RIGHT welbelo­ued brother Pollē ­tius, Cha. 1. the firste que­stiō of those which you writyng vnto me intreated as by way of consultacion, 1. Cor. 7. is that the Apostle sayth, To those that bee in mariage, I commaunde, not I, but the Lorde, that a wyfe do not go from her husbād, but if she go from him, that she remayne vn­maried, or els be reconcyled to her husband again. And that an hus­bande putte not away his wyfe. Whether it ought so to bee taken and vnderstonded that the womā is prohibited to marye, whiche goeth from her husband without cause of fornication (for that is your opiniō): or els, as I thought in those bookes whiche manye [Page] yeres ago I wrote vpon the ser­mon in sainct Mathewes gospell whiche our sauiour made vpō the mountaine, that he commaunded those women to remaine vnma­ried which did go from their hus­bandes for that cause whiche is only permitted, that is to say, the cause of fornication. For you thynke that a woman goyng frō her husbande ought not than to marye, if she go away beyng not compelled by any fornicatiō of her husband. And you considre not, if her husband geue no cause of for­nication, that than she ought not to remaine vnmaried if she go a­way, but she ought not at all to go frō him. For truely she that is cōmaunded to remaine vnmaried if she go from her husband, hath not the libertie of goyng awaye [Page] taken from her, but the libertie to be maried. Whiche saiyng of you if it be true, than is libertie geuen to those women that be disposed to liue in continencie, not to tarry nor regarde the consent of their husbandes, that the saiyng of the Apostle, (let not a woman go frō her husband) should seme to bee commaunded to theim that may chose, not continencie, but suche a deuorse as may bee lawfull to ioyne with other in mariage. Therfore it shalbe lauful to those women that loue to desyre no company of mā nor to beare the yoke of mariage, to forsake their hus­bandes yea without any cause of fornication and accordyng to the Apostles saiyng to remain vnma­ried. And men likewyse (for there is like forme in both) if they wyl [Page] liue continētly, may without the consent of their wyues forsake them, & remaine without any ma­riage. For than (as you thynke) they may seke newe mariages, if the deuorse be for the cause of fornication. But when that cause is not, than it foloweth (after your mynd) that the wyfe either ought not to go from her husband, or if she go from him, to remaine with out mariage, or els to returne to her former husband again. Ther­fore whan there is no cause of fornication, it shalbe lawful to either of theim to chose one of these thre thynges, either not to go one frō the other, or if either parte go a­way, to remaine so, or if they do not remain so, then not to seke thē another, but to returne to their former husband or wyfe againe.

[Page]And where is than that the same Apostle would not y ^t either of y ^e maryed parties shuld defraud the other in their carnall debt, Cha. 2▪ no not for a tyme, & for this cause al­so that they might wholy & with more feruent diligēce applie them selues to praier, but by their mu­tual consent? Howe shall this be saued that the Apostle sayth. 1. Cor. 7. But for fornicatiōs, let euery husbād haue his wyfe, & euery wife haue her husband. And let the husbād pay his debt to his wyfe, and likewyse the wyfe to her husbande. The wyfe hath not power of her body but the husband, & likewise the husband hath not power of his body but the wyfe. How shal this be true, except when the one partie wyll not, the other partie may not liue in continencie? For [Page] if the wyfe may so put away her husband that she may remain vnmaried, then the husbād hath not power of her body, but she her self Whiche is also vnderstāded of the husband. Moreouer when it is sayd, whosoeuer putteth awaye his wyfe, Math. 5. exceptyng the cause of fornication, maketh her to bee an adultresse: Howe shall wee vn­derstande this saiyng, but that a man isprohibite to put away his wyfe, if there be no cause of for­nication? and it is tolde why? lest he make her to bee an adultresse. Truely therefore, because al­though she put not him away, but be putte away her selfe, she shall be an adultresse if she marry.

Therfore for this great harme and inconuenience, Cha▪ 3. it is not law­full for a man to putte away his [Page] wyfe, but for the cause of forni­cation. For then in puttyng her awaye he dothe not make her an adultresse, but putteth away an adultresse. What if the man say, I put away my wyfe without a­ny cause of fornication, but for that he wyll liue chast, in conti­nencie: shal we therfore say that he dothe lawfully that he dothe? Who dare say so, that vnderstā ­deth the wyll of the Lord, saiyng that he would not haue the wyfe put away, no not because the mā would liue sole and chast, which excepted only the cause of fornication? But lette vs returne to the very wordes of the Apostle, sai­yng: 1. Cor. 7. To theim that bee in mari­age I commaunde, not I but the Lord, that the wyfe go not from her husband, but if she go, to re­maine [Page] vnmaried. And let vs aske of him, & as it were consult with him beyng present. Why diddest thou say O Apostle, if she go frō her husband let her remayne vn­maried? Is it lawful for her to go away from him, or is it not law­ful? If it be not lauful: why doest thou commaunde her goyng from her husbād to remain vnmaried? But if it bee lawfull, than truely there is a cause why it should be lawfull. This cause with no ser­chyng is founden but onely that which our sauiour excepted, that is to say, the cause of fornication. And therfore the Apostle cōmaunded not a wyfe that did go from her husband, to remaine vnma­ried, except she went from him for that cause, for whiche onely it is lawfull for a wyfe to go from her [Page] husband. For where it is sayd, I commaunde her not to go away, but if she do go away, to remaine vnmaried: God forbyd that she that so goeth away that she must remaine vnmaried, should do any thyng against this commaunde­ment. Howe therfore is she com­maunded to remaine vnmaried if she go away, except ye vnderstād her that may lawfully go away, which is not lawful to any wyfe, but in case her husband committe fornication? Who is it that wyll say, if a wyfe go frō her husband without cause of fornication, let her remain vnmaried: seyng that she may not at all go frō him but for fornication? Therefore I thynke that you nowe perceiue, howe muche this your vnderstā ­dyng is contrarie to the bonde of [Page] mariage, where God would not that continencie should bee taken on hand, but by the mutual agre­ment & cōsent of both the parties.

But let vs open the matter a lytle playner, Cha. 4 and as it were sette the thyng before our eyes. Put the case, that continent life plea­seth the woman, but not the man. The woman goeth from him, and begynneth to liue cōtinently, she for her part wil liue chast, but she shal make her husband an adulte­ror (which God wyll not) because he, whē he will not liue cōtinētly, wyll seke another woman. What shall wee say to the woman, but that the churche sayth in an hol­som doctrine, pay thy debt to thy husband, lest whyles thou sekest howe to be more honoured, he do fynde howe to bee damned. For [Page] this would we say to him also, if he would liue cōtinently without thy good wyll. For thou hast not power of thy body but he, like as he hath not power of his body but thou. Do not defraude one ano­ther but by comon consent. When we haue sayd these & other thyn­ges that pertain to this purpose, doth it content you that the womā should answer vs after your opi­nion, I am obediēt to the Apostle that sayth, I commaunde a wyfe not to go from her husband, but if she do go, to remaine vnmaried, or els to be reconciled to her hus­band. Loo I haue gone from my husbande, and I wyll not bee re­conciled, but wyl remaine vnma­ried. For he sayth not, if she go a­way, lette her remaine vnmaried tyl she be reconciled to her husbād [Page] but let her remaine vnmaried, or els be reconciled to her husbande. And he sayth let her do either this or that. He hath permitted one of the two to be chosen, & cōpelleth not to take the one. I haue chosē to remaine vnmaried, and so do I fulfil the cōmaundement. Correct me, blame me, refuse me, vse what seueritie you wyll if I do marry.

What can I say again to this woman, but this. Thou doest not vnderstand the Apostle well? For he would not haue commaunded the woman to remayne vnmaried if she go frō her husband, but on­ly suche a womā as may lawfully go frō him, that is to say, for that one cause, whiche is therfore not expressed there, because it is most knowen, whiche is fornication. For god our master excepted that [Page] cause onely, when he spake of puttyng away a wyfe, & did geue vs to vnderstande, that the lyke forme was also to be kept in the husbande, for not onely the wyfe hath not power of her body but the man: but also the mā hath not power of his body but the wyfe. Therefore when thou canst not accuse thy husbād of fornication, howe doest thou thynke to excuse thy goyng frō him by liuyng vn­maried, from whom it is not lawfull for the to go at all? When the woman shal heare these thynges of vs, I suppose she wyll answer vs thus againe, and say that she remaineth therfore vnmaried, be­cause she went from her husband without any fornication on his part. For if he had doone fornica­tion, then it had been lawfull not [Page] onely to go from him, but also to marry againe.

She can not say this, seyng that you are ashamed to geue that licence to women. Cha. 6 For you sayd, if a mā put away his wyfe for ad­ultry, and marry another, the wo­man onely shall haue the shame. But if a wyfe put away her hus­band for the same cause, and bee married to another, not onely the man but also the womā shal haue the shame. For whiche your sai­yng you made this reason, That men wyll say, she went therfore from her husbande, because she would marry another man. And if that man be perchance suche as the other was (for it is likely and easely for menne to faull into that kynde of vice) if she put him also away, & marry to the thyrd: then [Page] they wyl say more and more that she desireth to haue a gret nūbre of husbandes. And by this reason you cōclude & say. These thinges thus intreated and discussed, the woman must tolerate her husbād or els remayne vnmaryed. You haue geuen good counsail to wo­mē, that seyng they know that it is permitted vnto them to marry other, if they put away their for­mer husbādes for fornication, yet thei shuld not do it for the shame, but rather tolerate their adulte­rous husbandes, lest by this occa­sion they might seme to haue a wyl to be ioyned with many men, because it is hard for a womā not to fynd suche a man to marry, as he was whom she put away, be­cause men be prone to this vyce. Seyng therfore we say that it is [Page] not lawfull for a womā that put­teth away her husband for forni­cation, to marry another: and you say that it is lawful, but not expedient: Than w ^tout doubt we both say that she ought not to marrye that putteth away her husband for fornicatiō. But this differēce there is, that when both the par­ties be christened, wee say that a womā puttyng away her husbād for fornication, may not marry an other, and that she may not put away her husband without the cause of fornication. But you say that a woman may not marry an other, if she put away her husbād without any cause of fornicatiō, But if she do putte him away for that cause, that than it is not ex­pedient for her to marry, because of the shame and reproche. And [Page] so you permit a woman that shal not marry, to go from her husbād be he a fornicator or none at all.

But because the Apostle or ra­ther Christ by the Apostle dothe not permitte a woman to go from her husbād that is no fornicator, Cha. 7▪ therfore he forbiddeth her to ma­ry that goeth away, whō he suffereth to go away for fornication. For she of whom it is sayd, if she go away let her not marry: is suf­fered vnder that condicion to go away that she should not marry. If therfore she chose not to mar­ry, there is no cause why she shuld be prohibited to go away, as she of whom it is sayd, if she liue not continently, let her marry, and so is permitted to liue not continētly vpon this condicion that she mar­ry. If therfore she chose to marry [Page] she cannot be compelled to liue cō tinently. Lyke as a woman refu­syng to liue continently, is com­pelled to marry, that her inconti­nent life may not be damnable: so she goyng frō her husband is compelled to remain vnmaried, that her goyng away may be not cul­pable. But she shall be culpable if she go frō her husband without fornication, although she remain vnmaried. Therfore she is com­maunded to remayne vnmaried, if she go away, that goeth away frō a fornicator. Seyng these thyn­ges be thus, if we vnderstand the Apostle after that sorte, that we say to women, go not from your chast husbādes, but if ye wyl go, see that ye remain vnmaried: than wyll all those that delite to liue continently: suppose that they [Page] may lawfully go away without the consent of their husbandes. Whiche thyng seyng wee ought not to permitte, than it foloweth that the saiyng of the Apostle, (if she go away let her remaine vn­maried,) we ought to teache that it is spoken of her, whō we haue lerned may lawfully go away for no cause but for fornication. Lest (if we teache otherwyse) by pre­tence of cōtinentliuyng we trou­ble christen mariages, and lest a­gainst the most mercifull cōmaundement of our Lord, we compel & driue into adulteryes menne that wyl not liue continently without their wiues, when thei be forsakē of their wyues that wyll not liue continently. And so likewyse of women.

Than this that the lord sayth, Cha. 8. [Page] not in that sermon I expounded, but in another place. Whosoe­uer putteth awaye his wyfe but for the cause of fornication, and marieth another, committeth ad­ultery: if we vnderstande it this waye, that whosoeuer putteth a­way his wyfe for fornication and marieth another doth not commit adultery: Than it semeth in this matter y ^t there is not like forme & reason betwene the husbād & the wyfe, because the wyfe although she go from her husband for fornication, & marieth another, yet she doth adultery: but y ^e mā if he put­teth his wyfe awaye for the same cause & marieth another, doth no adulteri. But if ther be like forme in both: than both be adulterours if thei marry other, although thei separate theim selues for fornica­tion. [Page] And that there is like forme in this matter betwene the man & the wyfe, the Apostle sheweth there (wherof I must often make menciō) wher when he had sayd, the wyfe hath not power of her owne body, but the man, he added and sayd likewyse, the man hath not power of his owne body, but the woman.

Than (say you) why did Christ adde to his saiyng, Cha. 9 the cause of fornication, & did not rather say generally, whosoeuer putteth a­way his wyfe & marieth another committeth adultery, if he also cō mitteth adultery whiche putting awaye his wyfe for fornication, marieth another? I thīke because Christe would make mencion of that whiche is the greater fault. For who denieth but it is more [Page] adultery to putte his wyfe away without cause of fornication and marry another, than puttyng her away for fornication to marry an other, not because this is no adul­tery, but because it is lesse adul­tery, whē after the fyrst wyfe put away for fornication the second is maried. For sainct Iames the Apostle vsing a like speche, sayth To him that knoweth to do well and do not, it is synne. Is it ther­fore no synne to him that kno­weth not to do well, and therfore doth it not? yes truely it is synne, but this is greater, if he bothe knowe, and do not. And this is not therfore no synne, because it is lesse. But to speake then both after one sort, like as whosoeuer putteth away his wife, excepting the cause of fornication, and ma­rieth [Page] another, cōmitteth adulte­ry: Euen so whosoeuer knoweth good & doth it not, synneth. But like as it cā not be well sayd here therfore if he knowe not, he syn­neth not, (for there be also sinnes of those that bee ignoraunt, al­though thei be lesse than of those that knowe: Euen so it can not be well sayd there, Therfore if he putteth away his wife for forni­cation, and maryeth another, he cōmitteth no adultery. For there is adultery also of theim whiche marry other, forsakyng their for­mer wyues for fornication, but yet lesse than of those that marry other, forsakyng their wyues not for fornication. For like as it is sayd, to him that knoweth good and dothe it not, it is synne: euen so this also may bee sayd, to him [Page] that forsaketh his wife without cause of fornication and maryeth another, it is adultery. Therfore like as if we say, whosoeuer ma­ryeth a woman that is forsaken of her husband not for fornica­tion, cōmitteth adultery, without doubt we say true: and yet we do not deliuer him from that cryme that marieth a woman whiche is putte awaye for fornication, but doubte not but bothe bee adulte­rors, Euen so we pronounce him an adulteror, that w ^tout cause of fornication forsaketh his wyfe & marieth another, and yet wee doo not therfore defend him from the spot of that cryme, that putteth away his wyfe for fornication & maryeth another. For although one be more than another, yet we knowe theim bothe to be adulte­rors. [Page] For there is no man so vn­reasonable, that wyll deny him to bee an adulteror that marieth a woman whom her husband hath put away for fornication, when he wyll call him an adulteror that maryeth her that is putte awaye without fornication. After this sorte therfore these be both adul­terors. Wherfore when we say, whosoeuer maryeth her whō her husband hath put away without cause of fornication, committeth adultery: we speake it of one of theim, & yet do not therfore deny him to bee an adulteror that ma­rieth her whom her husband hath putte away for fornication. So when both be adulterors, that is to say, both he that puttethaway his wyfe without cause of forni­cation and maryeth another, and [Page] also he that puttyng awaye his wyfe for fornicatiō, coupleth him selfe to another: Truely when we reade this of one of them, we may not vnderstande it so, as though by him the other wer denyed to be an adulteror, because he is not ex­pressed. But if sainct Mathewe the Euangelist make this hard to be vnderstāded, by expressyng the one kynde, and kepyng in silence the other: did not the other Euan­gelistes comprehēd both so gene­rally, that it may be vnderstanded of bothe? For in sainct Markes gospel it is thus written, whoso­euer putteth away his wyfe, and maryeth another, committeth ad­ultery vpon her: and if the wyfe putteth away her husbād and bee maryed to another, she cōmitteth adulterye. And in sainct Lukes [Page] gospel thus. Euery mā that put­teth away his wyfe, and maryeth another, is an adulteror, and he that marieth her that is put away of her husbande, is an adulteror. Than what are wee that do say, there is one that puttyng awaye his wife & mariyng another, is an adulteror, And there is another that doyng the same thyng is no adulteror: seyng the gospel sayth, euery manne is an adulteror that doth it. Therefore if whosoeuer dothe it, that is to say, puttyng a­way his wyfe, maryeth another, is an adulteror: without doubte than they bee bothe adulterors, both he that without fornication and he that for fornication put­teth away his wyfe. For that is, whosoeuer putteth away, that is to say, euery one y ^t putteth away.

[Page] Cha. 10.And whē I brought furth the wordes of S. Mathewes gospel I dyd not skyppe ouer that was writtē (and maryeth another) and sayd thus, (he commytteth adul­tery) as I can not tell why it is thought so to you: but I put in the wordes whiche be red in the long sermon that the Lord made vpō the mountaine. For that toke I on hād to intreate vpon, which wordes bee there red so as I put theim, that is to say, whosoeuer putteth away his wyfe except the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery, & he that ma­ryeth her that is loosed from her husbande, commytteth adultery. Where although diuers exāples of bookes haue in diuers wordes the same sence when it is inter­pretated: yet they do not diffre frō [Page] that is vnderstand of it. For some copyes haue, Whosoeuer putteth away, Other haue, euery manne that putteth away. Lykewise, some haue, except the cause of fornication, other, besyde the cause of fornication, other, but for the cause of fornication. Lykewise, some haue, he that maryeth her y ^t is losed frō her husband is an ad­ulteror: other haue, he that marri­eth her that is dimissed or put a­way of her husband is an adulte­ror. Where I suppose you see that it maketh no matter for one & the same sentence, although this last sentēce, that is to say, he that maryeth her that is put from her husband, is an adulteror, Diuers bookes bothe Greke and Latine haue it not in that sermō that the Lord made vpon the mountaine. [Page] And I suppose therefore because this sentence may bee thought there to be explicated, in this that is sayd before. He maketh her to commit adultery. Howe can she that is put away bee made an adultresse except he that shal marry her be made an adulteror?

The wordes also that you put in, Cha. 11 wherfore you thought, that he cōmytted no adultery, that put awaye his wyfe for the cause of fornication, and maryed another: be verely obscure and darkely put in. Wherfore I meruail not if the reader do stycke at the vnderstā ­dyng of them, but yet they be not in that sermō of our Lord which I than intreated, when I wrote these thynges that moued you when you red thē. For in another place the same Mathewe calleth [Page] that Christ spake those wordes, not when he made the long sermō vpon the mountayn, but when he was asked of the Pharisies, whether it was lawful to a man for a­ny cause to putte away his wyfe. But that whiche is not vnderstā ­ded by sainct Mathewe, may bee vnderstanded by other Euangeli­stes. Wherfore when we reade in sainct Mathewes gospel, whoso­euer putteth awaye his wyfe but for fornicatiō, or rather this that is red in the greke text, besyde the cause of fornication, and marieth another, is an adulteror: Wee ought not by & by to thynke him no adulteror, that for the cause of fornicatiō putteth away his wife and maryeth another, but yet bee in doubt tyl we cōsult and reade y ^e gospel of other Euāgelistes that [Page] write of the same matter. What & if all be not written by S. Ma­thewe that pertaineth to this ma­tier, but a part is so written, that the whole may be vnderstāded of the part, which thyng S. Marke and sainct Luke as it were ma­kyng it plaine, had rather speake the whole, that the full sentence may appeare? Seyng therefore fyrst, not doubting that to be true that is red in S. Mathewe, who soeuer putteth away his wife for the cause of fornication, and ma­rieth another, is an adulteror: we do aske, whether only he is an adulteror in mariyng another wife, that besyde the cause of fornica­tion putteth awaye his former wyfe: or els euery man that put­teth away his wyfe and maryeth another, that he may be also included [Page] that putteth away his wyfe for fornication. Shall it not bee answered to vs by saint Markes gospell, why aske you, whether the one bee an adulteror and not the other? Whosoeuer putteth a­way his wyfe & maryeth another cōmytteth adultery. Shall it not also bee sayd to vs by S. Lukes gospel, why dout you whether he for the cause of fornicatiō putteth away his wyfe and maryeth an­other, bee an adulteror or no? E­uery man that putteth away his wyfe and maryeth another, is an adulteror. And because it is not lawfull to say the Euangelistes do not agree in one sence and one vnderstandyng, althoughe they speake of one thyng in dyuers wordes, therfore we must vnder­stande, that it pleased sainct Ma­thew [Page] to signifie the whole by the part, and to be of the same mynde, not that one man that putteth a­way his wyfe, and maryeth ano­ther, that is to say, he that put­teth her away beside the cause of fornication is an adulteror, and another man that putteth away hiswife for fornitation, is no ad­ulteror, but euery man that put­teth away his wife and maryeth another, should not bee doubted, but that he is an adulteror.

For that also that foloweth in sainct Luke, Cha. 12 he that maryeth a woman that is put away from her husbād, is an adulteror, howe is it true? Howe is he an adulte­ror, but because she whō he ma­rieth is yet another mans wife, so long as he liueth that did put her away? For if he haue carnal copulation [Page] with his owne wyfe, and not with another mannes wyfe, than commytteth he no adultery. But he doth commytte adultery. Therfore she is another mannes wife with whom he kepeth com­pany. Moreouer if she be another mannes wyfe, that is to say, his wife that put her awai, although she bee put away for fornication, yet she ceasseth not to be the wife of him that did putte her away. But if she cease to bee his wyfe, than is she wyfe to him that ma­ried her the tyme. And if she bee his wyfe, then is not he to bee iudged an adulteror, but an husband. But because the scrip­ture calleth him not an husband, but an adulteror, therfore she is yet his wyfe that did put her a­way for fornicatiō. And therfore [Page] what woman soeuer he maryeth that putteth awaye his former wyfe for fornication, she is an adulteresse, because she compa­nyeth with another wyues hus­band. Than howe can it be that he should be no adulteror, when it is certaine that she commytteth adultery whom he maryeth.

Nowe let vs see and considre this that the Apostle sayth. Cha. 13 But to other, I say, not the Lord, be­yng about to speake to vnequall mariages. (Unequal mariages is when bothe the parties bee not Christians, but the one parte.) Whiche saiyng, me thynke, he sayd by the way of exhortacion & admonishement, for because the partie christened be it manne or wyfe, may lawfully forsake and put away the other partie that is [Page] an infidele: therfore not the Lord but the Apostle forbyddeth that to bee done. For that the Lorde forbiddeth, may not be done at al. Therfore the Apostle dothe ex­hort and admonishe the parties that haue receiued the fayth, not to vse their licēce permitted them in forsakyng the infidele parties, that there may bee an occasion to wynne many to the fayth. But you thynke that it is not lawfull for the christians to putte away the infideles that bee maryed to them, because the Apostle forbid­deth it: When as I say, it is law­full, because the Lord dothe not forbid it, but not expedient, be­cause the Apostle doth counsail it not to bee done, who also geueth a reason why it is not expedient to bee doone, although it be law­full [Page] he sayth. 1. Cor. 9. When I was free from all men, I made my selfe seruant of all men, that I might wynne many men. When he had sayd a lytle before: Haue not we power to take our meate and drynke? Haue not wee licence to leade a­bout with vs a woman a syster as the other Apostles and the Lordes brethren & Peter? Haue I onely and Barnabas no power thus to do? Who doth euer go on warfare at his owne wages and charges? who doth plant a vyne­yarde, and eateth not of the fruite of it? who is a shepeherd and ta­keth not of the milke of y ^e flocke? And a lytle after he sayth: If o­ther men haue this power ouer you, why not we rather? But we haue not vsed this power, but suffre all thynges, least we geue [Page] any stop to the gospel of Christ. And a lytle after he sayth: What rewarde shall I haue, that prea­chyng the gospell, do make the gospel to be at no cost or charge to the receiuer, and do not abuse my power in the gospel. And by and by he putteth after, that I sayd a lytle before, when I was free frō all men, I made my selfe seruaunt of all men, that I might wynne many. Lykewise in ano­ther place concernyng thynges pertainyng to men, he sayth: 1. Cor. 6. All thynges be lawfull to me, but I wil be brought vnder the power of nothyng. The meate is for the bely, & the bely is for the meate, but God shal cause to cease both the bely & the meate. Lykewise in another place concernyng the same. All thynges be lawful, 1. Cor. 10 but [Page] all thynges be not expedient, all thinges be lawfull, but all thyn­ges do not edifye. Let no manne seeke that is his owne, but that is another mannes. And to shew wherof he spake, he sayd: What soeuer is solde in the market, eat of it, askyng & serchyng nothyng for conscience sake. And yet in another place he sayth: I wyll not eate fleshe for euermore, 1. Cor 8. lest I should offend my brother. And lykewise in another place: All thinges be cleane, Ro. 14. but it is euil to that man that eateth by offensiō. What is this (al thynges be lawfull? Uerely this, (all thynges be cleane. (And what is this (but al thinges be not expediēt)? Uerely this (but it is euil to that man that eateth by offension. Thus he sheweth that thynges whiche [Page] be lawfull, that is to say, whiche be prohibite by no commaunde­ment of the Lorde, ought rather to be ordered as they be expediēt, not by the appointment of lawe, but by the counsail of charitee. These bee the thynges that bee further bestowed vpon the wounded mā, whiche was brought by the mercyfulnes of the Samari­tane to the Inne to be cured and made whole. And therfore they be called not commaunded of the Lord, although they be admoni­shed of the Lord to bee done and offered, that we should vnderstād them so muche to bee the more thankefull as they be declared to be voluntary and not due.

But in suche thynges that be of this sorte, Cha. 15 that although they be lauful yet thei be not expediēt: [Page] It may not be sayd in them, this is good, but that is better, as it is sayd: 1. Cor. 7. He that geueth his vir­gyn to mariage doth well, and he that geueth not his virgyn to mariage dothe better, for there both be lawful, and the one som­tymes, somtymes the other is ex­pediēt. For to those women that liue not syngle cotinently, it is expedient to marry, & so that is lawfull, is expedient. But to theim that haue vowed continencie, it is neither lawfull nor expedient. Moreouer it is lawfull to go frō an infidele husband, but not ex­pedient. And to remain with him if he consent to dwel with her, is both lawfull and expedient. For if it were not lawful it could not be expediēt. One thyng therfore may be lawfull, and not expediēt: [Page] But it can not be expedient that is vnlawfull. And for that cause not all lawfull thynges be expe­dient, but all vnlawfull thynges be not expedient. For lyke as e­uery one that is redemed by the bloudde of Christ, is a man or a woman: but not euery one that is a man or a woman is redemed by the bloudde of Christ: Euen so euery thyng that is not lauful is not expedient, but not euery thyng that is not expedient is al­so vnlawfull. For there be law­full thynges that be not expedi­ent as we haue learned by the Apostles testimony.

But it is herd to define by a­ny vniuersal rule, Cha. 16 what differēce is betwene that is vnlawful and therfore not expedient, and that is lawful and yet not expedient. [Page] For a man wyll soone say, euery thyng that is not expedient to be done, is synne, but euery sinne is vnlawful, therfore euery thyng not expedient, is vnlawfull. And than where be those thinges the Apostle sayth be lawful, but not expedient, if euery thyng that is not expediēt be vnlawful? wher­fore, because we may not doubte but the Apostle sayd true, and we dare not say that any synnes be lawfull: Than it foloweth wee must say, that some thing is done that is not expediēt, & yet if it be lawfull it is not synne, although it be not to be done, because it is not expedient. But if it bee thought an absurditee, that any thyng should be done that is not expedient, and that he should be sayd not to haue synned that did [Page] it: we must vnderstand that it is called an absurditee by y ^e custome of speche, which custom of speche extendeth so farre, that we say, beastes hauyng no reason ought to bee beaten when they faut or synne. But to synne, properly pertayneth to nothyng but to him that vseth the reasonable election of frewyl, whiche among al mor­tal liuyng creatures, is geuen to none but to manne. But it is one thyng when we speake properly, and another thyng when wee bo­rowe wordes either by abusyng of them, or els by translation frō other thynges.

That we may therfore labor (if we can) by some propre differēce to put distinction betwene that is lawfull and not expedient, Cha 17 and that is vnlawful and therfore not [Page] expedient: Me thinke, those thin­ges be lawful and not expedient, whiche by righteousnes be per­mitted before God, but for offen­dyng of men, ought to bee auoy­ded, least therby they bee stopped from saluatiō, and those thynges be vnlawfull and therfore not expediēt, that be forbidden by righ­teousnes it selfe to be done at all, although thei be praised of those to whose knowledge they bee brought. Whiche thyng if it be so, than onely vnlawful thynges be prohibited of God, that thyn­ges lawfull & not expedient, may bee auoyded not by the bonde of lawe, but by the free beneuolence of mans discrecion. Therfore if it were not lawful to put away the infidele husbād or wyfe, the lord would haue forbydden it to bee [Page] done, and the Apostle forbiddyng it would not haue sayd, I say, not the Lord. For if the man be per­mitted to bee separated from his wyfe for the cause of fornicatiō: howe muche more ought the mā to detest and abhorre in his wyfe the fornication of the mynde, that is to say, infidelitie, of the which it is written: Psal. 72 Because loo they that make them selues farre from the, shall perishe. Thou hast de­stroyed euery one that hath gone by fornication from thee.

But because it is after that sorte lawfull, Cha, 18 that it is not expe­dient, least menne beyng offended for the separation of their wyfes, should abhorre the doctrine of saluacion, by whiche vnlauful thin­ges be prohibited, and so remain worse & worse in their infidelitie [Page] to their owne damnacion: Ther­fore the Apostle is an intercessor, and by admonishment forbiddeth to be done, that is lawfull in that sorte that it is not expedient. For christen men and women be euen in lyke sorte not forbydden of the Lorde to go from their infidele wyfes and husbandes, as they be not cōmaunded. For if they were commaunded to put away suche wyues & husbandes: than there should be no place left to y ^e coun­sail of the Apostle that admoni­sheth y ^e thyng should not be done. For a good seruant would by no meanes forbid a thing to be done that the Lord cōmaundeth. For the Lorde ones by Esdras the prophet cōmaunded it to be done, 1. Es. 10. and it was done. The Israelites all that than had any, put away [Page] their wyfes that wer straungers borne of another stocke, by which wyfes the men were seduced and led to straunge goddes, and not the women were won & brought to y ^e true god by their husbādes. For as yet the great grace of our sauiour did not shyne, & the mul­titude of that people didgape and looke for the temporal promises of the olde testament. And ther­fore when they sawe those men also that worshypped many false gods abound in worldly goodes whiche they looked for at the Lordes hand as a great reward, by the flattery of their wyues. First they were afrayde to offend those false goddes, and afterward were induced to worship theim. Wherfore the Lorde cōmaunded by the holy man Moyses, that no [Page] mā should marry a wyfe beyng a straūger born. Therfore by good right they did put away at y ^e lor­des cōmaundement, those wyues they maried against the Lordes commaundement. But when the gospel begā to be preached to the Gentyles it found one Gētile ma­ryed to another, of whom if both the parties dyd not receiue the fayth, but the man or the woman beyng an infidele dyd consent to dwel with the other parte beyng christened: Neither the christian ought to be prohibited of y ^e lorde to put away the infidele, nor yet to be cōmaunded. For she ought not to bee prohibited, because iu­stice suffereth to go away from a fornicator, & an infidele mā hath in his harte the greater fornica­tion: nor his chastitee with his [Page] wyfe can not bee called true, be­cause whatsoeuer is not of fayth is synne, although a christiā wo­mā may haue true chastitie with an infidele husband that hath no true chastitie. Therfore the chri­stians ought not to be commaun­ded to be separated frō infideles, because they were bothe maryed beyng Gentiles, not against the commaundement of the Lorde. Seyng than y ^e Lord neither for­byddeth nor commaundeth the christian to go from the infidele: Therfore, that the christiā shuld not go away, not the Lord, but the Apostle sayth, hauyng the holy ghost in whom he is able to geue fruitful and faythfull coun­sail. Wherfore when he had sayd of the womā whose husbād was dead, she shal be more happi, if she [Page] remaine so, after my counsail: lest any man might thynke this to be contemned as mannes counsail & not as Goddes, he added after, I thynke verely that I haue the spirit of God. We must therfore vnderstand that the thinges that be not cōmaunded of the Lorde, but be fruitfully coūsailed of his seruaunt, be counsailed by the in­spiration of the same Lord. God forbyd that any Catholike man say, when the holy ghost dothe counsail, that the Lord doth not counsail: seyng that he also is the Lord, & the workes of the Trinitie be inseparable. Yet he sayth, (concernyng virgynes I haue no cōmaundement of the Lord, 1. Cor. 7. but geue counsail, not that we shuld thynke this counsail came not of the Lorde, seyng it foloweth by [Page] and by, and he sayth. As hauyng obtained mercy of the Lord to be a faythfull counsailor. By God therfore he geueth a faythful coū sail in y ^e spirit of whō he sayth. I thinke that I also haue y ^e spirit of God. Notwithstandyng the cō maundement of the Lord is one thyng, and the faythfull counsail of the seruaunt accordyng to the mercyful gyft of charitee whiche is inspired & geuen to him of the Lord, is another thyng. There to doo otherwyse is not lawfull, here it is lawful, but so that the thyng lauful, is partly expedient, partly not expedient. It is than expedient, when not only by righteousnes before god it is permit­ted, but also when men receiue of it no impediment to saluation: al­though to do otherwise, (that is [Page] to say, to marry and embrace ma­riage whiche is good, but lesse than continency) is both lawful & expedient. Because it so releueth by the honesty of mariage the in­firmitie of y ^e fleshe whiche is euer prone to fal to al vnlawful thyn­ges, that it stoppeth no man from saluacion, although it wer more expedient & more honest, if a vir­gyn would take that counsail, whervnto y ^e cōmaundement doth not cōpel her. Than also a lauful thyng is not expedient, when it is permitted, but the vse of that libertie and power, bryngeth to other an impediment of saluaciō. Of this sort is (wherof we haue spoken long) the departyng of a christian man or wife from an in­fidele, whiche the Lord forbyd­deth not by commaundement of [Page] lawe, bycause it is not vniust be­fore hym: but the Apostle forbid­deth it by the counsel of charytie bicause it is to the infidels an im­pediment of saluacion, not onely for that they be very perniciously offended: but also for that when they fall and ioyne theim selues in other maryages their wyues beyng alyue that put them away before, than they be with muche difficultie loosed and pulled from suche adulterouse maryages, as they be bounden vnto.

Therefore here where that is lawefull is not expedyent, Cha. 19 it may not bee sayd, yf she putte awaye the infidell, she dothe well, yf she put him not awaye, she doth bet­ter: as it is sayd, he that gyueth to maryage doth wel, and he that dothe not gyue to maryage dothe [Page] better. For in that second part not onely both be lawfull, & therfore to neither of them any manne is compelled by Gods commaunde­ment: but also both be expedient, the one lesse, y ^e other more, wher­fore to that is more expedient, by the Apostles counsell euery man that may is prouoked to take it. But this where the questyon is concernynge the puttynge away or not puttyng awaye of the in­fideles wyfe or husband? both be lyke laweful by that ryghtwyse­nes whiche is before God, and therefore the Lorde forbyddeth neyther of them: but yet both be not expedient for the infyrmities of men, and therfore the Apostle forbiddeth that is not expedient, the Lord geuyng him free liber­tie to forbyd, for neither that the [Page] Apostle counsaileth, the lord for­byddeth, nor that the Apostle forbyddeth, the Lord cōmaundeth. Whiche thyng if it were not so, neither the Apostle would coun­sail any thyng against the lordes prohibition, nor would forbyd a­ny thyng against the Lordes cō ­maunded. Wherfore in these two causes, the one concernyng mari­yng and not mariyng, the other concernyng puttyng away or not putting away the infidele partie: In the Apostles wordes there is some thyng like▪ some thyng vn­like. The lyke thyng is that both there he sayth, I haue no com­maundement of the Lord, but do geue counsail, and here he sayth: I say, not the Lorde. For this saiyng, I haue no cōmaundemēt of the Lord, is like to this, The [Page] Lord sayth not. and this saiyng, I counsail, is lyke to this, I say. But this is vnlyke that concer­nyng mariyng and not mariyng, it may be sayd, this is well done, that is better, because both be ex­pediēt; the one lesse, y ^e other more But concernyng the puttyng a­way or not puttyng away of the infidele partie, it may not be sayd he that putteth away doth well, & he that putteth not away dothe better, but it must be said, let him not put away, for althoughe it be laweful, yet it is not expediente. Thus we may saye, it is better not to put away the infydle wife or husbande, although it be law­ful to put hym or her away euen as we say well, it is better, that is lawful and expedyēt, then that is lawful and not expediente.

[Page]For these causes, Cha. 20 when I ex­poundyng the Lordes longe ser­mon whiche he made vppon the Mountaine, came to that questy­on concernynge the puttynge a­way of wyues or not puttynge away, ioynyng also therunto the testimonies of the Apostle: I said it was the Apostles councel, and not the Lordes commaundement where he sayd. To other I saye, 1. Cor. 7 not the Lorde, counsellyng those that had infidel wyfes not to put them away, if they consented to dwel with them. Whiche thynge truely was to be counselled and not to be cōmaunded, for mē may not be forbidden with such great weight and charge to do thinges lawful althoughe not expedyent, as thei be forbiddē to do thyngs vnlawfull. And yf at any tyme [Page] the Apostle did vouchfafe to coū ­sel those thynges that were also to be commaunded: that did he to fauoure mens infirmytie, not to do any preiudice to Goddes com­maundement. For whiche cause he sayde, I wryte these thynges not to cōfound you, but I admo­nishe you as most derely beloued children. What questiō is in this that he saith, I say, not the lord? lykewyse where he saith. Behold I Paul say vnto you, that yf ye be cicumcised, Gala. 5. Chryst wyll pro­fyte you nothing: dyd he not also in this place saye, I say, not the Lord? But these be not lyke, be­cause it is not vnsemely nor con­trary, if the Apostle councel these thinges that the lorde also com­maundeth. For we counsell and admonishe them whom we loue, [Page] to do the preceptes or cōmaunde­mētes of the Lord. But when he sayth, I say, not the lord, he she­weth sufficiētly that the lord forbiddeth not that he forbad. And y ^e Lord would haue forbydden it, if it had been vnlauful. Therfore accordyng to those thynges that we haue before long and muche disputed: it was lawfull by righ­teousnes, & yet beyng lawfull it was not to be done for good wil and free beneuolence.

But you, whose opiniō is, that it is aswell vnlawful that y ^e lord forbiddeth not, but y ^e Apostle, Cha. 21 as it is vnlauful that the Lord for­byddeth. When ye would haue expounded what ment this saiyng of the Apostle, I say, not the lord, whereas the Apostle spake vnto christians that wer maried with infideles, you sayd that the Lord [Page] cōmaunded there shuld be no ma­riages made with theim that be of a diuers religion, & ye brought in the testimony of the Lord, sai­yng: Thou shalt not take a wyfe to thy sonne of the doughters of straungers borne, Deut. 7. least she leade him after her gods, and his soule perishe. You did also adde y ^e wor­des of the Apostle wher he sayth: A woman is bounden so long as her husbād liueth. But if her hus­band be dead, she is free to marry whom she wyll, onely in the lord. Which you expoūded so, that you added, that is to say, to a christiā. Thā you added further. This is therfore the cōmaundemēt of the Lord aswell in the old testament as in the newe, that no parties should remaine beyng coupled in mariage except they be of one re­ligion & faith. Than if this be the [Page] Lordes cōmaundement bothe in the olde testament and the newe, and if the Lord cōmaunde it and the Apostle teache it, that no ma­riage remaine coupled but of one religion and fayth: Why than a­gainst the lordes cōmaundemēt, against his own doctrin, against the precept of the olde testament and the newe, dothe the Apo­stle cōmaund, not only coūsaileth but also cōmaundeth, that if the husband or wyfe receiue y ^e fayth, the one should not put away the other beyng an infidele if the in­fidele consent to dwel with him? By these your wordes you shew euidently inough that this is one thyng and that another. For that (as you say) the Lord byddeth, y ^e Apostle teacheth, both the testa­mentes cōmaunde. But this is a­nother matter, who can denye? [Page] where it is intreated, not of those that are to be maried, but of those that be already maried. For thei wer both of one infidelitie when they were maryed, but when the gospel came, the mā without the wife, or the wife without the mā receyued the fayth. Than if this be a diuers thyng, as it appereth without any scruple or doubte: why doth not the Lord cōmaund as the Apostle doth, that the chri­stian should remaine in mariage with the infidele, except peraduē ­ture that lacketh in this place, that he himselfe sayd so boldly in another place. Wyll ye receiue an experiment of Christe that spea­keth in me? 2. Cor. 13 And truely Chryst is the lord: vnderstād you not what I say? or shall I tary in this and declare it a litel better? mark whether I do not in a playner speche [Page] laye the matter as it were before your eies to be cōsidered. Behold ther be two maried persons, both infidels when they were maried: in these two there is no question that can perteine to the lordes cō mandement, and the Apostles do­ctrine, and the precept of the olde and newe testament, whereby a Christian is forbiddē to ioyne in mariage with an infidel, for now they be man and wife and as yet bothe be infidels, as yet they be such as thei were before they maried, and as they were maried. the precher of the gospel cōmeth, one of them he or she receyueth the faith, but so that the other infidel cōsenteth to dwel with the Chri­stian, whether doth the Lord cō ­maunde the Chrystyan to put a­way the infidel, or not cōmaund? yf you say he commaundeth: the [Page] Apostle gain saith, I saye, not the Lorde. If you say he commaun­deth not, I aske the cause why. You wyl not aunswere the cause which you put in your letters, y ^t the Lord forbiddeth Christians to be maried to infidels: for that is no cause in this matter where we speke of persōs maried, not of persons to be maried. If therfore you haue found no cause why the Lorde shulde not forbid that the Apostle forbiddeth, (for you see nowe as I suppose, that it is no cause which you thought before was one) then consyder whether this be y ^e cause which I thought was it, and was then to be spokē and now to be defended, that the Lorde sayth that thinge, whiche rightwisnes before him permyt­teth, which may not be trāsgres­sed by any meanes, that is to say, [Page] whiche the Lord so cōmaundeth or forbiddeth y ^t it is not lawfull at all to do otherwyse. For what thyng he permitteth to the liber­tie of mans free wyl, either to do or not to doo lawfully: therin he semeth to geue place to the coun­sail of his seruauntes, that they shuld rather coūsel that they shal see expediēt. Let this rule be first and specially kept, that no vnlawful thynges be done. And where any thyng is lawefull after that sorte, that to do otherwyse is not altogether vnlawful: Than let it be done that is expedient, or that is more expedient. For that the Lord sayth as the Lord, that is to say, not by the aduice of a coū ­sailor, but by the cōmaundement of a ruler, it is not lawfull to do those thynges, & therfore not ex­pedient. The lord comaundeth a [Page] woman not to go away from her husbād, but if she go away, (that is to say, for that cause for whi­che it is lauful so to do) to remain vnmaried or els to be reconciled to her husbād. For a maryed wo­man, her husband beyng aliue, is bounden to the lawe, and duryng his life she shalbe called an adul­teresse, if she be w ^t another hus­band, because the woman is boū ­den so long as her husbād liueth. Wherfore if a wife put away her husbād & marierh another, she cō ­mitteth adultery, and he that ma­ryeth her that is put fro her hus­bād, is an adulteror. And so by y ^e same cōmaundement of the lord, let a man not put away his wife, for he y ^t putteth away his wyfe without cause of fornication, maketh her to cōmitte adultery, but if he put her away for that cause, yet let him remain so.

[Page]For euery man that putteth a­way his wyfe & marieth another is an adulteror. Cha, 22 These constitu­cions of y ^e Lord must be obserued without any breach or retractiō. For righteousnes before God wylleth these thynges, whether men allowe them or disalow thē. And therfore it may not be sayd, that they ought not to bee kepte, lest men be offēded, or lest men be stopped frō that saluacion which is in Christ. For what christian man dare say, lest I offend men, or to wynne men to Christ, I wyll cause my wife to cōmit adultery, or I be my self an adulteror? For it may come to passe that a chri­sten mā when he hath put away his wife for adultry, may be thus tempted, that a certaine woman whiche hath not yet receiued the faith, desiryng to be maried to hī, [Page] do promise that she wyll become a christian not deceitfully, but in very deede, if he wyll marry her. And when the man refuseth this mariage, the tempter may make this suggestion, the Lord sayth, whosoeuer putteth away his wif without the cause of fornication, and marieth another is an adulte­ror. But if thou that hast put a­way thy wyfe for fornication, do marry another: thou shalt not cō ­mit adultery. To this suggestion let him wisely answer, that he cō mitteth more greuous adultery y ^t puttyng away his wyfe without the cause of fornication, maryeth another: but yet he that after his wyfe putte away for fornication hath maried another, is not ther­fore no adulteror because he hath put away an adulteresse, as he is an adulteror that maryeth her y ^t [Page] is put away without cause of fornication, nor yet therfore he is no adulteror that maried her whō he found put away for the cause of fornication. And for that cause, y ^t which in S. Mathew is put very darkely, wher the whole is signi­fied by y ^e part: is set furth plainly in other that haue expressed the hole generally, as it is red in S. Marke: whosoeuer putteth away his wife & marieth another cōmitteth adultery. And in S. Luke, Euery mā that putteth away his wife and marieth another cōmit­teth adultery. They say not, some do cōmyt adultery, and not other some that put away their wyues and marry other: but whosoeuer putteth away, euery mā, say thei, without exception that putteth away his wife and marieth ano­ther cōmitteth adultery.

[Page] Cha. 23But if the christiā answer thus to the tempter, vnderstāding that it is lawfull for him to put away his wife for fornication, but not lawful to marry another: What if that tempter say, cōmit this sinne for this intent, to wynne the wo­mans soule to Christ, that is dead by infidelitie, who is ready to be made a christian, if she be maried to thee: what can the Christian answere els or say, but that if he do it, he can not escape cōdemna­cion, which y ^e Apostle made men­ciō of, Rom. 5. saiyng: And as some report vs to say, let vs do euil, that good may come, whose iudgement is iust? Howe can she be a true chri­stian womā, that shal liue in adul­tery with him that maried her?

Adultery is not only not to be committed, cha. 24 which not certain mē commit, but euery man that put­teth [Page] away his wife and marryeth an other, althoughe he marry her for this intēt to make her a chry­stian: But also whosoeuer beinge not bounden to a wyfe, hath vo­wed to God to liue contynentlye, ought by no menes to sin by this pretence and recompence, that he shulde beleue therefore he myght marry her to his wife, bicause she that desyreth his maryage hath promised to becom a Chrystyan. For that thyng that is laufull to any man before he hath vowed, is not lauful whē he hath vowed he wil neuer do it, if he vow that thynge that he may vowe, as for example, perpetuall virginitie, or els, continent life after the experi­ence of matrimony when the par­ties be losed from the bond of ma­riage, or by the mutual cōsent of the parties liuing, and relesynge [Page] carnal debte one to an other, both the parties beyng faythfull and chast, whiche thing is not lauful for the man to vowe without the wyfe, nor the wyfe withoute the man. These thinges and suche o­ther as may be vowed very well, after that men haue vowed them may be broken by no condicyon which were vowed without any cōdicion. For we must vnderstād that y ^e Lord cōmaunded so wher it is red, Psal. 75 vowe & performe your vowes to your lord God. Wher­vpon the Apostle cōcernyng cer­tain women that vowed continē ­cie, and afterward would marry, whiche before they had vowed was lawfull for thē to do, sayth: Hauyng damnation because thei haue made voyde their first fayth and promise. 1. Tim. 5 Therfore nothyng is expedient that is vnlawfull, & [Page] nothyng is lawfull that the lord forbiddeth.

As for those thynges that be restrayned by no cōmaundement of the Lord, Cha. 25 but be left in the po­wer & libertie of mā: Let vs heare and obey the Apostle monishyng and counsellyng in the holy gost, either to take thinges that be bet­ter, or to beware of thinges that be not expedient. On the one side let the Apostle be heard▪ saiyng: I haue no precept of the Lord, but geue counsel. And I say, not the Lord. On y ^e other side where the hearer chooseth the better, let him be heard, saiyng: 1. Cor. 7. He that is loosed frō a wyfe let him not seke a wyfe, and if he take a wyfe he sinneth not. And also let a virgyn not marry, for he y ^t doth not geue her to mariage, dothe better, and he that doth geue her to mariage [Page] doth well. And also, the woman shalbe more happy if she remaine so, whiche when her husband is dead hath in her libertie to marry whom she wyll, only in the Lord which may be taken two wayes, either remainyng a christian, or mariyng a christian. For in the tyme of the reuelyng of the newe testament, I do not remēbre that it is without al ambiguities and doubtes declared in the gospel, or in the Apostles writynges, whe­ther the Lord did forbyd y ^e chri­stians to bee maried to infideles or no? Although the most blessed man Cyprian doubteth not of it, and doth not put it among small & light crymes, to ioyne mariage with infideles, & sayth, that that is to prostitute and to ioyne the mēbres of Christ with infideles and Gentiles. But because it is [Page] another question of them that be alredi ioyned, let the Apostle here also be hard saiēg, if any brother haue an infidel to his wife, and if she consent to dwel with him, let him not put her away: and if any woman haue an infidel to her husbande and if he consent to dwell with her, let her not put hī away And let hym be herde so, that al­thoughe it is lawful to be done, bicause the lorde saith it not: yet let it not be done, bicause it is not expediente. For the Apostle as I haue shewed before most plainly tetheth, that al thinges be not expedient that be lawful. So that for euery kind of fornicacion, ey­ther of the fleshe, or of the spirite (where also infydelitye is vnder­standed) both it is not lauful for a woman, putting awaye her hus­band to marry an other man, and [Page] also it is not lauful for a mā put­tyng away his wyfe to marry an other, because the lord saith with out any exceptiō. If a wyfe put awai her husband and marrieth an other, Luke. 6. she commytteth adulterye. And euery mā that putteth away his wyfe and marieth another, cō ­mitteth adultery. These thinges after the mesure of my talent, be­ing thus intreated and discussed: yet I am not ignorant but that the question cōcernyng mariages is verye darke and intricate and hard to make plaine. Nor I dare not profeffe that I haue as yet vnfolded either in this worke or in any other, or that I nowe can (yf I be pressed vpon) explicate al the secrete corners of it. As for that you thought good lykewyse to consult and aske my mynde in an other letter, I wolde haue de­clared [Page] it apart by it selfe, if I had thought otherwise of it then you do. But seing our mindes and opinions cōcerning that be both one, it is not nedefull to dyspute of it here any lenger.

They that be as yet vnchry­stened and lerning the cathechys­me, being at the point of death, cha. 26 if by sicknes or by any chāce thei be so oppressed, that althoughe they yet liue, yet they can not for thē selfes aske baptisme, or answere to the interrogatories of theyr faith: ther wyl which in Christes faith is manifestly knowen, may profyt them so, that they may be baptised after y ^t sort as infantes be baptized, whose wyll as yet doth not apere at al. And yet we may not therfore condēne those y ^t be in that thing more ferefull thē we thinke they ought to be, least [Page] men thinke by vs that we woldē iudge of the talent committed to our felowe seruant rather noughtely then warely. For in such matters we must consydre what the Apostle saythe. Rom. 14. Euery one of vs shal giue accompt for hī self, therfore let vs no more one iudge an other. There be that thinke, that both in this and in other thinges we must obserue, that we reade y ^e Lord sayd. Mat. 7. Do not geue an holy thing to dogges, nor cast not precyous stones before hogges, and rehersinge these our Sauioures wordes, dare not baptize those y ^t can not aunswere for them selfe, least peraduenture they haue a cō trary wil, which can not be spokē of infantes, in whom as yet there is no vse of reson. And it is not only vncredible that this mā which is vnchristened and lerninge his [Page] Cathechisme, wold not be bapty­sed in the end of his lyfe: but also if his wyl were vnknowen, it is better to geue baptism to hī that wil not, thē to deny it to him that wyl, where it appereth not whe­ther he willeth it or refuseth it, & yet it is more credible y ^t he would rather say if he could, y ^t he would receiue those Sacramentes, without which he beleued nowe that he ought not to departe out of this body.

If the Lorde where he saithe, giue not an holy thing to dogges wold haue that vnderstāded, cha. 27 that these men thinke they oughte to beware of, he wold neuer hī selfe haue gyuen to his betrayer, that whiche he vnworthy receiued w ^t other beīg worthy, to his destru­ction without any faut of the gi­uer. Wherefore we must beleue y ^t [Page] the Lord would declare by y ^t his saiyng, that vnclene hartes beare not the light of spiritual vnderstā ding. And if the doctor do preche and put into their heades, what doctrin thei ougbt to bere, which they doo not take right: because they take it not, either they bite & rent it by reprehending it, or els they tread it vnderfoote by contē ning it. 1. Cor. 3. For if the blessed Apostle say, that he gaue mylke and not stronge meate to those that were borne againe and yet but childrē in Christ? for (saith he) as yet ye coulde not, nor euen nowe ye can not take it. And if the Lorde hym self said to his elect Apostles, Ihon. 16 yet I haue many thynges to saye to you, but you can not beare theim now: how much lesse can the vn­cleane myndes of wycked men do al thynges that be spoken of the [Page] heauenlye and incorporall lyght.

But to make an ende of my dis­putaciō in the same matter it be­gan in, Cha. 28 I thinke that not onely y ^e vnchristened lerners of our faith, but also they that be coupled and liue stil in adulterouse mariages, althoughe we do not admit them to baptisme: being in good health of bodye, and remaininge styll in their adultery, yet if they lye in desperacion of lyfe, and be peny­tente within them selfes, and can not answere for them selfes: I thinke they ought to be baptized that this syn may also with the rest be wasshed awaye by the la­uer of regeneracyon. For who knoweth whether perchāce they had purposed to reteine styll the adulterouse pleasure and prouo­cacyon of the fleshe euen to bap­tisme or no? But if they may re­couer [Page] the health from that despe­racyon they were in and lyue: ey­ther they wyll do that they pur­posed, or they wyll obey as they be taught, or els yf they bee con­temners, it shalbe done to theim, as it oughte to be doone to suche naughty Christened men. More­ouer that whiche is the cause of Baptysme, the same is the cause of reconciliacion, if by any chance the peryl of death do preuent the penytent. For our mother the churche ought not to wyl theim to depart out of this lyfe, without the pledge of their peace.

FOR aunswere to these thynges you wrote to me of be­fore, Cha. 1. Christen brother Pollentius, I haue now writē agayn no smalle, volume, concer­nynge those y ^t hauing theyr own wifes or husbandes aliue, yet be coupled and maryed vnto other. Wich thyng when it was knowē vnto you, you dyd adde certayne other maters to your boke, desirīg me to make answer to those also, but when I was about to doo so, and to adde likewise to my boke, so that ther shuld be but one boke of myne answer: sodenly my for­mer booke as soon as I had fini­shed it, it was published, at the re­queste of our brethren, and not [Page] knowing y ^t any thinge was more to be added vnto it, for that cause I am compelled to make answer in any other booke by it selfe to those thynges whiche you added. And those your additions be not ioyned to y ^e end of your booke, but are put & interlaced wher it plea­sed you in the body of your boke.

Cha. 2The firste of them wherunto I thynke I must make answer, is that in these wordes of the A­postle wher he saythe. (But to the other, I say, not our Lorde, that the wyfe doo not forsake and goo from her husband, but yf she goo from hym, then to remayn vnmaryed, or els to be reconcyled again to her husband) your opi­nion is, that it is not so spoken of S. P. (yf she goo away) that it shuld be vnderstāded of her goīg [Page] awaye from her husband cōmyt­tynge adultery, for whiche onely cause it is lawfull to make de­uorse: but rather you thynke that she is therfore commaunded to lyue vnmaried that she myght be reconciled to her husband, in case he will not lyue continently, leaste she beyng not reconciled, myght so bryng her husband to fornica­cion, that is to say, to marye an o­ther she beyng alyue. Moreouer yf she goo from her husbande for fornicacion, then you thynke that she is not cōmaundyd to remaine vnmaried, but y ^t she dothe it, be­cause she wyll lyue continētly, not that she shuld be taken as brekīg the commaundement, yf she be af­terward maryed. Whiche forme also you thynke ought to be ob­serued of the husband lykewyse, [Page] y ^t he doo not put away hys wyfe, excepte it be for fornication, but yf he put her away, that he remayne wythout maryage, that he myght afterwarde be reconcyled to hys chaste wyfe, excepte she by chaūce haue chosen continencye, leaste he refusynge to be reconcyled to hys chaste wife, myght compell her to commyt adultery, yf she forbea­ryng to lyue sole chaūce to be ma­ryed to an other, during her firste husbandes lyfe. But yf he be de­uorsed from hys wyfe for fornica­tion, than you thynke, he is bown­den by no commaundemēt, to liue vnmaryed, and that he cōmytteth no adultery, yf she beynge alyue, he doo marie an other, because the saing of the same Apostle S. paul (the woman is bownden so longe [Page] as her husband lyueth, but yf her husband be dead, she is deliuered frō that bond, to marye whom she wyll,) you thynke yt ought so to be vnderstanded, that yf the hus­band commit adultery, he shulde be takē for dead, and also the wife for dead, & therfor y ^t it is lawfull for eyther of thē, as after deathe, euen so after fornication of eyther parte to be maried to an other.

Now hauynge considered these your vnderstādīges, Cha. 3 I demaūde and aske vpon you, whether he y ^t shall marye a woman, that is de­liuered from the bonde of matry­monye with her husbande, is to be counted an adulterour or no? I suppose you thynke hym to be noon. For therfor a womā during her husbandes lyfe, shall be called an adultresse, yf she be w ^t an other [Page] man: because she is bownden so longe as her husband lyuethe, And yf thys bonde wer dissolued her husbande beynge alyue: than without any cryme of adultery she myght be maried to an other man. But yf she be bownden so longe as her husbāde liuethe: thē by no meanes she may be called free from that bonde, but by the death of her husbande. Further yf thys bonde betwen the man and the wyfe be brokē and lowsed by the deathe of eyther party, and (as you say) yf fornicatiō be counted for deathe: then wythout dowt a woman shal be deliuered from y ^t bond betwen her & her husbande, whensoeuer she shall commit for­nication. For it can not be sayd y ^t she is bownden to her husbande, & yf any man doo marie her, he shal [Page] be no adulterour.

But marke what a great ab­surditie it is, Cha. 4. that therfore the mā is no adulterour because he ma­ryethe an adultresse. Yea also (whiche thīg is more mōstruouse) the woman her selfe that commit­teth adultery, shal not be called an adultresse, bebause she shall be to the second man, not an other mās wyfe, but hys own wyfe. For whē the former bond of matrimonie is brokē by adultrye, to whatsoeuer man not hauynge a wyfe, she shal be maried, she shal not be an adultresse wyth an adulterour, but ra­ther a wyfe with her husbande. Then howe can it be true, that a woman is bownden so longe as her husbande liuethe? Behold her husband liueth, because he is ney­ther departed oute of his body, [Page] nor yet hathe committed fornica­tion, (which you wold haue repu­ted for deathe): and yet the womā is nowe no more bownden vnto hym. Doo you not marke howe directly this is agaīste y ^e Apostle, saiynge, a woman is bownden so long as her husbande lyuethe? or wyl you perchaūce say, that he ly­uethe, but yet he is not her hus­band? for than he ceased to be her husbande, when she, by adulterye, dissolued the bond of mariage. Than howe shall she duringe her husbandes lyfe, be called an adultresse, yf she be wyth an other mā, seying that her husbād is not now her husband, the bond of matry­monie beying dissolued by the womās adultery? For duryng which husbandes lyfe, shall she be called an adultresse, yf she be with an o­ther [Page] man but her own husbande? But yf he cease to be her husbād, than truely she shall not be called an adultresse duringe her husbā ­des lyfe, yf she be wyth an other man but hauinge no husband she may be maryed to her own hus­bād. He that is of thys minde, doo you not see how moch he thinketh agaīst y ^e Apostles minde? Which thing is not your opiniō, but this folowethe your opiniō. Chaunge therfor the antecedēt, yf ye wil be­ware & auoid y ^e cōsequēt. And say not y ^t the dead man or dead wife, may in this place be vnderstāded for the man or wife cōmittinge a­dultery. Wherfor after y ^e holsom doctrine & teachinge, the womā is bownden so longe as her husbād lyuethe y ^t is to say, is not departed oute of hys body. For a woman maried [Page] be of the Apostles mind, that we say not, a man committing adul­tery, is to be counted as a dead man, and y ^t therfor it is lawful for his wife to marye an other man. For although adulterie be death, not of y ^e bodye, but of the soule, whiche is worse: yet the Apostle spake not of that deathe, when he sayd, yf her husband be dead, she may marie to whom she will: but of that onely deathe wherby a mā departeth oute of his bodye. For yf by the mans adulterie, the bōd of matrimonye be dissolued: than foloweth that absurditie, which I tolde before ought to be auoided, that the wife also by her fornica­tion, shuld be loosed from y ^e bond, & yf she be loosed, she is free from the law of her husband, and ther­for (which thing is moste foulish­ly [Page] spokē) she shall be no adultresse yf she be with an other man, be­cause by her own adultery she is departed frō her former husband. Which thinge yf it be so far wide of truthe, y ^t no man, (I speake not onely of Christianes,) but no commen wit will admit it: than truely the womā is bownden so long as her husband liueth, and to speake more plainly, so long as her hus­band is in his bodye. And after lyke forme and maner, the husbād is bownden, so longe as y ^e womā lyuethe, in her bodye. For whiche cause, yf he wil put away the adultresse, let hym not marye an other womā, leste he him selfe doo cōmit y ^t he blameth in his wif. Likewise yf the woman put hym awaye, let her not couple her selfe to an o­ther, for she is bownden so longe [Page] as her husband lyueth nor she is not delyuered from the law of her husbande (except he be dead) that she be no adulteresse, if she be with on other man.

And wher as it is thought hard to you, Cha. 6 that after adoulterye the one partye shulde be reconciled to y ^e other: it shal not be herd yf faith be present. For why shulde we re­ken them as yete adulteroures, whome we beleue be eyther was­shed bi baptisme, or healed by pe­naunce? Thes crimes in the olde lawe of God wer purged by no sacrifyces, which by the bloud of the new testamēt without any dowbte are purged, & therfore than it was prohibyte all to gyther to take a­gayne hys wyfe, after shee hade been defyled by an other man: al­thoughe Dauid as beynge a pre­figurer [Page] of the new testamēt with­out any delaye tooke agayne the dowgther of Saul which her fa­ther had separated from Dauid & gyuen to an other. But nowe af­ter that Christe hathe sayd to the woman taken in adulterye? And I also wil not condemne the go thy ways, synne no more here­after: who vnderstādeth not that the husbande owghte to forgyue, that he seeth y ^e Lord of them both dyd forgyue, and that he oughte not now to call her an adulteresse whose crime at her penance, he be­leueth is forgiuen by the mercy­fulnes of God.

But the vnfaythfull mens vn­derstanding abhorreth thys, Cha. 7 in so moch that some hauing litle faith or rather beynge enemyes of true faithe, fearing as I suppose, that [Page] libertye to synne without punishemēt is giuen to their wyfes, wold pul out of ther bokes that which the Lorde dyd, in pardonyng the womā takē in adulteri: as though he had permytted and giuen libertye to synne, that said, syn no more herafter: or els that the woman ought not to be made hole of god the phisyciane, by the remission of that synne, lest they being infected & not wholle myght be offended: For these men that be displeasede with thys fact of the Lord be not them selfes chaste: nor yet chastitie dothe not make them so seuere & extreme: but rather they be of that numbre of men, to whom the lord said, which so euer of you is with out synne, let him first cast a stone agaynste her, sauyng that they a­frayed bi their own cōsciēces went [Page] away, & ceased to rempte Christe, or to persue the adultresse: but these, bothe beyng sicke thē selfes, reprehend the Phisicyane, & also beynge adulterours be cruell a­gainst women committing adul­terie: to whom yf it wer saide, not as it was to the Iewes, he that is without synne, (for who is wyth­out sinne?) but he that is without this sinne, let him first cast a stone against her: than perchaunce, they that wer greued for not kyllynge the adulterouse woman wold consider, with what great mercy of god they them selfes wer spared and fauored, that beynge adulte­rours yet wer alyue.

When we say these thynges to them, Cha. 8 not onely they wyll remyt nothinge of ther seueritie, but be more ouer angrie at y ^e veritie and [Page] truthe it selfe, and speake and an­swer thus: but we be men. Shall the dignitie of our kynde beynge men, susteyn thys iniurie, that we shulde be compared to women in sufferynge of punishment, yf we commit any fornicatiō with other women besyde oure wiues? As though they ought not therfore the more to refreyn lyke men theyr vnlawfull desires and lustes, be­cause they be men: as though they ought not therfore the more, to gyue them selfes as examples of thys vertue to ther wifes, because they be menne: as though they ought not therfore the lesse to be ouercommed with filthy pleasure, because they be men: as thoughe they ought not therfore the lesse to serue the wātones of the fleshe, because they be men. And yet they [Page] be angrie yf they heare that adul­terouse men doo suffre lyke pu­nyshment wyth adulterouse wo­men, saynge they ought to be punished so moche the more gre­uously, as it perteynethe more to them, bothe to ouercom women in vertue, and to rule them by exam­ple. I speake to Chrystē men, that with faithe heare thys saiyng, the man is the head of the woman: wher thei knowlege y ^t thei ought to be the guydes, and the women to be the folowers. And therfore the man muste beware that he go not that way by thys lyuinge that he fearethe, hys wyfe wyll go by folowynge.

But they that be displeased, that lyke forme of chastytie be kepte betwen man and wyfe, and chose rather (specially in thys matier) [Page] to be vnder the lawes of y ^e world, than of Christe, because the ciuill lawes of the world seme to bynde men not with the same bondes of chastitie, that they bynd women: let them read what Antonius the Emperour, whiche was no Chry­sten man, dyd constitute and or­deyn concernynge thys matier, wher the husbande is not suffred to accuse the wife for the cryme of adulterie, to whom he hathe not in hys liuinge gyuen example of chastitie, so that bothe shulde be condemned yf that contention did proue them bothe alyke to haue been vnchaste. For the foresayd Emperours wordes wryten to Gregorianus, be these. My let­ters, saythe he, shall in no parte of the cause be any preiudice. For yf [Page] the fawlt be in you, y ^t the mariage be dissolued, and yf your wife Eu­pasia doo marie accordynge to the lawe of Iulius, she shall not be condemned of adulterye for my wrytynge, excepte it appere and be proued that she hath doon adulterye. They shal haue before their eyes authorytie to inquyre, whether you lyuynge chastely, haue been author for her to lyue likewise well and chastely or no? For it semethe to me very vn­right, that the man shulde re­quire chastitie of hys wife, whiche he hym selfe wyll not performe: which thing may bothe condemne the man, and for mutuall re­compence of bothe their crymes, make an end of the matier betwen them both, or els take away the [Page] cause of the facte. Yf these be to be obserued for the comlynes of the earthly citie, howe moche more chaste doth the heauenly citie and the feloshyppe of angels require men to be. Seyng these thynges be thus, is the vncleanes of men therfore the lesse, and not rather more and worse, because in them there is a certayne proude and licentyouse boastinge? Lette not therfore men abhorre that Christe forgaue the adulterouse woman, but rather let them knowe their owne perill, and beynge infected wyth the same sickenes, lette them flee with deuout supplication to the same Sauioure, and lette them confesse it to be necessarie to them, that they read was doon in her, let them receiue the medy­cyne of their adulteryes, and cease [Page] to cōmyt any more adulteryes, let them prayse the pacience of God in them, let them doo penaunce, and receyue pardon, and finally let them change ther opinion con­cerning the punishment of womē, and the impunitie of them selfes.

Whyche thynges consydered and intreated, Cha▪ 9 yf the commen con­condicion betwene man and wife, the commen harme, the cōmen pe­ryll, the commen wound, the com­men health & saftye, be faithfully and humbly thought vpō: the re­concylinge of them bothe, after adulteries commytted and pur­ged, shal not be honeste nor harde, where men doubt not but remis­sion of synne is made by the keyes of the kyngdome of heauen, not that after deuorse frō her husbād [Page] the adultresse shulde be called home agayne: but that after fe­lowshyppe without Christe, she shulde be called no more an adul­tresse. But beholde (some wyll say) it ought not to be doone whiche noman compelleth, be­cause peraduenture some lawe of thys worlde after the maner of y ^e earthly citie forbiddeth it, wher the remission and abolishinge of sinne by the holy bloud of Christe is not thought vpon. Than let continency be taken, whiche no lawe forbyddethe, and let no mo new adulteries be committed. And what is that to vs, yf y ^e adul­terouse wife being at lest purged and made clene by the mercy of god be not reconciled to her hus­band, so that whyles they be vn­reconcyled, no other maryages [Page] be made as lawfull matrimonye, whiche are proued to be adulte­ries? For the woman is bounden so long as her husbande liueth, & so consequently the man is boun­den so longe as his wyfe lyuethe. Thys byndyng causeth that they can not be ioyned with other with­out adulterouse copulation, wher vpon it foloweth necessarily that of two maryed persons are made fowre adulterers, yf she marye an other man and he marye an other woman. For althoughe he com­mytteth more wycked adulterye that puttinge away hys wyfe not for fornication, maryeth an other, whiche kynde of adulterye Saint Matthewe made mention vpon: yet not only he cōmitteth adultery and as Luke sayth, euery mā that puttethe away hys wife & marieth [Page] an other, cōmitteth adultery. Of whiche testimonies I haue dispu­ted ynowgh in my former booke.

But you answer me that to liue continently is gyuen to fewe men and therfore they that haue put a­way their wifes for fornication, Cha. 10. because they can not be reconcyled, thei see thē selfes to be in so great daūger, that they pronounce chri­stes lawe not to be mercyfull and gentle, but beastely and cruell. O brother, mē that lyue not continētli for as moch as perteineth to thē may haue many cōplaintes wher­by (as you sai) to pronoūce Chri­stes law to be cruel & not merciful & yet we ought not for their cause to peruerte & chaūge the gospel of Christe. You are moued onely by their cōplaint, that put away their wifes for fornication, & be not suf­fred [Page] to mari other: because to liue continently is giuen to few men, & to it, men ought to be exhorted by prayse, not compelled by law. And so if when an adulteresse is put a­way, an other wyfe may not be maried: the incontinencie of men shal haue (as you thinke) a iuste com­plainte. But marke howe many thynges ther be where yf we wyll not admyt the complayntes of mē not lyuing continently, we muste nedes permytte adulteryes to be doon. For what and yf the wyfe be holden with a longe and incu­rable sicknes of the body, so that carnall copulation islet? What & if captiuitie or some other violēce, do separate y ^e one frō the other so y ^t the mā knoweth his wyfe is aliue & yet can not inioy her: thinke you y ^t we ought to admit y ^e grudgyng [Page] of incontinent men, and to permyt adulteries? What thynke you in that same wherin the Lorde was asked the question, and answered that it ought not to be doon, but that Moyses for the hardenes of their harte dyd permytte a libel of deuorse to be giuen, and for euery cause to put away the wyfe. Doth not Christes law displease the in­continent liuers, that wyll by a diuorse reiecte and put away theyr wifes that be chyding, contētiouse iniuriouse, proud and disdainful to pay their carnal debte, and ma­rie other? Now because the incon­tinent lyfe of these men abhorreth the lawe of Christe, therfore must Christes law be changed to theyr wyll. Moreouer if a wyfe forsake her husbande, or a man hys wife, not for fornication but rather for [Page] this intent to lyue in continencye, and yet is an incontinent liuer, to whom for that cause is giuen a li­bell of diuorse: I aske the questiō whether shal not he or she be adulterours, yf eyther of them be cou­pled in mariage to any other? Yf it be sayd, they shall not be. than it is sayd againste the Lorde, whose wordes be these, who soeuer put­teth away his wife except the cause of fornication, Mark. v. causeth her to com­mit adulterie, and he that marieth her that is put away, is an adulterour. Beholde she is put away, & puttethe not her husbāde awaye, and because to lyue continently is giuen to a fewe, she gaue place to incontinencie, and toke an hus­bande, and yet an adulterour ma­ried an adulteresse. Bothe be gil­tie bothe are to be cōdemned, both [Page] she that was maried her husband beinge alyue, and he that maried her, that had an husbande alyue. Doe we here call Christes lawe vnmercyfull, wherby she is made giltye of so great a cryme, and is punyshed, whom her husband put away, without any former fornication of her parte, & because to liue continently is giuen to few, in putting her away he compelled her to mari? Why doe we not here say, that the man is to be cownted as dead, that by puttīg her wrongfulli away, brake first the bond of matrimony? For by what reason will you saie, that he brake the bond of matrimonie, that althowgh he be an adulterour, dyd not put away his wife, & that he brake the bond of matrimonie, that did put away his wife beīg chast? but I sai that [Page] the bond remaineth in them both, wher by the woman is bowndē so long as her husband liueth, be he a continent liuer or an adulterour and that therfor the woman which is put away cōmitteth adulteri, if she marie, and that he is an adulterour that mariethe a woman put away, whether her husbande that put her away be an adulterour or a continent liuer, because the wo­mā is bowndē so long as her hus­band liueth. But now we dispute of the cōplaintes of incontinent li­uers. What is thought mor right wise thā the complaint of this wo­man that saithe, I am put away, & haue not put away, and because to liue continently is giuen to few, I haue not liued continētly, but leste I shuld cōmitte fornication haue maried, & yet I am sayde to haue [Page] cōmitted adulteri because I haue maried? Shal we for this woman as it wer a iuste complaint, thinke the lawe of God is to be chāged y ^t we shuld not iudge this womā to be an adulteresse? god forbid. But ye wyll answere that the woman ought not to haue been put away, for that no cause of fornication was giuen before. You say truth. For y ^e lord expressed her husbādes syn, wher he sayd, he that putteth away his wife excepte the cause of fornication: maketh her to cōmit adultrie. But did not she therfore synne after in marieng, because he synned befor in putting her way? Therfor what dothe it profit him that the woman not liuinge conti­nently complayneth of the lawe of Christe, excepte he for hys murmuringe be punyshed?

[Page]Nowe let vs see those thynges that ye added in an other place, Cha. 11. & wold haue me to make answer to them. Where it moueth you, and you haue pitie of that man, that although it be not for that he liueth not continētly, yet at leaste for the necessitie to beget children, is compelled to lye with an adulteresse, if it be not lawful for hym so to put her away, that he may marie an o­ther she being alyue: Wher vpon you shulde be iustely moued, yf it were not adulterye to marye an o­ther, his adulterouse wyfe beynge aliue. But yf it be adulterie, (as the thinges before disputed haue taught) why is the cause of byget­tynge chyldren pretended? We may not therfore permit and giue a licence, to heynowse crimes, and we may not so auoyd to dye with­out [Page] yssue of chyldren, as we muste choose & laboure to lyue oure sel­fes for euermore. And adulterers be not suffred to lyue euermore, who after y ^e firste death, muste ne­des be condēned by y ^e eternitie of the secōd deathe. This excuse and allegation for the bygettinge of chyldrene, compellethe men to put away not onely adulterouse wo­men but also moste chaste womē, yf perchaunce they be bareyn, and to mary other, which thing I sup­pose pleasethe not you. Wherfore yf adulteries be not to be excused for y ^e cause of not liuing cōtinent­ly, how moche lesse are they excu­sable, for the cause of bygettinge of children.

Cha. 12.This infirmitie of incōtinent li­uinge, y ^e Apostel wold haue relea­ued by y ^e honestie of mariage, for he saithe not, yf she haue no chyl­dren [Page] let her marye, but, yf she lyue not cōtinently, let her marye. The generation of children is a recompence, for that she giuethe place to incontinēt life by marienge. For incōtinency is a vice, but mariage is no vice, & therfore by this good the other is made veniall euell. Seing therfore mariage is insti­tute for generation, for that cause oure fathers wer maried, y ^t onely for generation & not vnlawfully dyd company wyth women. For than ther was a certaine necessi­tie of procreation, whiche is not nowe, because ther is a tyme of embracing (as it is written) which truely was than, Eccle. iii. and ther is a time of absteininge from embracinge, which is now. Of the which tyme the Apostell speakynge, saithe: frō hence forthe, brethren, the tyme is [Page] shorte, it folowethe that they that haue wyues, be as not hauynge wiues. Wherupon at this time it is very wel and aptly said, he that can take, let him take, and she that liuethe not continently, let her ma­rye. Continencye than descended to the offyce of matrimonie for the generation of chyldren: but nowe the bonde of mariage, releauethe the vyce of incontinencye, that of them that lyue not continentlye shulde come the generation of children, not by the dishonestie of for­nications, but by the honestye of mariages. Why than saythe not the Apostell, yf she haue no chyl­drē, let her marye? because at this tyme of absteynyng from embra­cīg, it is not necessarily to bygette children. And why saithe he, if she liue not continently let her marye? [Page] Truely therfore, leste by her incō ­tinencie she be compelled to cōmit fornication. Yf therfore she liue cō tinently, let her neyther marye nor bring forthe childrē, but if she liue not cōtinētly, let her marie lawful­ly leste she bring forthe chyldrē vnlawfully, or els leste she vsing carnall copulation more vnlawfully bring forthe no children at al. Al­thoughe thys that I sayde laste, some men doo it, that be also ma­ryed lawfulli. For a mā lieth with his lawful wife vnlawfully, & dis­honesteli, wher the cōceiuyng of a child is auoided. Whiche thynge Onan y ^e sonne of Iudas dyd, & for y ^e god killed him. Gene. xxxviii. Therfore y ^e ge­neratiō of childrē is the first & na­tural cause of maryage, & for that cause they y ^t be maried by reason of incontinencie, oughte not so to [Page] temper & moderate their euel, that they bānyshe the goodnes of ma­riage, that is to say, the fruite of childrē. For the Apostell spake of incontinent liuers whē he said. i. Tim. v. I wil that the yonger vydowes doo marie, & bring forthe chyldrē, & be huswifes, & to gyue no occasiō to the aduersarie of euel speakinge. For now certayn be, turned backe after Sathā. When he said: I wil y ^e yōger to mary, he counseyled y ^t. to stay the fal of incontinencie, but leste peraduenture they shulde thynke onely of the infirmitie of carnall concupiscēce, whiche onely muste be serued & releaued in the worke of mariage, and leste the goodnes of mariage be eyther cō ­temned or neglected: he sayde by & by after: and to bryng forthe chyl­dren, and to be huswyfes. They y ^t choose to lyue continently, choose truely a better thynge, than is the [Page] goodnes of mariage, y ^t is to saye, than the generation of chyldren. Yf continencie be chosen, for thys intent, to take vpon them a better thing than y ^e goodnes of mariage howe moche more ought it to be kepte to auoid adulterye. For whē the Apostell had saide, yf she lyue not continently, let her marye: for it is better, saide he, to be maried than burn, he sayd not, it is better to commytt adulterie than burn. Cha. 13.

Ther is nothinge wherunto we may exhorte these that feare to be recōciled to their adulterous wifes or husbādes, being purged & hea­led by penaūce, but to kepe conti­nencie. For a woman is boundē so longe as her adulterouse or chast husbād liueth, & cōmitteth adulte­ry, yf she marye an other: and a man is bounden so longe as hys adulterouse or chaste wyfe liue­the and committethe adultery yf he marye an other. Thys bonde [Page] truely is not dissolued, althoughe the wife beyng chaste of her body be separate by dyuorse, moch lesse it is dissolued, yf she be not sepa­rate and commyt adulterye. And therfore nothynge dissolueth this bond, but the deathe of the man or the wyfe, not fallyng into adulte­rye, but departing owt of the bodi Wherfore yf a wyfe go frō her a­dulterouse husband and wyll not be reconcyled to hym agayne, let her remayn vnmaryed: and yf a man put awaye hys adulterouse wyfe, and wyll not receyue her a­gayn, no not after her penance, let hym kepe continencye: although not of wil to chose the better good, yet at leste of necessitie to auoyde the perniciouse euyll. To this also I wolde exhorte, yf the wyfe wer holden with a long and incurable [Page] sickenes, or els yf she were corpo­rally separate and kepte in some place, whyther her husband could not haue accesse. Laste of all to thys also I wolde exhorte, yf the woman disposed and wyllynge to lyue continently, wolde, beynge chaste her selfe, put away her chaste husbande, althoughe it is agaynste the discipline, because it is not by mutuall consent. For I thinke no Chrystē man withstan­dethe hym to be an adulteroure, that hys wyfe eyther beynge long sycke, or lōge absent, or desyrouse to lyue continently, kepeth carnall companie with an other woman. euen so in lyke maner a man put­ting awaye his adulterouse wyfe, lyuethe beyng an adulteroure, w ^t an adultresse because, not he or he but euery man that putteth away [Page] hys wyfe and mariethe an other, committethe adulterie. Wherfore yf the lyfe of holy men whiche is free from the bond of mariage is not desired: let the punishment of adulterers be feared. And at leste let concupiscence be brydelyd with feare, yf continencie be not chosen by loue. Yf wher feare is, their la­boure workethe also: truely where labour was, ther shall loue be. We may not truste of oure own strength, but prayer muste be ioy­ned to oure labours & indeuours, that he myght kyll vs with good, that fearethe vs from euell.

Let vs answer also to that, y ^t you thynke, Cha. 14. men are compelled to pu­nishe their adulterous wifes with out any mercy, when they wolde haue them deade, if it be not law­full for them to marye other du­ringe their wifes lifes. And going [Page] about to amplyfie thys crueltie, you said, thys semethe not to me, moste louing father, to be a godly sense, wher gentilnes and pitie be excluded. These wordes you speake, as thoughe men oughte therfore to fauor & spare their adulterous wifes, because they may mary other, or yf they may not, y ^t than they shuld not spare thē, for thys intent that they might marye other. But rather they oughte to shewe mercy to their sinful wifes that they thē selfes myghte obteyn mercy for ther sinnes. And moche more thys oughte to be doon of thē y ^t puttinge away their adulte­rous wifes, desire to liue continēt­ly: for they oughte so moche to be more merciful, as they laboure to be more holy, y ^t they may be holpē of god to preserue chastytie in thē selfes, whiles that they reuēge not [Page] the violation and breache of cha­stitie in their wiues, and specially that word of the lord is to be cal­led to memorie, he that is w ^tout sinne let him firste cast a stone a­gainst her: not he y ^t is without that sinne, as we speake of chaste men, but he y ^t is without sinne, whyche thinge yf they say they be, they de­ceue them selues and truthe is not in thē. But yf they doo not seduce them selues, & yf truthe be in them there shall not be in thē any cruell & bluddy seueritie. For knowinge thē selues not to be without sinne, they forgyue that they myghe be forgyuen, and mercy and pitie are not excluded from them. But ra­ther they be excluded, yf licētiouse pleasure and not carefull pitie, dyd obteyne of them pardon for there wiues synne, that is to saye [Page] that thēy shulde therfore fauoure and spare them, because, they may marie other: and not ra­ther therfore, because they would god shulde fauour and spare thē. Therfore how moch better, hone­ster and worthier is it a Christen mans professiō, to spare the bloud of adulterouse wiues because it is writtē, Eccle. xxviii. forgiue thy neyghbors vn­ryghtuosnes, & then at thy praier thy sinnes shall be loused. A man reserueth hys angre to a man and askethe a medecine of the lorde, he hathe no mercy vpon a man lyke hym selfe, and for his own sinnes he askethe mercy. Seing he being fleshe reseruethe angre, who shall haue mercy vpon his sinnes? And in the gospel. Matt. vi. Forgyue and it shal be forgyuen to you, that we may say forgyue vs our debtes as we [Page] forgiue thē that be debters to vs. And in the Apostell, Rom. xii. rendrynge to no man euel for euel, & suche lyke saynges yf ther be any holy scrip­ture, wherby when a mans mynde is prouoked to vengeaunce, be­cause he is a Chrysten man, he is mitigated.

Cha. 15.How moche better is it to speake after thys sorte as I haue tolde, thā to saie thus, forgiue ōely your adulterouse wifes, & seke not their bloud, all the sorow you tooke for their noughty liuing, the comfor­te of your newe wifes whiche you shal marie, wyll take it away, for you myghte righte well desire to take thē oute of their lifes yf their lyfe were a stoppe to you for ma­rieng of other, but nowe whē they beynge aliue, it is lawfull to pro­uide for your selfes other wyfes, why shuld you desyre so moche to [Page] kyll thē? Yf we say thus, doo you not marke howe moche thys per­suasion is agaynste y ^e foorme of a Christē mans life, because bothe it is false y ^t they may doo which they may not, y ^t is to saye, their adulte­rouse wifes being aliue, to be coupled w ^t other: & also yf they ther­fore fauoure & spare thē, they shal not spare thē for pitie & godlines, but for y ^t they haue fre libertie to marie again. Laste of al, I aske of you, whether it be lawfull for a Chrysten husbād, eyther by y ^e olde law of god, or by y ^e romains law, to caste away or kyl his wife? If it be lawful it is better, to refreyn him selfe from both, that is to say, bothe from lawfull punyshment, yf she doo synne, and also frō vn­lawful mariage, yf she be alyue. And yf he continue erneste to choose y ^e one, it is better for him to [Page] doo that is lawfull, that the adul­tresse be punished, then to doo that is vnlawfull, that she beyng alyue, he commyt adultery. But yf that be saide that is more true, that it is not laufull for a Chry­sten man to kyll hys adulterouse wyfe, but onely to put her away: who is so madde as to say vnto hym, doo that is vnlaufull, that it may be laufull for you to doo y ^t is vnlauful. For when by Chry­stes law, both is vnlawful, eyther to kyll the adultresse, or to mary an other she beynge alyue: men must absteyn from bothe, and not doo one vnlawfull thynge for an other. But yf he wyll nedes doo that is vnlawful, let him than cō ­mit adultery, and not murdre, and rather to marye an other, hys wife beinge aliue, than to shedde mans bloud. [Page] and yf bothe be cruell wykednes, he ought not to doo the one for the other, but to auoyd bothe.

Here I see what may be saide of those y ^t lyue not cōtinently, Cha. 16. that he that puttethe away hys adulte­rouse wyfe, & suffrethe her to lyue, yf he marie an other, so longe as his firste wyfe liuethe, he is a per­petuall adulteroure, and dothe no fruitfull penaūce in y ^t he leauethe not hys wicked lyfe, & yf he be vn­chrystened & a learner of the ca­techisme, he is not admitted to ba­ptisme, because he is not chaūged from that, y ^t letthethe hym, nor can not be recōciled by any means, cō ­tinuinge in the same wickednes. But yf he accusynge hys adulte­rouse wyfe doo kyll her, thys synn because he is paste it, & remaineth not in it, if it be cōmitted of a lear­ner [Page] of oure faith, it is washed and purged by baptisme, and yfit be doon of hym that is Chrystened it is made hole by penaūce and re­conciliation. But shal we therfore say adultery is no adultery, which without doubt is cōmitted, if an­other wyfe be maried, y ^e first adul­terous wyfe beyng aliue? But ex­ceptyng this kynde of adultery, you put no doubtes but that it is adultery, if any man marry y ^e wife of him that liueth, whiche is put a way from her husband by a lybell of diuorse without any fornicatiō of the woman. What say we than, when he shal see himselfe not to be admitted to Baptisme, if he bee a learner, nor to do penāce fruitful­ly, if he did this fault beyng chri­stened, in that he correcteth not and forsaketh not his offēce: if he wold [Page] or could kyll him whose wyfe he maried, that his mischeuous sinne may either be washed by baptism, or loosed by penaunce, and so hys adulterye shulde not remayne, the woman beyng voyd of the lawe of her husbande after hys deathe, but for hys synne that is paste he shuld satisfie by penaūce, or haue it washed away by regeneration. Is Chrystes lawe therfore to be accused, as cōpellyng murther to be done, seyng it calleth it adultery to marry her y ^t is put away w ^tout the cryme of fornication? In this matier (if we cōsidre & marke what we say) many more weightie thin­ges may be spoken than you haue sayd. For you, whyles that you wyll not haue it adultery to put a­way their adulterous wyues & to marry other, haue found out this [Page] y ^t yf we call these adulteries, y ^t mē shal be cōpelled to kyll their adulterouse wifes, by whose lyfe they be stopped to marie other, and to amplifie thys matier, you sayde, this semeth not to me, moste louīg father, to be a godly sense, wher gentilnes & pitie is excluded. Thā yf any man not willyng to beleue it adulterie, whē a woman forsa­ken of her husbād w ^tout the crime of fornicatiō ▪ is maried of an other man, dothe inuent thys agaynste you y ^t by that reason men are in­duced to cōmitt murders, & by all trayns & sclanders they cāe to lye in wayte for y ^e husbandes of these womē which being forsakē w ^tout cryme of fornicatiō they haue ma­ried, or els by some true crymes to accuse thē and kyll thē, that when they are dead they may be true mariages, [Page] which when they wer aliue wer adulteries: will not this man in amplifiynge y ^e matier say vnto you, thys semethe not to me, moste louinge brother, to be a godly sence, where not only gentlenes & pitie is excluded, but also great malignitie & wyckednes is pro­uoked? For it is a great dele more lyght & tolerable, y ^t the husbādes shuld kil their adulterouse wifes, than that adulterours shuld kyll their wyfes former husbandes. Dothe it please you, that for thys moste vayn enuie, we shulde for­sake y ^e defence of the lordes minde and sentence, or els that we shuld moreouer accuse it, saiyng, adul­terie ought not to bee punished & reuenged, although a womā for­saken w ^tout the cause of fornica­tion be ioyned to another mā, leste [Page] he be cōpelled to kyll her husband that put her away, whiles y ^t he de­syrethe by y ^e deathe of her former husbād to turn his adulterie into mariage. I knowe thys pleaseth not you, y ^t for thys moste vayn en­uie Christes lawe, beynge founde true and holsome, shuld be called hard & vnmercifull. Euen so after this sorte, you ought not to be of thys minde, to denie it to be adul­terie, when the secōd wyfe is ma­ried, y ^e first adulterouse wyfe beīg alyue, because y ^e husband by that means may be cōpelled to kyl the adulterous wife, whiles y ^t he desi­rethe y ^t it may be lawfull for hym to marie an other wife, she beynge slayn, yf it be not lawfull to do it, she beyng aliue. For what & yf the sclanderers & enemies of Christes fayth shuld also speake this, that [Page] men were compelled to kyll their wiues, by wicked mischiefe & craf­tie traines whiche they coulde not beare, beynge paynfull and gre­uouse to dwell w ^t all, or els being sycke with a cōtinual disease, and not able to lye with them, or els being poore, or els for loue of som fairer wiues: because it is not lau­full besyde the cause of fornicatiō to forsake & put away these wiues which they wyll not beare, and marye other, lest that they beyng boū ­den in a perpetuall adulterye, can neyther bee baptized, nor by pe­naunce healed. Shal we therfore saye, leste these myscheuous mur­ders be doon, that they commytt no adulteryes, that put away ther wiues besyde the cause of fornica­tion, and be maried to other?

But nowe for as moche as you Cha. 17. [Page] thinke it is no adulterie, yf a man put away his wyfe for fornicatiō, and marie an other, doo you not thīke we ought to beware, leste mē by this opinion shuld learn to cō ­pell their wyues to cōmit adulte­ry, which wyfes for other innume­rable causes they can not beare, that whē the bond of matrimonie is (as you suppose) by their fornication dissolued, it may be lawfull for the men to marie other: & for y ^t they cōpelled their wiues to cōmit adulterie, eyther to be washed by baptism or healed by penaūce, for bothe grace & medicine shal be de­nied to thē, so longe as they shall lyue in adulterie w ^t their second wifes, hauing put away their for­mer wyfes besyde y ^e cause of fornication? Excepte perchaunce, some man say, y ^t no man can cause hys [Page] wife to cōmytt adultery, yf she be chaste: and yet y ^e lord saithe, euery man y ^t putteth away hys wyfe be­side y ^e cause of fornicatiō, maketh her to commit adulterye, therfore truely, because when she lyued chaste w ^t her husbande▪ yet being put away, she is cōpelled in y ^t she lyuethe not continently to be cou­pled w ^t an other man, her former husband beyng alyue, & y ^t is to cō mitt adulterie. And yf she doo not thus, yet he, for as moche as per­teynethe to hym, caused her to doo it, & god will impute that sinne to him, althoughe she remain chaste. But who knowethe not, howe few there be, y ^t lyue so chastely w ^t their husbādes, y ^t although they be put from thē, yet doo not seke for other husbādes. For w ^tout cōparison y ^e number of women is greater, that [Page] where as they lyue chastely wyth their husbādes, yet yf they be put from their husbādes, doo not dif­fer to be maried againe. Therfore whē men shall beleue god, saiyng: Euery mā that putteth away hys wyfe besyde the cause of fornica­tion, causeth her to cōmyt adulte­ry: if they beleue also you, saiyng: yf the woman cōmyt fornication, her husband may lawfully marie an other wyfe: whosoeuer for any other kynde of grefes wold lacke hys wyfe w ^t whom he is ioyned, firste he causeth her to cōmit adulterie, by puttinge her away, w ^tout cause of fornicatiō, that he myght than marye an other, when she by marienge is an adultresse, & so he beyng deliuered eyther by bap­tisme or by penaunce frō the first synne wherby he caused her to cō ­mitte [Page] adultery, myght seeme to haue & inioye w ^tout any adulte­rie of hys parte, the second wyfe, which he maried after the adulte­rie of y ^e first, the bond of matrimo­nye by y ^t meanes beinge as it wer dissolued. Which thing yf any mā shal attempte or interpryse: bothe he shal cause his wyfe to commyt adulterye, & he shall be an adulteroure hym selfe, althoughe he marie an other after the adulterye of hys wyfe, and it shall profite him nothing, that he beleued you, and not rather hym, y ^e saithe without any exception: euery man that for­sakethe hys wyfe and mariethe an other, commyttethe adulterye.

All whiche thinges wel considered and intreated, Cha. 18. it folowethe y ^t they y ^t heare these thīges diligētly shuld say to vs y ^t same y ^t was said [Page] to the lorde, yf thys be y ^e state of a man w ^t his wyfe, Mat. xix. it is not expediēt to marie. Tho whom what shulde we answer again, but y ^t he answe­red, euery man takethe not thys worde, but they to whō it is giuē? There be Eunuches y ^t be so borne from their mothers wōbe, & there be Eunuches y ^t be made so of mē, & there be Eunuches y ^t gelde them selfes for y ^e kyngedome of heauē. He y ^t may take, let him take. Ther­fore he y ^t may take, let hym take, whiche all men take not, but they may take, to whom the secrete iust mercy of God geueth y ^e gyft. But amōg all these that geld thē selfes for the kyngdome of heauen, there be some of bothe kyndes, y ^t neuer knewe carnal copulatiō, some that haue had experiēce of it, & are tur­ned frō it refusyng it, other som y ^t haue proued it, partely lawfully, [Page] partely vnlawfully. Morouer of thē y ^t haue proued it laufully, som there be y ^t haue proued onely law­fully, some bothe vnlawfully and lawfully. For amonge them there be some y ^t knowe onely their own wyfes, some that know also other women & all kynde of adulterie. But they y ^t after carnall copula­tion w ^t their wyfes, geld them sel­fes for the kyngdome of heauen, eyther loose their wifes by deathe, or professe to lyue continently w ^t thē by mutuall consent, or by ne­cessitie of diuorses, leste by mariēg of other, their wyfes beinge alyue they shuld cōmitt adulterye, doo geld thē selfes for the kyngedome of heauen, not y ^t they myghte be more clere & purer there, but that they can not otherwise be there, for they y ^t lyue cōtinently not for this [Page] necessitie, but for desyre of y ^e grea­ter good, may be ther, euē keping styll the chastitie of mariage, al­thoughe in lesse rewardes, yet within the kyngdome of heauen. But they that lyue therfore conti­nently, because they feare to be maried to other, their former wyues beinge aliue: ought to take more care for their own saluation, than they tooke that loued continencie for greater reward. For than they shall be there, if they be not adul­terers. And yf they doo not lyue continently, they shall be adulte­rours, for during the lifes of their former wiues they shal not ioyne theim selues with other lawfull wyues but with adulterous wo­men. And yf they shall be absent from the kyngedome of heauen, where shal they be, but wher they shall not be saued▪

[Page]These men therfore do I speake vnto, Cha. 19. that what thyng they ought to do, yf thei had their wiues liyng sicke and consuminge in a conti­nuall diseasse, or els absent in a place where they coulde not come vnto them, or els of some vnlaw­full stomake refreynynge to kepe carnall cōpany with thē: the same thinge they shulde doo, yf their wyues dyd committe fylthy adul­terie, and for that cause diuorsyng them selues from their wyues cō ­pany, shuld not seke newe maria­ges, because they shall not be ma­riages, but adulteries. For seing ther is lyke forme in this bond of matrimonie betwē y ^e husbād & the wyfe, like as y ^e wyfe duryng here husbandes lyfe, shall be called an adultresse if she be w ^t another mā: [Page] euen so the man, during his wifes lyfe, shal be called an adulterer yf he be w ^t an other adulterouse wo­mā. For althoughe it be more greuouse sinn, beside y ^e cause of forni­catiō, yet euery mā y ^t putteth away his wife & mariethe an other, com­mittethe adulterie. Let not y ^e bur­dyn of continencye feare them: it shall be a lyghte burden, yf it be Christes, it shalbe christes yf faith be presēt, which obteineth of christ y ^e cōmaunder, y ^e performing of the commaundemēt. Let it not moue thē, that their continent lyuynge, semethe to be of necessitie, & not of wyl: for they also that haue chosen continēcy by their wyl, haue made it to be of necessitie, because they can not nowe without damnation go from it, and they that be driuē vnto it by necessitie, make it to be [Page] voluntarie, yf they trust, not in thē selfes, but in hym from whō euery good thing commethe. Some doe clyme vp to thys gyfte of conti­nēcy, for the cause of more glorie, that they might attein some grea­ter rewarde: other some flye vnto it, for y ^e care and thoughte of their finall saluation, leste they shulde perishe and be condemned: but let thē bothe remayn, let bothe walke euen to the laste end in that state they haue cōmed vnto, let thē be feruent in studye and desire, let thē be suppliant in prayer, because y ^e one sorte muste thinke vpon their saluation, & beware they faul not from that their will hathe chosen: and the other sort may not dis­paire of greater glorye, yf they loue to persyste and continue in y ^e state that necessitie hathe brought [Page] thē vnto. For it may be possible & come to passe, that by god fearing and exhorting, conuerting and re­plenishinge, mans affection may he chaūged vnto the better: and y ^t they shuld vowe to lyue moste cō ­stātely to their liues end, without mariage, without any carnall co­pulation, and experience of filthy and vnclene pleasure: y ^t althoughe y ^e dissolutiō of mariage by death, gyue them occasion to marie other wifes, yet it shulde be shut & boūd by vowe, that was opē and free by lawfulnes▪ and y ^t it shuld be made perfite by charitie, that was begō by necessitie, to suche truely lyke rewarde shall be gyuen, as to thē, that by mutual consent with their wyfes doo vowe continencye, or els beynge vnmaried, haue chosen continēt life for the greater good. [Page] But yf they liue continently after this sorte, that they be in minde to marye other womē, yf their wyues dye by whose lyfe they be stopped from suche mariages: truely al­thoughe they departe before oute of ther bodyes, in that kynd of cō ­tinent lyfe, yet it can not be impu­ted but for chastitie in mariage, for the whiche they doo not y ^t they wold doo yf it were lawfull. For to lyue continently with thys in­tent, is lytle to the atteynynge of y ^e rewarde of continencie whiche is frely chosen, yet it is sufficient to auoyd adulteries.

See that you remembre that I speake these thinges of bothe the kindes of man & womā, Cha. 20. but speci­ally for mē: which therfore thinke thē selfes to be superiours to wo­men, lest they shuld vouchesafe to [Page] be like in chastitie, wherin they ought to go before, y ^t their wyues myght folow thē as their heades. And seinge the lawe forbiddethe adulteries, yf the excuse of carnall infirmitie be admitted vnder pre­tence of incontinēcie, there shall be an occasion of sinne & destruction giuen to many vnder the name & coloure of fained lawfulnes and impunitie. For women also haue fleshe as men haue, to whom men will not any suche thing shuld be lawfull, as thoughe it wer lawful to them because they be men. But god forbid, that any thyng shulde be due to the honour of mā being the better kynd, that is a deroga­tion to the chaste honestye of the same, seyng y ^t iust honor is due to vertue & not to vice. And truely seinge men require so great cha­stitie [Page] of women hauinge fleshe as they haue, y ^t when they haue been very longe absent frō their wiues yet they wold haue thē passe ouer the heate of their youthe vndefi­led with any adulterouse compa­nie of man: and very many moste chaste women, specially in Syria passe ouer their youthe honestely, whose husbandes beinge occupied about y ^e gaines of merchaundise, leaue their wiues very younge, and scarsely at laste returne again old men to their old wifes: by this facte they proue euidently that it is not vnpossible whiche they al­ledge for thē selfes that they can not doo. For yf the infirmitie of man can not doo it: moche lesse the weker kind of women can doo it. For which cause when we put thē in feare that thinke the excellencie [Page] of man is nothing but a licence to sinne, leste by the means of adul­terouse maryages they myghte perishe for euer more: we are woont to sette y ^e cōtinencie of cler­kes before thē, which often times are taken againste their wils to beare that burden, whiche when they haue taken it, performe it by godes helpe euen to the due end of their lifes. And therfore we say to them, what yf you also be taken by the violence of the people to beare this burden, wolde you not kepe y ^e office which you haue takē vpon you chastely, beinge sodenly conuerted to purchase strengthe of the Lorde, whyche you neuer thought of before? But, say they, honour dothe comforte thē muche & we answer againe, let feare tem­per and bridle you the more. For [Page] yf many of gods ministers take sodenly and at vnwares, thys of­fice that is laid vpō them, hoping that they shall more bryghtly shyne in y ^e inheritaunce of Christe howe moche more oughte you, beinge ware of adulteries, to lyue continently, fearinge not to shyne lesse in the kyngdome of god, but to burn more in the fyre of hell. These and suche lyke, as we can, we say vnto them, that going frō their wiues by any means, or put­tynge them away for adultery, will nedes marry other, and when they are forbid, they alledge to vs the infirmitie of their fleshe. But now thys booke also is to be en­ded, and god is to be prayed, that either he wolde not suffre them to be tempted by the separation of their wiues: or els suffre them so, [Page] that the feare of their saluation whiche is in daunger, may be an occasion of greater or more approued chastitie.