tution of matrimony, wherein his native preeminence ought most to shine. Although if we confider that juft and natural privileges men neither can rightly-feek, nor dare fully claim, unless they be allied to inward goodness and ftedfast knowledge, and that the want of this quells them to a fervile fenfe of their own confcious unworthinefs; it may fave the wondering why in this age many are fo oppofite both to human and to chriftian liberty, either while they understand not, or envy others that do; contenting, or rather priding themselves in a fpecious humility and strictness bred out of low ignorance, that never yet conceived the freedom of the gofpel; and is therefore by the apostle to the Coloffians ranked with no better company than will worship and the mere show of wifdom. And how injurious herein they are, if not to themselves, yet to their neighbours, and not to them only, but to the all-wife and bounteous grace offered us in our redemption, will orderly appear.

"In the image of God created he him."] It is enough determined, that this image of God, wherein man was created, is meant wifdom, purity, justice, and rule over all creatures. All which, being loft in Adam, was recovered with gain by the merits of Chrift. For albeit our first parent had lordfhip over fea, and land, and air, yet there was a law without him, as a guard fet over him. But Chrift having cancelled the handwriting of ordinances which was against us, Coloff. ii, 14, and interpreted the fulfilling of all through charity, hath in that respect fet us over law, in the free cuftody of his love, and left us victorious under the guidance of his living fpirit, not under the dead letter; to follow that which most edifies, moft aids and furthers a religious life, makes us holieft and likeft to his immortal image, not that which makes us moft conformable and captive to civil and fubordinate precepts: whereof the ftricteft obfervance may ofttimes prove the deftruction not only of many innocent perfons and families, but of whole nations. Although indeed no ordinance human or from Heaven can bind against the good of man; fo that to keep them ftrictly against that end, is all one with to break them. Men of moft renowned virtue have fometimes by tranfgreffing most truly

kept

kept the law; and wifeft magiftrates have permitted and difpenfed it; while they looked not peevishly at the letter, but with a greater fpirit at the good of mankind, if always not written in the characters of law, yet engraven in the heart of man by a divine impreffion. This Heathens could fee, as the well-read in ftory can recount of Solon and Epaminondas, whom Cicero in his first book of" Invention" nobly defends. "All law," faith he, "we ought to refer to the common good, and interpret by that, not by the scroll of letters. No man obferves law for law's fake, but for the good of them for whom it was made." The reft might ferve well to lecture these times, deluded through belly doctrines into a devout flavery. The Scripture also affords us David in the showbread, Hezekiah in the paffover, found and fafe tranfgreffors of the literal command, which also dispensed not feldom with itself; and taught us on what just occafions to do fo: until our Saviour, for whom that great and godlike work was reserved, redeemed us to a state above prefcriptions, by diffolving the whole law-into charity. And have we not the foul to understand this, and must we against this glory of God's tranfcendent love towards us be ftill the fervants of a literal indictment?

"Created he him."] It might be doubted why he faith, "In the image of God created he him," not them, as well as " male and female" them; especially fince that image might be common to them both, but male and female could not, however the Jews fable, and please themselves with the accidental concurrence of Plato's wit, as if man at first had been created hermaphrodite: but then it must have been male and female created he him. So had the image of God been equally common to them both, it had no doubt been faid, in the image of God created he them. But St. Paul ends the controverfy, by explaining, that the woman is not primarily and immediately the image of God, but in reference to the man, "The head of the woman," faith he, 1 Cor. xi, "is the man:"" he the image and glory of God, the the glory of the man," he not for her, but the for him. Therefore his precept is, "wives be fubject to your husbands as is fit in the Lord," Coloff. iii, 18; "In every thing,',

Eph

Eph. v. 24. Nevertheless man is not to hold her as a fervant, but receives her into a part of that empire, which God proclaims him to, though not equally, yet largely, as his own image and glory: for it is no small glory to him, that a creature fo like him fhould be made fubject to him. Not but that particular exceptions may have place, if the exceed her husband in prudence and dexterity, and he contentedly yield: for then a fuperior and more natural law comes in, that the wifer fhould govern the lefs wife, whether male or female. But that which far more eafily and obediently follows from this verfe is, that, feeing woman was purpofely made for man, and he her head, it cannot ftand before the breath of this divine utterrance, that man the portraiture of God, joining to himfelf for his intended good and folace an inferior fex, fhould fo become her thrall, whofe wilfulness or inability to be a wife fruftrates the occafional end of her creation; but that he may acquit himself to freedom by his natural birthright, and that indelible character of priority, which God crowned him with. If it be urged, that fin hath loft him this, the aufwer is not far to feek, that from her the fin firft proceeded, which keeps her juftly in the fame proportion still beneath. She is not to gain by being firft in the tranfgreffion, that man should further lofe to her, because already he hath loft by her means. Oft it happens, that in this matter he is without fault; fo that his punishment herein is caufelefs and God hath the praise in our speeches of him, to fort his punishment in the fame kind with the offence. Suppose he erred; it is not the intent of God or man, to hunt an errour fo to the death with a revenge beyond all measure and proportion. But if we argue thus, this affliction is befallen him for his fin, therefore he must bear it, without feeking the only remedy: first, it will be falfe, that all affliction comes for fin, as in the case of Job, and of the man born blind, Joh. ix, 3, was evident : next, by that reason, all miferies coming for fin, we must let them all lie upon us like the vermin of an Indian Catharift, which his fond religion forbids him to moleft. Were it a particular punishment inflicted through the anger of God upon a perfon, or upon a land, no law

hinders

hinders us in that regard, no law but bids us remove it if we can; much more if it be a dangerous temptation withal; much more yet, if it be certainly a temptation, and not certainly a punishment, though a pain. As for what they fay we muft bear with patience; to bear with patience, and to feek effectual remedies, implies no contradiction. It may no lefs be for our difobedience, our unfaithfulness, and other fins against God, that wives become adulterous to the bed; and questionless we ought to take the affliction as patiently as Chriftian prudence would wish: yet hereby is not loft the right of divorcing for adultery. No, you fay, because our Saviour excepted that only. But why, if he were fo bent to punish our fins, and try our patience in binding on us a difaftrous marriage, why did he except adultery? Certainly to have been bound from divorce in that cafe alfo had been as plentiful a punishment to our fins, and not too little work for the patienteft. Nay, perhaps they will fay it was too great a fufferance; and with as flight a reason, for no wife man but would fooner pardon the act of adultery once and again committed by a perfon worth pity and forgivenefs, than to lead a wearifome life of unloving and unquiet converfation with one who neither affects nor is affected, much lefs with one who exercises all bitterness, and would commit adultery too, but for envy left the perfecuted condition fhould thereby get the benefit of his freedom. It is plain therefore, that God enjoins not this fuppofed ftrictnefs of not divorcing either to punish us, or to try our patience.

Moreover, if man be the image of God, which confifts in holiness, and woman ought in the fame respect to be the image and companion of man, in fuch wife to be loved as the church is beloved of Chrift; and if, as God is the head of Chrift, and Chrift the head of man, fo man is the head of woman; I cannot fee by this golden dependance of headship and subjection, but that piety and religion is the main tie of Christian matrimony: fo as if there be found between the pair a notorious disparity either of wickedness or herefy, the hufband by all manner of right is difengaged from a creature, not made and inflicted on him to the vexation of his righteoufnefs: the

wife

wife alfo, as her fubjection is terminated in the Lord, being herself the redeemed of Chrift, is not ftill bound to be the vaffal of him, who is the bondflave of Satan: the being now neither the image nor the glory of fuch a perfon, nor made for him, nor left in bondage to him; but hath recourfe to the wing of charity, and protection of the church, unless there be a hope on either fide: yet fuch a hope must be meant, as may be a rational hope, and not an endlefs fervitude. Of which hereafter.

But ufually it is objected, that if it be thus, then there can be no true marriage between mifbelievers and irreligious perfons. I might anfwer, let them fee to that who are fuch; the church hath no commiffion to judge those without, 1 Cor. v. But this they will fay perhaps, is but penuriously to refolve a doubt. Ianfwer therefore, that where they are both irreligious, the marriage may be yet true enough to them in a civil relation. For there are left fome remains of God's image in man, as he is merely man; which reafon God gives against the shedding of man's blood, Gen. ix, as being made in God's image, without expreffing whether he were a good man or a bad, to exempt the flayer from punishment. So that in those marriages where the parties are alike void of religion, the wife owes a civil homage and fubjection, the husband owes a civil loyalty. But where the yoke is mifyoked, heretic with faithful, godly with ungodly, to the grievance and manifeft endangering of a brother or fifter, reafons of a higher ftrain than matrimonial bear fway; unless the gospel, instead of freeing us, debase itself to make us bond-men, and fuffer evil to control good.

"Male and female created he them."] This contains another end of matching man and woman, being the right and lawfulness of the marriage-bed; though much inferior to the former end of her being his image and help in religious fociety. And who of weakeft infight may not fee, that this creating of them male and female cannot in any order of reafon, or christianity, be of fuch moment against the better and higher purposes of their creation, as to enthral husband or wife to duties or to fufferings, unworthy and unbefeeming the image of God