews might have many wives, but not the wife many husbands: Ideo matrimonium nunquam statum perfectum habuit, nisi in lege Christi: Therefore matrimony had never any perfect state, but under the law of Christ. But to this it may be answered, that the institution of matrimony being first made in Paradise, was the same both under the law of Moses, and the law of Christ: but that much was permitted and tolerated unto the Jews only for the hardness of their heart, as our blessed Savior showeth, Matth. 19.

2. Some do urge the laws of men, and the greater punishments, which have been laid upon women for adultery, rather than upon men: and that therefore the sin of the woman should be the greater: But this showeth not the greatness of the sin before God, but the greater inconvenience that is brought upon the civil and politic state (which the laws of men seek chiefly to preserve) by the adultery of the woman, rather than of the man.

3. Some think that it is a greater sin in the man, because of his authority, quia vir caput mulieris, because the man is head of the woman: and the Apostle biddeth, that women, if they would learn anything, should ask their husbands at home, 1 Cor. 14.35. Est ergo vir doctor mulieris: The man then is the woman's teacher: then as the Priest sinneth more than a lay man, because he is his teacher; so the man doth more grievously offend than the woman: Thomas in opuscul. But this proveth not that the sin of the man simply is greater than the sin of the woman, but in a certain respect.

4. Wherefore the best answer is, that the sin of adultery in some respects is equal in both sexes, and in some other greater, both in the one and the other.

1. In regard of the law of Matrimony, whereby they have given their faith each to the other, the sin seemeth to be equal: for the man hath no more power over himself in this behalf, than the woman, as S. Paul teacheth, 1 Cor. 7.4. and therefore by Moses law, as well the adulterer, as the adulteress, was to be put to death.

2. But in respect of the quality and condition of the person, because the woman is the weaker vessel, and the man is the head of the woman, and of the more strength, this sin is greater in the man, because he therein give than evil example to the weaker party, and teacheth her an evil lesson, Ecclesiasticus 9.1.

3. But the inconveniences considered that follow hereupon, as the ignominy and shame of houses, the confusion of inheritances, and the obtruding of false heirs by the adultery and false play of women; their sin is thought to exce • d: Simler. Which might be the reason also why among the Jews, the men were permitted to have divers wives, but not the women to have divers husbands.

QUEST. IX. Whether adultery be now necessarily to be punished by death.

SOmewhat here would be inserted concerning the punishment of adultery by the sentence of death: wherein there are these three opinions: 1. Some think that adultery ought to be punished capitally, according to the judicial law of Moses, and not otherwise. Piscaetor giveth divers reasons hereof: but two especially I will single out: 1. Delicta temporibus naturam suam non mutant: Sins do not change their nature in time. 2. Deus naturam suam non mutat : Neither doth God change his nature, so that he hateth sin no less now than in times past, neither will he have it less punished: Praefat. in Exod.

Contra. 1. The nature of sin is the same, though the punishment be altered; adultery is as grievous before God now as it was under the law: but the circumstances as of place and person, so also of time, may give occasion of aggravating or alleviating the punishment. He that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath was stoned to death, Numb. 30. because it was necessary that the law at the beginning, being then newly given, should be established by severity. But yet our Savior excuseth his Apostles for gathering and rubbing ears of corn upon the Sabbath, Matth. 12. Saint Peter pronounced the sentence of death upon A • amas and Sapphira, for deteining part of that which they had given to the Church, for the terror and example of others: yet now, such dissimulation is not held to be worthy of death. 2. Neither is God changed, by the changing or mitigating the rigor of the law: but he removing the same, applieth his law according to the different respect of 〈◊〉 and persons: for as well he might be said to be changed, in the changing of other 〈◊〉 , as of the ceremonial, and judicials thereto annexed.

4. If all judicials annexed to the Moral law are now to be necessarily retained, then the violating of the rest of the Lord's day, as then of the Sabbath, which was in that respect moral, should be punished with death; and blaspheming, and profaning of the name of God by swearing, as Levite. 24.16. which would seem to be too rigorous.

5. And seeing the times of the Gospel are the times of mercy, and those under the Law were the times of rigor and severity, to abate somewhat of the rigorous punishments of the Law, not leaving sin unpunished, may seem not unlawful.

2. Another opinion is, that adultery is not at all now to be punished by death: for our Savior would not condemn the woman taken in adultery, John. 8.

Contra. 1. Upon that example of Christ, it cannot be gathered, that it is unlawful to censure adultery by death: for it would follow as well, that adultery is not to be punished at all, because Christ inflicteth no punishment at all upon her: only this may be inferred, that by Christ's silence and forbearance it appeareth, that the punishment of adultery by death, is not necessary: for if his will had been, that the rigor of that law should stand in force, our Savior needed not to have feared their trap, lest they should have condemned him of rigor and severity, if he had judged her worthy of death: and if he had repealed that law, they would have accused him, as contrary to Moses. 3. This then may be collected by Christ's silence and connivence, that it is not necessary that adultery should always and in all places be sentenced unto death; but rather, that it is left indifferent: that neither those Churches are to be condemned of too great severity, which follow the president of Moses judicials herein, nor yet they are to be accused of too much lenity, which judge adultery otherwise than by death, as they see it best to fit their estate, so that the severity of the punishment be answerable to the quality of the sin. By Moses law, they which committed adultery were to die the death, that is, if it were duplex adulterium, that both the adulterer and adulteress were married, or if the woman were another's wife, Levite. 20.10. otherwise it was not death for a married man beside his wife, to have a Concubine, or to one wife to take another, so she were not another's wife. What will they think now of such single adultery, that would have it revenged by death? they have no president in Moses law, for the punishing of this kind of adultery by death: then it is evident, that all adultery by the law of Moses was not adjudged to death.

The Roman laws followed Moses president, in punishing of adulterers: so did some other nations beside. The King of Babel burnt Zedekiah and Ahab, two false Prophets, with fire, for committing adultery, Ierem. 29.23. Among the Egyptians, the man taken in adultery was beaten with a thousand stripes, the woman had her nose cut off: Diodorus. Sicul. lib. 2. cap. 3. The Germans used to set the adulteress naked before her kindred, and cut off her hair, and then her husband d • ave her before him through the street beating her with cudgels: Cornel. Tacit. de morib. German. The Cumeans placed the adulteress in the Market place upon a stone in open view, that she might be derided and scorned of all, and then set her upon an asse: and ever after she was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , an asse rider: and the stone they abhorred as an unclean thing: Plutar. tom. 1. in quastionib. Graci • . These or some other grievous punishment may be imposed upon the odious crime of adultery, where it is not recompensed with loss of life: but to dally with so great iniquity, and either to wink at it, or to let it pass with a light and superficial check, is displeasing to God, and offensive to all good men. See more of this question, how far Moses Judicials do now bind, 1 qu. general in Exod.

QUEST. X. Whether it be lawful for the husband to kill his wife taken in adultery.

BUt whereas the ancient Roman laws permitted the husband to kill his wife taken in adultery, as appeareth in the declamations of Seneca, how a man having lost both his hands in war, coming home, and taking his wife with another in adultery, commanded his son to kill them both, and for refusing, he did abdicate and renounce him for his son: Some would justify this also as lawful, pretending the example of Phinehas, that stroke the adulterer and adulteress thorough at once.

Contra. 1. Though the ancient laws did not punish the husband that killed his wife taken in adultery: yet that act was not thereby made lawful, but the law did therein bear with the just grief of the husband. 2. And though the laws of men should tolerate it, yet before God he committeth murder; because he doth it in his rage, and in his own revenge. 3. But the last • r Roman laws gave no such liberty for the man to kill his wife, but only the adulterer with whom she is taken in her husbands house: for by this means, if men hated their wives, they might seek occasion to be rid of them: and if he were a Noble personage, with whom the woman was found, it was not lawful for the husband to kill him, but only to keep him four and twenty hours prisoner at home, until he brought the witnesses. 4. Phinehas example is altogether unlike, for beside that he was stirred by the extraordinary motion of the Spirit: if this president should be followed, it might be lawful for any man to kill the adulterer, and the adulteress, and not for the husband only: for both of these, whom Phinehas killed, were strangers unto him: the man was of another tribe, and the woman a Midia • i • esse, ex Simler • .

QUEST. XI. Simple fornication, whether a breach of this Commandment.

THou shalt not commit adultery, &c. 1. Some are of opinion, that simplex fornicatio, single fornication, which is soluti cum soluta, of a single man with a single woman, is not here forbidden, Oleaster. He granteth that fornication with a woman, quae esset alteri, vel omnibus exposita, which was either defiled by another, or common to many, was forbidden to the Israelites, as Deut. 22.21. She that played the where in her fathers house should be put to death: but otherwise it was not: in this Commandment therefore he thinketh adultery only to be forbidden, according to the native signification of the word na • ph, which signifieth only to commit adultery.

Contra. 1. But I rather prefer the opinion of Ibn Ezrah, a learned Rabbin, who thinketh O •• em concubitum, qui non est viri cum uxore sua hîc esse prohibitum: That all companying with a woman, beside of the man with the wife, is here forbidden: for seeing single fornication is against the Law of nature, as Judah, before the Law was written, adjudged Tamar for her whoredom to the fire, Gen. 38. as Oleast himself confesseth, it must also of necessity be held to be a breach of the Moral law, which is grounded upon the Law of nature. 2. And as for the use of the word, Augustine well showeth, by the interpretation of our blessed Savior, Matth· 5.9. that even adultery is a kind of fornication: He that dismisseth his wife, except for fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , fornication, which is taken for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , adultery, Beza in hunc locum.

2. But that single fornication, even between parties both unmarried and unbetrothed, is forbidden in this Commandment, it shall be manifested by these reasons. 1. Augustine thus argueth: 1. If that kind of fornication be not forbidden here, Vbi sit illa prohibita in decalogo, utrum inveniri possit, ignore ; Whether it can be found prohibited elsewhere in the decalogue, I am ignorant, &c. But it is certain, that it is either forbidden here, or nowhere in the moral law. 2. Again, Si furti nomine been intelligitur omnis illicita usurpatio rei alienae, &c. if under the name of theft is well understood all unlawful usurping of other men's goods, Profecto & nomine moechiae omnis illicitus concubitus, &c. by the same reason also, by the name of adultery, all unlawful company with a woman is forbidden, August. quaest. 71. in Exod. 3. Further, Augustine in another place thus reasoneth: Say not, Vxorem non habeo, &c. I have no wife, and therefore I sin not against her: neither do I covet another man's wife: ad meretricem eo, I go unto an harlot; In Deum pecccas, cujus imaginem per diffluentias libidinis in te violasti, &c. Thou sinnest against God, whose image thou hast violated in thyself, by thy overflowing lust. 4. Again, Dominus, quiscit quid tibi utile sit, uxorem concessit, hoc pracepit, hoc jussit ; The Lord, who knoweth what is best for thee, hath granted thee a wife, that thou shouldest not wander in lust: this he commandeth thee to do, if thou canst not contain thyself, &c. Therefore the fornicator, in giving himself to lust, and refusing the remedy which God hath appointed, therein offendeth against God.

2. Thom. Aquin. addeth these arguments: 1. A rigno Dei non excluditur aliquis nisi per peccatum mortal, &c. one is not excluded the Kingdom of heaven, but by a mortal sin: but fornication excludeth out of the Kingdom of God, 1 Cor. 6.9. therefore it is a deadly sin. 2. Licet non detur corpus uxoris, datur tamen corpus Christi, &c. although he have not a wife given, against whose body he sinneth, yet the body of Christ was given him in Baptism, and he made a member thereof: if it be not lawful to sin against the body of his wife, much less against the body of Christ; whose members he taketh, and by fornication maketh them members of an harlot, as S. Paul showeth, 1 Cor. 6.15. So he concludeth, Est ergo haeresis, dicere fornicationem, &c. it is heresy therefore to say, that single fornication is not deadly sin, &c. and therefore in this precept, Thou shalt not commit adultery, not only adultery, but all carnal copulation out of matrimony is forbidden, Thomas in opuscul.

3. Tostatus urgeth these reasons: 1. Whatsoever is evil, belonging unto carnal lust, must be here forbidden, either express, or tacit, either by express words, or closely: for it cannot be forbidden elsewhere: now simple fornication, even by the natural light of reason, is judged to be evil: But it is not necessary to find out a thing evil by nature, that all men should be of the same judgment, but only those whose reason and understanding is aright: for like as some are deceived in the judgment of the outward sense, as he whose tongue is infected with bitter choler, thinketh honey to be bitter: and he whose eye is vitiate and corrupt, with a kind of melancholy, will take the Aethiope and the Crow to be whitish: So in some the judgment of natural reason is corrupted, as in intemperate and incontinent men: it is therefore sufficient, that temperate and sober men by the light of reason, judge fornication to be evil. 2. Every natural act, not used and employed to the right end, is evil: so then, as to eat and drink, Non propter conservationem individui, &c. not to preserve the body, but of riot and excess, is evil: so to use carnal copulation of lust, and not Propter conservationem speciei per generationem, &c. for the preserving of the kind by generation, for the which it is appointed, must needs be evil, as it is in fornication, Tostat. quaest. 22.

4. M. Calvin thus proveth that fornication is a sin before God, and a breach of this Commandment: Ex quo legimus Deum benedixisse conjugio, &c. where we read that God blessed marriage, it is easy to gather on the contrary, that all other companying of man and woman, not in marriage, is accursed, and so the Apostle setteth the one as opposite to the other, Hebr. 13.4. Marriage is honorable among all men, &c. but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge: Seeing therefore the sanctity and chastity of marriage is commanded in this precept, the contrary is forbideen, all other acts of uncleanness whatsoever, which are a violation of marriage. 2. Nec aliunde, quàm ex lege Oseas illam reprehensionem sumpsit. &c. Neither did Hosea take that reprehension, but from the law, c. 4.11. Whoredom & wine take away the hears, 3. S. Paul also showeth, that the Israelites were punished for their fornication, and fell in one day 23 thousand, 1. Cor. 10.8. 4. The Apostles also exhorting the brethren to abstain from fornication, give this as a reason thereof, because Moses was read in their Synagogues every Sabbath day, Act. 15.19. if fornication then had not been contrary to the law of Moses, and so generally taken, it had not been such a great offense. Sic Calvin in hunc locum.

QUEST. XII. Spiritual fornication is not a breach of this precept.

SOme do make spiritual fornication a breach of this Commandment, Thou shalt not commit adultery: Necesse est spiritualiter observari: it must be spiritually observed: and this abstinence from spiritual fornication, they make of th •• e sorts, 〈◊〉 Idolorum, & omni superstitio •• Gentili ••• ▪ from the ceremonies of Idols, and all superstition of the Gentiles: there is another kind of fornication, Qua in Iudaismi superstitionibus cont •• etur, which consisteth in the superstitions of Judaism; and the third is adulteri • m haereticorum, the adultery of heretics, Lippom. ex collationibus putrum.

But spiritual fornication, because it concerneth the worship of God, cannot be referred to this precept, being of the second Table, which only concerneth our duty toward our neighbor: and beside, if this precept should be so spiritually understood, then the rest of the second table in like manner, which were inconvenient: and spiritual fornication, which is committed by idolatry and false worship, is a peculiar breach of the second Commandment, and therefore need not to be referred hither.

QUEST. XIII. Of the lawfulness and dignity of marriage.

NOw because in this precept, Thou shalt not commit adultery, as all inconveniency and uncleanness is forbidden: so chastity both in marriage and without, is commanded: Here it shall not be amiss to insert certain questions concerning marriage: and first of the lawfulness and dignity thereof, which the Apostle calleth honorable, Heb. 13.4. This honor of the married estate is set forth, 1. By the author and institutor thereof, God himself when he brought Eve unto Adam ; and to signify the near conjunction that ought to be between man and wife, he made woman of one of the man's ribs, Gen. 2. 2. The time and place, when and where Matrimony was instituted, do set forth the commendation of it, which was in Paradise, in the time of man's innocence, before sin yet was entered into the world. 3. The holy and wholesome ends, for the which Matrimony was ordained▪ do show not only the lawfulness, but the excellency of it: which shall afterward, quest. 27. more fully be declared: whereof the most especial is, the procreation of children, ipsi Deu, Ecclesiae & reipublica : unto God himself, his Church and Common-wealth, Bucan. 4. In holy Matrimony it hath pleased God to represent unto us the mystical conjunction between Christ and his Church, Ephe. 5. so that it cannot be but holy, wherein is shadowed forth such an holy mystery.

QUEST. XIV. Of the espousals and contract of marriage, with the difference, and divers kinds thereof.

NOw Matrimony is of two sorts, either inchoatum, which is only initiate and begun by the espousals and contract only; or it is perfect and consummate, when all the rites of marriage are accomplished and performed. Concerning the contract and espousals, which is the affiancing and betrothing of the man and woman each to other, by their own voluntary and full consent, with the liking and approbation of their friends, there are two kinds of them: 1. Some contracts are conditional, and de futura, of the time to come, as they are called: as if the man make this promise, that he will marry a woman if her friends will consent, or if he may have a competent dowry with her: or if both the parties are under age, and not fit for marriage: for all these espousals are only promises of marriage for the time to come: and they do not bind the parties: they may show their levity in not performing the promise made, unless they can give probable and reasonable cause of the change of their mind; but they are not to be forced by any such promise of marriage, to accomplish the same. 2. The other kind of espousals, is de praesenti, pronounced of the time present: as if one say, Ego te mihi despondeo uxorem : I take thee to my wife: this contract is actual and effectual; and cannot be dissolved, being lawfully made: for that which God hath coupled together, man cannot put asunder, Matth. 19.7. and they which are thus contracted, are man and wife before God: as Jacob calleth Rachel, being only espoused, his wife: Give me my wife, Genes. 29.21 and the Angel calleth Mary espoused to Joseph, his wife, Matth. 1.20. Hereof it was, that by Moses law, he which deflowered a maid espoused unto another, was to be stoned to death, Deut. 22.23. 3. After these espousals, there came between them and the celebration of the marriage some convenient space of time: 1. For public honesty sake, that they should not presently come together, as brute beasts in the heat of their fleshly desire. 2. That by this means their minds might be first knit together, before their bodies: their desire of each to other by this means being kindled and increased. 2. That this pause being made, if in the mean time there should fall out any just cause of let, it might appear, Bucanus.

QUEST. XV. Of marriage consummate, and the rites and orders therein to be observed.

MAriage is consummate by two solemn and public actions; one is religious and Ecclesiastical, the other is Civil: 1. The parties espoused are first brought into the face of the congregation, both to testify their unfeigned consent each to other, and that they may publicly be instructed by the Minister of the duties of marriage, and be commended unto God by the prayers of the congregation: which godly use of the public celebration of marriage before the congregation, howsoever some schismatics foolishly and willfully spurn against it; yet is grounded partly upon the example of God himself, who brought man and woman together, and gave them a solemn blessing, saying, Increase and multiply : partly upon that rule of the Apostle, 1. Corinth. 14.40. that all things in the Church should be done honestly, and by order: for by this means, secret and 〈◊〉 marriages are prevented: and the parties freed from all suspicion, who without this public solemnity might be thought so live incontinently together: and seeing all things are consecrate by the word of God and prayer, 1. Tim, 4.5. it is requisite that such a weighty business as this should be sanctified with prayer, and invocation of the name of God.

2. The other public action is Civil, in the nuptial feast, or festivitie: for it hath been a commendable custom in all ages, and in all nations almost, to solemnize marriage with the cheerful meeting of friend •• as Laban made a feast in the marriage of his daughters, Genes. 29.22. our blessed Savior was present at a marriage feast at Cana in Galilee, John. 2. But the marriage feast ought to be kept with this cavent, that there be no excess, riot, or disorder, with other abuses, that often fall out in such meetings. As in that great feast which the great King of Persia made unto his Nobles, such good order was kept, that none was compelled to drink more than he would himself, Esther 1.8. This moderate and sober kind of feasting may safely be retained among Christians, according to S. Paul's rule, Philip. 4.8, 9. Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, &c. those things do, and the God of peace shall be with you, Ex Bucano.

QUEST. XVI. What conditions are required in lawful marriage.

BUt in lawful marriage divers conditions are required, and namely these: 1. That Matrimony be contracted between such parties as are apt for marriage. The contracts then and espousals made between children are void. 2. That there be a voluntary consent of both parties, not forced or urged thereunto. 3. The consent also of the parents, or of those which are in the place and stead of parents, must not be wanting. 4. There must be no error in the persons: as when they are espoused as virgins, which prove afterward to be otherwise: or such like errors and mistakings. 5. That honest condition • be propounded in such contracts, with decency and comeliness. 6. That Matrimony be contracted only between two parties: for though the Fathers were permitted to have many wives; yet we must live not according to examples, but by a certain law and rule. 7. Marriage must be contracted in the Lord, that is, only between the faithful and believers, and such as consent together in the true faith and religion. 8. That such persons contract not together, as are within the degrees prohibited either of affinity and consanguinity, which are expressed Levite. 18. which prohibition of degrees is grounded upon the law of nature, and therefore is moral and perpetual: for God did cast out the Canaanites, because they were defiled herein, Levite. 18.24. Who were not bound to the ceremonial, but to the moral laws: and the end of this prohibition of certain degrees was for reverence of the nearness of kindred and blood, as this reason is rendered: None shall come near to any of the kindred of his flesh to uncover their shame, Levite. 18.6. and therefore this law is universal and perpetual: Ursinus. Concerning the particular limitation of these degrees and right computation of them; see elsewhere this matter handled at large, Synops contr. 15. of Matrimony, qu. 3.

QUEST. XVII. Of the ends of the institution of matrimony.

NOw the ends wherefore Matrimony was ordained are these: 1. In respect of the parties themselves there are three ends: 1. That they should be a mutual help one unto another, both in divine and human duties: as the Lord, when he made woman, said, I will make an help meet for him, Gen. 2.18. which help is partly in human affairs, as in domestical duties, in governing and ordering the family, in the bringing up and education of children: and in personal duties, one in helping and relieving another, in sickness and in health: as also in divine, one in comforting another, in praying one for another, and such like. 2. Marriage is ordained to be a remedy against incontinency and vagrant lust, 1. Cor. 7.2. 3. For procreation of children, which should continue their parents name, and succeed in his inheritance: as the Lord said unto them, Gen. 1.28. Increase and multiply.

2. In respect of the Church and Common-wealth, Matrimony was appointed as a mean to increase them both with profitable members and instruments, and therefore parents are charged to bring up their children in the instruction and information of the Lord, Ephes. 6.4. that they may be fit to be employed in the Church and Common-wealth.

3. In respect of God, Matrimony was instituted principally for the setting forth of his glory; that the married parties should together better learn to serve and worship God, and to bring up their children in his fear: and in their matrimony, which is a sweet and amiable fellowship, is set forth that mystical conjunction which is between Christ and his Church, Ephes. 5.32. Ex Bucan. Ursinus:

QUEST. XVIII. Of the mutual matrimonial duties between man and wife.

THe duties to be performed in marriage are first, such as are common between man and wife: as 1. Mutuall love, that they should one love another, to love as they are beloved. 2. Matrimoniall faith, in keeping themselves one to another, not seeking after strange flesh. 3. A communion of their goods, one supplying another's wants: and a communion of affection, one having a lively fellow-feeling of another's griefs. 4. The education of their children, wherein both the parents are bound to show their Christian care. 5. And mutual hearing and forbearing one another, tolerating their infirmities, 〈◊〉 a great desire to have them amended and healed, Ursinus.

2. The duties required on the husbands part are: 1. To instruct and teach his wife, and bring her to the knowledge of God, 1 Cor. 14.35. 2. To be her head, to protect and defend her from injuries▪ to guide▪ direct, and govern her in discretion, Ephes. 5.23. The husband is the woman's head, as Christ is the head of her Church. 3. To be amiable unto his wife, not bitter or cruel unto her, Colos. 3.19. not to use her as his maid or servant; but as his yokefellow, and collateral companion and coadjutrix in the government of the house. 4. To provide for her all things needful in sickness and in health: for he is worse than an Infidel that doth nor provide for those of his own house, 1 Timoth. 5.8. 5. To honor the wife as the weaker vessel, 1 Pet. 3.7. and in his Christian discretion to win her with lenity.

3. The special duties on the behalf of the wife are: 1. To show her care and diligence in preserving of her husbands domestical estate, and wisely disposing the household affairs: as that h • swively Mac • on is described, Prov. 31. 2. To give due reverence and honor to her husband, as unto her head, as Sara is commended, 1 Pet. 3.7. 3. And to be subject and obedient unto him in all things in the Lord, Ephes. 5.22.

QUEST. XIX. Whether marriage be left indifferent to all.

MAtrimonie is neither denied unto any by the divine institution; nor yet commanded unto all: 1. It is lawful and granted unto all to marry, if they will: for the Apostle saith, that marriage is honorable among all men, Hebr. 13.4. because that blessing given unto marriage, Increase and multiply, was general to Adam and all his posterity. 2. As marriage is not necessarily imposed upon all, so is it indifferent unto those which have the gift of continency: for although they need not the remedy of matrimony against fornication, having received that special gift; yet they may desire marriage for mutual comfort, and to have issue: and for other ends, whereunto marriage was appointed. 3. But unto those which cannot contain, it is necessary to use this remedy, and to them marriage is not indifferent. So the Apostle saith, It were good for a man not to touch a woman: nevertheless to avoid fornication, let every man have his wife, &c. 1 Cor. 7.2. and verse. 9. If they cannot abstain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. 4. But though this liberty be given to use the remedy, yet there must be a temperate sobriety and moderation, both in the use of marriage, that they do not give themselves over to fleshly delight, but sometime sequester themselves to fasting and prayer, 1 Cor. 7.5. And a comely decency must be observed both in first and second marriages, not hastily and greedily to fall into them: as among the Romans Numa made a law, that a woman should not marry within ten months after her husbands death, Ursinus.

1. Doct. Of the general and particular contents of this precept.

IN this Commandment under one special kind of adultery, all other acts of uncleanness whatsoever are restrained: and whatsoever belongeth unto chastity, is prescribed and commanded: as these three virtues principally: 1. Chastity. 2. Shamefastnes. 3. Temperance. The contrary unto which virtues likewise are forbidden.

1. Chastity is commanded, which is a virtue keeping both the soul and body chaste, avoiding and shunning all uncleanness and unlawful lust, both in marriage, and in the single estate: as also all causes, occasions, opportunities, egging and provoking thereunto, as likewise the effects and inconveniences that ensue thereon. So the Apostle teacheth: This is the will of God even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication, that everyone of you should know how to possess his vessel in holiness and honor, not in the lust of concupiscence, &c. 1 Thess. 4.3, 4.

Contrarie unto this virtue of chastity are, 1. Such kinds of inordinate lust as are against even this nature of ours, as it is corrupt: as first, the confusion of divers kinds, as when men are given over to vile affections to defile themselves with b • uit beasts. Secondly, the abuse of the sex, as when men with men work filthiness, which was one of the sins of the heathen, Rom. 1.28. Likewise may the feminine sex be abused, Rom. 1.27. Thirdly, when as the lawful sex is used, but in too near a degree, as in incest: all these are unnatural lusts, and deserve of the Magistrate to be extraordinarily punished.

2. Other kinds of lusts there are, which proceed from this our corrupt nature: 1. Fornication between parties not married, when as one with one committeth folly, or which is more odious, one with many, which is the vile practice of strumpets and whores. 2. Adultery, either the one party being married, and it is called adulterium simplex, simple adultery: or both, which is adulterium duplex, double adultery.

3. There are beside these, evil inclinations of the heart, and inward inflammations, which the godly do resist by prayer, and cut off the occasions of them: and the remedy against this kind of lust is marriage, according to S. Paul's rule: It is better to marry then to burn, 1 Cor. 7.9.

4. Shamefastnesse is here required▪ which abhorreth all kind of turpitude and uncleanness, being always accompanied with a certain grief and fear, lest anything uncomely should be committed: such was the shamefastness of Joseph, that being enticed often by his shameless Mistress, would not afterward come into her company,

Contrarie hereunto are, 1. Immodestie and unshamefastnesse, such as was in Herod • as daughter, that came in impudently and danced before Herod and the rest that were at the table. 2. Obscenitie and uncomeliness in word or in deed, as in Joseph's Mistress, that was not ashamed to move him with her own mouth to lie with her.

3. Temperance is also commanded, which is a moderate and sober use of such things as belong unto the body, as meat and drink, agreeable for the time, place, and persons, as S. Paul saith, Be not filled with wine, wherein is excess, Ephes. 5.18.

Contrarie hereunto are, 1. Intemperance in meats and drinks, as in drunkenness and gluttony: 2. Facesse and superfluity of meats and drinks, which breedeth intemperance: as also excess and pride of apparel, reproved by the Prophet in the daughters of Zion, Isai. 3. and other unseemly usages of the body, as in painting or colouring the face or hair, as wicked whorish Ie • abel used to do, 2 King. 9.30. 3. Contrarie unto this moderate temperance, is in another extreme superstitious and immoderate abstinence, such as was that of the Heremites and Anachorites, that with too rigorous abstinence and fasting did oppress nature, Ursinus. 4. As in temperance in diet is forbidden, as the nourishing cause of lust, so also in all other kind of behavior: as the wantonness of the eye, which opened as it were a window unto that great sin of adultery, which David committed with Bathsheba, 2 Sam. 12. Likewise obscenitie and uncomeliness in speech: for evil words corrupt good manners, 1 Cor. 15.33. Simler. But these two last rehearsed are rather opposite unto the second virtue of shamefastness before rehearsed.

1. Confut. Against the Anabaptists and Nicolaitans, which make their wives common.

THou shalt not commit adultery, &c. First, seeing this precept commandeth chastity in the married estate to be preserved, the Nicolaitans, and heretics called Gnostici, are condemned, which as of other things, brought in a filthy community and mutual commixtion of their wives, Bucanus. Contrarie to the Apostles doctrine, To avoid fornication, let everyone have his wife, 1 Cor. 7.2. that is, the wife ought to be proper and peculiar to the husband, and the husband likewise to the wife: for the honor of marriage is stained when the marriage bed is defiled, and therefore the Apostle putteth them both together, Heb. 13.4.

2. Confut. Against the Manichees and Marcionites that condemn marriage.

FUrther, this Commandment forbidding the violating of marriage by adultery, and all other unclean and unlawful lust, consequently alloweth the wholesome remedy of marriage, against the old heretics, the Manichees, Encratites, Marcionists, Chrysost. hom. 12. in 1 Timoth. Ambrose addeth to these the Patritians, in 1 Tim. 4. that condemned marriage, as being instituted of Satan: whose wicked opinion is blasphemous against God, upon whose blessing, (Increase and multiply) dependeth the procreation of children, which is the special fruit of marriage: And they contradict the holy Apostle, who saith, That marriage is honorable, &c. Hebr. 13.4.

3. Confut. Against the Romanists that forbid Marriage.

THirdly, the Romanists are here confuted, that enjoin single life unto their Priests, as more agreeable unto their orders, which they think are defiled and polluted by marriage: and they count that to be the more holy state among them, and such to be most religious, which are entered into a vow of single life: so that although they do not in open blasphemy condemn marriage, as the other wicked heretics, which made the devil the author thereof, yet they speak falsehood through hypocrisy, and under pretence of greater holiness, condemn the holy institution of marriage, so that they cannot escape the censure of the Apostle, which calleth it a doctrine of devils to forbid to marry, 1 Tim. 4.1.3. Neither can they shift it off by saying, that they do not forbid marriage generally: no more did the Manichees, who allowed their hearers, such as were lay men, to marry, but denied that liberty to their Clergy, whom they called their elect and chosen men, August. hares 46. And the Heretics called Apostolici would not permit such to marry, as had made a vow of single life, being not able to perform it, August. hares. 61. So the Romanists hold it unlawful for their votaries to marry, though they be never so weak and unable to perform their vow. It is evident then, that whereas S. Paul giveth liberty to every man for avoiding of fornication, to have his wife, 1 Cor. 7.2. and again he saith, that marriage is honorable among all men, Hebr. 13.4. the practice of the Romanists not allowing their Clergy and Monks to marry, doth contradict the Apostolical doctrine. And beside, by this restraint of marriage, they give occasion of adultery, fornication, and other unclean lusts, seeing they restrain the remedy against these enormities, which is lawful and honest marriage: and so they are apparent transgressors of this precept: Herein they are not unlike to those old Heretics, called Origeniani turpes, the filthy Origenists, who, as Epiphanius writeth of them, rejected marriage, and yet gave themselves to lust, and some of them went in the habit of Monks, professing solitary life, and yet were defiled with uncleanness, Epiphan. hares. 63. Such were the Monks in Popery, given over to all filthiness, as their hypocrisy was notably discovered in the suppression of their unclean cages and cells here in England. See more hereof, Synops. pag. 260, 261, &c.

4. Confut. Against Aquinas, that saith in the matrimonial copulation there may be mortal sin.

HEre by the way some exception is to be taken unto certain positions of Thomas Aquinas, who confuting those who affirmed, Commixtionem viri & uxoris non esse sint peccato, that the companying of the husband with the wife could not be without sin, setteth down these conclusions: 1. That 〈◊〉 conjunctio aliquando non solum est sine peccato, sed etiam ad meritum vita • ternae: that such conjunction is sometime not only without sin, but meritorious also of eternal life. 2. Quando est cum intention procr • anda prolis, vel reddendi debiti, &c. when in the matrimonial act there is an intention of procreation, or of rendering the mutual debt of marriage, it is an act of justice, and so without sin at all. 3. Aliquando est cum peccato veniali, &c. sometime it hath a venial or small sin, as when neither of the two former intendments do concur. 4. Quando autem excedit, ut si posset se extenderet in alium, tunc est mortal, &c. but when this matrimonial copulation exceedeth the bounds, that if it might be, it would extend it self to another, then it is mortal, Thomas in opuscul.

Contra. 1. No act of righteousness in man can be meritorious of eternal life; seeing our best works are imperfect, and between the merit and work there must be a proportion and kind of equality: but so there cannot be between our imperfect works, and such a perfect and infinite reward: The Apostle saith, That the afflictions of this present life are not worthy of the glory which shall be shown unto us, Rom. 8.18. If the sufferings of the Saints are not meritorious, much less their actions.

2. When matrimonial conjunction is applied to the right end, it is without sin, as S. Paul saith in the like case, Let him do what he will, he sinneth not, 1 Cor. 7.36. that is, materially he sinneth not: the thing which he doth is no sin, neither is it a sinful act: but yet there may be some blemish and imperfection in the manner: seeing our best actions are stained, as the Prophet saith, All our righteousness is 〈◊〉 filthy clouts, Isai. 64.4.

3. If venial sin be taken for a small offense, we deny not, but that such blemishes are found in matrimonial duties, which are tolerated and covered in marriage, according to that excellent saying of Augustine; Libidinis voluptas, non propter nuptias cadit in culpam, sed propter nuptias accipit veniam: The pleasure of lusts doth not take blame because of marriage, but for marriage sake doth receive pardon: Lib. 1. de concupis. cap. 15.

4. But mortal or deadly sin in marriage there is none, that is, in his sense, heinous and grievous: for if his meaning be, that the fleshly desire would extend it self to another, that is, coveteth strange flesh, this is not incident unto any act of marriage, but is a violating of marriage, by adulterous and unchaste thoughts: And if there could be any s • ch mortal and deadly sin in the duties of marriage, what is become of that saying of the Apostle, concerning the giving in marriage, He sinneth not? 1 Cor. 7.36. which also may be understood of the duties of marriage. Augustine hath this worthy saying, Sicut bono uti male malum est, ita male • ti been bonum est: been utitur bono continentiam dedicans Deo, bono utitur male continentiam dedicons idolo; malo utitur male concupiscentiam relaxans adulteri • , been utitur malo concupiscentiam restring •• s connubio: As it is evil to use a good thing evil, so it is good to use an evil thing well; as he useth a good thing well that dedicateth his continency unto God, he useth a good thing evil that dedicateth his continency to an Idol: he useth an evil thing evil, that doth loose the reins of his concupiscence to adultery, he useth an evil thing evil, who restraineth his concupiscence to matrimony, August. cont. Pelag. 1.19. If he do an evil thing well, that limiteth and keepeth his concupiscence within the bounds of marriage, he then cannot sin mortally.

V. Confut. Against Tostatus that would not have simple fornication punished by human laws.

AGainst Tostatus, here also worthily exception is taken, who justifieth this defect and imperfection in human laws, he meaneth such as are practiced among the Romanists, which do not punish simple fornication: these are his words, Injustissima civilis lex esset, qua • eretrices tolleret ; That should be a most unjust Civil law, which should take away strumpets, and punish simple fornication, &c. We will see and examine his reasons.

1. Civil laws are only to restrain such sins, whereby justice is violated, and injury done unto another, but in fornication there is no act of injustice, Non est ibi aliqua persona cui inferatur injuria ; There is no person there to whom any injury can be done.

Contra. There is a manifold wrong committed in single fornication: 1. They offer wrong and dishonor unto Christ, in making the members of Christ, the members of an harlot, 1 Cor. 6.15. 2. They injury themselves, in sinning against their own bodies, in defiling and polluting them, ibid. verse. 18. 3. They do wrong unto their posterity, bringing upon them the shame of bastardy, making them illegitimate, and disenabling them to inherit.

2. If human laws should punish fornication, it would give occasion unto adultery, incest, Sodomitry, seeing the most in a common-wealth are weak and imperfect, and if they were restrained from this smaller vice, they would fall into greater enormity • .

Contra. 1. As though God hath not appointed a remedy against fornication, and all other uncleanness, by lawful matrimony: shall men make themselves wiser than God, and seek to cure one evil by another?

2. And thus the divine order is perverted among the Romanists: for they restrain marriage, and give way unto fornication, and therefore it is no marvel, if among them such unnatural lusts do reign. Bernard well showeth the reason thereof, Tolle de Ecclesia honorabile conjug • um, &c. Take away from the Church honorable matrimony, (he saith not, take away harlots, and brothel houses, as Tostatus doth) shall ye not replenish it with incestuous persons, with concubinaries, Sodomitical vices? &c. supe • Cant. serm. 66.

3. Human laws are not to forbid all sins, because Homo legem ponens non potest dare gratiam praeservativam, &c. because man making a law, cannot give preserving grace to keep it: and this was the cause, why Lex Mosis non prohib • bat omnia vitia, Moses law did not forbid all vices, because therein was no grace given, or help ministered to avoid them: therefore some things were permitted among them, as to take usury of the Gentiles, to give a bill of divorcement, and such like. So Tostatus quaest. 23.

Contra. 1. By this reason human laws should forbid no sins, because God's word, not man's law, giveth grace to abstain from any sin. 2. Neither is there any sin forbidden in the New Testament against the moral law, which is not prohibited in the old: as it may appear by our blessed Savior's interpretation of the law, Mat. 5. wherein he giveth no new law, but only expoundeth the old. 3. Though Moses law gave no grace to keep it, yet because it was a Schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, Gal. 3.19. it was fit it should be a perfect law, and contain a strict rule of all righteousness▪ that men the rather should be driven unto Christ, seeing themselves to come so far short. 4. The toleration of some things among the Israelites, for their hardness of heart showeth not a defect in the law, but an imperfection in them, that could not be▪ subject to the perfect rule of the law. 5. And concerning the punishment of fornication, it was not omitted in Moses law: for although fornication with one were recompensed with marriage, and paying of the dowry, Deut. 22.24. yet if a daughter in Israel did play the whore, she was stoned to death, ibid. verse. 21. And seeing the law saith, There shall not be a whore of the daughters of Israel, Deut. 23.17. how dare any defend the tolerating and suffering of whores in a Christian Common-wealth?

1. Obser. Against shameless adulterers, that thrust themselves into the Congregation of the Lord's people.

THou shalt not commit adultery. This sin being so heinous in the sight of God, whereby both the ordinance of God is perverted, and matrimonial faith mutually given violated, and the Temples of the holy Ghost defiled: hereby their impudency, unshamefastnesse, and profaneness is evident, that being guilty of this sin, dare presume to come into the Lord's house, to offer themselves to hear the Word, to receive the Sacraments, or communicate in any other exercise of religion, against whom the Prophet thus enveigheth: Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, &c. and come and stand before me in this house, whereupon my name is called, and say we are delivered, though we have done all these abominations? Ierem. 7.9. Chrysostom well saith to this purpose: Non est locu • hic lupanar, sed Ecclesia; si membra meretricis habes, abesto ab Ecclesia, ne praesentiâ tuâ sordescat: This place is no brothelhouse, but the Church; if thou hast the members of an harlot, absent thyself from the Church, lest it be defiled by thy presence, &c. homil. 62. super loan.

2. Obser. Against fornication.

ANd let not only adulterers take heed unto themselves: even fornication, between those that are not married, is a grievous offense before God, who will not only judge adulterers, but whoremongers also, Hebr. 13.4. And that saying of the Apostle may be applied against fornication, as well as adulteries Know ye not, that ye are the Temple of God? &c. if any man destroy the Temple of God, him shall God destroy, 1 Cor. 3.16. Whereupon Augustine thus writeth: Non vis corrumpi domum tuam, quare corrumpi • 〈◊〉 Dei? Thou wouldest not have thine house corrupted, or defiled, why then doest thou corrupt the house of God? lib. d • in chord. cap. 9. And these mischiefs fornication bringeth with it: 1. Perdit anima • , The fornicator destroyeth his own soul, Prov. 9.18. He knoweth not, that the dead are there, and that her guests are in the depth of hell. 2. Consumit substantiam, He consumeth and wasteth his substance, Prov. 6.16. Because of the whorish woman, a man is brought to a morsel of bread. 3. Vilificat prolem, It maketh their posterity vile and base, as the Apostle showeth, Otherwise were your children unclean, 1 Cor. 7.14. that is, without marriage. 4. Privat honor, &c. It depriveth of honor, and purchaseth an everlasting blot, Prov. 6.32. He shall find a wound, and dishonor, and his reproach shall never be put away, Thomas in opuscul.

3. Obser. Against disguising of the body and uncomely apparel.

AVgustine showeth, how this Commandment is otherwise transgressed, by light behavior, disordered apparel, disguising of the body: Habitus impudicus corporis est nuntius adulterini cordis ; The unshamefast behavior of the body is the messenger of an adulterate heart: Superflua & inordinata capilatura, vestimentorum muliebrium affectata similitudo, as, Superfluous and inordinate hair, and affectation of women's garments, &c. And in women, Fucatafacies, capillorum nativi coloris adulteratio: A painted face, colouring of the hair, imitating the fashion of men's garments, &c. August. serm. 347. The one S. Paul reproveth in men, 1 Cor. 11.14. Doth not nature it self teach you, that if a man have long hair it is a shame unto him? The other S. Peter reprehendeth in women, As their broydred hair, and gold put about, and the putting on of apparel, 1 Pet. 3.3.

QUEST. I. Whether the stealing of men only be forbidden in this precept.

Vers. 15. THou shalt not steal. ] R. Solomon is of opinion, that only the stealing of men is prohibited here: because that kind of stealth only was punished by death, other kinds of theft by restitution either of double, or quadruple.

Contra. 1. It doth evidently appear, that all kind of theft, and not that of men only is here forbidden, by these two reasons: first, because the Moral law only, as grounded upon the law of nature, did bind both Jews and Gentiles, the Judicials only concerned the Israelites: therefore if other thefts had been restrained only by the Judicials, and not by the Moral law, the Gentiles would not have condemned the stealing of goods, as well as of men, as they did. Secondly, the Judicials did only bind the people after they were delivered unto them, not before: but it was a sin to steal in Israel, even before they had received the Judicials. 2. The ground of his opinion is not found: that the breach of every moral law was punished by death: for the coveting of a man's ox or asse, though this coveting had proceeded to act, was not judged worthy of death, Tostat. qu. 24.

QUEST. II. Of the order and phrase used in this precept.

THou shalt not steal. 1. Next unto those wrongs which either are done unto a man's single person, as in offering violence to his life; or in persona conjuncta, in his coupled and conjoined person, namely his wife, in committing adultery: next after follow those injuries which concern his substance, and such things as appertain unto him, Thomas in opuscul. 2. And first of all, prohibentur nocumen • a, quae infertimiur facto, those hindrances are forbidden, which are done in fact: then those, quae inseruntur verbo, which are done in word: as in 9. precept, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Lyranus. 3. But here this word theft is more generally taken, quàm apud jurisc • nsu tos, than among the Lawyers, Borrah. for it signifieth quamlibet alienae rei usurpationem, any kind of usurping of that which is another man's, Gloss. interlinear. 4. And the reason why all violence, fraud, circumvention is prohibited under the name of theft, is, Furandi verbum posuit, quod ut probros • m omnibus naturaliter exhorrent: He useth the word stealing, which all men by nature do abhor is ignominious, that we might the better be persuaded to abstain from all kind of theft, Calvin. For men cunningly do gloss and color their vicious and corrupt dealing with honest names: as fraud and deceit is called wit; and cunning getting of other men's goods, providence. The Lord therefore to meet with all such daubing, doth call things as they are, and showeth how that before him all such wrong-doers are held guilty of theft.

QUEST. III. Of the general heads of the things here prohibited.

THree things in general are forbidden in this Commandment: 1. The unjust getting of other men's goods, which is, 1. Either by rapine or violence, either of sacred things, or of profane and common. 2. Or else by theft and pilfring. 3. Or by deceit, circumvention, and fraud.

2. All damages, discommoditie, or hindrance, which either is brought upon another, by hatred, evil will, enmity: or else which is not turned aside, and declined from our brother, it being in our power.

3. The abuse of men's goods and substance is likewise here condemned, either in the evil bestowing, and expending of them in vain and unprofitable things: or in the unjust holding and possessing, and not employing of them when necessity requireth, Simler.

QUEST. IV. Of Sacrilege.

THe first general transgression then is in sacrilege, which is the stealing either of any sacred thing, appointed for holy and sacred uses, out of any place, sacred or profane; or of any profane and common thing out of a sacred place. And this sacrilege is of two kinds: it is either of things spiritual, or of things external and temporal: of this latter sort are these: 1. The willful stealing and withdrawing of such things as are ordained to holy and divine uses: which kind of sacrilege is strictly punished by human laws. Such was the sin of Achan, in stealing the wedge of gold, and the Babylonish garment, which God had consecrate to his treasury, Josh. 6.19. and for the same offense he was stoned to death. 2. When the Church goods are employed to another end, than for the which they were first given to the Church: which was to maintain the ministry of the word of God and Sacraments, to relieve the poor, to maintain the edifices of the Church. Let such therefore look unto it, as live of the tithes and revenues of the Church, being lay men, not called to the office of teaching, instructing and spiritual feeding. 3. They abuse the Church goods, which either give themselves to idleness, living of the tithes and offerings, but feed not the people: such are idle, careless, and negligent pastors: or those which misspend them in riot and excess, as in keeping hawks, hounds, in dice, cards, and such like, as do the Roman Cardinals and Prelates: all these are guilty of Church robbing and sacrilege, Simler.

QUEST. V. Whether it be lawful to convert things consecrated to Idolatry, to other uses sacred or profane.

HEre it will be questioned, what is to be thought of the converting and turning of such things to religious uses, which were bequeathed to superstition, whether therein any sacrilege may be committed or not. The answer is this: 1. That it is lawful from superstitious and no true religious uses, to convert such bequests to the true service of God, and therein no violence is offered at all to the will of the dead: for their general intendment is observed, the applying of them to sacred uses, 〈◊〉 the particular use be not kept, which they, led with the error of the time, intended, Simler▪ So the Lord commanded, that the silver and gold and brass in Jericho should be consecrate to the Lord's • urie, Josh. 6.19. which had been before abused to idolatry. 2. Where excessive and superfluous legacies have been given to such uses, it is lawful for the Civil Magistrate, reserving a sufficient maintenance for the service of God, to dispose of the overplus of such gifts for other public uses, as to support the necessity of the Crown and State, to maintain maimed soldiers, and such like, and to apply them to other lawful and profitable Civil uses: as Jehu converted the house of Baal from a superstitious and idolatrous, to a civil and public use, 2 King. 10.27. Josiah also defiled and polluted the high places, 2 King. 23.8. that is, cleansed them of those superstitions there practiced, and turned them to profane and common uses. Hereunto is agreeable that Imperial law, Cod. lib. 1. tit. 14. leg. 5. Omnia loca quae sacris veterum error deputavit, nostrae rei jubemus sacrari, &c. Honor. Theodos. All those places which have been in the error of former time appointed to sacred uses, we bid to be joined to our treasury, &c. Yet so, as it was provided by another law, that sufficient should be reserved for the use and exercise of Religion: as