" '• •' Av
vviv'.v vXv 'MvX'X*
Y.V *6* *,*"
• •
-. • >:" >;« >>•*;•> ;♦%. t • *. ;• t
t , • . • .
* .»'.*.•« *4 jC it 4
.*
'•"r«
. V.V •. ,\Yi . .\Y \v.V«Y.\v;\4 \\vt-.vX- - • • •v.v.\v/^;\Y^Y/.v.Y/.v/.v;\\Y.:.v.:;Y.\;.:i;Av.'.v.\:4:i*,%t.iA
In Memory o£
FREDERICK
BENJAMIN KAYE
(Yale, 1914)
Professor cf English
Northwestern XIniVersify
1916-1930
Northwestern University Eihrary
EVanston, Illinois
'
,V:> '•
•
CRITICAL NOTES
ON SOME
PASSAGES
O F
SCRIPTURE,
Comparing them
With the moft Ancient Versions
And reftoring them
To their original Reading, or true Senfe.
LONDON,
Printed for C. Davis againft Gray's Inn Gate in Ho lb our
mdccxlvii •
[ Price Two Shillings. ]
Q0-$
H E Author of the following Notes de-
clares, that nothing can be farther
from his intention, than by them to leffen*
in any degree, the iuft veneration of the pub-
lie for thefe ineftimable remains of antiquity:
He rather thinks it wonderful, that in the
courfe of fo very many ages, thro' remote
and ignorant nations, the oldeft books in the
world, writ in a language, which has been dead
above two thoufand years, fhould have been no
worfe corrupted* That they have fuffered
fome corruptions, is now generally agreed
by men of learning and judgment; is partly
acknowledged by the Jews themfelves col-
ledting many hundreds of various readings;
and has been abundantly proved by the learn-
ed Louis Cappel, in fo many more exam-
pies of differences from the prefent text in
the oldeft verfions, as are fufficient to con-
fute that fond notion of the conffant incor-
ruption of the Hebrew •, which in the laft
age prevailed abroad fo far, as to be eredted
into an article of Religion, and that to be
A 2
fubferibed
v ADVERTISEMENT.
fubfcribed by ail the candidates of the mi-
niftry. It was indeed afterwards, upon bet-
ter confideration, repealed, there being little
ieafon to imagine, that Providence had taken a
more peculiar care of the Old Teftament,
than had ever been fuppofed of the New,
or that Jewifh tranfcribers had any prero-
gative of infallibility above Chriitian printers.
Nor can there be any good ground for us to
give more credit to the Maforetic editors of
the Bible than to the oldeft tranflators of it,
and fometimeseven to the authors of the New,
who writ feveral ages before the Jewifh
correctors.
*
To wipe away, therefore, fome of thefer
fpots, which obfcure the face of Scripture, and
to reflore the original meaning of the text
either by interpretation, or by alteration of the
words, where the fenle and the old verfions
would warrant it, feemed an attempt, that
might pofiibly be of ufe to pious readers,
who may, at pleafure, rejeCt fuch conjectures as
are found frivolous or unneeeflary. The au-
thor will be moft glad, if any thing here will
provoke the learned and ingenious Dr. Hunt
to take- the trouble of correcting it, and, inftead
of thefe imperfeCt eflays, to publifh the valu-
able
ADVERTISEMENT. vi
able dilTertations of this kind which he has
prepared.
In the few comments on the New Tefta-
ment, tho' the aim be to difplay the truth for
the benefit of all with defire to offend none,
that perhaps, in a world full of parties and
prejudices, may be a vain expe&ation. If un-
deferved wrath arife, the befl reply to Proteft-
ant and Papifl will be St .Paul's, If I would
pleafe meny 1 fhould not be the fervant of
Chrijl,
But one thing ought not to be forgot, that
thefe Notes will be of little ufe to any that will
not take the pains firft to read in his Bible the
paffages refer'd to.
ERRATA.
Page 4. A 3• for into land read into the land
8. /. 27. refoedive refpeded
>?. /. 29.
22. /. 5- read Dp'7 mitf (1^711^1
33. /. 7. people.,
40. /. 7. p' W |17»
50. /. 19- the point
21. tranilators, read tranflators;
51./. 5. for true original
• 55. /. 8. for we wilh we and all (hould wilh
56. /. zi.pr the read that we may be fatisfied that the
63. /. 6. head
94. /. 11. Tho* add 3.
95. /. 3. here, is dele comma
97. antepen. for quotations, are read quotations arc
98. /. 2 for copies read copiers
21. in his read in a
103. /. 5.for worlhipped, themread worfhipped them
137. /. 9. after art add now
CRITICAL NOTES
Paflages of Scripture.
G E N. iv. 7.
THIS verfe is by fome commen-
tators better translated thus, If thou
doft well, is there not acceptance \
and if thou dof not well, fin (or the punifh-
ment of fin) lying at the door f For to thee is
his (Abel's) defre, and thou rulefl over him.
This feems to be the meaning of the ad-
monition and caution, which God, in his
goodnefs, offered againft Cain's jealoufy
and rage at his innocent brother.
— 8. And Cain talked with Abel his bro-
ther — and it came to pafs — The Hebrew
San Sn' I'D "IDR'I and Cain faid to Abel—
does naturally make us expert to read what
Cain faid, which in the Hebrew text now
is not expreft; but is in fo many of the an-
cient verfions, as for inflance, the Samari-
tan text and verfion, the Septuagint, the
B Syriac,
2 Critical Notes on
Syriac, the Vulgat Latin, the Jeruialem
Targum, and Jonathan's Targum, that it is
hard to forbear fuppofmg that thus much
was once in the original, as is now in the
i- /«£> iJ Samaritan text, Let us go tn-
to the field; for which words fome Hebrew
manuscripts, Dr. Walton obferves, leave a
void fpace, and that the Maforetes add in a
marginal note upon the place, that this is
one of the twenty eight gaps of this kind
which are to be found in the Scripture.
— 14, 15. Cainfaid ^ And it Jball come
to pajs, that every one that findeth me Jhall
fiay me. And the Lord Jaid unto him; there-
fore whofo ever fiayeth Cain, vengeance Jhall
be taken on him j event old. Inftead of p(?
therefore, the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Vul-
gat, Symmachus and Theodotion read in
their copies p ftp for they tranflate, Not Jo,
but whojbeverfiayeth Cain, &c.
G e n. vi. 3.
cbyhdim ♦rm pT nm»
rue; dxti rwo vo» vm neo xin dx'3
And the Lord jaid, Myfipirit Jhall not al-
ways ftrive with man; for that he aljo is
fiejh: Yet his days Jhall be an hundred and
twenty years. It is faid that the Hebrew
JVT ft 7 may lignify (hail not firive or litigate:
But whether it may or not, the Septuagint
with other Greek interpreters, the Targum
of Onkelos, the Syriac, the Arabic, and
the
GENESIS. 2
theVulgat all furnifhus fomething moreintel-
ligible, Jhall not remain or continue, by which
it appeared to Louis Cappel, that their reading
then was CLTP for pp> but it feems more pro-
bable that it was pS> which indeed fig nines
fleall remain or continue. The latter part of the
Verfe, yet his days jhall be an hundred and
twenty years, is indeed literally tranflated;
but, as it may, at firft fight, induce an un-
attentive reader to underftand, that God did
by thofe words declare, that men's lives fihould
for the future be reduced to an hundred and
twenty years, and in fa<fl they are often lomif-
conftrued, among others by Jofephus; it can-
not be improper to obferve, after other learned
men, that fuch abbreviation of the life of
man cannot there be meant, becaufe, from
that time down to Mofes, there is none of
thofe whofe ages are recorded in Scripture
who did not exceed this term of an hundred
and twenty years. But this declaration is
fuppofed to have been made fo many years
before the deluge, and this to be the fenfe
of this verfe; And the Lord jor Javo \ Jaid,
My jpirit Jhall not continue always with thcfe
men, becaufe they are carnal: But they jhall
yet fubfift an hundred and twenty years.
— xxii. i, 2. And it came to pafs after
theje things, that God did empt Ab ah am,
and /aid unto him, Abraham / n I he
J aid, Behold here 1 am. And he fa d, Take
now thy Jon, thine only fon Ijaac, it horn thou
B 2 lovejl,
4 Critical Notes on
lovejl, and get thee into land of Moriah, and
offer him there for a burnt offerings upon
one of the mountains which I will tell thee
°f.
This narrative of that fignal trial of Abra-
ham's faith and the iffue of it, upon God's
command to facrifice his moft beloved fon,
in which all agree the death and refurrec-
tion of Jefus to have been prefigured; in
one circumftance of it, namely the place of
the facrifice, has not by any writers, that
we know of, been well confidered or under-
flood; perhaps thought not to be of any
fignificancy, tho' it is to be obferved, that the
choice of the place was not left to Abra-
ham as indifferent; but 4ie was directed to
make a journey of three days to a particular
fpot in the land of Moriah, which fhould
be pointed out to him by an angel. We
have no angel now to lead us to it, tho' it
was then fo diflinguifhed, but muft trace it
out by conjecture, as well as we can. Mo-
riah is mentioned once more in 2 Chron*
chap. iii. $ 1. where Solomon is faid to
have begun to build the houfe of the Lord
at Jerufalem in mount Moriah (it might
perhaps be better rendered on a mount of
Moriah) by which Jolephus and other Jews
have been led to think, Moriah was a name
peculiarly appropriated to the mount of the
temple only, and the facrifice of Ifaac
to have been prepared upon that ground.
But
Dl
GENESIS5
Bat Maundrel and other judicious obfervers
have juftly applied Moriah to the whole
mountain of Jerufalem, comprehending all
thofe mounts of Gihon without the walls,
(of which mount Calvary was once a part)
of Sion, of Acra, or Jerufalem proper,
and of the temple within the walls. Of
thefe mount Gihon or Calvary was, and
ftill is, notwithftanding the alterations of
three thoufand years, the higheft ground to
the weft; and the mount of the temple,
the loweft of them all on the eaft fide of the
city. Of this lownefs of the mount of the
temple, one mark was the brook Siloam,
fpringing out of the fide of mount Gihon
or Calvary near the weftern wall, where it
entered, and by its channel divided the city
of Jerufalem from the city of Sion, pafling
out to the eaft near the mount of the temple:
And Jofephus confirms it, with obferving
how much pains had been taken, during
the reigns of the Afmonean princes, to
lower the ground of Jerufalem, that it
might not fo much overtop that of the
temple, as it naturally did. Beerfheba, the
place of Abraham's refidence, was in 01*
near the road from Egypt to Jerufalem,
and from that city forty two miles diftant
to the fouth weft. Conducted in that way
by an angel, he came not till the third day
to the fight of thedeftined mount of Moriah,
which appeared to him afar of; yet pro-
B 3 bably
I —: *
6 Critical Notes
bably was within few miles, as he was to
afcend it on foot with Ifaac heavy loaden.
In this pofition to the weft or fouth-weft,
it was impoftible but that that mount of
Moriah, which was higheft and neareft to
him eaftward, (hould meet his eye, which
in after ages was called mount Caivary, and
not that which was beyond it and much
lower, on which afterwards the temple ftood.
It was therefore on this mount Calvary,
that Abraham offered his only fon, as on this
fame mount Calvary, about two thoufand
years after, the Almighty Father decreed that
his only fon Jefus fhould be facrificed for the
redemption of mankind. This rocky mount
has been taken in and inclofed with the city
wall by Adrian or when the Chriftians be-
came mafters there, and is ftill high, not-
withftanding the great pains, that have
been taken to dig it down, and reduce it
within the compafs of a church, called the
Temple of the holy fepulchre: In which
the cleft rock, ftill bearing the memorial of
our Saviour's paffion, is clofely joined, and
almoft under the reputed altar of Ifaac, the
old tradition, among the Chriftians of jeru-
fa;em, being that both the type and anti-
type were offered there.
And on this very fpot, in all probability,
after the burnt offering of the ram, and
Gocfs g acious acceptance of all with the
words, And in thy jeed fhall all the nations,
GENESIS.7
off the earth be bleffed, becaufe thou haft obey-
ed my voice, the faithful patriarch was ho-
nour'd and rejoiced with feeing in a vifion
the intended facrifice of the lamb of God,
and the bleffed confequences of it to all man-
kind, which Chrift himfelf intimated to the
unbelieving Jews, John viii. 56. Tour fa-
ther Abraham rejoiced to fee my day, and
hefaw it, and was glad
• Gen. xxvii. 40.
And by thy [word thou Jhalt live, and
Jhalt ferve thy brother; and it fhall come to
pafs, when thou jhalt have the dominion,
that thou fait break his yoke from off thy
neck.
: -pira byo "by npisi mri mwn rrm
Thefe words being part of Ifaac's predic-
tion, addrefs'd to Efau concerning the future
fortunes of his pofterity compared with that
of his brother Jacob, feem to carry afenfe in
our tranflation unworthy of the prophet. For
to fay, that, when the Edomites fhall get the
upper hand of the Ifraelites, they will no
longer be fubjedt to the Ifraelites, would
have been a truth that Efau would have
lcarcely taken for infpiration. The word
-inn may indeed fignify thou Jhalt have the
dominion; but it is fo improper here, that the
learned Louis Cappel, thought it would
be more advifable to follow the meaning or
the Targum of Onkelos, in fubftituting
B 4 lor
8 Critical Notes
for -inn thou Jhall have the dominion
hejhall rebel — when he Jhall rebels or apojla-
tife, thou Jhalt break his yoke, &c. The cor-
reftion is ingenious, but furely not necefiary.
For -inn the word in the text has, in the
Chaldee and the Syriac, another fenfe,
amend or repent, and if you will allow the
Syriac verfion and the Greek of Symmachus,
"inn fhould be rendered when thou
Jhalt be reformed or amended, thou Jhalt
break his yoke from off thy neck. Which was
effedted about 865 years after this, 2 Kings
viii. 20.
G e n. xlix. 10.
v^n po ppnoi n-nrvo mp "nD, k1?
□♦oy nnp' Yn nS'p no* "u?
The Jceptre Jhall not depart from Judah,
nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until
Shiloh come-, and unto him Jhall the gather-
ing of the people be.
Of the fenfe of this famous prophecy the
antienteft and ableft among the Jewifh in-
terpreters and commentators had no difpute
with the Chriftians that we know of; but
agreed that it related to the time of Chrift's
coming into the world. And accordingly
Onkelos, the moft refpedtive Targumift of
them all, has thus paraphrafed this verfe.
'There fall never be want'nig a ruler out of the
houj'e of Judah, nor a chief judge out of his
Jons Jons, until Mejfah Jhall come, to whom
the kingdom belongs, and the nations Jhall
hear
GENESIS. 9
hear ox obey him. And as the other Tar-
gums, namely that of Jonathan and that of
jerufalem, with the Talmudifls, join to
give us in fubftance the very fame meaning
of this verfe concerning the Meffiah ; the
forced interpretations of the later Jews are
too abfurd and frivolous to deferve fo much
regard as fome learned men have ffiew'd in
confuting them.
But one thing muft be obferv'd, that the
moderns have in this verfe found a new
name for the Meffiah, Shiloh, not to be
met with in any other part of Scripture,
nor in any of the oldeft interpreters or
commentators of this place, but coined by
the Jewifh corre&ors of the Bible, in what
they call their Mafora, into nS^> a. word
of no fignification at all. Whereas i. the
Septuagint read that is, ^ He
whofe it is, he to whom it belongs, [meaning
the fcepter before mentioned] as Louis Cap-
pela well obferves; for in the original and
beft edition of their verfion, as Juftin Mar-
tyr b long ago affirmed, this was ren-
dered £> He for whom it is referv-
ed, as it now itands in the i\lexandrian ma-
nufcript. 2. The Samaritan Copy has
the fame in the Chaldee dialedt as 3.
Onkelos, and 4. the Jerufalem Targum, fpeak
the fame fenfe, and fo do 5. the Syriac,
6. the i\rabic, and 7. Aquila, if notSymma-
aCriricaSac. p. 325. b Dial, cum Tryph. p. 348.
chus
io Critical Notes
chus too. It is evident therefore from all
thefe authorities, than which we know of
none better, i. That the prefent read-
ing nS'ty was not in the ancient copies,
but 2. That by tranflating it He whofe
it is, they took it to be a defignation of the
perfon of the Meffiah, and not a proper
name of him, much lefs a little town of
Samaria, nor any thing elfe, that is fuggeft-
ed by the trifling Rabbies. 3. That confe-
quently nl7t^, hgnifying, he that is fenty
or to be fent, which the author of the Vul-
gat Latin is here fuppofed to have read, if
he did not miftake it) and which Grotius
moft approves, not being fupported by the
teftimony of any old paraphraft or annotator,
can have no right to be admitted upon con-
je&ure only.
In the words following Q'fty finp* iS")
and unto him (ball the gathering of the people
be, inftead of fiHp* a noun fignirying a ga-
thering, or obedience, the Samaritan copy has
a plainer and better reading of IJinp* a verb
plural fignifying fhall be gathered or obey. But
the error arifing from our tranflation, muft not
pafs without notice, which renders XZPXTp a
noun plural, by the people in the lingular,
by which people in Scripture the Ifraelites
are generally meant; whereas the Hebrew
word in this place certainly fignifies all the
nations upon earth. To conclude, the whole
verfe fhould be thus tranflated :
The
EXODUS ii
The Scepter Jhall not depart from Judah,
nor a principaljudge from between his feet,
until heJhall come, whofe the fcepter is, and
until the nations Jhall obey him. This pre-
diCtion, as Mede well obferves, was after-
wards applied and explained by our Saviour
himfelf, in thofe words, And this gojpel of
the Kingdom [of Chrift] Jhall be preached
in all the world, for a witnefs unto all na-
tions, and then Jhall the end come % that is,
the end of the Jewifh flate: and it was hifto-
rically confirmed before that end by St. Paul,
faying, the gofpel has been preached to every
creature which is under heavenb.
Exod. vi. 2, 3.
: mrv xk vbw idn'I nc?0 orba 13T1
!x' Vnd npy bni pnv Pk oh-ok ba npni
: EnP 'ny-ix np nirr 'an
And God (pake unto Mojes, and faid unto
him, I am the Lord: and I appeared unto
Abraham, unto Ifaac, and unto Jacob by
the name of God Almighty, but by my name
Jehovah was I not known to them.
The latter part of this paffage, but by ;my
namejehovah was I not known to them, as it
now ftands, and has for many ages flood in
our bibles apparently contradicts the book of
Genefis from the chap. xii. to the end of it: and
' indeed the third chapter too of this Exodus
a Matth. xxiv. 14. b ColofT. i. 23.
itfelf
12 Critical Notes on
itfelf, }If 13— 15. When Mofes faid unto
God, Behold when I come unto the children
of IJrael, and Jhall fay unto them, The God
of your fathers hath fent me unto you and
they Jhall fay to me. What is his name ?
What fall I fay unto them?— And he faid,
Thus Jhalt thou fay unto the children of If-
rael, I am hath fent me unto you.— The
Lord (or Jehovah, for Jehovah or Javoh
is in the Hebrew) the God of your fathers,
the God of Abraham, the God of Ifaac, and
the God of Jacob hath fent me unto you. This
is my name for ever. Mofes then is here
diredted to mention to the Ifraelites the name
of Jehovah, as the fignal and feal of his
miffion, which they would acknowledge.
But if the name Jehovah was never known
to their fathers, how ihould thefe their de-
fcendents have learnt it, or recognife it ?
Yet Mofes himfelf intimates a that they had
called upon the name of Jehovah in their
diflrefs, before Mofes was fent to them —
The Egyptians evil e?itreated us, and affiA-
ed us — And when we cried unto the Lord
[Jehovah] the God of our Fathers, the Lord
heard our voice, &c. For it fhould be ob-
ferved to an Englifh reader, that wherever
he finds the Lord in our tranflation, the
word in the Hebrew is generally Jehovah
[or Javoh.] And confequently Jehovah can-
a Dcut. xxvi. 6; 7.
not
/
EXODUS.,, 13
not be denied to occur as the name of God,
which he declared to thofe patriarchsa, un-
der which he appeared to them in vifionsb,
gave them commands and promifes, under
which name they anfwered him, raifed al-
tars to him, and called upon him, nay, and left
this name of Jehovah to the placesc where
he had thus condefcended to converfe with
them. And thefe inftances are found in
Genefis to return fo frequently, and unquef-
tionably, that a plain negative of them all,
in this one paffage of Exodus has furniffi-
ed to the learned fceptics an argument, to
prove, that the author of Exodus could not
have been the author of Geneiis, which he
fo manifeftly difavows, nor even have known
it. What relief do the commentators bring
us in this great difficulty ? Rabbi Salomon
has faid, that the fentence was not to be ex-
pounded literally, but as if God had faid,—
But my truth (fignified by my name Jeho-
vah) was not manifejied to the patriarchs by
the completion of the promije made to them.
This interpretation has been preferred to all
others by the annotators of greateft fame,
that is Munfter, Fagius, Vatablus, Drufius,
Grotius, Cartwright, Ainfworth, &c. Let
us examine it without refpedf of perfons.
This claufe is fuppofed to relate to the re-
velation and promife made by God to Abra-
■ Gen. xv. 7, 8. and xxii. 16. b Gen, xxvi. 2.
and xxviii. 1?. c Gen. xxii, 14.
ham,
14 Critical Notes on
ham, Gen. xv. 13, 14. And [Jehovah] faid
unto Abraham, Know of a Jurety, that thy
feed Jhall be a fir anger in a la?id that is not
theirs, and Jhall ferve them; and they Jhall
affibl them four hundred years: And alfo
that nation whom they foall ferve, will I
judge ; and af terwards ffall they come out
with great jubfiance. This promife of a
deliverance, tho' expreffed to Abraham, yet
manifeftly relates not to him, but to his
feed fome ages after him, and, according to
the letter, was not to be accornplilhed be-
fore this time, when Mofes is charged with
this meffage to the afflided Ifraelites. The
only meaning therefore of the words, But by
my name Jehovah was I not known to them,
that thefe learned annotators can give us, is
no better than this: But I never effectually
accomplijhed to them [the Patriarchs] my pro-
mije of a deliverance [which was indeed
never intended for them nor wanted by
them.] Will any intelligent reader be con-
tented with fuch interpretations ? and yet
we know of 110 better. Now if no reafona-
ble, or probable meaning of the words can
be made out, the text muft have been cor-
rupted, and poiiibly to the reverfe of what
it originally iignified. For the Ifraelites
gradually finking into the fuperftitions and
idolatry, as well as the bondage of the
Egyptians, and having begun to ferve their
Gods or Devils, (Leviticus xvii. 7. Jofhua
1 xxiv.
EXODUS. is
xxiv. I4» Ezek. xx. 8.) which they too
plainly proved again about three months
after this, it feems to have been neceffary
that Mofes fhould revive the memory of the
great Jehovah almoft loft among them, and
carry this name with the etymology of it
to them as a token, whereby the oldeft and
moft knowing among the Hebrews might
be fatisfied, that he brought his commifiion
from the God of their fathersa. This re-
port of Mofes the elders are faid to have be-
lieved b. But Pharaoh treating them all
with tyrannical fiercenefs and cruelty, Mofes
is fent to them again with freflh encourage-
mentc, in which God declares himfelf to
be the fame God, who had been fo gra-
cious a protestor to their anceftors, who had
appeared to the patriarchs in viiions under
the title of Hw? the Almighty Godd
And who had made known to them, his
peculiar name of Jehovah, [or Javoh]e o
the firft caufe, and principle of all exiftence
in the world, by which he was diftinguiih-
ed from every thing that was ever called
God: And who had ejiablijhed his cove-
* nant, &c.
For fuch was, in all probability, the origi-
nal reading and fenfe of this claufe, or part
of the third verfe, not kS rniT OEfi
a Exod. iii, 14. b Ch. iv. 31. c Ch. vi.
d xvii. xxxv. 11. xlviii. 3. f Gen. xv. 7,8.
xvii. 1. xxvi. 24, 25. xxviii. 13.
cnS
16 Critical Notes on
on1?, but by my name Jehovah was I not
known to them: But, with the change only
of kS not into V? it, iS mil*
CDH1? And my name Jehovah 1 made it
known to them. Which makes the whole
context very coherent and intelligible. I
am Jehovah, and I appeared unto Abraham,
unto Ijaac, and unto Jacob, by the name oj
God Almighty, and my name Jehovah I
made it known unto them : And alfo eft a-
blifhed my covenant with them to give them
the land oj Canaan, the land of their pilgri-
grim age wherein they were Jt rangers.
Now the change even of a letter, of
into may be thought too bold a ftroke
of criticifm without the authority of an-
cient verfions and manufcripts: And it
would be fo, if made without the weighty-
eft reafons, and where the context in its pre-
fent ftate is indefenfible. ButNoldius, in his
annotations N°. 1444. quotes the Jewifh
Mafora for faying that there are no lefsthan
eighteen places in which this very change
of ab into V? ought to be made, and obferves
that the Chaldee Targum tranflates them
all agreeably to the Mafora. The famous Louis
Cappel a confiders every one of thefe places
diftindtly, then adds two more parallel
emendations out of Buxtorf, and in different
places feven more of his own. If this therefore
be admitted to be the twenty eighth in-
* L. iii. c. io»
ftance,
EXODUS. 7 v
fiance, where V? fhould be read for it
will be upon as good foundation as any of
the others, and the tranflation be properly
amended, as above.
E x o d. xii. 40.
D'E^E? Q'Ta'OD "IDE" "I m SNX" '33 3E?101
: HJE? niNo jniNi TOE?
Now the fojourning of the children of If-
rael, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred
and thirty years. But St. Paul a fays the
law was given from Mount Sinai four hun-
dred and thirty years after the call and cove-
nant with Abraham. It is plain, therefore,
that the fojourning of the Ifraelites in Egypt,
wrhich in reafon muft not be reckoned to
begin before Jacob's going thither to his
fon Jofeph, cannot extend to more than
half that time, and confequently the text,
in its prefent ftate, is not true. But the
Samaritan copy gives the verfe complete:
pND IDE?' TE'N DHIDKI '33 DE?1D1
mKO PINT H3E? O'E^E? O'li'O pK31 $33
♦ rusy
Now the fojourning of the children of
Ifrael, and of their fathers, which they fo-
jouriied in the land of Canaan, and in the
land of Egypt, was four hundred and thirty
years. And the Septuagint, in the manu-
fcript of Alexandria, and in Aldus's edition,
"Gal. iii. 17.
C eon-
i8 Critical Notes on
confirm the fame reading; 'H 3 Txra^oUvjang
tuv tjuv IcgyitjA, r)v fzrotq(litri(rctv cv yn 'Aiyv7riu>
yyj Xuvomlv gujtqi o\ hrenins cuutuv, stvj
TiTgc/LKocrici vfia,}CGv]a. If this had been known
to be the original reading of this place, it
would have faved the commentators the
very great pains that it has coft to unravel
the perplexity of this text in the modern
editions.
—xv. 3. t w mm norfro e»x mm
<The Lord is a man of war, the Lord is
his name. Who can read this abfurd attri-
bute of God, without fome indignation,
and not be moved to feek out for fome ex-
preflion that may be lefs unworthy of him ?
And yet it muft be confeft, that this is the
exadt verfion of the prefent Hebrew text.
But the Septuagint, the Chaldee of Onke-
los, the Syriac and the Arabic have nothing
fo low, and the Samaritan copy gives us
another reading better by far HEnS/M "VDJ
mighty in war, which is preferved too in the
Syriac. The Lord is mighty in war, feho-
vah is his name.
Num. xvi. 5.
~\wb irny So 'mw nip Sx mm
t> ipx nx mm jm ip3
And he /pake unto Korah, and unto all his
company, faying, Even to morrow the Lord
willJhew who are his> &c.
The
NUMBERS. i9
The learned and ingenious Louis Cappel*
has taken notice of the different reading of
the Hebrew in this beginning of the fpeech
ofMofes, expreft by the Septuagint in this
manner, 'Ei^ iyvu o 9~tog t£s ovrag
air#/; God injpedis and knows who are his.
The latter part of which St.Paulfeems plain-
ly to quote from this paffage in his fecond
Ep. to Timothy ii. 19. And therefore Cappel
thinks they read then not ipD in the morn-
ingy (in which fenfe it fhould have rather
been writ *1pD3) but a word not fo different
in the figure of the letters as in the fignifica-
tion"Tp£ injpedieth. He might have confirm-
ed this to be the probable reading, by what
ftill remains in the prefent Hebrew text, and
immediately follows, JTW and knoweth,
which feems to imply, that fome other verb
preceded and was connected with it, and
therefore fhould thus be tranflated, Jehovah
infpediethy and knoweth them that are his,
&c. But, after all, it muft be owned that
the Samaritan copy and all the other ver-
fions confirm the prefent reading; fo that, if
it be an error, it is a very ancient one.
1. Sam. ii. 31.
v*ii nKi imr j-in »njrui o'ku D'o» run
no
* Grit. Sac. p. 246.
C 2 Behold
20 Critical Notes on
Behold the days come that I will cut off
thine arm, and the arm of thy father s houfe.
Here the Syriac, the Vulgat, and the
Arabic render *jjHf as if it had been writ
thy arm, whereas the natural fenfe ci
the context, recommends the prefent read-
ing of the Hebrew "jjHf thy feed, and that
too is further confirmed by the Septuagint
and the Chaldee, who both teach us to
tranflate, Behold the days come, that I will
cut off thy feed and the feed of thy father s
houfe.
P s a l. ii. II.
and rejoice unto him with reve-
rence. The Greek, the Vulgat, and iEthio-
pic, and our laft verlion fay, and exult to
him with trembling : Words that will hard-
lybe thought confiftent and intelligible. The
Syriac renders it hold him> &c. the Arabic
firaife him, (for all of them add to him
which is not in the prefent editions of the
Hebrew) but the Chaldee only, iSvi and
fray —which would, if it were Hebrew,
make a good and clear fenfe, with very
fmall variation of the letters. But perhaps
the original reading, with as little variation,
may have been lS "iSjl and trujl in ,
with the addition of ft to him, as in all the
old verfions. For this verb, tho' rare, is
ufed in this fignification in Pi'alm xxii. $ 8.
mn> Sk He trufted in Jehovah or Java.
And
Nit! i i '•
j u hI Ills *
PSALMS. 21
And may likewife be fo here —and trujl in
him with great reverence.
ii. 12.— ; tDyDD O if his wrath
be kindled yea but a little: But the Syriac
renders this paffage, as the words will bear,
and it feems more agreeable to the context,
than our Englifh tranflation, — For his
wrath willfoon be inflamed.
P S A L. vii. 2.
: S'vo pr»a 'trsi nnio tptD' [3
Left he devour my foul like a lion> and tear
it in pieces, while there is none to help.
What we tranllate and tear it in pieces,
is in all the other tranflations, except the
Chaldee, rendered, and none to redeem;
whence it appears they all read differently
from the prefent Maloretic text plfj
And none to redeem, and none to
deliver. And that the word pi£j is ufed in
that fenfe, is proved from Pfaim cxxxvi. 24.
and redeemed us from our enemies.
and from Lament, v. 8. LDTO there
is none that doth deliver out of their hand.
Left he feize like a lion my foul, while there
is none to redeem and none to deliver.
— vii. 4. :jn 'oSlP T&DJ DK If I have
rewarded evil to him that dealt friendly
with me. The Chaldee only, which ap-
pears to be the mofl modern of all the ver-
fions that are called ancient, is here and
mod commonly followed by the Englifh:
C 3 For
mi
22 Critical Notes
For the Syriac, the Greek, the Vulgat, the
Arabic, and Apollinarius's tranflation in
verfe, carry a nobler fenfe and more like the
Chriftian doctrine, If I have repaid evil to
him who did me evil, Ibid. Dpn
Tea I have delivered him that with-
out caufe is mine enemy. Here the Syriac
and Chaldee too, read a word near in let-
ters, but different in fignification, which
feems more adapted to this place Cor
rraSriN, and makes this fenfe, Or if I have
opprefed them who without caufe are mine
enemies.
vii. ii. : pHV God is a rigid-
teous judgey frong and patient:
JDV SdD CJft SiO and God is provoked
every day.
The former of thefe two verficles is by all
interpreters that I know of, rendered not
as in the new verfion, but as it now is in
the margin of our bibles, God is a righteous
judge. For the words ftrong and patient
have nothing to anfwer them in the Hebrew.
In the latter *-7^ being capable of fignify-
ing either God, or the particle noty has
been here tranflated by the Chaldee Gody
and his authority followed in it by the mo-
dern tranflators generally, tho', to complete
the fenfe, it has been commonly thought ne-
ceffary to exprefs or underftand agaijifi the
wicked, which is not in the original. But
the Syriac, Greek, Vulgat, Arabic, /Ethio-
.
V
PSALMS. 23
pic, and Apollinarius agree to render the
words better, and is not enraged every day.
The verbal tranflation therefore is onlv this,
• J *
God ts a righteous [i. e. merciful] judge,
and is not very angry every day.
Ps al viii. 2.
: ?y PW D'pJ'l D,L,L>"iy '3D Out of the
mouth oj babes andfucklings haft thou ordain-
ed ftrength.
It is not eafy to excufe our tranflators
here, for following the Chaldee in oppoli-
tion to all the antient interpreters, and to
St. Matthew's quotation of this text in the
words of the Greek Verfion, by which ty
rno' is rendered thou hajl perfected prai)ey
or, as the Syriac expreffes it, thou haft eft a-
blijhed thy glory. For tho' the word be more
commonly ufed to fignify ftrength, it is
rendered by praife, or honour, in the Greek
and other verfions of Pfalm xxix, $ 2 a.
and again xcvi. # 7. and lxviii. 34b. xcix.
f 3. Chron xvi. 27. as well as in this
place.
a Give unto the Lord the honour [new verfion glory~\
due unto his name.
b And Pfalm lxviii. 34. Afcribe ye the power to
God: the Greek, the Syriac, theVulgat, &c. fay give
ye glory to God. Pfalm xcvi. 7. Jfcribe unto the Lord
worfhip and power. The fame old tranflators render
glory and honour.
Ps al.
24 Cr itical Notes on
Psal, xi. i.
J Dmn mi Flee as a bird to your
mountain this is of the laft corrected ver-
fion, for that ufed in our Liturgy fays, Flee
as a bird unto the hilL The difference be-
tween the one and the other is not material,
but this corrected verfion adhering more
clofely to the Chaldee, fhews a text that, by
that time, was come to be a little corrupted,
which the preceding interpreters knew no-
thing of, for they render it, Flee to the
mountains as a bird, whereby they fhew
how the text was read in their age, that is
x Tiflya □ nn vro
— 3- * pDirv mwn For the jounda-
tions will be cafi down — And here too, the
Chaldee has led our tranflators to a new
reading, and a new fenfe, unknown to all
the oldeft interpreters, who rendered the
words in this manner: For what thou didji
place they have dejlroyed. What then mufl
they have read? I fuppofe for mr^njoun-
dations nWH in Hiphil thou didji place>
a variation very common of one letter,
and that fcarcely difcernible. For the pro-
noun what in the Hebrew, as well as the
Englifh is often underftood.
Psal. xii. 5.
t 'h rr3» TOrnw idk" — Saith
the Lord (or Javo) I will jet him in fajety
from
PSALMS. 25
from him that pujfeth at him. In the old
tranilation, I will help every one from him
that fwelleth againjl him, and will Jet him at
reft. The great difficulty is in the two laft
words, TV& as they now (land, and the
rendering of this clofe of the period among
the antients and moderns, which is fo very
various, that one cannot imagine they had
the fame words before them. The Greek
(followed by the vulgar Latin, and iEthio-
pic) fays, 1 will deal freely with him: The
Chaldee, I will teftijy evil againft the wick-
ed. Of the moderns Pagninus's literal ver-
fion, interlined in the Polyglot Bibles, ex-
preffes it thus, I will enfnare him: The li-
teral Spanifh tranflation of Ferrara \_from
enfnares him: which is followed
e by the Italian of Bruccioli, the
French of Geneva, &c. in which an ellipfis
is fuppofed of more words, than any lan-
guage probably admits of. But the Syriac,
the Arabic, Symmachus, and Apollina-
rius's paraphrafe in verfe, all concur in one
fenfe of openly, or in the light, from whence
it is manifeft that the verb rV£)S whether it
fignify pujfeth, fwelleth, or enfnareth was
not in their copies, but fome other word,
which thofe that are better acquainted with
the Hebrew, may fettle with great probabi-
lity. But no better conjecture at prefent oc-
curs to me, for reftoring the original read-
ing, than HJto' lujire,I will faith
the
him that
in this ca
26 Critical Notes on
the Lord, I will fet him in fafety with lujlre
to himfelj.
PsAL. xvi. 2.
: r~im mn,c> mcx O my Soul thou
haft faid unto the Lord, Thou art my God.
All the antient verfions (except the Chaldee)
and with them Apollinarius, concur in
reading VY1DN 1 faid to Jehovah (ovjavoh)
Thou art my Lord. O my foul is not in the
original, and there is no fort of neceffity of
adding it now to the original or to the ver-
fion, in order to piece out this error of the
Chaldee copy.
I'Sy Sd WIlD — My goods are nothing
unto thee. Which our iaft tranilators ren-
der, My goodnejs extendeth not to thee.
The Greek, the Vulgat, the Arabic, the
Vulgat, the /Ethiopic fay, thou hajl no
want of my goodsy all which give but lit-
tie fatisfadtion. The Syriac, and Chal-
dee agree in a meaning not unworthy
of the Pfalmift, but neverthelefs differ a
little in their reading of the text: The Sy-
riac renders it, and all my good is from thee
[or, is thine] and might perhaps have read
lyby VDU31 The Chaldee fays, my good
is not given but by thee: and therefore feems
to have read, ^*72 VOID I have no
good without thee. The antients being fo
much divided among themfelves, we will
leave the choice to the judicious reader, not
being
P S J L M S. 2 7
being affured of any thing but that the text
is at prefent corrupted.
— 9.: 'tod >dS nop pS Wherefore
my heart was glad, and my glory rejoiceth.
The Syriac here agrees with the Chalet :e m
reading my glory, which is expounded by
the Rabbins to fignify the intellectual foul;
but as the Greek, the Arabic, the Aithiopic,
the Vulgat, Apollinarius, and St. Peter in
the ACts all appear to have read my
tongue, and that carries a much plainer
fenfe, it feems therefore preferable.—Where-
fore my heart was glad, and my tongue re-
joicedt
Psal. xx. 7.
mrv cx'd uruio c'didd rtw dddd rha
ion UTPN
Some put their truft in chariots a?id fome
in horfes, but we will remember the name
of the Lord our God.
Thus the Chaldee verfion leads us, and
the Englifh, and mod of the moderns fol-
low it, without reflecting that in the analo-
gy of all languages, fuch a verb as truft, is
never to be fuppofed or underftood, if not
expreft a little before or after, and that re-
member cannot be joined with in the
name; as it ought literally to be rendered.
How do the oldeft interpreters direCt us?
Inftead of "VDtt w* W// remember they all
found fome verb, which fignified we will be
great or frong except the Vulgat, (if that
% is
28 Critical Notes on
is come down to us uncorrupted, (for in its
prefent ftate, Hi in curribus et hi in equis,
nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nojiri in-
vocabimus, it is neither good Latin, nor good
fenfe) but what that verb was, cannot now
be known but by conjecture, of which the
learned muft determine. In the mean time
no word in letters comes nearer to than
we will be Jlrong or Jlrengthen our-
felves, which may fit the former as well as
the latter part of the fentence: Some in cha-
riots, andfomeinhorfes, but we willftrengthy
en ourfelves in the name of Jehovah our God,
P s a l. xxii. 2 i.
: avji 'npsi nnx 'jyenn
Save me from the lions mouth; thou hafl
heard me alfo jrom among the horns of the
unicorns. we and many of the mo-
derns render thou haft heard me> but all the
antients, except the Chaldee, feem to have
read *>T\ytymylow eft at e> as in$ 24. forfo they
unanimoufly tranflate: Save me from the lions
mouthy and my difir efs from horns of unicorns.
■— ?6. EDMdS *JT Your heart j,hall
live for ever. None of all the antient ver-
fions, not even the Chaldee, have your, but
their heart or hearts in this place, fo that it
feems to be onlv a fault in the tranfcribing
* , o
of the Hebrew OHMS tho' generally fol-
lowed by the moderns.
— 30. rrn W331— A hath
quickened his own Soul. This tco is from
the
PSALMS. 29
the Chaldee; the others with Apollinarius
give us a very different fenfe, by which fays
Louis Cappel, they appear to have read
rrn 'h for they tranflate, my foul pall
live to him, and connect thefe with the fol-
lowing words, My feed pall ferve him.
Psal. 24. 6.
: npy in n?
This is the generation of them, that feek
him, even of them that Jeek thy face, O fa-
cob. As it is undoubtedly abfurd to call
God by the name of Jacob, which is com-
monly underftood, and indeed may naturally
be taken from hence to be one of his names;
and pretty difficult to make any tolerable
fenfe offeeking the face of Jacob, or Ijrael;
commentators have thought of different
words to be underftood here for complet-
ing the fenfe, which need not now be
mentioned, for the beft antient tranflators,
as the Syriac, the Septuagint, Apollinarius,
the iEthiopic, the Arabic, and the Vulgat
exprefs the word God unanimoufly as found
in their copies, and as it ought to be re-
placed in our or mSn. This is the ge-
neration of them that feek him, of them that
feek thy face, 0 God of Jacob,
Psal. xxv.
This and the xxxiv,xxxvii,cxi,cxii,cxix,and
the cxlv Pfalms are alphabetical, that is, all the
verfes
30 Critical Notes on
verfes or fo many fets of verfes are to begin,
with the feveral letters of the Hebrew alpha-
bet in their order; a regulation that might have
ferved for a guide to the hands of the old Jew-
ifh copiers, as on the other hand the inobfer-
vance of it difcovers and demonftrates their
negligence. And of this all the alphabetical
Pfalms furnifh but too many inftances, and
the xxvth. in particular, in which if the letter
Beth may be found, yet Vau and Coph at the
beginning of their feveral verfes, and parts
of fome others are plainly wanting. And
what is worfe, thefe defers are fo ancient,
that the oldeft verfions we now have, will
feldom enable us to fupply them.
Psal, xxvii. 8.
tmrr -po pN 'JS vpn ION
IVhen thou faidfi, Seek ye my face, my
heart faid unto thee, Thy face, Lord, will I feek.
In the old tranflation, -my heart hath
talked of thee, feek ye my face: thy face,
Lord, will I feek. So our laft tranfla-
tors have taken the liberty to add to the
text, when thou faidf, and to quite tranf-
pole the parts of this period. But the two
verfions differ no more from one another,
than the ancient verfions from one another,
and from the prefent Hebrew text. For
inftance, none of them all have feek ye; the
Chaldee only, feek thou; the Septuagint (or
Theodotion) of the Alexandrine manufcript,
or
PSALMS. 31.
or the Vatican, or of Aldus's edition, and
Symmachus's, and Apollinarius's verfions
with the Syriac, Vulgat, Arabic all agree fo
far as to make this verb not in the Impera-
tive, but Indicative mood fought thee, tho'
perhaps with a different nominative cafe, as
?ny face, or 7ny heart, or I fought thee. It
is plain therefore, fays the excellent Louis
Cappela, that they read in the Hebrew not
'VD\)*lfeek ye> &s it Hands now in all editions
and tranflations, but f0Ught thee.
And it is remarkable, that the Syriac, one
of the oldeft and bed; interpreters of all,
wants this part of the verfe, thy face, Lordy
will Ifeek, whether exadtly following the
copies of that time or not, is not now to
be known, all the others have it with fome
minute variations. Upon the whole we
muft defire the learned and judicious to de-
cide, how near this reading may be to the
true one -pa nN 'sS ION "p
w pDK rtvv thus tranflated: iTo thee my heart
hath jpoken> and fought thee, thy face, O
Lord (or, 0 Javoh) will I Jeek.
— 13. pN3 m.T DltDD mxP 'i-lJONH
X 0»n Ijhould utterly have fainted; but that 1
believe verily to fee thegoodnefs of the Lord (or
Javoh) in the land of the living. Here again
the Chaldee has inferted into the original text
unleJ'Siutterly unknown to all the ancient
verfions, and of no fignification or ufe in this
a Critica Sac. p. 26 1.
place
32 Critical Notesw
place but to make the1 fenfe fufpended and im~
perfedt, and from thence putting a fort of ne-
ceflity on our tranflators, to fupply this ap-
parent deficiency with thefe words of their
own invention, I Jhould utterly have fainted,
unlefs — So that it is more eafy to be affur-
ed, that the particle ^7^7 unlefs, together
with that fupplement fhould not be here,
than to explain how it came in. But it is
not improbable that 'h one half of this word
^^7 was in fome old copies, the end of
the preceding verfe, for the Greek, the
/Ethiopic, the Vulgat, and the Arabic clofe
it with himfelf or it (elf and the wicked hath
made lies for himfelf that is, in Hebrew
and with a little more corruption nW?.
But it {hould be tranflated fimply, I trufl
I foall fee the goodnefs of the Lord in the
land of the living.
P s a l. xxviii. 4.
It is obfervable that the Syriac only has
in his tranflation but half of this verfe, re-
ward them according to their deeds, and ac-
cording to the wickednefs of their own in-
ventions; whereas all the other verfions
have the imprecations again repeated 3 which
reading was moft likely to be genuine,
mufl be left to conjedure.
— 9. — : loS iy miT The Lord is my
Jlrength: in the new verfion, the Lord is
their frength, without fignifying who they
are
PSALMS. 33
are that are fo protected. Nov/ all the old
verfions, but the Chaldee, thus render thefe
words, the Lord is the jlrength of his people.
No other reading then was in their copies,
but lOyS his people, changed by the ne-
gligent tranfcriber into his or their
people.
PsAL, xxix. 2.
: enp mnris rnrrS nnwn
Lord with holy worfhip, or, as the new verfion
has it, in the beauty of holinefs. This word
beauty too we have only from the Chaldee.
For all the reft with Apollinarius tranflate
the paffage, JVor/Joip the Lord in the courts
of his holinefs, fhewing thereby that they all
read inftead of rmro in the beauty,
nVWO in the courts of his holinefs.
(as in Pfalm xcvi. 9. and c. 4,) in atrio
fanffo ejust Vulgat.
xxix. 9. — ; r-lVTK SSm> nw Sip The
'voice of the Lord maketh the hinds to bring
forth young. The Syriac feems for rnS'tf
hinds to have read oaks, the Lord jhak-
eth the oaks, which feems more coherent
with the following words, the Lord faketh
the oaks, and uncover eth the forejls.
Ps al. xxxiv. 5, &c.
:nmi loon rhey had an eye unto
him and were lightnedy and their faces were
not afloamed. Here our tranfiators and com-
mentators in general are bewildered, being
D utterly
34 Ckitical Notes c«
utterly unable to point out who they are, that
looked unto God and were enlightned, and
what connexion there is with the prece-
ding or fubfequent periods. And therefore
fome have fufpe&ed a gap, in the context of
this place, and that fome words are loft.
But the whole difficulty here feems, to arife
from the blind following of the Chaldee,
who has rendered the whole verfe in the pre-
terit, without regarding the other more an-
cient and faithful verfions, who concur in
rendering it in the imperative mood, thus:
Look unto him, and be illuminated [or enlight-
ned] and your faces jhall not be ajhamed.
But in confequence of this interpretation it
appears that they read your facesy al-
tered fince their time in the Chaldee copy to
OnUD their faces.
This being one of the alphabetical Pfalms,
difcovers the want of two members of verfes
after the fifth verfe, and that the laft verfe
is fupernumerary, and out of rule, after the
laft letter of the Hebrew alphabet in this
Pfalm, as well as in the xxvth.
Psal, xxxvii. 20.
ibn D'-o np'D mir VOK» Dyen o
: iSd ftpyu As for the ungodly they Jhall perif:,
and the enemies of the Lord Jhall conjume as
the fat oj lambs-y yea even as the fmoke Jhall
they confume away. Here again the Chaldee
copy and paraphrafe miilead, and the mo-
derns readily follow that guide, who too
com-
PSALMS. 35
commonly debafes the fenfe. But Louis
Cappela has long ago obferved, that what
is now rendered: Jhall be as the fat of lambs,
they Jhall conjume, into fmoke Jhall they con-
fume away, was in the Greek afxct t£ $c£a-
<8"ijvat ccuzzg ^ vtyaQyjvctt, 6te\&7rovjeg ccrJi xuTrvcg
ityXi7rcv. In their very honour and exaltation
(or in the time of their being honoured a?id
exalted) they confume away as fmoke: That
therefore the text then run in being
honoured, in being exalted, both being the
Infinitive mood or gerund, and on the other
hand, inftead of JtpyD into\fmoke, Jwy^as jmoke,
as inilances of a very frequent interchanging
of two fimilar letters 3 and 3. And it may
be added, that the other interpreters, concur
with the Greek in this fenfe, and not with
the Chaldee. Now fo general an agreement
of the verfions, is hardly to be fuppofed, if
the original context were not the fame to all,
and is therefore preferable: But the wicked
Jhall perijh, and the enemies of the Lord in
their honour and exaltation Jhall confume and
vaniflo as Jmoke.
Psal. xl. 6.
: "pK -py pN iPn -protrnoi — And
thoughts which are to us ward, they cannot
be reckoned up in order unto thee: Or, in the
old tranflation, and vet there is no man that
ordereth them unto thee. Both abfurd y but
the more recent tranflation of the Engliflh,
'Critica Sac. p. 200. and 217.
D 2 comes
36 Critical Notes w
comes a little nearer to the nonfenfe of the
Chaldee paraphrafe. Now lince here is no
queflion or doubt about the reading of the
place; let us fee what fenfe do the oldeft ver-
fions give us of it. They are all uniform in
rendring, Many, O Lord our God, are the
1wonders thou haji wrought ; and thy thoughts
[or cGunfels~\ toward us, and none is like unto
thee. For the Hebrew word -py has indeed
fometimes the fignification given here by the
Chaldee, orders, difpofes, draws up in order,
which common fenfe will tell us cannot be ap-
plied to this paffage; for one may venture to
fay, that thefe words: And yet there is no
man that ordereth the thoughts of God unto
God, have no meaning at all. But the fame
word "py having alfo a very different fignifi-
cation, is like, refembles, is compared to, as in
Pf. lxxxix. 6. For who is he among the clouds,
that ["py] fhall be compared unto the Lord?
Job xxviii. 17. The gold and the cryjlal cannot
equal &S] wifdom; all the other old
interpreters, in profe or in verfe, have agreed
to take it here in this laft fenfe, and with
good reafon. Many, 0 Jehovah, our God are
the wonders thou haft wrought \ and thy
thoughts concerning us> none is like unto thee.
P s a l. xlvii. 4.
ipx apy> pxj nx unSra nx \h ina*
♦ DHK He fioall chufe out an inheritance for
us3 even theworfoip of Jacob whom he loved.
Thus
PSALMS. 37
Thus fay our tranflators, following the
Chaldee paraphraft, who thus expreffes one
of the Jewifh conceits, He will take pleafure
in us, Jo that we Jhall pofefs our inheritance,
the houfe of the JanEluary of Jacob, which he
will always love. Now all the antients tranT
late his inheritance not our; and for himfelf
not for us, except the Seventy and Vulgat.
And therefore the Syriac and Arabic feem,
beft to have preferved the true reading and
fenfe of the original, He hath chofen us to him-
J elf for his Inheritance, &c. HN V? WrD*
: mSm
xlvii. 9. CiTOX TtSx Otf 1SDN3 D'DJ? OHJ
: nbp nxo fix 'uo cn^xb '3
I he princes of the people are joined unto
the people of the God of Abraham : For God,
which is very high exalted, doth defend the
earth, as it were with a field. In this
verfe the oldeft tranflators, differ from
one another both a little in the reading and
more in the conftrudtion of the text; but De
Muis, a learned and diligent profeffor of the
Hebrew language, after considering four of
thofe different interpretations, concludes with
his opinion, that all thofe fenfes come in ef-
fedt to this one: Fhat God is the Lord and
King of all the earth, and will in time bring
all into one body of the church. Indeed the
princes — are joined — to the God of Abra-
ham, cannot be taken but in the ftyleof a pre-
didtion, in which the future time is often
moft ftrongly painted1 in the prefect tenfe.
D 3 And
38 Critical Notes ^
And fo all the old tranflators have rendered
this paffage, except the Syriac, who in the
Imperative mood feems to have conveyed the
force and fpirit of the original better than
any of them all: 0 ye pri?ices of the nations,
join yourfelves to the people of the God of
Abraham, for the territories of the earth are
God's, he is moft high. It may perhaps be
objected, that the prefent Hebrew text has
OJID the Jhields of the earth, by which
the commentators Aben Ezra and Kimchi
undetftand Rulers. But i. the other tranfla-
tors printed in the Polyglot, belides the Chal-
dee, do not render the word fields, but potent
men, by which if they meant to explain Jhields,
the metaphor is not eafy. 2. The reading
which the Syriac tranflates territories, is, in
all probability, at leaft as old as the other,
more appofite to the fenfe of the context,
and therefore likely enough to have been the
true one, which is conjedfured to have been
pof 'ejjioiis, or territories.
xiix. 5._ py jn 'O'i noV
Wherefore Jhould I fear in the days of
imckednefs, and when the iniquity of my heels
compafjeth me round about ? This rendering is
not only ours, but is admitted in the moft
efteemed verfions of the moderns. Perhaps
it may pafs for one of the dark payings inti-
mated in the preceding verfe; furely the
meaning, which naturally refults from thefe
words is not a good one, but much fitter for
the mouth of a man avowedly wicked, than
to
PSALMS.
39
to be read in any book of fcripture. For proof
of which put the queltion on the oppofite
fide, and fay, Wherefore Jhould I not fear in
evil days, when the iniquity of my own heels
Jhall compajs me about ? would it not be
allowed to be reafonable ? TheChaldee, who
has commonly the blame of mifleading, here
thought fo, and turn'd it thus, Why Jhould I
fear in the day of an evil form, unlejs when
the guilt of my own fin fur rounds me? But the
Syriac and Arabic having another reading of
my enemies^ fon^py my heels, havefolved
the difficulty by tranflating to this effe6h
Why Jhould I jear in evil days, when the ini-
quity of my enemies hath furrowided me, who
truft in their wealth, and boaft themfelves in
the multitude of their riches ?
xlix. 11. -m1? ornopo amp
♦ And yet they think that their houfesfhall
continueJor ever, and that their dwelling places
fhall endure from one generation to another,
CDSHp their middle, or inward thought, as we
have fince tranflated it, is no better than an old
blunder of the copiers (as old it may be as the
time of Chryfoftom) by tranfpofing of two
letters % and inftead of their fepul-
chres, a miftake avoided by all the old tranf-
lators of all ages that one can meet with,
even the Chaldee, the word being never ufed
in the fenfe here put upon it; and yet now
generally adhered to by the moderns, who, to
accommodate this forced fignification of the
word to this paffage, are obliged to add of
D 4 their
40 Critical Notes
their own, without any authority for it, the
words Jhall continue. Whereas the antients
are unanimous in rendering the context after
this manner, their fepnlchres are their man-
fions for ever, and their dwelling places for
all generations.
xiix. 13. rnorOD ^£>03 j'S' Vd v2 ehni
M013 Neverthelejs man will not abide in
honour feeing he may be compared unto
the beafls that perifh. This verfe being re-
peated in the end of this Pfalm might have
borrowed fome amendment from thence, as
well as from the Greek, Syriac, Vulgat,
Arabic, and /Ethiopia verfions; but it feems
to have been a rule with the moderns to fol-
low the Chaldee, both in the text and para-
phrafe againft them all. ^0 abideth not
is in the laft verfe underflandeth not,
and fo it is in all the old interpreters before-
mentioned, and Apollinarius's verfes, both
here and in the laft period. And itTO that
perifh, as we render the word, is not fo ren-
dered by any one of all the old interpreters,
not even the Chaldee, but all tranflate it, it
is like to [it, or them'] and confequently fig-
nify that they read here ITOH or rather
V? noil For out of them we may deduce this
fenfe, Man being in honour [who] underjland-
eth not, makes himfelf equal to a bea/l, and is
like it.
— 18 t -jS 3'tSTl 'D "pVl ~|-I3' V*m 1£'&) 'D
For while he lived he counted him/elf an
happy man : And fo long as thou dofi well un-
to
PSALMS. 41
to thy felf men will[peak good of thee. This
latter part of the verfe, being an uncommon
obfervation, that we ufually praife thole who
are kindeft to themfelves, calls us to ex-
amine how far the original countenances fo
ftrange a proportion. Now we find that all
the reft of the old interpreters befides the
Chaldee (who yet does not at all favour the
moderns, but feems raptured in a ftrain of
enthufiafm) agree to tranflate it, And he will
thank thee when thou dofl good to him. And
therefore muft have read the Hebrew thus: —
: iS 3'tD'n *3 -]*m
P S A L. 1. I.
! *"01 ITliT The mighty God, even
the Lord, hath fpoken. The fimple literal
verfion offered us by all the old interpreters
has more majefty in it, than this paraphrafe
from the Chaldee: The God of Gods javoh
Jpoke, and called — For this guide of the mo-
derns has exceedingly corrupted and perverted
the fenfe of this whole fublime and admira-
ble Pfalm, and reprefented it little better than
a chapter of the Koran, and therefore de-
ferves the leaf!; regard of any that are called
antient.
— 5. ♦ t-i3? hy 'rvo wo 'Ton ISDK
Gather my fai?its together unto me, thofe
that have made a covenant with me by Sa-
crifice. Thus the Chaldee has read and
tranflated, and ours have followed him:
The others differ from one another only in
the
the
ate
iter
m-
i"
31
it in'
link
iSit.
, have
ce, 2;
'ulgat,
feems
,0 fol-
[para-
etb nil
tb nut,
before-
both
ru fi«i
fo ren-
preters,
te it, if
itly
rather
ace this
r/ldfil-
ani'ti
42 Critical Notes
the rendering of the fir ft word, whether it
fhould be adtively or paffively, Gather ye, or,
Be ye gathered-, in the reft they read for my,
his and for for me him, in this manner, Be
gathered to him, O ye his faints, who have
made a covenant with him by facrifice.
Which fhews that their copies had for V?,
for >TDn v-ron, for »nna mna.
PSAL. li. 4.
•paeD nam -paia p-rcn iyo1? —
thou mighteji be jujlified in thy faying, and
be clear when thou art judged, tyzb which
is here tranflated that, as indeed it commonly
fignifies, is by the Chaldee rendered therefore,
and by Noldius, an accurate examiner of the
Hebrew particles, is explained here in the
fenfe of therefore, 01* fo, as introducing fome
confequence of what preceded. nD?n thou
mighteft be clear, when thou art judged (/. e.
by us men) is in none of all the old interpre-
ters, except the Chaldee, but inftead of it
they tranflate thou mighteji prevail or over-
come, which fhews they read fWfV So that
the whole fhould be rendered in fome fuch
manner as this, So that thou wilt be jujlified
in thyfaying, and wilt overcome in thy judgment,
or, when thou art judged, as in the Greek,
Vulgat, and Arabic,
Ps a l. Iv. 14.
:wi2 "jSro cd'hSk* nvaaTiD p'noj nn»
IVe took jweet counfel together, and walked
in
PSALMS. 43
in the houfe of God as friends. This fenfe
might well pafs without exception, if t£WD
may ftand for as friends, or in company,
which, they fay, it never fignifies but in this
only place, and if it did not appear that the
ancient verfions generally intimate and fup-
pofe a different reading, We fweetned our food
together, and went to the houfe of God in
concord. So that thefe may feem to have read
for T)D counfel Tl? food, and for in tu-
mult we know not what, unlefs it ftiould be
pVID with benevolence.
P S A L. lvi. 8.
♦ "pKto PIOHP — Put my tears into
thy bottle. This low and vulgar expreffion of
the Pfalmift's prayer may naturally tempt one
to fufpect the reading of the text, which is
fupported by none of the antients but the
Chaldee, whereas all the reft for in thy
bottle, read "pjiJD before thee, or in thy fight.
— 13. :~f? nnin chvx 7"ru own
Unto tkee, O God, will I pay my vows:
unto thee, will I give thanks. Or, according
to the laft verfion, Thy vows are upon mey O
God, I will render praifes unto thee. It would
not be eafy to make fenfe of thefe laft words,
and yet it muft not be denied that they are the
literal rendring of the prefent Hebrew text,
and equal to the reft of the moderns, French,
Italian, Spanifh, &c. The corruption ap-
pears to be ancient by the old verfions: The
correction you may have from the jiote of
the
44 Critical Notes on
the learned bifhop Hare, on this place. Af-
fixum utique quod ad Py pertinebat, errore
librarii tw appojitum eft. Sed et aliud
in hac periodo mendum eft \ nec tantum verfui
fecundo dee ft fua quantitas; fed et tm nmn
verbum fuum ;nrO?N igitur addendumputavi.
Vid. Pf. 1. 14, 23. cvii. 22. & cxvi. 17. To
which may be added a confirmation of his
conjecture which he overlooked; for the Sy-
riac has all the bifhop's amendments, with
fo little variation from the Hebrew language,
that it may not be amifs to add the words
here in the Hebrew characters: "p
: ~p roiN xrvnroi ma cbvx thee, o
God, will I perform my vows; and with
praife will IJacrifice to thee.
P s al. Ixiii. 1.
rri' i'lmd nco hod ♦&•$» ~\b i-inov—
: D'o tyy»
My foul thirfethfor thee, my jlejh alfo long-
eth after thee, in a barren and dry land
where no water is. The learned have long
difregarded the infcriptions or titles at the
head of the feveral Pfaims, as added by igno-
norant men in after ages. That of this
Pfalm is probably taken from this firft verfe,
and is entirely different from the preamble of
the Syriac, which fuppofes David being fled
to the king of Moab for fear of Saul, to have
made this prayer there. The prefent reading
has nothing to offend, or of ill confequence in
it 5 yet I do not much doubt but the Syriac
only
PSALMS 45
only of all the old interpreters has preferved
the original reading JO'O 'bO fj'pi !~1'V pND
As a dry and thirjiy land without ,water fo
have I longed, &c. the Hebrew Letters 3 for
in, and 3 for as, being fo like in figure, that
they are very often interchanged thro' all the
old teflament.
Psal. lxviii. 4.
mmpa am1? V?d w nor D'n^N1?
: psS vSjri ioar no
O Jing unto God and feng praifes to his
name, magnify him that rideth upon the hea-
vens as it were upon an horfe, praife him by
his name fcih, and rejoice before him.
rYQ^jD is here rendered upon the heavens,
and indeed God is fo often in Scripture repre-
fented in the image of a great king, riding
on the clouds of the air, as Deut. xxxiii. 26.
pr. xviii. 10. and civ. 3. and again in the 33d
verfe of this very Pfalm, that it is no wonder
that our tranflators were ready enough to
take Rabbi Kimchi's authority for rendering
rTDiy heavens, tho' the word never figni-
fies heavens in any other place but deferts, or
the wejl, and is here by the Greek, the Vul-
gat, the Syriac, and the Arabic trandated the
weft, to which the fame verfions make the
33d verfe anfwer by rendering it, to him that
rideth upon the heaven of heavens [itowards
the eajl 5] tho' the Chaidee and the moderns
will have thefe laft words to fignify [which
were of old.] Now, if they will put heavens in
the fourth verfe, they ought to have read
nop
46 Critical Notes on
JTD)? clouds, inftead of p'YD'TP deferts. At leafl
it were to be wilhed, that this low image of
the Almighty, as it were upon an horfe,
which is not in the Hebrew, may be erafed
from the Englifh. But we muft not pafs
without notice one corruption that runs
thro' all the moderns, tho' unknown to all
the antients of the Polyglott, even the Chal-
dee: j—jO by hi* name Jahy where
the antients uniformly fay fT Jah
is his name, which the Greek fcholiaft has
thus writ in Greek chara&ers id aspd.
Psal. Ixxiii. 8.
:roT Ditao pty jro nm ip»o*
In the old verfion, 'They corrupt other, and
Jpeak oj wicked blafphcmy, their talking is
againfl the mo/thigh — In the new, They are
corrupt, andjpeak wickedly concerning oppref-
fiony they Jpeak loftily. which is by the
Chaldee, and now by the moderns commonly
rendered corrupted ovdifolved, fignified to the
Syriac, the Greek, the Vulgat, the iEthiopic,
the Arabic, and Apollinarius, they meditate, as
Dr. Caftle obferves in his Lexicon. And for
&Y\t2'Oloftily> as in our new tranllation, thefe
antients feem plainly to have read DD01? that
is, as the Syriac diredtly tranflates it and our
old verfion, againjl the mofl high. The verfe
would be therefore better reprefented in thefe
words: They ?neditate and Jpeak wickedly,
they Jpeak [blajpkemy] agamjl the mojl high•
And this fenie agrees weli with the follow-
ing
PSALMS. 47
ing verfe. For they Jlretch Jorth their month
to the heavens.—.
lxxiii. 18. onSan rwn nipSro *]K
: mawob
Namely how thou dojl jet them in Jlippery
places: and cafteji them down and dejlroyeji
them. The Syriac, Greek, Latin, Arabic, and
Apollinarius mud have read a little differently
from the Chaldee paraphrad, and from the
prefent Hebrew text, at lead in the lad word
to dejlrudlion, which the former
five Interpreters render in their very exalta-
tion, or, when they were mo(l exalted, and
fo declare the reading of their time to have
been OfilNEftXJ. 2. yd") them as in our tranf-
lation, is by them rendered in the dative
cafe to them, as it ought to be. 3. mpSrO
which we turn in Jlippery places, the Greek,
Latin, Arabic, and Apollinarius render becaufe
cj? deceits; the Syriac, according to their
deceits, which feems bed. The whole verfe
therefore in Englidi might well run thus:
Surely thou didjl appoint to them according
to their deceits; thou didjl cajl them down,
when mojl exalted.
PsAL. Ixxiv. 19,
: -pin »ai rvrb jnn ^"7^ 0 deliver not the
foul of thy turtle-dove unto the multitude oj the
enemies. There are no traces of this metaphor
of the turtle-dove in any old verfion whatfo-
ever, who could not have mid it, at lead not all
of them, if it had ever been in their copies.
The
48 Critical Notes w
The truth is, it is only the blunder of fome
negligent tranfcriber propagated down to us,
who took a 1 ^ for a v, and fo writ "pin
thy turtle-dove, for TTIH confejjing thee, for
fo the antients tranflate, O give not up to
beajls a foul confejjing thee\ which the Chal-
dee paraphraft leems to apply to the prefent
fituation of the Jews.
P s al. lxxv. i.
nan *pp mipi win -jS ij'iin
t
Unto theey O God, do we give thanks, unto
thee do we give thanks ; thy name alfo is fo
nigh, and that do thy wondrous works declare.
None of the ancient interpreters, befidesthe
Chaldee, knew of this reading of this latter part
of the verfe, or ofthe nearnejs of God's name;
for they prove the reading of their times to
have been -pp UXIpl UHin ~p O'lin
¥0 thee, O God, do we give
thanks, we give thanks, and call upon thy
name, and declare thy wondrous works: for
thus they tranflate unanimoufly, except that
before thy wondrous works, the Syriac, Greek,
fEthiopic, and Arabic infert ^ all.
—6.: ann -01*3.0 NSI aiyaoi NXIQO ab o
For promotion cometh ?ieither from the eafy
nor from the wefi, nor yet from the Jouth.
Here again is a divifion about the fenfe of this
verfe, all the antients being ranged on one
fide, and the moderns on the other, between
whom the reader muft judge. The latter,
1 both
m
PSALMS. 49
both Jews and Chriftians, would take the laft
word onn for an Infinitive mood in Hi-
phil fignifying to raife or lift up, and fo
make it a verbal, fignifying exaltation or pro-
motion. On the other fide all the antients
without exception take it in it's moft com-
mon fignification of mountains; but then it
muft be acknowledged that the fienfe is imper-
fedt, and makes no entire propoiition, quia
nec ab oriente, nec ab occidente, nec a defertis
montibus, unlefs the reading of the Syriac be
allowed, who inftead of from the
exit [of the fun] has exlt or efcaping
only (without the particle from) in the nomi-
native cafe, and fo gives us this meaning,
For there is ?io efc aping from the <weft^ nor
from the defert of the mountains, intimating
perhaps by the weft the Philiftines, by the
defert of the mountains Arabia Petraea to
thefouth and fouth eaft of Judaea. The very
fmall remains of the Jewifh hiftory that are
now left us will not enable us to make a par-
ticular application of this ode; but as it is
thought to have been composed after fome
fuccefs with denunciation of God's ievere
vengeance on their enemies, the antients in-
terpretaticn of this verfe feems more fuitable
to the fpirit of the whole, than that of the mo-
derns.
Ps al. Ixxxiii. i.
Bold not thy tongue,
O God—All the antients, except the Chaidee,
agree in reading the beginning of this Pfalm
E "jS
50 Critical Notes on
T D'iTn for they all tranflate, O
God, who is like unto thee ? and at the fame
time fignify that nott was not then in
the text.
lxxxiii. 6. What is commonly rendered
Moabites and Hagarenes, is in the Chaldee,
Moabites and Hungarians, by which fome
judgment may be made of the age of that
Verfion.
P s a l. Ixxxiv. 5, 6.
niy; oarba nV?DO "ja V? ny dtk
nay mana oj imrw pya Joan pop
: nno
Blejfed is the man, whofe Jlrength is in
thee: in whofe heart are thy ways, who going
thro the vale of mifery ufe it for a well, and
the pools are filled with water. This
whole paffage is dark and difficult, perhaps
was fo originally, as one may colledt from
the great differences between the oldeft tranf-
lators, and the tranfcribers, from time to time
adding miftakes to what they did not under-
ftand, have made it now almoft incompre-
henfible. The moderns having got from Jofe-
phus the name of Baca a little village on the
edge of Galilee next the Tyrians, which
might have been in the road of the caravans
to Jerufalem, have turned all the words of
feveral fignifications here, to defcribe the
conveniences of the pilgrims in that march,
and herein agree, as ufually, to follow one an<-
other; but the Syriac with fome fmall varia-
tions of his copies from the prefent text,
viz.
4
r
<»,
%
PSALMS. 51
viz. of -jrvfrDO thy ways, for r~\i~>D!2 ways
of 133*73 his Heart for 3333*73 their heart,
of Y"OJ? faffed for PaffinZ> an<^ °f p]?0
habitation for pjflg, a well, has led us into a
better reading, and perhaps the original fenfe
of this verfe, -j/tiSdo "|3 iS ny nix ntytf
dj inin'u?» pyo toan pqjn roy 133*73
: mvj Pipy* Blejfed is the man
whofe Jlrength is in thee, into whofe heart
thy ways have faffed in deep for row, and
Jet their dwelling in it. He becoming
a teacher Jhall even be covered with blef-
fings.
PsAL. lxxxvi. 2.
I Ton '3 Tl3i iTOP Preferve thou
my foul, for I am holy. David Kimchi ob-
i ferves upon this place, that fome wonder at
this faying, but with little reafon; and yet
moil of the Rabbis, fenlible of the offence,
offer fome excufe, or evafive explanation of
the expreffion as unfit for David or any
man, when in God's fight no man living
^ fhall be juflified. The reading is indeed
as old as the time of Apollinarius; yet it is
hardly to be doubted, but that the reading
found in the Syriac and Arabic nn& thou for
I, fhould be preferred, and Ton render-
ed gracious or merciful. Preferve my Joul,
for thou art gracious.
Psal. xc. 9.
133 11W 11,!73 ■]rr)3J?3 113 Ij'3' S3 '3
: rnn
E 2 For
%
$
Stt
tk
d
eaD*
0
rt
52 Critical Notes
For when thou art angry, all our days are
gone, we bring our years to an end, as it were
a tale that is told. The corruptions of this
verfe, among many others, teach us, how poor
are the remains we have left of the ancient
Hebrew language, which has been by fome
ignorantly condemned as barren, only be-
caufe there is but one book extant of it.
US is by Pagninus rendered have declined,
by the Seventy, Syriac, and Arabic g|eAmov,
have failed, or are fpent. What therefore
muft have been the reading in their copies?
for UD never lignified any fuch thing. Per-
haps it was "OS are run outy which is now
found only in Ezek. xlvii, 2. tho' derived into
the other languages of near affinity with the
Hebrew. The latter part of the verfe, which
we alone tranflate, we fpend our years, as a
tale that is told; (for the word run never
llgnifies a tale) others, — as a vapor of the
mouth, --«• as a difcourfe— as a word, — as a
thought; by all the ancient interpreters be-
.fides the Chaldee, is rendered, as a fpider's
weby which therefore in all probability was
the genuine fenfe of the original. But we
now find no Hebrew word for a fpiders
weby unlefs run, or run, or fome word near
it, from JUH to turn in a round, may have
that meaning. The word in the Syriac for
a fpiders web is UU from the fame root, and
not utterly unlike. The verfe then Ihould
be rendered, with the Syriac, For all our days
are run out by thy wrath, and our years are
wafttci
PSALMS. 53
wafted like a fpider's web. The tenth verfe
fufficiently proves, that the author of it was
fome ages later than Mofes.
xc. ii.: -jrroy -jdntdi *]dk piv
But who regardeth the power of thy wrath ?
For even thereafter as a manfeareth,foisthy
difpleafure. None of all the ancient interpre-
ters have given us this fenfe of this verfe, tho'
they are not unanimous themfelves in their
expofition of it. But the moderns may be ex-
cufed, if, from the context in its prefent con-
dition, they cannot make out any meaning
at all. For is the wrath of God according to
or proportioned to man's fear of that wrath ?
The paffage is corrupted by the Jewifh copy-
ers, and by the help of the Syriac and Apolli-
narius's tranllation in verfe may bereflored to
its primitive purity. Apollinarius's verfes
are:
Tig creo fiya, (p(>i<r\ xd,£!@* civiyvto \
cdj ^i9pYi<retZ]/ d^eiSea Set pot joe, Bvpz ;
Who hath known in his Mind thy great
Power, when angry ? Who might number the
. 7 , O
horrid Terrors of thy Wrath ? — (Where, it
may be obferved, that the Verb number is ta-
ken from the Verfe following.) The Syriac
fays, Who knows the Force of thine Anger, and
the Terror of thine Indignation f Whence it
appears, that the reading of that time was
:-|n-Oy r-WV ?01 "j3X TJ? JTIV 'O Who know-
eth the force of thine anger, and who the terror
of thine indignation ? And the feniclefs
E 3 words
Pj
Hi
54 Critical Notes 0/z
words of the Septuagint ^ ^tto tx (po&S tS
6vpb <rx do in fome meafure confirm this
amendment; for in Hebrew they would
be with the difference of only one *
■jrroj/.
P s a l. xcv. 7.
: IT IN'VI inym unaa imSx Kin
For he is the Lord our God, and we are
the people of his pajlure, and the fneep of his
hand. This being the introductory Pfalm
in our liturgy fhould not pafs without notice
of a fmall tranfpofition of the words the
people and the fheep from their proper places
interchangeably ; for omitting the incongrui-
ty of pafture to a people, the fame thought
being repeated in Pfalm lxxix. 13. and c. 3.
in the natural affociation of fheep (not peo-
pie) to a pafture, it is hardly to be doubted
but the Syriac fhould be followed in doing
the fome in this place — And we are the peo-
pie of his handy and the fheep of his pafture.
P S A l. ex. 3.
nrro tnp mm -p»n fbm mn -py
/ : imV Sd -j1? -intra
parcTrf In the day of thy power Jhall the people
f '+ft /// offer thee free will offerings with an holy wor-
jhrp : The dew of thy birth is of the womb of
the morning. Hoc loco, fays the learned Dr.
■Muis, non orbit ror ullum clfcuriorem efe in
toto Pfalmorum vol amine; and all, it is to be
be-
PSALMS. '55
believed, will readily agree with him. The
fubjed, the images, and phrafes are all pro-
phetic and divine, and the corruptions great
in proportion to the fmall number of lines
of this moll fublime ode, which the extrava-
gances of the Chaldee paraphrafe feem in-
tended rather to obfcure than illuftrate, which
we wifh to do. may fignify with thee,
as it is rendered by the Septuagint, Apollina^
rius, the Arabic, the iEthiopic,and the Vul-
gat; or thy people, as tranflated by the
Syriac and Chaldee: And neither fenfe im-
proper or inconfiftent, but the former feems
preferable. 2. by the Septuagint and
Arabic is tranflated government ^ which Ama-
ma, one of the moll learned Hebricians we
have known, affirms it never fignifies; and
Caftel has it not in his Lexicon; the Syriac
turns it into an adjedive, fignifying honour a-
ble or glorious^ by which one may fuppofe he
read which Dr. Caftel renders a Prince or
King as it ufually fignifies, 3. t£Hp the Syriac
and Chaldee expound holinefs, but all the others
read "rtSHp thy faints, as appears from their
verfions. 4. OHIO jrorn the womb fay all the
ancient interpreters, except the Chaldee, who
renders it mercy (and not improperly) and
connects it with the words preceding, tho'
according to his own conceit. 5. of
old, as the Syriac tranflates it; before the
morning flary as all the others more clearly
interpret it; only the Chaldee has thought fit
to take no notice of it. 6. in this place
E 4 is
56 Criticai Notes ck
is redundant, as tibi often is in Latin writers,
which Noldius, in his moft ufeful book of
Concordances of the particles, has fhewn to be
frequent in Scripture, 7. "jrnS* the dew of
thy birth. Unintelligible words of long ftand-
ing;for Aquila, Symmachus, and another Greek
verfion had them. But the Syriac, the Septua-
gint, the Vulgat, the Arabic, the iEthiopic,
and Apollinarius have thus conveyed to us
the fenfe of the original: I begot theey
my Son. As in Pfalm ii. 7. Thou art my Son9
this day have I begotten thee. Which, in great
probability, is the genuine fignification of the
text, of which the Syriac gives us the very
words, or at leaft very nearly '■jTflS*
For, tho' here is now no fuch word as or
or extant for a fon or child in the
flender remains that are left us of the He-
brew tongue \ yet there are fuch plain traces
of the word, or one very near it in the Sama-
ritan, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic languages,
that the oldeffc interpreters would never have
exprefl it in this place, if they had not found
it here. If thefe premifes be allowed, we
may proceed to make the fecond and third
verfes more intelligible in fome fuch manner
as this: 2. A fcepter of might will favoh de-
liver thee out of Sion \ reign thou in the midjl
of thine enemies, — 3. And with thee9 O
prince, in the day of thy power, thy faints
thro' mercy clothed with fplendor. Before the
the morning far I begot thee, my fon.
ex. 4*
PSALMS. 57
ex. 4. cfryh jro nnx aw nSi nm»
: pnv 'sSo 'man
The Lord hath fworn and will not repenty
Thou art a priejl for ever after the order of
Melchifedek. All the ancient interpreters
translate the latter part of the verfe to this
fenfe, as it is quoted by the author of the
epiftle to the Hebrews, except the Chaldee
alone, who for — after the order of Melchi-
zedek, fays — becaufe thou hajl been a jujl
king. Who in this may perhaps be followed
by Aben Ezra, Kimchi, and fome more of
the Jewifh Rabbis, but by no other of the
moderns whatfoever. But, on the other fide,
the modern profefiors of Hebrew themfelves
acknowledge that by or JTtn by is a
phrafe mod commonly ufed before a noun
to fignify for or becaufe of by the Septuagint
made equivalent to mxev, or zlf, by Buxtorf
in his Concordance, Amamain his note, and
Noldius in his Concordance to anfwer to the
Latin propter ; and accordingly thus it is ren-
dered in Gen. xii. 17. And the Lord plagued
Pharaoh—becaufe of Sarai, Abraham s wife
and again in Ch.xx. 18. AndCh. xliii. #18.
Becaufe of the money, that was returned in
cur Jacks —And Pfalm lxxix. 9. Help us, O
God ofour falvation, for the glory of thy name.
The fame phrafe before a part of a fentence
with or any fuch particle, is ufed to fig-
nify becaufe that, and by the Septuagint rend-
ered en, by the Latin Volgat quia, eo quod,
as in Deut. xxii. 24. The damjel, becauie Jhe
cried
58 Critical Notes ^
cried not being in the city, and the man be-
caufe he hath humbled his neighbour s wife.
and Deut. xxiii. 4. Becaufe they met you not
with bread, &c. Nor is there one pafTage in
the old Teftament, in which this phrafe
mm by is by the Septuagint tranflated
KctTct TclPiVy or by us according to the order,
excepting this one verfe. Therefore Kim-
chi concludes with his verfion in this form
* "ho nriNty nm by becaufe thou art a
king of righteoufnefsy as in Pfalm xlv. 8.
Thou hajl loved right eoufnefs, and hated iniquity,
therefore God, even thy God hath anointed thee
with the oil of gla dnefs above thy fellows. To
which Noldius, who quotes him, replies only,
that in this he contradi&s St. Paul, whom Nol-
dius takes to be the writer of the epiftle to
the Hebrews. But Mills, in his concluding
note on that epiftle, will anfwer for Kimchi,
that the author of it was fo much attached
to the Septuagint, that he makes no refe-
rences but to the Greek verlion, and often
fo unaccurately, that, if his citations in Greek
were to be examined and compared with the
original Hebrew, all his arguments on thofe
points would be difcovered to have no foun-
dation at all -> of which he alledges four or
five inftances, with an intimation that he could
have given more; and no doubt but Kimchi
would have reckoned this for one of them.
ex. 6. j nvu mSo 0»1j3 p* He Shall
judge among the heathen, he Jhall fill the
places with the dead bodies. Louis Capel in his
Critica
PSALMS. 59
Critica Sacra p. 367. has, out of St. Jerom's
Latin tranflation, helped us to a better reading
of this place, inftead of nVU 'with the dead
bodies or JDKU the valleys, (for it is
writ both ways) He Jh all judge the nations, he
flail Jill the valleys — correfponding perhaps
with the fenfe of Ifaiah xl. 4. Every valley
flail be exalted, and every mountain and hill
flail be made low. HIT) pIN by pD
—And fmite in funder the heads over divers
countries. None of all the antients had the
prefent reading nin but or OOI in the
plural of many or of the great ones on the
earth, and head being in the original in
the fingular number, He fhall crufl the head
of the great ones on the earth, may in the opi-
nion of Bruccioli, the author of an old Ita-
lian tranflation, be pointed at Antichrift.
P s a l. cxxxix. i,
Aben Ezra fays, there is not in all the five
books of Plalms, any fo excellent as this of
the ways of God with a rational foul. Arm-
ma obferves many Chaldaifms in it, from
whence it may be reafonably inferred, that it
was writ after the beginning of the Babylo-
nian captivity, as well as mod of the reft of
the Pfalms of this fifth book, the Greek title
fays by Zachariah.
— t.: n? Sjin k? i-orco 'joo run rvNSa
Such knowledge is too wonderful and ex-
cellent for me, I cannot attain unto it,
The Greek, and Apollinarius, the Latin,
/Ethi-
6o Critical Notes on
iEthiopic, and Arabic read for pyi knowledge
TJTJH thy knowledge — and inftead of attain,
to which there is no word in the Hebrew to
anfwer, the very fame expreflion rf? SdIN
occuring before in Pfalmcxxix. 2. in thejudg-
ment of Amama fhould be tranflated here, as it
was there, and in Jerem. i. 19 prevail againjl,
and the whole fhould ftand thus: Wonderful
is thy knowledge and elevated above me, I
cannot prevail againjl it. For hence he
purfues the thought of God's omniprefence,
Whither fhall I go from thy fpirit? Or whi-
ther fo all I go from thy prejence?
— 8. J -pn VlNP np'VNl down to
. hell, thou art there alfo. Literally, If I
ftrow hell, an expreflion, in this place atleaft,
unknown to all the old interpreters, (except
the Chaldee) for they phrafe it, If I defcend
into hell, and therefore probably ufed a word
not very different in its letters nyUfcO if I
reach quite to hell, as in Ezekiel vii. 12. ^Jin
OVn the day is fully come and in 2. Chron.
xxviii. 9. yun tytyrfl -ty ^
re ache th up to heaven, in which cafe the
words fhould be rendered, If I go even to
hell, lo thou art there.
— 9. :o» nnnio pusum inp '3:0 xpk
If I take the wings of the mornings and
dwell in the uttermojl parts of the fea: We
never hear of any wings belonging to the
morning, but from the Chaldee. The Septua-
gint and Vulgat read "iH&O or in the
morning,
PSALMS. 61
morning., or perhaps in the fame
fenfe; but the Syriac and Arabic help us to
a clearer fenfe by tranflating what it is to be
fuppofed they read in their copies as
an eagle: If I take wings, like an eagle.
— 13- i '/vVS nnN O For my reins
are thine. The Greek (as it now ftands,
iKlqru) and the Vulgat, poffedifti> join with
the A2thiopic and the Chaldee in confirming
the prefent reading of the Hebrew TVjp thou
hajl pojjejfed: Yet one may perhaps withobt
partiality prefer that of the Syriac and Arabic
fVJpft thou hafl compofed or created — which
being a Syriac word, as well as Hebrew,'
ftands in fo many letters in that verfion.
And if this be the true reading, the Greek
thou haft poffejfed, may be as eafily
turned into 6^1 lea thou haft created. Thou
haft created my reins.
_ — 14. ♦ 'n'Sai marro o -pix i -will
give thanks unto thee, for I am fearfully and
wonderfully made: This verfion is collected
from the Chaldee only, which the reft of the
antients do not countenance; none of them
find (which we render lam wonderfully
made) in the firft perfon, but in the jecond
ftixnu jySqi iQajufjiurddvjSt thou art wonder-
ful in terrors, or, according to the Syriac and
Arabic, thou haft done wonders in terrors.
cxli. 5, 6. ti'Ni foe? on'OTi ion pns ooVrs?
: 'e'Ki o' bit
Let the righteous rather fmite me friendly,
and reprove me. 6. But let not their pre-
cious
62 Critical Notes on
cious balms break my head. The ancient
verfions, by their variations and obfcurities,
fhew many corruptions crept into this Pfalm,
in the courfe of fo many ages: pH'J'lobn*
let the the righteous fmite me, fay our tranfla-
tors, which is literally, Let the righteous
knock me with a mallet. There are commenta-
tors, who will labour to make this pafs
with us, but they difhonour the original,
more than any that fay it is corrupted; for
the latter have on their fide the Septugint, the
Syriac, the Arabic, who read ion
"jHtf Let the righteous teach me in mercy,
of which is the very word in the Syriac.
2. V81 JEtP oil of the head is faid by the
Rabbis to intimate the beft oil, the befl
being ufually applied to that part: probably
it was fo; but the obfervation is of no ufe
here, where all the ancients found not
head but ygn wicked, which Louis Cappella
obferves of the Septuagint, and the late learn-
ed Bifhop Hare thought to be the genuine
reading. 3. \ Which/hall not break
my head. Was there any danger that balms
fhould break his head ? w itfelf is a word no
where elfe to be found, and Dr. Caftle in
his Lexicon under the word £03 to break
remarks, that the Septuagint, Syriac, Arabic,
iEthiopic, Vulgat, and fome of the Hebrews
feem to have read in this place tyy bedrop
or anoint. In this manner therefore do the
a Critica Sac. p. 286.
ancient
1
■l i
x
PSALMS. 63
ancient interpreters teach us to read this
verfe: b>H yen JOtf ♦JITDVI "IDH pHJf
t and thus to tranilate it. Let the
righteous inflru&l me in mercy, and reprove
me; the oil of the wicked fhall not anoint my
P s A L. cxliv. 12.
\ D'SuO WJ3 "Iti'N That ourfins
may grow up as the young plants. — This is
the reading and fenfe of the Chaldee only, and
is continued thro' the two following verfes,
as a prayer for the internal profperity of the
Jewifh nation at home, whereas all the
other old interpreters with Apollinarius agree
in rendering the fame verfes, as fo many cir-
cumftances of the adual felicity of the aliens
of their neighbourhood; Whofe fons grow up
as the young plants, and whofe daughters are
as the polifhed cor?iers of the temple: Whofe
granaries are full, &c. fo that wherever the
prefent Hebrew text has our, in their time
it had on their, and therefore has received
thefe amendments or changes probably from
the hands of later Jews, in which the mo-
dern tranflators generally follow them. And
yet the conclufion of the Pfalm is in both
the fame in words, but in the ancient ver-
fions to be taken by way of antithesis, as,
Happy the people, who have fuch things: More
happy the people, who have fehova for their
God,
PsAL.
64 Critical Notes on
(C
(C
<c
((
<c
PSAL. Cxlv. 14.
Here we may properly infert an exftrad
from theCritica Sacra of Louis Cappell, p. 294.
" Pf. cxlv, qui alphabeticus eft, poft verfum
13 qui incipit a littera Mem, et ante ver-
fum 14, qui incipit a litera Samech Septua-
ginta [ut et Syrus, Arabs, ALthiops, Vul-
" gatus interpres et Apollinarius] addunt
" hunc verficulum, qui Hebraice fic procul
" dubio fuit conceptus VCD nin) JOJO
" \ Vbbyfi TDm Et rede fane videtur
additus; neque ehim videtur verifimile in
Pfalmo illo alphabetico fuifle omiffum
" verficulum qui inciperet a litera Nun.
In the cxlv Pfalm, which is one of the
alphabetical Pfalms, between the 13 verfe
beginning with the Hebrew letter ft Mem,
and the 14 verfe beginning with the letter
D Samech, the Septuagint (and with the Sep-
tuagint, the Syriac, the Arabic, the ALthi-
opiCy the Vulgat Latiny and Apollinarius s
paraphrafe in verfe^ in a word all but the
Chaldee) infert a verfe beginning with the
letter J Nun, which in all probability was
thus in the Hebrew: TDm VTTD PTWT piO
SdD And indeed with good reafon;
for it feems not at all probable, that in a
Pfalm, where the feveral verfes were to be-
gin with the feveral letters of the alpha-
bet, that verfe only which was to begin
with the letter Nun, Jhould ha<ve been dropt.
This verfe, which by the teftimony of fo many
antient
ISAIAH. 65
antient tranflators once filled this place, and
ought to be reftored to it, would in Englifh
run thus: Faithful is the Lord in hisfaymgsy
and holy in all his works.
Psal. cxlviii. 5.
Let thempraife the name of the Lord: for
he [pake the word, and they were made, he
comma?ided, a?id they were created. Here
our old compofers of the tranflation ufed in
our liturgy, have taken a liberty, of which
we find no other inftance, of inferring thefe
words, he fpake the word, and they were
made> which are not in the prefent Hebrew
text, nor in any other of the modern ver-
fions, that we have met with. But on the
other fide, they are in all the antient ver-
fions, exeept theChaldee, (if that be antient)
and that is a fufficient inducement for us to
believe, that they were formerly in the He-
brew text, and nearly the fame which are
ftill in the Syriac, viz.jym "ION* Siin '3
which are literally rendered thus — For he
fpake, and they were he co?nmanded, and they
were created.
Isaiah vii. 8.
: qys ansx nrr rw trom ow -njwi
_ And within threefcore and five years [hall
Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.
Louis Cappel a obferves that no corruptions
* Crit. Sac. 1. vi. c. 7.
F - of
66 Critical Notes ^
of the Hebrew text occur more frequently
than in the numbers, which indeed he has
proved by a multitude of inftances, and, in
conclufion, alledges this flagrant example of
Jevvifh negligence, or prefumption; by which
a prediction fent to encourage Ahaz and his
fubjeCts againft the Ifraelites of the ten tribes,
who are here called Ephraim, then confede-
rated with the Syrians; and which, both
promifes deliverance to Judah, and de-
nounces to Ifrael a total deftruCtion of that
kingdom, within a limited time; is fo chang-
ed, as to be utterly inconfiftent with the
fubfequent hiftory of thofe two kingdoms in
Scripture. For the prophefy was fent to Ahaz,
Ahaz reigned 16 yearsb; and was immediate-
ly fucceeded by his fon Hezekiah; in Heze-
kiah's fixth year c, came the total deftruCtion,
and captivity of the kingdom of Ifrael, from
which it never recovered. If then the
prophefy were delivered, the very find day
of the reign of Ahaz, it could not be full
22 years to the completion of it. But if in
the end of the firft year of Ahaz, or the be-
ginning of his fecond, not full twenty one
years. Vitringa thews with great probabili-
ty, that this confternation of Ahaz, and con-
fequently Ifaiah's meflage, muft have come
in the fecond year of his reign, after the lofs of
120,000 men againft Pekah alone, without
which victory, the two kings would fcarcely
h 2 Kings xvi. 2. 2 Chron. xxviii. i. c 2 Kings
xviii. 10.
have
ISAIAH. 67
have projected diredtly to form the fiege of
Jerufalem, and to depofe king Ahaz. And
they are called the two tails of fmoking fire-
brands, apparently from the combuftion
of the preceding invafion. And the faille
pious and judicious commentator, with great-
er pains and accuracy than the fubjedt de-
ferved, has confuted firft one notion derived
from the Jews, to very many of the learned
moderns, that the infallibility of the Jewifti
tranfcribers being then undifputed, the fixty
five years mull: be reckoned to have begun
backwards, above forty years before this pro-
phecy was declared or known; and then
another interpretation, which is little better;
that the fixty five years, are to be extended as
much beyond the real event of the deftruc-
tion of the Samaritan kingdom, to a term of
which there is no mark or mention in the
facred hiftory. But according to either of
thefe conftru&ions, thefe words muft have
been unintelligible to thofe wTho heard them,
even after the event, and loft all force and
divine authority.
What then is to be done? Louis Cappel
makes no more doubt, than we do, that the
text is corrupted, and he would corredt it
it in this manner trw CtfJm W "njD with-
in fx and jive years, that is eleven years —
which Grotius, a mafter in all fciences but
chronology, commends as undoubtedly true,
not obferving how much it clafhed with the
Scripture hiftory. For if this prophecy was
F 2 pro-
68 Critical Notes on
nounced eleven years before the captivity of
the Ifraelites, that muff: at the fame time be
the eleventh of the reign of Ahaz the ele-
venth of Ahaz, was above feven years after
the death of Refin, and Pekah, who were
both fo terrible, at the time of this prophe-
cy, to the court and people of Judah. Vi-
tringa being as much perfuaded as Cappel,
of the corruption of the text, and the ne-
ceffity of a reform, offers another reading,
rm* C'Drn * W and within jixteen and
five years, fuppofing the letter * after w to have
been originally writ for the number ten, of
which it is the common mark, and by fub-
fequent tranfcribers joined to W as part of
that word, which, by that addition, would
come to ffgnify fixty inffead offix. For the
fum total of twenty one years, the excellent
Profeffor's conjecture is unexceptionable, as
in effedt has been fhewn a little before. But
j. it will be hard to find a reafon, why thefe
tranfcribers fhould exprefs the number ten,
by a mark » and the numbers fix and five,
at the fame time by words at length. 2.
Whereas he juftly fuppofes Ifaiah to have
made up the total of twenty one years, by
the years paft in each of the reigns of Ahaz
and Plezekiah, before the captivity of Ifrael;
he cannot affign /ixtee?i of the twenty one,
to the reign of Ahaz, when he has laid it
down, that Ahaz had reigned one year, be-
fore the declaration of this prophecy, and yet
reigned but jixteen in the whole. 3. Nor can
the
ISAIAH. 69
the prophefy with good reafon be brought
to fignify within jive years of Hezekiatis
reign, when it is certain, that the capti-
vity of Ifrael fell not before the fixth of
Hezekiah.
From the event, it may without doubt be
collected, that the original prediction of
Ifaiah, included no more than one and
twenty years, from the fecond of Ahaz, to
the defolation[of Samaria; and thole, in
all probability, diftributed into the two
terms of fifteen years, for the remainder
of the reign of Ahaz, and fix for the firft
part of Hezekiah's: And this might have
been expreft by tPIP fix inftead of OW fx-
ty, and by the addition of ten, the
words being ranged according to the courfe
of the events, in this manner: TOH
x nyo dhsk nri' mty vm And with-
in fifteen and fix years Ephraim fhall be bro-
ken, that it be not a people. It has been ob-
jedted by able critics, that this putting of fif-
teen and fix for twenty one, is a way of rec-
koning not ufed by any nation, that we
know of; and it muft be allowed, that it
was not cuftomary even among the Hebrews;
but jthe prophets might, and fometimes cer-
tainly did ufe this myfterious ftyle, when they
intended to cover under it fome notices of
things, that after the events would be opened
to all confiderate eyes. And befide the in-
fiances brought by Vitringa, p. 176. there
is a remarkable one, in the feventy weeks of
F 3 Daniel
70 Critical Notes
Daniel, where the weeks to be numbered,
from the going forth of the commandment
[under Ezra] to Meffiah, are not faid to be
69, as they are, but 7 and 62, becaufe that
whole fum was made up of thofe two diflindt
periods.
Isaiah ix. 6.
— 7$ 'DN *VOJ fyv JSSQ W Nlp'l
: abv -\v
—* And his name fhall be called wonderful,
counfellery the mighty God, the everlaftng
father, the prince of peace.
It feems flrange that this famous paffage of
Ifaiah fhould by any Chriftian commentator
be applied to Hezekiab, or any king of Ju-
dab, when Jonathan's Targum expreffes the
Meblah, as the fubjedt of thofe high titles,
which may be faid to be given him, not by
the prophet, but by the Lord of hods, as in
the verfe following, and which are in fub-
fiance explained again, in the fecond verfe
of the eleventh chapter. And the fpirit of the
Lord fhall reft upon kimy the fpirit of wifdom
and underfanding, the fpirit of counfel and
might, the fpirit of knowledge and of the fear
of the Lord. For Vitringa well obferves, as
many before him had done, that what this child,
preordained to fit on the throne of David, will
be called, is intended to fignify what he will be
hzwill be wonderful counfelier, or wonderful
in counfel, potent lord, father of the age
[to come] a prince of peace, ha (of
which the name Gabriel is compounded,
and
ISAIAH. 71
and therefore perhaps the Septuagint render-
ed, thefe two words by57may be
tranflated the mighty God, as in our verfion,
but fmce the fame words in the plural num-
ber, in Ezekiel xxxii. 21.
ftand forJirong and mighty, and cannot there
hgnify Gods, and fince the other attributes
here mentioned of wonderful counfellor,
prince of peace, &c. would rather feem low
and mean, if applied to the Almighty; the
old Greek verfions are perhaps not wrong,
in tranflating them, as in general they do,
in the fenfe of potent lord. *jp is made
to import in our tranflation, that the Meffiah
will be the everlafting father ; how much
that means, is above our capacity to compre-
hend; furely the text imports not fo much.
*Tp here is agreed to be a noun fignifying an
age, or eternity: The old Greek Interpre-
ters, and the Vulgat, taking it in the firft
fenfe nctTrjg added to it as an ex-
planation, tx fohovi©*, Father of the future
age, Father of the age to come, by which per-
haps they intended to fignify, Lord of all
the world for the ages following his afcen-
Hon; perhaps as much as we fhould by ta-
king Hp, in the fecond fenfe of eternity,
father of eternity or eternal life, viz. to all
his true followers. And either of thefe
fenfes will make a clear and fublime cha-
ra&er of the grandeur and glory of the
Meffiah.
F 4 IsAI-
72
Critical Notes on
isaiah x. 5.
: 'ay? dt3 xin nasi aiv "view nn
O Affyrian, ^ rod of mine anger, <2 W
ftaff* in their hand is ?nine indignation: The
plain and natural tranflation of thefe words
feems to be this: Wo to the Affyrian ! the rod
and the ftaff of mine anger is he, in their hands
is mine indignation. — And when the Lord
Jhall have perfected his whole work upon mount
Sion — I will vifit the fruit of the ft out heart
of the king of Affyria, and the glory of his
high looks. Shall the ax boaft itfelf againft
him, that heweth therewith ? — An excellent
ledure of humiliation, to all the the proud
conquerors of mankind.
Isaiah xxvi. 19.
: poip' 'rfaj -j'fiD vn»
Thy dead men jhall live, together with my
dead body jhall they arije. Awake and fing^ye
that dwell in duft : for thy dew is as the dew of
herbs, and the earth Jhall caft out the dead.
This being part of an addrefs to God, from
the affiided Ifraelites, reprefents a reftoration
of their fallen date, in as lively imagery, as
they would have done a real refurredion from
the dead: and has therefore been often
brought as a fufficient evidence, that the lat-
ter was the general belief of Ifaiah's time,
of which Vitringa makes no doubt, tho' he
acknowledges the primary fenfe here, to be
only figurative. But he forgets to reduce
the
redes
tie
ISAIAH. 73
the words [together with my dead
body Jhall they arije] and in his translation
[cadaver meum. rejurgenti] to any gramma-
tical conftrudlion, or coherence. my
dead body in the Angular number, was not in
the copies of any of the antient tranflators,
but their dead bodies. Thy dead men
Jhall live, their dead bodies Jlwll arife. Let
them awake and fing, that dwell in the
dujl, &c.
Isaiah lii. 14.
\ yby As many were ajlo-
nied at thee — Thus it Hands at prefent in
the fecond perfon, in the Hebrew text of this
famous prophecy of a fuffering Meffiah, tho'
all before and after thefe words are fpoken of
him in the third perfon. It is true that this
change of the perfons is of little importance,
and not uncommon in Scripture, but never-
thelefs it feems better, not to multiply the
inilances of that fort farther than the origi-
nal authorizes them. Here it appears plainly
that the Syriac read for y^y at thee at
him, that is at this fervant of Jehovah, men-
tioned in the verfe preceding: and very pro-
bably, that the Chaldee read the fame, tho'that
paraphraft, in this, and the following chap-
ter, affedtedly mifapplies to the whole nation
of the Jews whatever the prophet affirms of
a Angle perfon, and by fuch a perverfe inter-
pretation makes it hard to determine what
was in the text of his time. And yet he is
not much more abfurd than Grotius, who
would
74 C R I T I C A I, N O T £ s on
would perfuade us to expound all of Jeremiah
and his perfecutions.
Isaiah liii. 2.
imsmi nNici KSI lrwui -nn xbi vh
—He hath no form nor comelinefs, and when
we Jhall fee him, there is no beauty that we
Jhould defire him.
Here is a little diforder in the end of the
verfe; lrnoroi fignifying naturally, as the Vul-
gat has rendered it, et dejideravimus eum, and
we defred him, which is inconhftent with the
reft of the context. Forerius therefore would
have us underftand, the particle not, and we
defred him not\ which of all particles is
never to be underftood in anyferious writing.
The Syriac fays, — And we Jaw that he had
?20 form, and we refufed [or difownedJ him, as
if the word in the Hebrew had been irUNOJl.
The ealieft alteration, and mod agreeable both
to the Septuagint, (who exprefs it by £
cwTiy, Kj cbc eixsv IVe Jaw
him, and he had no form nor beautyJ and to the
modern verfions, would be maOO tfSl in JO}
mom We jaw him, and his ajpedl is 72ot de-
frable.
—liii. 10.—tjnr pint iti'33 ouw awn ax
When thou Jhalt jnake his foul an offering for
Jin, he Jhall fee his feed.— The conjunction Dtf
which is generally rendered if, but in this
place when, implies a condition, fays Vitringa,
without which this fervant of Jehovah was
not to enjoy the privileges annexed, He
Jhall
ISAIAH. 75
Jhall fee his feed, he Jhall prolong his days> and
the pie afur e of the Lord jhall profper in his
hand. But it appears much more fuited to
the divine oeconomy to fay that it had been of
old decreed, without condition or contingen-
cy, that he himfelf fhould make his life a
free-will offering for fin, and that in the ori-
ginal this wasdiredly, not hypothetically affir-
med, as it is ftill in the Syriac, who for
DN reads in one word D'UWltf in Hithpael,
fignifying is put or made, and fo the fenfe,
without any forced apoftrophe to God, as in
our tranflation, will be natural and eafy, His
foul is made an offering for fin, he Jhall fee
his feed, he Jhall prolong his days, &c.
Isaiah, lviii. 4.
: yen fpjjo rronSi iooti nvoi an1? ;n
Behold ye fajl for Jlrife and debate, and to
fmite with the fiff of wickednefs. The latter
part [and to fmite with the fifl of wickednefs]
is by the Septuagint rendered ^ TuV^e vrvy-
[teas TctTreticv, and ye fmite the poor with your
ff/ls, which fhews that inffead of which
we tranflate of wickednefs their copy had
the poor> a reading more fignificantand pointed.
lviii. 5. D°IK /YliSj; DV "imrOtfDTC .TH' HDH
_ naxi pan le'jn pjso fp"?n lea:
Is it juch a fajl that I have chojen ? for
a man to ajflibl his foul for a day ? Is it to
bow down his head as a bulrufh, and to Jpread
fackcloth and affees under him? This divine
expoffulation lofes much of its force in our
tranflation, as well as the reft of the moderns,
8 John x. 17, 18. and xii. 27.
by
y6 Critical Notes
by this improper fimilitude of a bulrufh, of
which it is notorious enough, that it is the
leaft apt to bow down its head of any plant;
and thence comes into a French proverb, on
a man that is haughty and ftiff in behaviour,
il fe tient droit comme un jonc, He keeps
himfelf as upright as a bulrufh. On the
contrary all the ancient tranflators here and in
other places render this word as a circle,
ring) or hook but it feems probable that the
firft letter 3 which ftands for as, was origi-
nally 3 fignifying in, one of the moft common
changes of this language, and then the ver-
flon will run thus, Is it to bow down his head
in a circle ?
I S A I % H. Ixvi. I, 2.
Thus faith the Lord, The heaven is my
throne, and the earth is myfootjlool: Where
is the houfe that ye build unto me? And where
is the place of my rejl ? For all thofe things
hath mine-hand made, nbtt ViTl and all
thofe things have been, faith the Lord.
The fpeech is indeed majeftic, and worthy
of the Lord of all the world, and the reafon-
ing irrefiftible; but in the laft part, and all
thofe things have been, there is a flat tautolo-
gy, which the oldeft and belt verfions have
not, who muft have read in their copies
VH with the infertion of one
letter only, becaufe they agree in this tranfla-
tion of the words And all theje things are
mine: A fentiment expreft by David, upon
the
ISAIAH. 77
the fame fubjed, as it is recited i Chron.
xxix. 16. O Lord our God, all this Jlore that
we have prepared, to build thee an houfe for
thine holy name, cometh of thine handy and
is all thine own.
Iff!'
Jeremiah vii. 4.
iDxS npun nan Sn oaS inaan Sk
: non mrr ho'n
Truft ye not in lying words, faying. The
temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the
temple of the Lordzxz thefe. Is this veriion in-
telligible? The pronoun HOT they has created
to our tranflators all the difficulty, for, as it
ftands alone, it can have no fignification,
but if it be allowed to be connected with the
gerund it may be rendered in
that they fay, it is the Lord's temple, &c. a
populous cry of the falfe prophets, as if it
were to be expeded, that God fhould proted
the wicked nation, for the fake of their
temple. But all the antient verfions take
no notice of this word nOH, and without
it, give the whole verfe thus, Trufl ye not in
lying Jpeeches of them who tell you, it is the
temple of the Lord, &c.
But it is obfervable, in the following verfe,
where we now read, For if ye throughly
amend your ways and your doings — the Sy-
riac fays, ye are the temple oj the Lord, if
ye throughly amend your ways and your do-
ings, — agreeably to that divine drain in
Ifaiah
7 8 Critical Notes on
Ifaiah3, 'Thus faith the high and lofty one9
that inhabiteth eternity, whofe name is holy,
I dwell in the high and holy place, and with
him alfo, that is of a contrite and humble
Jpirit, &c. But it muft be acknowledged,
that-this infertion from the Svriac, is not
confirmed, by any other old paraphraft or
commentator, and fome will not perhaps
allow his (ingle authority to be fufficient,
tho' one of the beft of all the antient tranfla-
tors; yet neverthelefs thefe words feemed not
unworthy to be mentioned.
M i c a h vi. 8.
enn mrv noi mo no din -|S ton
jwii non nonxi od^o mr; ok o *po
t yrbx Dyrd?
He hath fthewed thee, O man, what is good,
and what doth the Lord require of thee, but
to do jujlly, and to love mercy, and to walk
humbly with thy God?
Here, as Grotius obferves, is a mofl excel-
lent preparation, and introduction, to the true
fpirit of the Gofpel, by drawing our princi-
pal attention off, from external and circum-
flantial things, and (as Cocceius very well
adds) from all traditions and precepts of men,
to the practice of fincere piety to God, and
juftice and beneficence to our neighbour.
There is indeed a fmall variation from the
text in the Syriac, Arabic, and Vulgat, but
3 lvii. 15.
hardly
M I C A H. 79
hardly worth obferving, for inftead of He
hath /hewed, they read "pjriK and rendered
I have Jhewed or will Jhew and thereby
made it ambiguous, whether thefe are im-
mediately the words of God or his prophets;
the prefent reading, being the clearer, feems
rather the better. And being a noun
fhould be rendered, not jujlly, but jujlice,
tho' it muft be confeft without any material
difference, for the illuftration of the fenfe of
this divine and ever memorable declaration.
He hath Jhewed thee, 0 man, what is good;
and what doth Jehovah thy God require of
thee, but to do jujlice, and to love mercyy
and to be humble in walking with thy God?
John xx. 30, 31.
And many other Jigns, truly, did J ejus, in
the prefence of his dij'ciples, which are not
written in this book. — But theje are written,
that ye might believe, that J ejus is the Chrift,
the Jon of God, and that believing ye might
have life through his name.
Grotius, in his note on this place, declares
himfelf to be clearly of opinion, that here St.
John concluded his Gofpel: But as the laft
chapter of Deuteronomy, and the laid of Jo-
fhua were added by the Hebrew Sanhedrin ;
fo was the following xxf chapter here an-
nexed by the church of Ephefus. In con-
firmation of this decifion, he brings the 24th
verfe of this la ft chapter, this is the difciple
80 Critical Notes ^
which tejlifieth of thefe things, and wrote
thefe things -> and we know that his tejlimony
is true. Which can never be fuppoled to be
the language, of the evangelift himfelf, but
of the church after his death. Father Simon,
tho' acknowledging that in all appearance,
St. John defigned to end his hiftory with thofe
words; yet will not allow, that Grotius has
alledged any folid proof of what he was fo
ready to advance. But rather imagines, that
there has been fome change made in the
courfe of St. John's narrative, and that the
la ft chapter is not in it's true place, and that,
if any one will confider how little there is
of method or order in his whole relation, he
will be induced to charge St. John himfelf
with thefe little defeats, which, fays he, make
no alteration in the truth of his hiftory.
On the other fide it may be laid, in fup-
port of Grotius's judgment, that you will not
find, any one genuine Chriftian writer, of
the two firft centuries, that mentions or
quotes any thing of that xxift chapter. But
on the contrary, Tertullian, in his difpute
Adverfus Praxeam, cap. xxv. concerning the
diftin&ion of the perfon of the Son from
the Father, after many quotations from St.
John's Gofpel, fays Ipfa quoque claufula Evan-
gelii propter quid confignat hcec fcripta, nifi
ut credatis JeJum Chrijlum filium Dei?
<c And the very conclusion of his Gofpel, for
<c what end does it leal up thofe writings, but
" that ye might believe, lays he, that Jefus is
the
I
JOHN.
ec the Chrift, the Son of God ?" Which are
the words of the laft verfe of the xxth chap-
ter, and confequently fhew, that Tertullian
knew of no xxift chapter, nor of any Afiatic
hyperbole at the end of it. And if any quel-
tion be made of the proper fignification of
the word claufula, Rigaltius in his note on
De Idololatria, cap. 9. will tell you that it fig-
nifies the end or clofe of any thing, and indeed
Tertullian never ufes it in any other fenfe.
G alat 1 an s i. 8, 9.
'AAAu it ioiv tfxeis vj uyl"sh@^ cCciy-
yeXjfca vfv uraf 0 djYiyhXitrdfJLiQoc, vju.iv, dvdQz-
fACt \<?Gd. fig Tt^Gei^KA/vS/J, Kf dpTl 73-clXlV A
Ems vpaq djocyftxfCflui Tzct J 0 TsrapeXdiije, dvccSi-
>/ ^
fXCt £5*6).
But thd we or an A?igel from heaven,
preach any other gofpel unto you, than that
which we have preached unto you, let him be
accurfed. As we faid before, fo fay I now
again, If any man preach any other gojpel
unto you, than that ye have received, let
him be accurfed.
St. Paul had but lately converted the Ga-
latians from Paganifm to Chriftianity, and
this they had gladly embraced. But, foon
after his departure from them, fome ]u-
daizing Christians had perfuaded them, that
it was neceflary, or at lead expedient, to fu-
peradd to their Chriftian creed, the obfer-
vance of the Levitical rites of the Jews;
G which
82 Critical Notes on
which was to miflead them from their faitb
in Chrift,: to truft in the works of the Mo-
laical law.
Dr. Whitby remarks, that Grotius and
Obadiah Walker a (and probably many other
Romanifts) note that the Apoftle here fpeaks
only of dodtrines, contrary to his gofpel:
For that the particle in this place figni
lies not bejides or differejit from (as all the
verfions antient or modern, that are come to
our hands, render it) but contrary to hisGof-
pel. And by this conftrudtion, the greateft
innovators, and corruptors of the faith once
delivered to the faints, fo long as their fyf-
terns are not diredtly contrary to the dodlrine
of Chrift, may flatter themfelves, with being
covered from this denunciation. Now indeed
it muft be allowed, that may have
fometimes that fenfe, according to the nature
of the lubjedt, to which it is joined. But
let it be applied fo here, and we (hall fee how
little it fits this place: But tho we or an angel
from heaven, preach unto you a gofpel con-
trary to the gofpel, which I have preached
unto you, let him be accurfed. Is not this
to make St. Paul moft irrationally fuppofing
of himfelf, that he might recant, and con-
tradidt all that he had before taught them as
God's Apoftle. Which, were itpoffible to be
the cafe, the Galatians would not want much
to be cautioned againft giving him any credit.
a In the paraphrafe and annotations faid to be corredied
and improved by bifhop Fell.
But
aaaagg
GALATIANS. 83
But the Galatians might not, perhaps, think
it fo abiolutely ablurd and impoffible, that
St. Paul might, in procefs of time, add feme
article of dodtrine, to what he had at firft
preached, or permit other miffionaries to do
the fame. It is againft this imagination
that all his reafoning is bent. He labours
to convince them, that, as his dodtrine came
immediately from Heaven, he has not, will
not, cannot make any variation from it, or
addition to it, nor fhould they admit of any
from any man living, nor from any authori-
ty whatfoever. For the literal and natural
tranflation of this paffage is this: But tho
we or an angel from heavens Jhould preach to
you for gojpel any things befides what we
have preached unto you, let him be accurfed•
As we faid before, fo fay I now again, if any
one preach to you for gojpel, anything be fides
what ye have received, let him be accurfed.
An Anathema of great importance, and very
exteniive in its conlequences, not only to the
churches of Galatia, or of Aha, nor to the bi-
fhops or preachers only of that age, but to all
the pallors and biihops of Chrillendom then
prefent or to come, and is with good reafon
fo applied by many of the reformed churches,
abfolutely forbidding all, to add any new
dodtrines of human invention, any articles
of relig ion not taught bv St. Paul. For if it
prohibits the admitting, or annexing to the
gofpel of Chrift, the ritual law, which had
once been delivered from heaven, by the hand
G 2 of
84 Critical Notes'^
of Mofes, and had been obferved by ChriPc
himfelf, and his Apoitles in general, dovra
to the time of this epiftle: how much more
does it preclude, and forbid all fubfequent
additions of dodrines, all new creeds, all
new articles of religion, which would be
only the precepts and decifions of men ?
Againftallluch attempts of ecclefiafticalambi-
tion is this denunciation levelled, after the
manner of that in Deuteronomy, iv. 2. Ye
Jhall not add unto the word, which I com-
mand you: And that in Revel, xxii. 18. I
[Jefus] tejiify unto every man that heareth
the words of the prophecy of this book -y if any
man Jhall add unto thefe things, God fall
add unto him the plagues that are written in
this book. Dr. Whitby obferves here, that
the Fathers thus underftood, and thus ap-
plied this declaration of the Apoftle, Chry-
Mom and Oecumenius among the Greeks,
and Auguftin among the Latins, who has
this note, He faith noty If they preach things
contrary, but if they preach things never
jo little different from the gofpel which I
have preached unto you. And others might
eafily be added, if there were any need of
authorities, to fupport fo clear, and certain
an interpretation.
Nor is this expreft with more terror than
juftice. If a mighty emperor grants a free
pardon to his revolted fubjeds, on condition
only of repentance and returning to their alle-
giance: fliall his officers, without his licence
or
GALATIANS. 85
or confent, dare to limit his gracious offer,
and annex many other conditions of their own
deviling, making the poor people believe that
the Lord's pardon is void, unlefs they be fa-
tisfied as well as he ? If they do, they have
nothing to expedl but the effedts of his indig-
nation, for ufurping the fovereign's preroga-
tive, defeating his intended clemency, difcou-
raging and burdening his iubjedts, and aif-
honouring his adminiftration. So when our
Lord had by his Apoftles publifhed to all
mankind his Gofpel of peace and falvation
upon no harder terms than of believing a fhort
creed of few articles as inducements to piety,
and thofe eafily comprehended, and of a holy
life for the future; if any man of whatfoever
dignity introduces a dodlrine of his own in-
vention, not taught by thofe apoftles, nor re-
corded in their writings, and efpecially if he
lays it on the confciences of men under the pe-
nalty of damnation ; as he is guilty of fatanical
impudence, in taking the place of Ohrifh ouron-
ly Lord and Lawgiver, he deferves to incur this
anathema of St. Paul and all its confequences.
Yet, alas, in what age, or nation of Chri-
ftendom, ever fince Chriftianity has been
the reigning religion, have the bifhops and
teachers of mankind flood in awe of this
divine prohibition, and abftained from con-
founding vulgar minds, with their own me-
taphyfical refinements on obfcure fubje&S,
from binding on men's confciences their own
conceits, about the nature of the Deity and
i his
86 Critical Notes ow
his ways ? How often have they, efpecially
the inventive Greeks, in pack'd fynods,
where the majority was always of courfe the
orthodox party, contrived to add to the com-
mon creed, fome dark and captious article or
term, to which their adverlaries in, difpute
were to fubmit, on pain of anathemas, im-
prifonment, or exile ? Till at laft, the do-
d:rine of jefus, from its original fimplicity,
whereby it was calculated for the underftand-
ings of all, even the meaneft of mankind;
receiving continual additions, from the pre-
fumptuous theologues of many ages, as if
our Lord had left it deficient for them to
mend, is fwelled into a voluminous, litigious,
and difficult body of opinions, which is called
faith, and impofed on ah. And yet fuch un-
neceffary additions to the gofpel, fo enforced
by fa&ion and perfecution, are faid, by wife
men, to have been the immediate caufe of
the defolationof all the churches of theeaft, of
the propagation of Mahometifm in thofe re-
gions, and of infidelity in ours.
To fay nothing now of that great mother
of abominations, the deceiver of men, and
blafphemer of God, I heartily wifh the fu-
perior clergy of the reformed themfelves may
not all have incurred this tremendous ana-
thema, by delivering to their people for di-
vine truths, many more doctrines, than St.
Paul ever taught the Galatians! For tho' all
have praifed and efpoufed that pofition of
Luther, that neither the church nor the pope
hay?
GALATIANS, 87
have power to make articles of faith ; tho* all
have profefled to make Scripture the only*
rule of their belief, as containing all things
neceffary to falvation; and that neither men
nor angels have any right to add to the
doctrines of it; yet have they all prefcribed
and taught fome additional articles of reli-
gion, neither plainly contained in Scripture,
nor plainly deducible from it.
To mention a few : That our Lord has
the very jame body, fef> and bones now in
heaven, in which he fuffered on earth : That
all the dependents of Adam, even infants,
if nnbaptized, by their original fin, deferve
and incur God's wrath, and ever la fling
damnation : That the very good works of pa-
gam are undoubtedly finful: And fome of
them fay That all men are abfolutely and
unconditionally predefiinated to eternal hap-
pinefs or mifery: Thefe and others are the
traditions and decrees of our proteflant doc-
tors, unknown to the apoftles of Chrift,
which they have annexed to the Gofpel,
declared them to be taken thence, and have
required unfeigned aflent, from all within
their power, as if they had that infallibility,
which in words they difclaim. But for
the doflrine of the Trinity, they have not
only pretended the fame divine authority,
but proceeded to denounce everlafting per-
dition to all, that do not hold it, as it is pro-
poled in the Creed bearing the name of Atha-
nalius: That we fhould worfhip one God in
G 4 CJ- r j, t
88 Critical Notes ch
trinity — That in this Trinity, none is afore
or after other, none is greater or lefs than an-
other: But the whole three perjons are coe-
ternal together and coequal. — That it is ne-
ceffary to everlajling falvation, that we alfo
believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord
Jejus Chrijl. For the right faith is, that our
Lord Jefus Chrijl is perfect God and per-
fed man, of a reafonable foul and human
flejh fubfifling, equal to the Father as touch-
ing his Godhead, and inferior to the Father
as touching his manhood, &c. Thefe additions
are called effential, fundamental, and neceffa-
ry parts of the Chriftian faith, and fo become
indeed mill-fiones, hung on the neck of the
gofpel, and perpetual impediments cf its
propagation.
But before we proceed any farther on
this fubjed:, it will be proper to di-
ftinguifh between believing in the Trinity,
and believing the dodlrine of the Trinity;
phrafes, unknown indeed to Scripture, but
yet frequent in vulgar ufe, which differ more
widely in fignification than they do in found.
For by the former we mean not merely be-
. Jieving the exigence (for the devils them-
felves do as much) but believing and trufting
alfo in the wifdom, truth, and goodnefs of
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoft
purfuant to that only precept about the Tri-
nitv, which Chrift at his departure left with
his apoftles, Go ye and make difciples of all
%ations, baptizing them into the name of the
Father
GALA? IAN S. 89
Father, of the Sony and of the Holy Ghoft :
for fo the Greek fhould be rendered. All na-
tions therefore did by the profefiion of that
belief at their baptifm, fays Grotius, fubmit
and devote themfelves, to the inftrudion
and difcipline of the one God, and Father of
all.(to ufe St. Paul's ftyle) one Lord, and one
Spirit; thus endeavouring to fulfil the pro-
phecy, that all fhould be taught of God,
This he juftly takes to have been the firft
Chriftian creed, and all the mod ancient
forms of that nature, now extant, are in ef-
fed: but fo many paraphrafes of it: And tho*
in pmcefs of time it has been fomewhat en-
iarged, by the addition of fome things, which
had been ufually demanded of the converts
when preparing for baptifm, yet the fubdance
and ground-work of the original if ill remain-
ing intire, it has acquired the name of the
apoifles creed, and from fome the rule of
faith, being univerfally received by all na-
tions of Chridendom, from the firft ages
down to ours, and by the wifeft and bed of
men, taken for a complete fummary of the
articles, neceffarily to be believed by Chri-
ftians in order to falvation. Such was the
judgment of the incomparable archbifhop
Uiher on this fubjed, Float in thofe propo/i-
tions (that is the apoifles creed) which with-
out controverfy are univerfally received in the
whole Chrijtian world, fo much truth is con-
tained\ as being joined with holy obedience
may be fujfcient to bring a man to ever I aft ing
J'alva -
5?o Critical Notes ^
falvation. And Chillingworth commenting
on that declaration, added: This faying de-
ferves as much applaufe as any faying, it being
as great and as good a truth, and as necejfary
for thefe miferable times, as pofjibly can be ut-
tered. This is the belief and truft in the
Trinity, which was prefcribed firft by Chrift,
and repeated afterwards more than once by St.
Paul.
But this faith and truft in the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghoft, muft be certainly
an a (ft extremely different from the belief of
the doBrine of the Trinity, which is giving up
our underftandings to men, who attempt to
defcribe the Trinity : For that doftrine is in
truth, but a compofition of human conceits
and hypothefes, concerning the perfons, the
fubftance, order, modes of exiftence, proper-
ties, unity, coeternity, and coequality of the
Father, the Son, and the HolyGhoft: and thofe
notions ill drawn in part from Scripture,
but moftiy the creatures of imagination, formed
by vain men aiming to be wife above what is
written, and to intrude into things which they
have?7ot feen. Such knowledge is too great and
fublime for our underftandings, and even if
we had revelation of thofe matters, our minds
in their prefent ftate would want capacity for
them. But as that docftrine would be no ufe or
tendency to a good life, our Lord hath never,
in any place of Scripture, made it our duty to
be fo curious in lpeculations infinitely above
ps ; he hath not required us to fearch out the
Almighty
r i m o t h r. 91
Almighty to perfection, or to comprehend
the rnojl high that dwelleth in light inaccefji-
S ble, much lefs to define the nature of the infi-
^ nite one, in any words but what himfelf
hath taught us.
Now fince neither our Saviour, nor his
apoftieshave charged us with the duty of be-
lieving this circumftaniial doCtrine and de-
for iption of the Trinity, but on the contrary
have forbid us to admit any dodtrine, which
kr, tk ^ey not taught: Since the modern advo-
cates of it, profeffing to fliew that it is fuffi-
' ciently infilled on in Scripture, to be deemed
§1V1W a fundamental dodtrine, have not produced fcj
ttemptl. much as one fentence of Scripture to prove it
ine is i- fundamental, or even important: Since it hath
1 couce:. not ferVed to the edification of Christians, but
1 rather to excite fierce and fcandalous conten-
c, pf lions among Churchmen, who have often
employed one branch or other of it, as a ted
hanife to exterminate their adverfaries and compe-
1 Serif® titors: What impious prefumption muft it be,
ioD,fa* for any principal pallors of the church in
Jithe open defiance and contempt of St. Paul's
anathema, denounced by the Spirit of God,
00cr# to impole on the minds of the faithful, fuch
anJ# various perplext and difputable conclufions
, about the natures, diver lilies, and proper-
capacitf ties of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft;
and to affume God's authority, without
his warrant for damning all his fervants,
who may queflion or deny fuch opinions!
a!t£|y Can it be a good fpirit that teaches thofe
jrcii'i' who
0
92 Critical Notes
who understand not the Athanafian Creed,
(that is, almoft all mankind that repeat it)
not to fpare direct anathemas to one another,
and indeed to themfeIves, for none can be faid
truly to hold this Athanafian faith, and to
keep it whole and undejiled, who do not com-
prehend it! So that Chriftians, whom their
Lord forbids to judge, are thus blindly
brought to pronounce without any remorfe,
a fentence of everlafiing damnation againft
millions of Chriftians, for unavoidable igno-
ranee of fome things, which perhaps may not
be at aU warranted by Scripture, perhaps not
be true, or, even if true, yet not be required
of us to believe.
And thus have the paftorseven of the reform-
ed declared to their inferiors and their flocks
terms of falvation, unthought of by Chrifland
his Apoftles, to the great offence of Mahome-
tans, Jews, and Pagans, and increafe of infide-
lity in the Chriftian world. How long, 0
Lord, wilt thou fuffer this ufurpation of thy
authority, corruption of thy gofpel, and mif-
leading of thy people ? O let thy kingdom
come and thy will be known and done on
earth, as it is in heaven.
i. Tim. iv. i, 2, 3.
T0 oe Tzrvzvfzci pqlcog Xsyet, o~i ct> t<gipoig xoufung
'&7rv<rr!\<Tov)cii rivsg tj]g 7ri<geagy rss-go<ri%ov]eg
CTl 7T?Kclv0ig Vy S^OtfTKOtXlotiq ciatfAGVlMVi
2. 'EJ> v7T0K£/<ret %eKStvJv£/c&(rusi>ui'
W
» \y
TYjv iotuy (rwuetdqcr.V}
1
3. K>
TIMOTHY. 93
3- KcaXvcvJccv yoi/metv, diriyji&i'on (S^u^oltuv, d
c S~eog tit]hpsv tig pijaXvplnv f^SLd ivyu^iccg rctg
irtfcTg £ iTreyvaxoo-i rrtv dhrfi&av.
In our Engliffi tranflation thus:
1. Now the Spirit fpeaketh exprejly, that in
the latter timesJome fall depart from thefaith
giving heed to feducing fpirits and doctrines
of devils.
2. Speaking lies in hypocrify, having their
confcience feared with a hot iron.
3. Forbidding to marry, and commanding
to abjlain from meats, which God hath creat-
cd to be received, with thanfgiving of them>
which believe and know the truth.
Here is a fignal and important prophecy,
declared by St. Paul to Timothy, of a dread-
ful revolt and apoftafy of C'nriftians from
the faith of Chrift, which would appear in
after ages.
But wherein was this apoftafy to conftft,
tor it is neither intimated, nor fuppofed to
be a total denial of Chriftianitv ? The Apoftle
affirms the prediction to be exprefs and plain,
and doubtlefs it was fo, as he gave it forth.
But in the prefent ftate of the context, it has
not in many ages been underftood, nor does
any thing appear, that can be conftrued fo
high a crime, nothing being added towards
an explanation, but that it would come to
pafs cv vTTottfycret ipetSohoyuv, thro', 01* by
means of fome impudent venders of lies,
who would be prohibiters of marriage, and
of certain meats. 1. Now prohibiting of
marriage
94- Critical Notes on
marriage and meats are, as Mede fays, in
comparifon only thefmalier, and, if I may fa
fay, almoft circumftantial errors of the lat-
ter times, which cannot be fuppofed to de-
ferve the charge of apoftafy. 2. Thisapofta-
fy was to appear in the latter times. But the
reftraints from marriage and meats were in-
troducing in the apoftles own times as may
be collected out of their epiftles, and there-
fore cannot be the things principally intend-
ed, or foretold. Tho' our tranflation con-
founds the perfons in the firft verfe, with
thofe in the fecond and third, as tho' the
apoftle were continuing to fpeak of the fame
men, viz. That they jhould be fpeaking lies,
forbidding marriage, &c. the grammatical
fyntax evidently fhews, that thofe in the
firft verfe wgocewvjeg giving heed to, &c. be-
ing the nominative cafe, muft be a different
fet of men, from thofe in the fecond and
third verfes; oXofov, xaXvcvjav yafteiv, &c.
impudent liars, forbidding to marry, &c.
being in the genitive cafe; who would in
time feduce the former to apoftatize. Here
is, therefore, no diftinCt defcription of the
nature of this great apoftafy, as the apoftle's
introduction would make us expeCt.
Yet Mede, at length, more by his own fa-
gacityand long meditation on the divine oeco-
nomy, than from the words of this paffage, dif-
covered, that the prophecy, pointed out a
new kind of idolatry, the invocation of faints,
that would in time arife among Chriftians,
tho'
T I M O 5T H 1. 9 5
tho' his proofs are hardly fufficient to fup-
port his expofition. For he lays it down for
his principle, that Scupoviuv here, is to be ta-
ken in the Platonic notion of Demons, that
is, the deified fouls of worthy men after death,
fince no Chriflians do, or ever did, fays he
worfhip Devils formally, or as Devils. He
might have added, no, nor Pagans. But not
one of his inftances from Scripture come up
to the point, the Demons in Scripture are
always evil Demons. And Origen (cont. Cel-
fum, p. 234, and 403.edit. Cantab.) maintains,
that Chriflians knew of none but of that fort.
And in this all commentators ever fince
have agreed. Now if Demons here, be not
allowed to mean deified faints, Mede will
not have one word of this paffage left him,
whereon to build his expofition of the pro-
phefy, that in future ages, fome will be wor-
fhippers of the dead, together with all the
train of reliques, images, &c. And accor-
dingly himfelf confeffes p. 636. That none
of the antients did expound it in his lenfe.
It cannot then be denied, that this predidtion
itfelf muft appear to mankind imperfedt and
obfcure; imperfedt, whilft it is not at all
fpecified, in what refpedt, degree, or manner
men will apoflatize from the faith: and ob-
fcure (what St. Paul fays is plain) fince none
of the antients underflood it thus; no, nor
any of the moderns fince the reformation,
when they mo ft wanted fuch a teflimony,
againft the Saint-worfhip of the Romanifis.
But
g6 Critical Notes on
But Mede's elaborate difcourfe on this fub~
jed has produced one out of Epiphanius,
which tho' flightly treated by him, may, if
well confidered, perhaps be more fatisfadory
than all.
For Epiphanius, in his 78th Herefy, recites
a long paftoral letter of his own at large,
which he had publifhed fome time before.
In this he much laments the general tendency
of his time to all novel opinions and do-
drines, which he calls herefies, mentions a
great variety of them, which induce him to
think, that his were the very times, thofe
vq-epoi nctiqoi intended by St. Paul, in the firft
verfe of this chapter: And towards the con-*
clufion, upon occalion of fome Arabian
Chriftians, who were making a goddefs of
the bleffed virgin, and offering a cake to her,
as to the queen of heaven, he addsa: " Which
<£ is altogether impious and abominable,
" utterly different from the preaching of the
<c Holy Ghoftj fo that the whole is a diabo^
<c lical operation, and the dodrine of an un-
€t clean fpirit. For upon thefe alfo is that
" of the apoftle fulfilled: Some fhall apof-
" tatize from found dodrine, giving heed to
<c fables and dodrines of Demons. For they
<c (fays the apoftle) foall he worfhippers of
a f'r\ . ^ ~ \ 'ft ' >v~ T
UTTep TO ttav t<TlV Kj Citi-fAiTOV »)AAoiOJ^VJOV tXTTO ra X.Y,pv}[AX~
Toe Ta ccym irrviV(/>ct]oq' ure tlvoa to tsxv oix^oXizov Ivipyri^x, Kg
CVVSVfAOlTOi; a.KCL§tX(>T8 hoOicrZxhla,. n"Kvp^TXi yoLo Kj ITT) thtovc TO
AT:oTY)(Jov\a,l Tivsg rn? vyiSq hSourzcchicts, ttrpocrs^ovlif (JLVQOIC tu ot-
^oarzx^aUC oxifAoviuv. "Ecroflca yxo, (pr,cr<, vszpoi: Aorpsuom?, J;
>£, Iv tu> 'lcrfxvh scrB&acrOqcrM. Harr, 78. p. 1055. ec^ ^olon.
" the
i reel
i'
& \aj
ne fe
I tenta
i and i
Dentiors;
ice fc::
nes, tfe
a the I
> the ci
e Arak
jqJMs
c&fcfok
i. ttft
j)0
chlDg of"
leisat
mcofffi®
i alio i- ^
elilf
is,
afpy
ia» ™
i P &
' ■ , JjCl1
&
r.
» ii r,
T I M O T1 H ?. 97
ct the dead, /» Ifrael alfo they ivorjhipped
41 them!7 xAnd then he fubjoins two examples
rnore of fuch worfhip of the dead; one of
the Sichemites, who had a faint, under the
title of Jephthah's daughter: And another of
the Egyptians, who adored Thermutis, the
daughter of Amenoph, the Pharaoh of that
time, (he that took up Mofes and educated him.
Againft the authenticity of this additional
claufe of Epiphanius, Mills, much more
famed for his diligence, than for his judg^
ment, determines, that it is nothing elfe, but
a marginal comment or explanation of the
doctrines of demons, taken from fome place
or other of the old Teftament, which the
transcribers afterwards thruft into the text in
a wrong place. But i. by this account, this
explanation muft have been inferted before
Epiphanius's time, that is, before any Saint-
worfhip was heard of in the world, and
would therefore have been not an explana-
tion, but a prophecy. 2. Mede has before
obferved, that none of the antients ever took
the place in that fenfe. If fo, they never
made any fuch marginal explanation, as Mills
imagines. But Mede himfelf objedts i. That
Epiphanius either ufed a very corrupt copy,
or quoted very carelefly. Mills fays, that his
copy feems in general to have been good,
tho' with fome faults, of which Mills takes
this place to be one; that his quotations,
are ufuallv made by memory, as is common
with the Fathers. In truth it is hard to fay
H what
Critical Notes on
what are Epiphanius's own miftakes, for
his copies and editors, not excepting Peta-
vius, have left his text full of faults as they
found it.
Mede objedts 2. That perhaps Epiphanius
added thisclaufe only for an explanation. But
Epiphanius on the contrary diredtly profeffes
the claufe to be St. Paul's own words, with the
word <pjjtns/, He [the ApofWe) fays, as Beza and
Mills himfelf allow: And indeed Epiphanius
infifts upon them altogether, as his only ar-
gument and indifputable teftimony againfi:
the idolatry then growing in his neighbour-
hood. Now Tillemont, tho' offended with
* Ephiphanius's warm oppoiition to the wor-
fhip of faints and images, yet allows him
the higheft charadter of piety and fandfity of
any in that age. Is it pofiible, therefore, to
believe that the good old bifhop fhould have
forged this teflimony out of his own brain,
adapted it to the context, and, in his paftoral
letter, twice impofed it on the Chriftians of
Paleftine and Arabia round, for a piece of
St. Paul's prophecy? Had he been capable
of fuch a fraud, Petavius a Jefuit, and advo-
cate for faint-worfhip in general, and who
(as his panegyrifls tell us) had a moft tender
affe&ion to the Virgin Mary, as if fhe were
his mother^ would fcarcely have paft it in his
edition, as he has done, without the fevereft
iafh of his fevere pen.
Mede objedts 3. Hath any of the fathers
bcfide Epiphanius mentioned this reading
of
n wesrtorm
l/n(v©r8(ty
T I M 0 T H T. ' 99
of his ? Anfw. We know of none. Bat yet
we muft not immediately condemn the claufe
as fpurious on account of their filence. Sup-
pofe it poflible that the fathers themfelves
fhould be found to have been the chief propa-
gators of faint-worfhip, and you will not won-
der, if they carefully avoided quoting any
fuch verfe, in which their crime is foretold,
and called apoftafy.
For even in Conftantine's time a notion was
commonly infufed into Chriftians, that mar-
tyrs and other faints after death became good
Demons; juft as Plato directs of thofe who
died bravely in war, or had lived long with
eminent virtue, that they fhould be regarded
as Demons ftill exifting, and their fepulchres
honour'd, and adored accordingly: and, as He-
fiod had faid of the worthies of the golden
age,
Thefe o'er the earth prefide, pure Demons made,
Kind guards of men, and ready to their aid.
For thefe paflages of Plato and Hefiod Eu~
febius a quotes to fhew the conformity of
Pagans with Chriftians on that fubjedft, and
adds: " Thefe ceremonies are proper to be
" ufed upon the death of the favourites of
C£ God, whom you may well call the cham-
" pions of the true religion. Whence it is
iC our cuftorn to aflemble at their tombs, and
<c make our prayers at them, and to honour
<< their beatified fouls.
3 Praep. Evan. 1. xlii. c. n.
H 2 After
loo Critical Notes ^
After this falfe perfuafion had once taken
root, That the faints after death knew the di-
ftreffes of mankind, and had will and power
to relieve them ; the next ftep would foon be
taken, to pray to them; indeed it would be
hard to have ftopt fuch a motion. But the
monks, pretenders to extraordinary purity and
mortification by abfiinence from marriage,
and from meats, were the great inftruments
of introducing faint-worfhip by old wives
fablesa, by impudent lies of miraculous cures,
and deliverances wrought by apparitions of the
faints in dreams, by the touch of their lepul-
chers, their bones, and other reliques. Thefe
were by credulous monkifh biihops, out of
fuperftition, and fometimes for worfe reafons,
publifhed to the people with all the pomp
and ornament of eloquence ; and who then
would forbear applying to the faints as medi-
ators and as prote&ors, who had given fuch
evident tokens of their ability and readinefs to
aflifi: mankind ?
" Mede fpares (he fays) to name the au-
" thors, not willing to difcover the naked-
" nefs of the fathers. But whofo reads them
<c will admire to fee fo truly verified what the
" fpirit foretold fhould be in the latter times.''
Yet Theodoret Mede himfelf b judged to de-
ferve fome diftindt cenfure for his zeal in ad-
vancing this impious worfhip, and his com-
a See Auguftin De Civ. Dei; 1. 22, of which the 8th chap-
ter alone will furnifh as many as any judicious reader can
eafily digeft. b pag. 641.
I plaints.
TIMOTHY. i o i
plaints of the people's flownefs to believe his
legends. And Sir Ifaac Newton c thinks no
fuch regard to be due to any of thofe, who
either taught to pray to faints, or led the way
to it by lying miracles, but brings them forth
to (hame: Paul of Egypt, Antony, Athana-
fius, Bafil, Hilary, Gregory Nazianzen,
Gregory NyfTen, Ephraim Syrus, Chryfo-
ftom, Jerom, of thofe in the eaft only, for
his fcheme in this part extends not to thofe of
the weft. But thefe he fhews to have been
diligent teachers of fuperftition and idolatry.
Such fathers of faint-worfliip therefore, who
gave fo much occafion to Julian and Eunapius
to blafpheme, may well be excufed, if, while
they were every day fulfilling St. Paul's pro-
phefy, they took care never to quote it to
their own confufion. Nay will it be abfo-
lutely unjuft to fufpeCt, that fome of thefe
faints, thefe great faintsy as they called one
another, might have had a hand in effacing
fo many of the apoftle's words as moft plainly
pointed out their crime ? Surely if a rafure
were difcovered in a record of confequence,
the firft inquiry would naturally be made
after the man, cui bono fuit, for whofeffakc
and fervice fuch rafure was made. But we
forbear to accufe upon conjecture, where no
teftimony can be expeCted againft an over-
ruling party, which in the fourth century pre-
vailed over moft of the eaft, in the fifth ovef
c Obferv. on the Proph. Ch. 14.
H 3 th«
102 Critical Notes on
the weft, and in the fixth faw their idolatry
eftablifhed in public litanies by pope Gregory,
called the Great, as you may learn from Si-
goniusa and others.
Since therefore this prophefy of a future
apoftafy among Chriftians has been (hewn to
be hitherto indiftinct and undefined, and there~
fore imperfedt: fince what St. Paul declares
to be plain, has now for very many ages been
underftood by none: fince Epiphanius has fup-
plied the claufe that was wanted to make the
prophefy both perfedt and plain: and fince he,
with an undifputed chara&er of probity and
truth, has vouched this claufe to be St. Paul's
own words: tho' none of the other fathers
have mentioned it; we make no doubt of
concluding that it ought to be reftored to it's
place in the context, as it is quoted by Epi^
phanius.
1. To 3 7rvzvfAct pvjTcHg htiei, oti ev v$-tpoig
?loupfg cc7ro<rwcv]cu img T?jg 7ri?eugy Trpoa-i^ofjeg
TTvevpcMTt 7rXdvoigy ^ $i$ct<rx,a\ioag Saipovlav.
2. ''Ercvjoa vejc^ojg hfgtfjovjeg, dg ^ cv
Icr^wiJa icnf3dS'7}(7uVt iv v7ro)C(>i<TSi ij/eiiHoXoyo&v ne-
Kcwjylp/o(.<r[^/jav Trjv i$iav (rvmcfyriV)
3. KuXvofjuv yaptetv, ci7re%ec9-at d
i But ex]urev eig piiaXrfiv ptzjci dj^otgislcig Totg
iri^otg Xj \7rvyvgmocti tytv axvfieiciv.
Which may be thus tranflated ;
1, Now the J'pirit faith plainly, that in
* De regno Italiae ad an, 591.
the
•" ;
Jr^ . .
A. V -
T I M O T H r. 103
the latter times fome 'will apoftatize from the
faith, giving attention to feducing fpirits, and
doBrines of devils:
2. For they will come to be worfhippers of
the dead, as in I/rael alfo they worfhiped>
them, thro the hypocrify of men given to lying
with feared confciences,
3. Of men for biding to marry, commanding
to abftain from meats, which God created to
be received with thank/giving by them who
have believed a?id known the truth.
Revelations xiii xviii.
In this admirable book of prophefy, our
Lord has been pleafed to prefigure to man-
kind the various dates of Chridianity in the
world, more particularly in Europe to the ut-
moll extent of the old Roman empire, from
the times of the apodle to the final confum-
mation of all things, under the mod fevere
and dangerous trials, and with aftonidling
fcenes in profpedl both of the blacked horror
denounced to the followers of the bead, and
of tranfeendent glory for the dedfad difciples
of Chrid. This he requires all, that are ca-
pable, to dudy with attention and diligence, in
order to prevent the influence of the falfe pro-
phet, to eftablifli their confidence in God in
all times, and to confirm .their patience and
perfeverance under the lodged reign of prof-
perous iniquity. Thofe are even declared
blefled, that will read, underdand, and obferve
H 4 thefe
i©4 Critical Notes on
thefe predictions and precepts. Can it then
be of little importance to us to know the arti-
fices and the terrors of that beaft, to whom
all kings and nations would fubmit and adore,
whofe mark all forts and conditions of men
would bear 5 when we are told by an angel,
that whoever Jhall worjhip him and receive
his mark, Jhall drink of the wine of the wrath
of God, a7id be tormented with fire and
brimftone for ever ? Is there not great reafon
to inquire carefully about this great and wick?-
ed Babylon, this mother cf abominations,
when a warning voice from heaven cries a-
loud, Come out of hery my people, that ye be
not partakers of her JinSy and that ye receive
not of her plagues ? None therefore furely
ought to be defpifed, who ferioufly endeavour
to explain thefe vifions, for the inftrudlion and
admonition of mankind, which being gene-
rally delivered in myftical reprefentations and
expreffions were fometimes difficult even to St.
John himfelf without a divine expofitor.
Sir Ifaac Newton, in his Pofthumous Ob-
fervations upon Daniel and the Apocalypfe,
has remarked, <c that there is already fomuch
" of the prophefy fulfilled, that as many as will
fi take pains in this fludy, may fee fufficient in-
" fiances of God's providence Among the
" interpreters of the laft age there is fcarce one
81 of note, who hath not made fome difcovery
8C worth knowingj and thence I feem to gather,
<< that God is about opening thefe myfieries."
The figure in chap. xiii. arifing out of the
fea
REVELATIONS. 105
fea to St. John's view is a wild beaft having
feven heads and ten horns, with all the ter-
rors of teeth, paws, force, and roar of the
moft favage of all beafts. His appearance and
defcription, that all the world admired and
worfhiped him, and thought none able to make
war with him, fhew, that he is a mighty em-
pire inverted with power over all kindreds and
tongues and nations: He would be impious,
as having his feat and great authority given
him by the dragon: arrogant with a mouth
Jpeaking great things and blafphemies : apofta-
tizing from God to idolatry, as caufing all the
earth to worjloip himfelf and opening his mouth
in blafphemy againjt God, and them that dwell
in heaven : tyrannical in compelling all, upon
pain of excommunication and deaths to receive
his mark: deceiving mankind with falfe mi-
racles, and cruel in perfecuting and making
war with the faints. In another view in
chap. xvii. upon this lame beaft fits thz great
whore and forcerefs, with whom the kings of
the earth commit adultery, holding a cup of
wine for philtres to intoxicate thofe kings and
and nations, and bring them into fubje&ion,
flie being berfelf drunk with the blood of the
faints and of the martyrs of J ejus. This whore
the angel interprets to fignify the great me-
tropolis of the mighty empire before-men-
tioned; and its grandeur, extenfive power,
and diftinguifned fituation upon feven hills
difcover it to be Rome.
Thus far is agreed by all, by antients and
moderns,
106 Critical Notes on
moderns, by Romanifts and their adverfaries,
that the beaft fignifies the empire of Romey
which in other places of this book is called
Babylon, the great city, and the great whore.
And that, in which all parties do fo confent,
muft be allowed to be plain and clear. But there
is no advancing one ftep farther without dif-
pute and oppofition, and therefore we muft
be longer in our comment.
The next and main queftion is, whether
Rome under the pagan emperors be here de-
figned, or Rome after it was called Chriftian.
The Romanifts in general, as might well be
expecfted, fay pagan Rome, with Bofiiiet the
famous bifhop of Meaux at their head, the
moft able and artful advocate of that fide,
who glories in finding fome learned Proteftants
of his opinion, as Grotius, and Hammond,
and Bullinger too before them both. But al-
moft all the reft of thofe, who have feparated
from the church of Rome, in former or in
latter ages, believe that Rome fpiritual, or
ftnce it has profeft chriftianity, is meant by
the angel, the metropolis of this beftial em-
pire: and they may for that opinion alledge
thefe arguments:
i. That pagan Rome had been riflng many
ages before the date of this revelation, and
even before St. John's birth, and was by that
time afcended to the higheft degree of gran-
deur and power that it ever reached: whereas
the beaft, which St. John faw had then no
cxiftence but in vifton, but was^ceAAsy dvctftcuvav,
was
REVELATIONS. 107
was to arife gradually in fome fubfequent age,
chap. xvii. 8. And therefore could be ao o-
ther than Rome when called Chriftian.
2. In ch. xvii. ver. 6. St. John was feized
with exceffive aftonifhment and admiration
upon feeing the great whore [Rome] drunk
with the blood of the faints and of the mar-
tyrs of Jefus. And what indeed to pious
eyes could be a more monftrous and con-
founding objeCt, than a body of pretended
and feeming Chriflians, glutted and gorged
with the blood of Chriftians? But would he
have been furprifed at fuch a view of pagan
Rome, after he had lived himfelf to fee two
of her perfecutions under Nero and Do-
mitian ?
3. Power, it is faid, was given to the beajl
to continue forty and two months, that is, in ,
the prophetical account, 1260 years: where-
as it is not affirmed, nor can we find in hi-
ftory any ground to imagine, that the pagan
religion continued openly in Rome, even fo
much as 400 years after the date of this Re-
velation.
4. Babylon, or the great whore, is faid to
have corrupted the inhabitants of the earth,
and to have ?nade them drunk with the wine
of her fornications, to have deceived all na~
tions with her forceries, to have drawn the
kings of the earth to commit fornication^ and to
live delicioufiy with her. All characters moll
unfuitable and unlike to the iron government
of pagan Rome, and to her fevere methods of
fubduing,
10S Critical Notes on
fubduing, and keeping the nations in her obe-
dience. And what kings, and where were
they, that Rome ffiould court and debauch to
her own religion ? We have no traces remain-
ing of any kingdom inveigled and feduced by
her, to her idolatry, but that (he fometimes
invited and imported, and always eafily ad-
mitted all forts of foreign gods and fuperfti-
tions, without diftindtion or preference,
5. It is laid of Babylon [or Rome] that it
is fallen — that Jhe fl:all be utterly burnt with
fire—that the kings jhall bewail her, when they
jhall fee the fmoke of her burning. A predic-
tion, which bifhop Boffuet has thought fit to
pronounce accomplifhed (but tells us of no
kings that bewailed that fall) in A. D. 410.
Indeed if pagan Rome has been utterly burnt
with fire, it muft have been done many ages
ago, even before A. D. 410; for paganifm
had then long ceafed to be the religion pub-
lickly profefled at Rome. Now we read of
no fuch event in hiftory, and long fince the
extinction of paganifm, we have no other in-
telligence from Rome, but that fiie fill fitteth
a queen, and glorifieth herfelf a7id liroeth de-
licioufly. But if what Bofiuet affirms were to
be allowed him, that pagan Rome was faU
leny and utterly burnt with fire by the hand
of Alaric in A. D. 410, the' contradidted by
all the writers of thofe times, and known to be
falfe; what, according to the prophecy, was
to be the confequence of that fall ? The
words immediately following in the context
REVEL AT' 10 N S. 109
of chap xviii. and which are in great meafure
copied from Ifaiah's prediction of the final de-
ftruction of old Babylon, are, That Babylon
[or Rome] fhould become the habitation of
devils and the hold of every foul fpirit, &c.
Muft not then the fame Romanifts acknow-
ledge, that, if Rome was by Alaric as totally
wafted as Babylon, it muft, from the time
of that defolation, have never been inhabited
but by devils ?
6. The ten horns are faid to be ten kings
which have received no kingdom as yet, but
receive power as kings one hour with the
beafl. If the beaft be Rome, or the Roman
empire, asbifhop Boffuet fuppofes, and the ten
horns are members of the beaft, and grow out of
him 5 the ten kingdoms here mentioned muft
by analogy be ten members of that empire, not
ten bordering nations commonly at war with
Rome. Now no ten kingdoms are to be found
in hiftory within the compafs of the Roman
empire whilft it was Pagan, no nor any one
kingdom that was not tributary, and in a
precarious and dependent ftate with power
derived from Rome. The ten kingdoms
therefore were to arife, as we know in fadt
they did, not till after Rome had ceafed to
profefs paganifm, and then to receive power
together with the beaft. For then too, that
is, after the breaking of the old Roman em-
pire, was Antichrift the man of fin, the Ion of
perdition, the oppofer, and ex alter of himfelf
1 dieco^ above all that is called God, to be revealed,
iio Critical Notes ^
as the primitive Chriftians generally under-
flood St. Paul, 2. The if ii. 3, 4.*.
7. Another argument to prove, that the
beafl cannot be the reprefentative of pagan
Rome, is the deadly wound fhe received long
after the extinction of public paganifm, viz,
A. D. 547. For in that year Totilasking of
the Goths, having taken Rome by furprize,
from Juftinian the Roman emperor, refolved
at firft to rafeit utterly, and turn it to a fheep-
walk, had fet his army to the work, burnt
great part of the buildings, and demolifhed
in different places full one third of the whole
circuit of the city walls. Rut, upon a letter
from Belifarius Juflinian's general, fhewing
him the folly of laying waft the greateft city
of the univerfe, which way foever the fate of
the war was to turn at laft, and leave either
Totilas or Juftinian in poffeflion of Italy;
he forbore labouring any more in the deftruc-
tion of the place, but made it be fo effe&ually'
evacuated, that the great Rome had not
within her walls fo much as one living foul.
This was as deadly a wound by the fword,
and as true a death as a city is capable of j
nor is there in all hiftory, any other inftance
of a deadly wound by the fword given to
Rome. When Alaric took it in 410, and
3 Bellarmin's own words are remarkable, cC Erit enim
" Antichriftus fupremum- et ultimum caput impiorum,
" et eft ultimus rex, qui Romanum imperirum tenebit,
" tamen fine nomine Romani imperatoris." De Rom.
Pont. L. iii. c. 15. Vitringa in Apoc. in loc. p. 593.
Genfe-
REVELATIONS.hi
Genferic in 454, it was pillaged only, but left
ftandingand inhabited, without many violent
marks of conqued upon the buildings but
Totilas burnt it, difmantled it, and made it a
defert.
Now it is out of difpute, and univerfally
agreed, that the bead fignifies Rome. If then
thefe evidences are fufficient to demondrate,
that it cannot reprefent Rome when pagan,
it will unavoidably follow, that it muft figni-
fy Rome, fince it has profefs'd Chridianity,
and is under an ecclefiadical power.
This beafl had on his head a name> or names of
blafphemy. That is, openly affumed blafphe-
mous titles, and claimed divine honours and
powers. Of thefe the indances are not eafy
to number : but a few may be fufficient to ve-
rify the text. In general it has been afferted
by the Romifh cafuids, That the honour due
to Chrifl, as Gody is due to the pope, becaufe
the honour is due to the power: but the power
of Chrifl, as God, and of the pope is all onea.
He has fuffered himfelf to be called Pontifex
Maximus, and head of the whole church on
earth, which St. Paul appropriates to Chrid,
vicar of Chriji, vicar of God, king of kings,
lord of the whole world both in temporals and
fpirituats, omnipote?it, to whom all power i?i
heaven and earth is given, infallible, another
God upon earth, Pope Nicolas III himfelf
having faid, that Peter [and confequently
sj Peter's iuccefforvs] hath been a fumed into the
\
a Heidegger, My ft. Ba'oylonis M. Difft 10.
GO ' fociety
h2 Critical Notes on
Jociety of the undivided Trinitya. Much more?
might be added to exemplify this moft ob-
vious fenfe of the word blafphemy: But thefe
feem to be fufficient to fill any Chriftian heart
with indignation and abhorrence
The other fenfe of blafphemy, that is ido-
latry, as Grotius, Mede, and Vitringa ex-
pound it, it will be more proper to enlarge upon
at ver. 5, 6. where St. John fays more of the
praiticeof it, for here he only fignifies> that
it was openly marked on the front of the
beaft, and it was indeed fo notorious, that it
may feem trifling to mention one memorial
of it, a mitre preferved at Rome as a precious
relique of Pope Sylvefter I. richly but not art-
fully embroidered with the figure of the vir-
gin Mary crowned, and holding a little Chrift,
and thefe words in large capitals underneath,
aVG RGGINa CGLI, Hail queen cf heaven,
in the front; of which Father Angelo Rocca,
keeper of the Pope's facrifty, and an eminent
antiquary has given a copper plate in the third
vol. p. 490 of the works of pope Gregory I.
and it feems more probably to have belonged
to Gregory; becaufe he is faid to have firft
inftituted at Rome the litanies to the virgin
Mary.
The Dragon gave [ the beaft ] his power, and
his feat, and great authority. It would be
more clearly exprefled in thefe words; The
Dragon gave [the beaft] his army, and his
throne, and great power. For it has been
obferved by the learned, that the word Suva-
a Rivet, in Jefuita vapulans. c. 7.
pi;
aort
4
thd
hear,
sit
;aa.
supos
of tie
i, tk
of 4
ki
emona
ireci®
not a::
then-
e Chr:
icrnear
fiw
io Rot
lembs
itlti
Jiff-
bdtof
te:'
lb: rif
0/-
[foul ij
ids;
iws ^
ord
REVELATIONS. 113
^ which is here rendered power, is common-
ly ufed in the Septuagint for army, and they
doubt not but that it fignifies fo here. Ac-
cordingly Vitringa interprets it, of thofe pro-
digious numbers of volunteers, who crolTed
and devoted themfelves to the murder of
all fuch poor Chriflians in France, as reject-
ed the abominations of Rome : One of which
of 300,000 fuch pilgrims, under the conduft
of the pope's Legat, ftormed Beziers, and
there butchered 6o,ooo fouls in one day, as
if fuch a facrifice of blood were acceptable to
the Almighty. But as thofe were only occa-
fional levies of affaffins, called out to the
(laughter of the innocent, upon a promife of
pardon for their own crimes, and were to be
on foot but a very few months at a time ; we
can hardly believe that by armies here St.
John meant fuch Crufadas, as raged and
made havock but feldom, at uncertain times,
and in few centuries; but are rather led by
the words to think of fome vifible (landing
militia of Rome, fome eflablifhed armv.
' j
And what can that be ? I know of none that
can any way bear that figurative name, if it
does not belong properly to the univerfal
body of monks or regular clergy; nor would
I now have fuggefled this notion, if I could
have found any other at all probable, and
adequate to the text, For I tremble to think
of pafling fo many millions of men into the
number of the devil's troops; for they are
here faid to be the devil's own, and that he
I con.
ii4 Critical Notes on
configned them to Rome. But we prefume
not to make any judgment of our own, but
only to difplay the fentence of him, who can-
not but do right. The general ftyle of the
foundation and hiftory of the feveral orders
runs in military metaphors they are faid
to jerve as foldiers of God, or of Chrift: but
they take oaths and vows of implicit obedi-
ence to the Pope as their emperor, and are
required to revere him, as if he were Je-
fus Chrift in perfon upon earth. And their
effectual devoting of foul and body to the
pope's fervice, and zealous execution of all
his commands, not fpiritual only, but civil
and military too (of which innumerable
inftances occur, in the hiftory efpecially of
the middle ages) made them an army far
fuperior in force to all the legions and auxi-
liaries of ancient Rome, as well as in numbers,
which Sandys about the year 1600 computed
to be above a million. Thefe are the men
diftinguifhed by St. Paul with the mark of
jorbidding marriage andflejh meats, who, by
their frauds and lies of miracles wrought by
dead mens bones, reliques, and images, and
by tranfubftantiated wafers, had, accordingto
Mede, been principal inftruments of filling
the world with idolatry in all its branches,
and of bringing mankind, by fubjedtion to the
beaft, to the worfhip of the old dragon. This
fpiritual kind of militia was begun to be raifed
in Egypt and the Eaft, and had been gieatly
increas'd, before the beaft appeared in poffefii-
on
REVELATIONS. 115
on of the devil's throne, (and therefore perhaps
the transferring of the army may be mentioned
before the throne) fo that the Bead: had little
to do but to form and regulate it for the pur-
poles of his empire. Accordingly by procu-
ring for all his clergy immunities from tri-
butes and taxes, and from all the other bur-
dens of the laity, by exemptions from the
civil courts and jurifdiCtions, by frequent
and ready interpofitions in their defence
again ft all great men, and even their own
natural fovereigns, the Pope madeittheintereft
of all ecclefiaftics in the univerfe, efpecially
the regulars, to feek his patronage, and come
under his obedience. Thus was his fpiritual
army prodigioufly multiplied, and power was
given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and
nations, as early as A. D. 600. For when
the primate of Byzacene in Africa, being ac-
cufed by his fuffragan bifhops, acknowledged
himfelf fubjeCt to the correction of the apo-
ftolical fee of Rome: Gregory I. anfwered,
As for his faying, that, if a bifhop is culpable,
he is fubjett to the apoftolicalJeey I know of
no bijhop in the world, that is not fubjeel to it.
And as the times were beyond meafure igno-
rant and fuperflitious, by attaching to him-
felf the clergy, he led the laity like fheep,
and bewitched filly princes to defire the
monk's habit, and to imagine their fins were
well covered, if at death their bodies were
wrapt up in Benedict's coul.
I 2 . And
n6 Critical Notes ^
And there was given unto the beafl, a mouth
Jpeaking great things and blafphemies — And
he opened his mouth in blafphemy againft Gody
to blafpheme his namey and his tabernacley
and them that dwell in heaven. What is this
witchchraft of idolatry, that the bed mailers
of hidory obferve to have fpread among
Chridians, the farthed and the faded of all
the corruptions of religion ? That the Apodles
fhould find it neceflary fo often to caution
the faithful, againd the abominations long
ago forfaken by the Jews, and which the
very Mahometans might afterwards teach
them to reform! But the Romanids will tell
you, that they deted idolatry, that the
church of Rome never hath been, nor is, nor
will be guilty of it, tho' the honour, belong-
ing to God only, is every day paid to a creature,
or perhaps even to a non-entity. For Rome
has in nothing more, or longer deceived the
world, than by infufing falle notions of Ido-
latry, perfuading men, that, if they worfhip
the one true God, though they join with
him a thoufand faints or inferior deities,
none incur the guilt of idolatrya, except fuch
as worfhip docks and dones; nor they nei-
ther, if they direct their thoughts to the
perfons reprefented in fuch materials, which
may eafily be fuppofed to be within the
capacity of the mod dupid votaries. Thus
have they explained away all the fin of
idolatry: But God is not mocked, who hath
a Alcafar in Revel.
faid
REVELATIONS, it?
faid, Thou Jhalt have none other God before
me b. Befdes me there is no God c. The
crime extends much farther than the worfhip
of images, tho' the word carries no more. St.
Paul has taught us, that covetous men are
idolatersd, as fetting their affedtion, their
hopes and dependence only upon riches. Does
he fin lefs, who imagines divine virtue in the
fuppofed relique of a fuppofed faint, and ap-
plies to it for cures of ailments, or deliver
ranee from dangers ? He who prays Angels
and dead men only to intercede to God for
him (which is the more common iub]edt of
the Romifh litanies) does he not diredtly dif-
honour and rejedt the fon of God, and dif-
obey the Father, who hath appointed the
fon to be the only mediator, in order to in-
troduce in his room an idol-mediator of his
own fancy ? This was the firfl and moft mo-
deft ftep of Idolatry to make faints interceffors:
But afterwards the beafl opened his mouth
wide in blafphemy and dijhonour againft Gody
and his tabernacle, (which Vitringa expounds
of Chrift) and againft them which dwell in
heaven, by making them fo many deities, and
teaching men that it is impious to refufe pray-
ing to angels and faintse, the number of which
is become almoft infinite, with the various
powers and offices affigned them by men who
have deified them, having the virgin Mary at
their head, perpetually called by Romanifts
the mother of God, and the queen of heaveny
b Exod. xx. 3. c Ifa. xliv. 6. d Ephef. v. 5.
e Cone. Trident. Self, 25. Catech. ad parcch. in Decal.
whom
118 Critical Notes
whom Mahomet for that reafon, took to be
meant for the wife of God, and to be one of the
Trinity a. Upon the whole (as Daille well ob-
ferves hJ the modern Roman theology, or di-
fpofition of the divinity, as Tertullian expref-
fed it, of many inferior Gods under one fu-
preme, refembles that of the old pagan philo-
fophers to fuch a degree, that it would be
hard to fhew any material difference. And
becaufe fome have faid, that the manner in
which the church of Rome invokes their
faints cannot pafs for idolatry, tho' the vul-
gar have fcmetimes been in danger of it;
her MifTal and Breviary will furnifh in-
fiances without number, not only of praying
the faints to intercede to God for them, but
of begging of them direcily all manner of
graces without any mention of God the Father;
exprefsly requefting the virgin Mary in par-
ticular, the queen of angeis, of prophets,
of apoftles and evangel ills, c Be merciful, O
lady, fpare us; O lady, deliver us from all
C£ evil; O mofi merciful lady, we befeech
cc that thou wouldft vouchfafe to preferve the
ct holy church, &c. Mother of God, queen
€< of heaven, Lady of the world, have mercy
a Al. Koran ch. iv. b De Relig. cultus objecfto, 1. iii.
c. 25*
c 44 Maria, mater gratiae, tu nos ab hofte protege, Et
44 Jiora mortis fufpice. Solve vincla reis, profer lumen
44 csecis, mala noftra pelle, bona cuncfta pofce, monftra
44 te eiTe matrem. O felix puerpera, noftra pians fcelera,
44 jure matris impera redemtori. Virgo parens clementiae,
H dona faiutem fervulis; Dallaeus, p. 420.
<c on
REVELATIONS. 119
" on us." p. 358. ibid. and on All Saints day,
together with her all the angels, fathers, pro-
phets, apoftles, martyrs, priefts, nuns, and
princes of heaven, for protedion, aid, and re-
miffion of fins; in a word, for all things that
man can afk of the Almighty. Such are the
prayers offered to faints by that church, on
every day of the year, and on every folemn hour
of the day, in open affront and blafphemy to
God, by affigning him a partner of his throne,
and to thole that dwell in heaven, by giving
them forbidden honours, and by affuming a
power to increafe their number by canonifa-
tions. And if this be manifeft apoftafy and re-
bellion againft the Moft High, it will be trifling
in the Romanifis to difpute whether it be lite-
rally idolatry, or not.
If the firft beaft fignifies Rome, fince it has
been called Chriftian, with all its blafphemy,
The fee on d beaji coming up out of the earth
with horns like the lambs, and fpeech like the
dragons, who puts in exercife and execution,
all the power of the firfl beaft, and brings
the whole earth, except thofe that are written
in the book of life, to obey and worfhip the
firfl beaft; what can he be but the head of
that church, prefenting at firfl: with lenity,
his horns, that is, his clergy regular and
fecular, but afterwards giving out a voice of
terror, who in other places hath the title of
the falfe prophet, and who therefore la-
bours induftrioufly in bringing mankind to
adore the church of Rome, as having himfelf
principally the real fruit of that adoration ?
I 4 Pope
120 Critic ai Notes ob
Pope Gregory the Firft " expounds the firft
<c beaft to be Antichrift, and the fecond to
" be the multitude of the preachers of An-
" tichrift, who affume the appearance of the
<c lamb, that they may have opportunities of
ic infufing the poifon of the ferpent. At the
" fame time he cautions his audience not to
cc fuppofe fuch wicked preachers, to arife
<c only in far diftant times; for fome, he faid,
cc did even then preach Antichrift in fpeeches,
<c and moft in their morals, deceiving the
<c world with their hypocrify and pretend-
" ed miracles11.'' So near was he to feeing a
truth, which, if feen, muft have confounded
him.
This fecond beaft is faid to come up out of
the earth, perhaps becaufe the great prelates
of thofe times were commonly made out of
monks. For the humour of thofe ages,
running much into fpiritual retreats, men of
all ranks went from the court and the camp,
into caverm and cells> pretending penitence
and mortification, who were then called
converts, and from thence often found a way
to return to the world, and rife to the higheft
dignities of the church.
The fecond beaft, or falfe prophet, would
caufe mankind to make an image of the firft
he aft fo wounded as before, and to give life
and fipeech to it, and power to kill all that
would not worfhip it. This image of the firft
'beaft by Vitringa's conjedture is well enough
a Expofitio Moral. 1. xxxiii. c, 26.
made
RE V EL At ION S. 121
made out to be the type of the office of inqui-
fition, which was introduced among the blind
vulgar, as a popular fcheme, and warmly re-
commended by the Dominican and Francifcan
monks, at firit without any voice of com-
mand, or power of execution. For at the be-
ginning, fays Limborch a, the inquifitors had
no tribunal, but only commiffion to inquire
into the numbers, qualities, powers, and prac-
tices of the heretics, and to report them to
the biffiops, the fole judges at that time of
ecclefiaftical matters, in order to fome procefs
and judgment of the fpiritual court againft
them. Sometimes they would inflame the
populace with calumnies and reproaches, and
fometirnes the Princes to infult and perfecute
them. So that, during that flate, the image
had itfelf no life, no breath, or fpeeeh to de-
clare what dodtrines fhould be current, to
pronounce decrees, and fee them executed ;
till after the year 1250, when courts of in-
quifition were eredted independent of bifhops,
and judges, officers, familiars, prifons, and
tormentors appointed, who Ihould put to ex-
quiflte puniffiments, and deliver over to a
cruel death all that would not fubmit with
implicit obedience: And fo incredible num-
bers of all conditions, ages, and fexes pe-
rifhed. But long before this the falfe pro-
phet had even literally ordered (as in ver. 17.)
that no man might buy or fell, or carry on
any commerce, or inherit, Jave he that had
* Hift. Inquif. 1. i. c. 10.
received
122 Critical Notes on
received the mark of the heaji, that is, openly
taken upon himfelf and owned that fymbol
and profeffion, which Rome required of her
fubje<ftsa.
The name of Antichrift, tho' not menti-
oned by St. John in this book, but in his firft
epiftle, yet is by the commentators on this
chapter generally fuppofed to be mod: in his
thoughts, tho' they do not all agree whether
it fhould be applied to the firft or to the ie-
cond beaft. And therefore fomething muft
be faid to it. Antichrift hath been ufed in
two fenfes, which yet in the end do not
much differ from each other: The in oft com-
mon and obvious meaning is that of the ad-
verfary to Chrift: The other is one perfonating
Chrifi, or putting himfelf in the place of
Chrift: Or, in the words of Grotiush) he who
falfely calls himfelf Chrifi, or takes upon him
Chrifi's office : For no man is more an adver-
Jury to Chrifi, than he who calls himfelf Chrifi,
as none more direBly oppofes the king, than
he who takes the title of king.
That learned man having in vain endea-
voured to reconcile proteftants to popery, as
he would have it moderated, and meeting
with oppofition from fonie able Calvinifts, he
forgot the part of mediator, and became a
warm advocate for the Romanifts in a differ-
tation, De Antichrifio (fubjoined in the Cn-
a Alexander HI. in Synodo Turon. A D. 1163. Ufher
De Eccl. SuccefT. c. viii. § 31. b Not. 011 1 John
ii. 18.
tici
)pen\v
pM
of ki
mentv
&fal
,onti
Art
wbetki
to tie it-
iiisj mi
:n uieli
id do ^
nolle®
<& the i
j ftoi
>t flit fifc1,
«dcf
tHi:l
111
vain
to
af»f;
^alviiifc'
Is®1 j,
ili#'
REVELATIONS. 123
tici Sacri to the xviith chapter of the Apoca-
lypfe) in which he labours to {hew that the
name of Antichrifl: cannot with any juftice be
applied to the pope. Now as deputy conful
or proconful is in Greek a vice-king
or king's deputy is in Greek dvjiQcttri'ktvg; fo
Chrift's vicegerent or reprefentative, in Latin
Chrijli vicarius, is in Greek dvjix^wg- If
therefore any Pope takes the title of vicar of
Chrift, he does thereby diredlly call himfelf
Antichrifl:. And by calling himfelf the vicar or
vicegerent of Chrift, without any leave or com-
million from Chrift, hemufl, according to Gro-
tius's own reafoning, bid defiance, and become
Antichrifl in the firfr fenfe of the word, that
is, an adverfary to Chrift. If we pals now
from the analogy of words to the offices and
authority of Chrift declared in Scripture, the
Pope's ambition will be found invefted with
the higheft of them, to claim them as due,
and thereby make fure of a right to the name
of Antichrifl. i. St. Paul has in many places
declared, that Chrift is the head of the uni-
verfal church on earth: Pope Gregory I. af-
firmed to Mauritius the Emperor, a that the
pope, as fucceflor of St. Peter, had the care of
the univerfal church committed to him : The
pope then taking upon himfelf Chrift's of-
fice, according to Grotius's definition, made
himfelf Antichrifl. 2. To Chrift all power
in heaven and earth hath been delivered of
iity 1. * Regift. 1. iv. cp. 32.
iKflt®1'
the
124 Critical Notes on
the Father3, and his apoftles proclaimed him
to be the appointed Lord of all the world.
But Boniface the eighth b faid himfelf was
lord of all the world, both in fpirituals
and temporals. 3. Chrift is king of kings
and lord of lords0: Leo X. had the fame
title given him in the Lateran council.
4. Chrift is our only lawgiverd: But the
popes have long affumed an unlimited
power of making new laws, new articles of
faith, and new terms of Salvatione, and all
with a claim of divine authority. 5. Chrift
had on earth power to forgive finsf: The
popes have pretended to the fame power in
themfelves, and even to delegate it to every
prieft. 6. Chrift hath declared, that we muft
all appear before his judgment-feat, that every
one may receive according to that he hath
done, whether it be good or bad s: The Popes
have neither thought fit to wait for that day,
nor to leave that decifion to Chrift, but have
beatified, canonized, and propofed for public
worfhip what dead men they pleafed ; and
with a high hand fent to hell all diffenters.
And more might be added, if thefe marks be
not fufficient to point out and diftinguifh An-
tichrift.; ' •
It is faid of the beaft, that it was and is
not, and yet is, or (according to another read-
a Matth xi. 27. John iii. 35. and xiii. 3. Acts x. 36.
b Rolwinckius in Fafcic. Temp. p. 259. c Revel,
xvii. 14. and xix. 36. d Jam iv. 12. e See Rivet,
in Jefuita vapul c. vii. t Matth. ix. 6. s Matth.
xxv. 31. 2 Cor. v. 10.
REVELATIONS. 125
ing of the original) and is coming. This ex-
planation of the angel is itfelf enigmatical and
perplexed, for which affedled obfcurity no
doubt there was good reafon, and perhaps a
fort of neceffity. For a plain predi&ion of
ruin to the empire of the great, the eternal
Rome, as the old Pagans often ftyled her,
might have provoked the Romans to attempt
the extirpation of all Chriftians, as enemies to
their ftate. The true fenfe of the prophecy
feems to be this:
A time fhall come, when it fhall be faid,
that the Roman empire hath been, but is now
broken to pieces, and is no more. Yet out of
the blind fuperftition and profound ftupidity
of the barbarous nations, as out of a fea, it
fhall emerge again to its old feat of fovereignty,
tho' in a form intirely different from the laft
or any preceding monarchy, and may be cal-
led the fpiritual or eccleliaftical empire of
Rome, to the extreme amazement of all man-
p kind, except the faithful few to whom reve-
lation had notified the change. For it will be
a prodigious revolution unheard of before,
r,; and without any example in the annals of all
former ages, and in ail appearance without
any parallel to come. Its throne fhall be
transferred to it by the devil, who will fee it
more exalted and adored than ever, with the
title of Pontifex Maximus from the Caefars;
but in royal pomp and magnificence far fur-
palling the proudeft of them all, and particu-
larly in habits and decorations ot purple, jcar-
let,
126 Critical Notes ^
let, and gold, (for the prediction in this too
was literally fulfilled) the Pope's court will
far outfhine that of Auguftus: Its dominions
will be at leaft as widely extended : Its ftand-
ing armies of ecclefiaflics much more nume-
rous: Its gods as many, and of human crea-
tion, as the old ones were: Its frauds and
cruelty more dangerous and terrible.
This papal monarchy is more marked in
the thirteenth chapter from its arrogance,
force, conquefts, and tyranny: In the feven-
teenth the characters are more taken from the
whorifh arts, with which it began, of pomp
and fplendor to create reverence, lufcious do-
Ctrines of licentioufnefs, eafy pardons, lying
miracles, and idolatry to attraCt and intoxi-
cate its followers. Her fury to deftroy all that
would fly from her fnares or oppofe her au-
thority, which was hinted in the thirteenth,
is indeed properly repeated again in the feven-
teenth, and painted in true colours of horror:
*The whore was drunken with the blood of the
Saints, with the blood of the martyrs of Je-
Jus. And he mufl be little acquainted with
ecclefiaftical hiftory, that has not known this
to have been fulfilled up to the meafure of
this mod fhocking idea. For if we omit the
outragious and numberlefs daughters of inno-
cent Chriftians, on account of religion in
Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Bohemia, &c.
the maflacres of France only, and particular-
ly of the Vaudois and Albigeois, (which Pe-
rin, in his hiftory of that miferable people,
from
REVELATIONS. 127
from the bed authorities tells us amounted
to a million of fouls) will probably make
above ten times the number of all the Chri-
dians, who were flain in all the ten perfecu-
tions of the Caefars put together. So that
Rome might well appear perfectly gorged
with blood, and almod drowned in it.
The feven heads are faid to typify two dif-
ferent things, the feven hills on which Rome
is feated, and feven kinds of fovereigns of
Rome, not coeval, but in fucceffion, of which
five were pad before the time of the prophe-
fy ; the fixth, which we take to be that of
the emperors then ffanding, but the feries of
them to be afterwards interrupted by a he-
terogeneous intruder, Odoacer king of the
Heruli, who was to continue but a fortfpace,
and then again to be replaced by Theoderic
in the name and right of Judinian, who was
then the Roman emperor in the Ead; and in
Judinian's time the bead began to rife.
The bead is faid to be of the feven fove-
reigns abovementioned, and yet might be
reckoned for the eighth. The hidory of pa-
pal Rome in thofe times will help us to a
probable folution of this difficulty. For in the
year 533, Judinian by writ directed to Epi-
phanius, patriarch of Condantinople,declared,
that his holinefs the pope of old Rome was
the head of all the mod holy prieds of God.
The year following judinian fent to pope
John of Rome, two bifhops as his ambafla-
dors, with his own profeffion of faith, defir-
128 Critical Notes on
ing the Pope's approbation and prayers. In
the preamble of which he declares, " That
he had always earneflly laboured, that the
" whole clergy of all the eafi fhould be fub-
" je<S and united to the fee of his holinefs,
" and that he fuffers nothing to be moved con-
<c cerning the Rate of the churches, tho' ne-
c< ver fo clear and unqHeftionable, without
" communicating to his holinefs, who is the
" head of all holy churches." Pope John ac-
cepts this declaration, with commendation of
the emperor's due reverence to the fee of
Rome, in fubjeding and uniting all to it:
For that the rules of the fathers, the ftatutes
of former princes* and Juftinian's own teftify,
that that fee is truly the head of all churchesa.
And indeed the fuperflitious emperor made it
no infignificant title by perfecuting with in-
capacities to buy, fell, make wills, &c. with
confifcation, banifhment, or perpetual impri-
fonment, all that his holinefs declared hete-
rodox or heretics.
This fpiritual power the pope effectually
exercifed with a high hand over the bifhops
and clergy of the whole empire, deciding ec-
clefiaftical controverfies of the greateft con-
fequence without appeal, depriving bifhops
made by the Emperor's direction without
the Pope's approbation b, and annulling the
decrees of councils at Conftantinople, called
by the emperorc. He carried it even to
all countries, that had ever fubmitted
.
a Cod. 1. i. tit. i. b Gregorii i. Reg. 1. iv. ep. 34.
c Gregorii 1. Regift. 1. iv. ep. 36.
to
ro
REVELATIONS. 129
to the Casfars, tho' then perhaps revolted from
them. For the barbarous nations of the North,
when they tore away vaft provinces from the
Roman Emperor, yet, being generally wild
and ignorant Chriftians, they foon fubmitted
to the Roman Pontif, who was commonly
gaining as much as the other loft. From
hence therefore, Mauritius the Emperor feems
to have fufpedted Pope Gregory the firft, that
he might have done more towards deftroying
the Lombards out of Italy, if he had pleafed
to exert himfelf. The Pope frankly acknow-
ledged ita; and at the fame time had evidently
fuch a fway over the Lombards, then at war
with Mauritius, (between whom he afterwards
mediated a peace) that the Milanefe clergy and
commonalty, by the Pope's advice, chofe
Deufdedit for their Archbifhop, without regard
to the recommendation of their own King Agi-
lulfusk And fuch veneration was paid him in
Italy, that if the Exarch, that is, the Emperor's
lieutenant in that country, took a fugitive prieft
or nun under his protection, the Pope threat-
ned him with his indignation and Duni(hmentc:
O x
If the Exarch went to Rome on any occaiion,
tho' heentred in pomp, the ceremonial requir-
ed his going directly to adore the Pope as if he
were his Lord.
The Pope then might juftly be fa id to be
of the /even, as having, in effect, a coordinate
jurifdidtion, whilft the Emperor kept any {ha-
dow of power in Italy: When that was totally
4 Gregory i Regift. 1. vii. ep. i. kibid. 1. viii. ep. 65.
c Ibid. 1. iv. ep. 18.
> K loll
130 Critical Notes on
loft, as in fadl it was D. 727, the Pope
then became the eighth, and fo continues. tith
And the ten horns—are ten Kings, which Jy
have received no kingdom as yet, but [will] 1 ft/
receive power as Kings one hour with the be aft, | Sicik,
This part too of the revelation having been long remaij
ago notorioufly accomplilhed, gives a full at- ftrfa
teftation to the veracity of the divine interpre- No
ter, and of S. John the reporter, and great
light at the fame time to the other parts of C(Wg
the prophecy. For none want now to learn, (
that the old Roman Empire hath been long j^i
ago broken or divided into about ten feven 1 e^r
kingdoms or governments, which were not jjy
diftinguifhed as fo many feveral kingdoms in ^
S. John's time, nor thought of before that
diffolution of the Empire. Yet different au- jj^j
thors having a little differed in the computa- ^
tion of the particular ftates, it fhould be pre- old\-;r
mifed, that none can properly be reckoned a jj^
horn which did never grow on the head of
the beaft, that is, that no kingdom can be ^
admitted into the number of the ten here in-
tended, which had never been a part of the
old Roman Empire; nor any that was not ^^
for fome time devoted with the reft to the fpi- ^ ^
ritual power of Rome. Thefe limitations, ..."
which fome commentators have difregarded, ^
will lead us to count out the ten kingdoms in Y e
the grofs, tho' fome of them have received
confiderable alterations fince the firft divifion,
as 1. Ireland. 2.Great Britain. 3.Germany, fouth
of the Elbe. 4. France. 5. Spain. 6.Lombardy ^
with ^
REVELATIONS, tjt
with Iftria, Sardinia, andCorfica. 7. the Pope's
Patrimony, with Romania and Tufcany. 8.
The two Sicilies, or kingdoms of Naples and
Sicily. 9. Pannonia, or Hungary. 10. Illyricum,
remaining to the Greek Emperor, now called
Turkey in Europe.
Now if thefe Kings receive power, as Kings,
—with the beafi, hiftory will compel us to
confefs, that the general divifion of the Ro-
man empire into the ten kingdoms was not
later than the fixth century: For mod writ-
ers agree to begin it higher 5 and the context
[Jhall receive with the beaji] feems plainly
to make the rife of the beaft nearly contem-
porary with that divifion j which not only
Romanifts deny, and bilhop Bofluet calls un-
charitable, but the candor and benignity of
old Vitringa's heart would not fuffer him to
fuppofe* that the church of Rome, then com-
prehending the generality of Chriftians of all
nations, could fo early be faid to revolt from
the faith of Chrift, and be feduced to all the
abominations, which character ife the beafi.
And therefore he concluded, that the beaft
arofe not before, but in the noted Hil-
debrand, called Gregory the feventh, tho' at
the fame time he fays, after Mede, that the Pa-
pal arrogance and impiety were then at the
height. But if they were at the height about
the year 185, which cannot be denied, it
was not all at once, but by many degrees, that
they afcended fo high, and the rife therefore
muft have commenced long before. Was it not
K 2 the
132 Critical Notes
the beaft that received the deadly wound with
a fword upon one of its heads, and do we
know of any other deadly wound by a fword
befides that aforementioned to have been given
him by Totilasinthe year 547 ? That wound,
therefore, tho' healed again, has left an indelible
mark both to diftinguifh the beaft, and to fix
the time of his appearance in the world.
But it will be faid, that none ever charged
Rome in the fixth century with all the odious
articles, that make up the defcription of her
in the xiiith and xviith chapters. Nor will we
with all of them it is more probable that
thefe foul characters were not intended to ap-
pear upon the beaft at firft, nor all at once,
tho' fo enumerated, but fucceflively, as it is
exprefly faid of it'sfeven heads: That he be-
gan with apparent lenity and meeknefs, de-
eeiving, corrupting, and intoxicating all kings
and nations, and difcovered not the cruelty
and terrors of the leopard, the bear, and the
lion, 'till all were fubdued and under his
paws. The frauds, impoftures, and idola-
tries even of that age were boundlefs* but the
tyranny and perfecutions not yet fo mercilefs
and bloody.
Let us, to avoid all fufpicion of partiality,
take our inftances chiefly out of the life and
writings of Gregory, the firft of the name, and
commonly reputed, after S. Peter, the greateft
Saint and Pontif of the whole lift, the director
and exemplar of all his fucceffors in thatthrone.
He cannot he excufed of idolatry by any
that
REVELATION S. 133
that believe the worfhipof faints and of their
reliques to be idolatrous. For he made lita-
nies to them, and, as he told the patriarch of
Alexandria, he celebrated maffes every day
in veneration of the martyrsa; to propagate
which more effectually he wrote himfelf,
when Pope, four books of dialogues between
himfelf and his deacon Peter, containing no-
thing but ftrange dories of miracles wrought
by Italian faints, and their reliques, both before
and in his own time (probably to vye with the
fables of the Greeks) and vouches for the ve-
racity of his informants; to all which deacon
Peter anfwers with wonder. Johannes Dia-
conus,who writ Gregory's life about 270 years
after, fays very ferioufly, that no fuch mi-
racles as Gregory's had been wrought by any
one fince Gregory's time, which one may eafi-
ly believe. But it will be better to give a
fmall fpecimen, than any character of this
legend.
A dead child brought to life by the old
buikin of abbotHonoratus, i. 2. An imitation
of what Elifha did with Elijah's mantle. A
monk of the fame convent ordered a ferpent
to watch their kitchen garden, and he did it
punctually, i. 3. Bonifacius bv prayer mul-
tiplied his corn and wine, i. 9. Fortunatus, by
making the fign of the crofs, reftored fight to
the blind, and tamed a mad horfe : With holy
water in a moment confolidated a broken hip-
bone, and by prayer revived on Eafter day
aRegiftr. l.vii. ep. 25?.
K 3 one
134 Critical Notes on
one that died the day before, i. 10. Pope
John, as he was entering Conftantinople, gave
fight to a blind man, iii. 2. Pope Agapet cured
one lame and dumb in uirtute Dei ex adjutorio
Petri, in. 3. ABifhoptook poifonunhurtfrom
his archdeacon, and the archdeacon himfelf,
tho' he took it not, died of it, iii. 5. Sabinus,
bijfhop of Placentia, fending a written order to
the Po not to overflow, was obey'd, iii. 10.
Eutychius, wanting a fhepherd, fet a bear to
lead out and bring home the fheep of the
monaflery, at the hours appointed, who did
it exadtly as long as he lived, iii. 15. And if
his coat was carried about the fields in dry
feafons, it would prefently bring rain, ibid.
Benedict could not be burnt by fire put round
his cell, no nor in an oven, iii. 18. Orthodox
bifhops, after their tongues had been cut out
by the Arians in Juftinian's time, fpoke plainly
all, except one, who left his fpeech by his in-
continence, iii. 32. Two monks fung after
they were hanged, iv. 2 r.
He affirms that he had known great bene-
fits done to departed fouls by the lacrifice of
the hoft: That a prieft near Civita Vecchia
knew one of his parifh, who after death was
condemned to come and ferve as a waiter in
a bagnio, of which he had been the owner, till
the prieft, finding out his diftrefs, procured him
a releafeby offering the hoft for him a week
together.
Another inftance is of one Juftus, a monk
of Gregory's own monaflery, who, by pradtif-
ing
REVELATIONS. 135
ing phyfic had got three pieces of gold, and,
contrary to the rules of the houfe, prefumed to
keep them. Thefe being dilcovered in his
ficknefs, Gregory, in indignation, ordered, that
none fhould attend him in his laft hours, that
his body (hould be buried in a dunghill, and
his gold thrown upon him, all crying out, Thy
money perifh with thee. Juftus hearing this
order, dy'd with forrow. But Gregory, after-
wards relenting, directed the hoft to be offered
for his abfolution, thirty days together; at
the end of them he appeared to his brother
Copiofus of the fame convent, who aiked him,
What is the matter, brother, how art ? Juftus
anfwered, Hitherto I have been ill, but now am
well; for to-day I received the communion,
iv" 55-
He maintained, that not only the dead bo-
dies of the fuppofed faints would work mira-
cles, as well as the living, cure the fick, free
demoniacs, fend devils into thofe that were
perjured, cleanfe the lepers, and raife the dead,
iv. 6. but that the fcraps, and reliques of re-
liques, which had touched the bodies, would
operate as much as the bodies themfelvesa. He
fent therefore to all the Princes of Europe 5
to theEmprefs Conflantia, and to her women,
to Recared, king of the Wifigoths in Spain, to
Childebert, kingof theFrancs, toqueen Bruni-
child of theFrancs, to Aldibert and Aldiberga,
king and queen of the Angles, &c. a blelfed
key from the body of Peter, or fome other
aReg. 1. iii. ep 30.
K 4 brandeum
136 Critical Notes on
brandeum, or fcrap, including fome fuppofed
filings from a fuppofed iron chain of Peter or
Paul, (for he owns to Conftantia, that often
no filings come from it b) with fome fuch ad-
ditionasthis, That what boundPeter's 01* Paul's
neck, may loofe yours from all your fins, and
multiply all things with bleffings* That it
may hang about your neck and defend you
from all evilsd. That you may be defend-
ed from the evil onec.
He befeeched the emprefs Conftantia, that
(he would feek to get and preferve the good
grace of St. Peter, who might both now be her
aid in all things, and hereafter might forgive
her her fins*. And to queen Brunechild of
the Francs much in the fame ftyles. And to
the emprefs Leontia wife of Phocash. Now
S. Peter, fays he, is ftill in his fucceflbrs, fit-
ting in that chair*.
If then the faints, and the reliques of faints,
can effectually accomplifh whatever is defired,
even to forgiving of fins, as Gregory then
taught men to believe, what is there left to
be afked of God ? But if any fhould believe
that all thefe ftories came from the hypocrijy
of liars of feared conjciences, and were forged
to deceive the fimple, in order to exalt the
dignity and authority of all the officers of
Rome's fpiritual mona1 chy (for we have not
obferved one lay faint:) Gregory himfelf has
fuggefted reafon enough to fufpecft the truth
bReg. ibid. c Ibid. 1. v. ep. 12S. and 1 x. ep. 7. Tb.
L.v. ep. 6. eL. vii.ep. 54. fReg.l. iv. ep. 34. gReg.
J. v. ep. h Reg. 1. xi. ep. 46, 'Reg. 1, vi, ep. 37.
of
REVELATIONS. 137
of them all, For in his xxviiith homily on the
words at the end of St. Mark's gofpel, Andtheje
fgnsJhallfollow them that believe; in my name
Jhall they cafl out devils, they Jhall Jpeak with
new tongues, they fhall take up ferpents, and
if they drink any deadly things it Jhall not hurt
them: 'They Jhall lay hands on thefck, and they
Ihall recover. He adds, What, my brethren,
will not ye believe, becaufe theje miracles are
no longer wrought ? But thefe were necejfary
at the beginning of the church, See.
For the worfhip of images, Gregory's fen-
timents appear in his letter to Secundinus, a
favourite reclnfe. Secundinus had begg'd of the
Pope to fend him the image of Chrift, with
the virgin Mary, Peter, and Paul. The Pope
anfvvers, " That he is extremely pleafed with
" Secundinus's requeft, as knowing that he is
" feeking him, whofe image he defires to
" have in his fight. And we do not wrong,
" if we by vifible things reprejent the invifible.
'c He knows that Secundinus has notbegg'd the
fC image of our Saviour in order to worthip it
<c asGod, but that, on occafion of theremem-
" brance of the fon of God, he may be rein-
t£ flamed with his love. And thathe himfelf
<c [Gregory] proftrateshimfelf before the fame
tc image, not as before the Deity, but that he
" is adoring him, whofe image prefents to
u his remembrance his birth or his pafilon,
<£ and his fitting too now on his thronea."
This for the clergy. For the laity, he faid,
a Reg. 3. vii, ep. 54,
(hould
138 Critical Notes on
fhould have images, as books of hiftory, even
tho' they fhould be in never fo much danger
of worfhipping them. Therefore when Se-
renus, bifhop of Marfeilles, feeing his people
actually worfhip images, had juftly broke
them, and thrown them out of the church;
Gregory, tho' acknowledging, that nothing
made with hands ought to be worfhipped, with
fournefs rebuked his zeal, as having exceeded
his duty, and directed him tofet them up again
to gratify his people, and then to difluade the
worfhip of thema.
The fecond commandment fays, Thou Jhalt
not make to thy Jelf any graven image, nor
the Itkenefs of any thing that is in heaven
above, &c. Gregory fays, We do not wrong
if we by vifible things reprefent the invifible.
Is this an expofition, and not rather a flat
contradiction and repeal of God's law, and
but ill covered with that poor evafion of not
worfhipping the image of God? The learned
Pagans pleaded full as well for their idolatry ;
that they adored not the ftone, or the paint-
ing, but the Deity reprefented by it. And
what did the Ifraelites, as Mede obferves, do
worfe, when they made to themfelves calves
and images of men, and committed whore-
dom with them, as Ezekiel flyles it, tho' they
meant not thereby to revolt from Jehovah
their God, but ftill called themfelves his peo-
pie ? And yet the unparallel'd plagues and ven-
geance they fuffered for this lin, can hardly
1 Reg. 1. vii. ep. 111. and 1, ix. ep. 9.
REVELATIONS. 139
vet be read without horror, andaftonifhment.
J
Arrogance is another of the characters of
the beaft, and a month Jpeaking great things,
But this, however notorious in mod of the
fucceflors, neither Roman ifts, nor even many
of the reformed divines, will fuffer to be im-
puted to Gregory. They mention, with ho-
nour, two fignal inftances of his humility and
modefty, that he firft taught the Pope to ftyle
himfelf Servus fervorum Dei, a fervant of the
fervants of God: And that he rejected for
himfelf the title of oecumenical patriarch, or
univerfal bifhop, which the patriarch of Con-
ftantinople affumed. But they mifunderftand
both the cafes. Servus Dei is always ufed
by Gregory to fignify a regular ecclefiaftic,
monk, or anchorete ; the fecular ones he calls
facer dotes or clerici, as in that declaration of
his in Regifir. Lib. iv. ep. 32. Ego cunttorum
facerdotum fervus fum, in quantum ipfi facer-
dotaliter vivunt. In both which expreffions
Jervus has not it's old Latin fenfe of a favey
but the modernized one of humble ferva?2t, or
friend; and fo the qualification, which Pope
Gregory took to himfelf, fignified, in truth, no-
thing elfe but the friend or protedlor of all
Monks. A title that declared his policy at
leaftas much as his humility.
The other inftance of Gregory's humility
is not much better. John of Conftantinople,
from his frequent mortifications called the
Rafter, had for fome years before Gregory's
ponti-
140 Critical Notes on
pontificate, with the Emperor's confent taken
the empty title of oecumenical patriarch. Pope
Pelagius II. had warmly oppofed this, and
annulled the adtsof a fynod at Conftantinople
for giving this title to their patriarch John.
Gregory fucceeding Pelagius, takes up the quar-
rel, and writes againft John to the emperor
Mauritius, and to theemprefsConflantia, with
ridiculing John's hypocritical auflerities, and
pretended felf-denial, defiringthem to reduce
his pride, and fupprefs that title, which he
calls lingular, novel, foolifh, proud, perverfe,
profane, wicked, fcandalous, and blafphe-
mousj that it deftroys the truth, and the
peace of the world, tears out the bowels of the
church, and fets John above the Emperor him-
&c.
The Emperor, labouring for peace between
the prelates, Gregory condescended to write to
John[dulciter]amicablyy ashefays, prayinghim
to quit that haughty, ra(h, infolent, abominable
word,Oecumenical, or he will break communi-
on withhim: That by affuming this new name,
by which no true faint ever prefumed to be cal-
led, he proves how little fincerity there was in
his former pretended humility, and flying from
the bifliopric: That in this ambition he imi-
tates him, who, not content to be numbred with
the Angels, faid, I will exalt my throne above
the Jlars of God—I will be like the mojl High.
(For that paflage applied by Ifaiah to the king
of Babylon was miftaken by Gregory to be
«Reg. 1. iv. ep. 32. and ep. 34.
meant
REVELATIONS. 141
meant of Satan; which has occafioned the
vulgar error of making Lucifer one of the
names of the Devilb.)
The patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch
he begg'd to think themfelves as much interefted
in thedifputeas himfelf, not to give John that
title, noradmithis letters with that fubfeription,
but toftand ftout againftalladverfities from the
Em peror, and rather to dye as martyrs than gra-
tify John's pride; to which, it feems, hecould
never perfuade them c. For the patriarch of
Antioch difapproved his pafiionate condudt, as
appears by Gregory's reply, wherein he confef-
fes, thattheEmperor had many timesendeavou-
red to pacify him with the fame confideration
of giving no fcandal on account of fuch afrivo-
lous titled. The patriarch of Alexandria fig-
nify'd his compliance, but in the fame letter
gave to Gregory himfelf the very title in dif-
pute, which Gregory having fo many years
treated as impious and deteftable in any that
fhould take it, could not now accept, without
confuting himfelf; and fo he refuted it.
But that Gregory may not be fufpe&ed of
any humility in this matter, and that you
may fee his abhorrence was to any kind of
ariftocracy of patriarchs in competition with
himfelf, who claimed a monarchy over all;
in the letter to Mauritius, before cited, he plain-
ly let forth his right to that fupremacy: That
byChrift's faying to St. Peter, the holy and
principal apoftle of all the apoftles, Peter
wReg. 1. iv. ep. 38. cReg. 1. iv. ep. 36. d lb. 1. vi, ep. 24.
lovej}
142 Critical Notes on
lovejl thou me? feed my Jheep, &c. Cur a et
principatus totius ecclejicz, the care and pre-
lidency over the univerfal church was com-
mitted to Peter [and to his fucceffors of courfe.]
In the fame letter, declaiming againft John's
arrogance, he unwarily affirms, that by fuch
a title John fet himfelf above the Emperor.
For if the name of oecumenical patriarch
fet John above the Emperor, where wasGre-
gory to ftand, who claimed a right to be fu-
perior to John ? Whether Mauritius obferved
this or not, he found by experience, that all
his authority could not obtain from Pope
Gregory peace and communion with the pa-
triarch of Conflantinople as long as he held this
title, tho' given him by the Emperor himfelf.
Yet the ecclefiaftical hiftorians aftiire us,
that the allegations on Gregory's fide are falfe
in fad; that the title of oecumenical was
neither new nor Angular, as he charged it.
For Bafnage has fhewn that Diofcorus, patri-
arch of Alexandria, had taken it Arft, about 150
years before this time; that Leo, Hormifdas,
and Agapetus, Popes of Rome, had kindly ac-
cepted it themfelves; and that bifhops, coun-
cils, and emperors had given it to the patri-
archs of Conflantinople, for the time being,
for 70 or 80 years before Gregory called it
new and Angular. Gregory, therefore, for his
excufe muft be fuppofed to know as little of
eccleftaftical hiftory as he did of Greek, both
which defeds he acknowledges on other oc-
caAons a: or elfe he muft take to himfelf,
aRegift. 1. vii. ep. 29. andl. ix. ep. 69.
what
RE RELATION S. 143
what he intimates more than once of John,
that he is fomewhat given to hypocrify and
lyingb.
Thus much of Roman impofture, idolatry,
blafphemy and arrogance appeared in the fixth
century; and thus were the weftern nations,
who loved ftrong delufions, left in their fu-
perftition and ignorance to raife the empire of
the beaft and falfe prophet to a ftupendous
height, and heeftablifhed his throne upon the
vices of mankind, and the ruins of Chriftiaai-
ty. And the fame corruptions were overfpread-
ing the eaft, when an illiterate Arab, calling
himfelf a prophet, but without any proof of
his million, effectually deftroy'd idolatry in
thofe parts, while nominal Chriftians were
induftrioufty propagating it in the weft, and
profpered till he brought all who came under
his law, that is, a multitude now far fuperior
to that of the Chriftians, to worfhip the one
true God. Will not he, who taught piety and
virtue, tho' he had but a glimmering, and
knew nothing of the Old or New Teftament
but by hearfay, arife in judgment and con-
demn thofe minifters of Rome, who had fo
great a light, and yetchofe darknefsfor them-
felves, and for all beneath them ? One ftory is
told of Mahomet, as it is of Gregory, that he
had a dove taught to come to his ear, as if the
Holy Ghoft frequently converfea with him in
that form. Of Mahomet it is a fable with-
out any foundation, fays Prideauxa: but of
a Reg. 1. ii. ep. 52. andl. iv. ep. 34, and 38. b Life of
Mahomet, p. 48.
Gregory,
144 Critical Notes on
Gregory, Johannes Diaconus the writer of his
life, reports, that the Romans after Gregory's
death having concluded and begun to burn
his writings (for what reafon is not told us)
his old companion and deacon Peter, in or-
der to fave the remainder, made oath, that
he had very often feen the Holy Ghoft perch-
ed upon the head of Gregory like a dove,
while he was writing. From whence, fays
our author, it is cuftomary to paint Gregory
writing with a dove over his head. And
thence, too, perhaps fomeboay thought it as
proper a circumftance for Mahomet as for
that artful Pope, as taking one to be as dex-
trous an impoftor as the other. But to return
to our comment.
It is faid, the ten kings receive power as kings,
with the beaft, fic&v co^av, which by the Vulgat,
and by the moderns in general, feems not well
tranflated in one hour. For grammarians will
tell you, that the word being in theaccufative
cafe,fhould fignify duration or length of time,
and fhould be rendered, as Bugenhagius only
has done, TheyJhall receive power as kings for
one length of time with the bea/i. If then the
beaft arofe in the fixth century, as hath been
collected by the arguments preceding, and if
the forty two months appointed for his reign
in chap.xiii. ver. 5. are to be computed in the
prophetical manner, in which a day common-
ly ftands for a year 3 42 months, of 30 days
each month, will make one thoufand two
hundred andfixty years from the rifing of this
wonderful
a
\
REVELATIONS. 145
wonderful empire to it's downfal, when its
great capital, Rome, is to be utterly burnt
with fire, by fome of thofe kings whom /he
had formerly bewitched and intoxicated,
while the reft of thofe kings [or kingdoms
rather] £hall bewail her fate. But let it be
ferioufly remembred, that, as the ten kings rofe
together with the beaft; fo, by our interpre-
tation of the text, are they to fink with him.
When, therefore, this great Babylon, this
mother of the whoredoms and abomina-
tions of the earth, {hall be brought to utter
deftrudtion; that event will be a fignal to all
the ten kingdoms, that their diffolution too
is approaching,
I
.. II - I I " ... II I I .. ill .1 ——■
—
BOOKS Printed jor and Sold by
C. Davis.
I. R IT I C A L Notes on the Old Teftament: Wherein
the prefent Hebrew Text is explained, and in many
places amended, from the ancient Verfions, more particularly
from that of the LXXII. Drawn up in the Order the feveral
Books were written, or may moft conveniently be read. To
which is prefixed, a large Introduction, adjuftingthe Authority
of the Maforetic Bible, and vindicating it from the Objections
of Mr. Whijlon, and the Author of the Grounds and Reafons
of the Cbrijiian Religion. By the late learned William Wall,
D. D. Author of the Hiftory of the Infant Baptifm in two
Volumes 8vo.
II. Mifcellaneous Difcourfes relating to the Traditions and
TJfages of the Scribes and Pharifees in our Blefled Saviour
Jefus Chrift's Time: Containing,
1. ADifcourfeof the Nature, Authority, and Ufefulnefs of
the Mifna.
2. Table and Contents of all the Titles of the Mifna.
3. A Difcourfe of the Recital of the Shema, PhylaCteries
and Schedules of Gates and Door Pofts.
4. Texts relating to the Religious Obfervation of one Day
in feven, with Annotations.
5. Shabbath. A Title of the Mifna concerning the Sabbath.
6. Eruvin. A Title of the Mifna concerning the Mixtures
praftifed by the Jenvs in Jefus Chrift's Time, to ftrengthen the
Obfervation of the Sabbath, in Hebrew and Engliih. With
Annotations. In two Volumes 8vo. By W. Wotton, D. D.
S v V
if- v
a
dissertation
o n
The Power of States
t o
Deny Civil Protection
t o
The Marriages of Minors, &c.
[ Price One Shilling, j
■ y
jT
' M
p
r
'
. - - r~ •
DISSERTATION
o N
The Power of States
T O
Deny Civil Protection
to the Marriages of Minors
Made without the Consent of their
Parents or Guardians.
in which
The Opinion of Baron Puffendorf upon that
Subject, is examined.
By HENRY STEERING, D. D.
Chancellor of the Diocefe of S ^ r u m ; and
Chaplain in Ordinary to his Majesty.
LONDON,
Printed for C. Davis, againft Grays-Inn-Gate in Holborn•
mdcclv.
/ .••••••••
/
PREFACE.
% w ^
t
JJ/-HOEVER reads the 'Title
of this Book will prefently co?i-
elude that it hath an AfpeEl to the
Marriage Act, which waspaffed the
lafi Parliament;nor will he find
felf mijlaken. But I would not have
him fet out with an Opinion that I am
an Enemy to the general Dejign of re-
forming our Marriage Laws. I have
long feen the Necefftty of it, and no
Body wipes it more than my felf
The principal Parts of this Acl are
the annulling Claufes; of which
that
ii PREFACE.
that which relates to Marriages folem-
nized in illegal Places, a?id without
Banns or Licences, is undoubtedly ,
and will, I hope, ^ of great Benefit
to the Publick. But as to that which
relates to Minors, by which, if they
marry without the Confent of their
Parents or Guardians, Mar-
riages are denied all civil Effect ; I
have always doubted whether it be
equally unexceptionable. "This put me
upon examining into this ,and
confulting what Grotius, Puffendorf,
and other Writers of CharaEler have
faid upon this SubjeSl. Papers
contain the Refult of my Enquiries; and
I hope it will be no Offence to lay them
before the Publick; which I do with all
Obedience to Authority, and with
due
due RefpeEl to better Judgments than
my own. And if what I have written
may fuggefi any thing either of Pub-
lick or Private Ufe, I floall be well
pleafed.
r MB™*
I '!« '
■ ■
I. H 10
I
| |1
ERRATA.
Pag. Line
ii. 16. after borrowing put this Mark) as concluding
the Parenthefis.
13. 6. put a full Point after Family.
21. 17. after Parents Right, put a double Comma;"
and flrike out the double Comma's that
are placed before the Four following
Lines.
25. 18. inftead of Bp. Fleetwood Jhall anfwer, put, 1
will anfwer in the Words of Bp. Fleet-
wood.
29. 22. put a full Point after Satisfaction.
41. 21. for Contract put Contract. Ibid, for prohibit
put proted.
48. 14. for furely put feverely.
\
y\ U/'i'V1 •km
x
-—
c i)
A
DISSERTATION
O N
The Power of States, &c.
WHEN the Queftion is afked, What
Power the State has to deny Protec-
tion to Marriage Contrails •, it is
fuppofed that Marriage has a natural Exift-
ence of its own, antecedent to, and abftradted
from, all the Laws of Civil Society. And there
is in fadt nothing more certain. Marriage there
was before Civil Societies began ; and Mar-
riage there would be again if all Civil Socie-
ties in the World fhould be deftroyed.
A State is faid to protedl Marriage, when
it enforces, by Civil Sancuu is, every Obliga-
tion which naturally arifes from the Marri-
age Contract, both with refpect to the mar-
tied Couple between each other mutually;
and their joint Iflue reciprocally; and this
Aid the Law muft be underftood to refufe,
when it declares a Marriage to be null.
A A Nullity
* /
( 2 )
A Nullity is nothing ; and to declare a Mar.ri-
age null, is to declare it ?20thi?ig ; that is,
that the Parties {hall be treated and confi-
dered in all Refpeds, and to all Intents and
Purpofes of Law, as if there were no fuch
Contract fubfifting.
The Rights which naturally arife from the
Marriage Contrad are principally thefe, viz.
The Parties contrading are bound to live to-
gether in conjugal Love and Fidelity, during
their joint Lives; the Wife may challenge
Maintenance and Protedion from the Huf-
band; the Iffue may challenge Maintenance
from both, till they are able to maintain
themfelves j and they are entitled to the Sub-
ftance of the Parents, when dead, againfl:
all Strangers, except fo far forth as they
may ftand excluded by fome Ad of the
Parents themfelves. Thefe are Rights which
Society is to fupport, and will fupport, in
Confequence of a Marriage Contrad, allow-
ed and admitted as fuch by the Law. But
fuppofe the very Being of a Marriage Con-
trad deftroyed by a Nullity in Law, thefe
Confequences will neceffarily follow;— the
State will not enforce Cohabitation but pu-
nifh it, and the Parties, for ought that the
Law will hinder, may marry again y—the
Wife
W
\
( 3 )
Wife can fue for no Maintenance, •— the
Law will not oblige * the Parents to provide
for the Children, any farther than is necef-
fary to prevent their being chargeable to the
Publick — nor fhall the Children be entitled
to any Eftate as by Inheritance from fuch
Parents. In one word, Perfons under fuch
a Contract fhall in all RefpeCts be treated,
not as married, but, as in a State of For-
ni cat ion.
The Queftion now to be difcufled is this,
How far has Society Power in fuch Cafes ?
I fhall reduce the Whole of what I have to
fay in Anfwer, under two general Propo-
fi tions.
Proposition I.
No Marriage can challenge the Protection of
the State, which is defective in any essen-
tial Point.
Be c A u s e a Marriage ejfentially defective,
is, in Truth, no Marriage, and therefore
not a proper ObjeCt of Protection. The
Points ejfential to a Marriage, are, i. A fuf-
ficiency of Knowledge or Underftanding to
qualify the Parties to contraCt. 2. A Right
to contradt; and 3. A ContraCt actually made
A 2 between
( 4 )
between the Parties, by which they pledge
their Faith to each other, to live together as
Man and Wife.
As to the firft; we are thus far clear,
viz. That Fools or Madmen, whilft fuch,
cannot bind themfelves by Contract, and
therefore cannot marry. If they do, the
Marriage is, in itfelf, null, and fhould pafs
as fuch in Civil Eftimation. But it is not
every Degree, nor every confiderable Degree
of Weaknefs in the Underftanding, that dif-
qualifies a Man to marry. If he has Senfe
enough to know what he binds himfelf to,
it is fufficient. The fame thing may be
faid of Children — But here Laws ufually
interpofe; and Puffendorf tells us, that
<c Since the Obligation to Matrimony is un-
cc. determinate, and admits of fome Latitude,
" the Civil Authority may fix the Age when
" Perfons fhall be fit to be joined in Mar-
<c riage [a]which, in a certain Senfe, is
true : But not in this Senfe, that Lawgivers
are at Liberty arbitrarily to fix what Time
they pleafe. Experience and Obfervation
[a~\ Cum obligatio ad Matrimonium ineundum fit in-
determinata, et latitudine quapiam gaudens ; lieebit Legi
civili tempus aetatemque connubio jungendorum definire.
De Jur. Nat. Lib. vi. Cap. i. § 8.
2 muft
( 5 )
muft be confulted, to know at what Age
Perfons are ordinarily of fufficient Under-
Handing to make the Marriage Contract; and
Lawgivers ought not to aft againft fuch Ex-
perience, but be direfted by it 5 in which
Care fhould always be taken to keep as
near as may be to the Standard of Na-
ture 3 and rather to fall a little below it, than
rife much above it. If the Law fhould fay,
that no Woman fhall marry till fhe is Four-
teen of Years Age, nor any Man till he is Six-
teen, it would be a very fafe and a reafonable
Law ; for few (in thefe Parts of the World
at lead) ever think of marrying fo foon.
But if it fhould be declared that no Perfons
fhall be adjudged capable of contracting
Marriage, till they are upwards of T'wenty>
it would be very unreafonable for Nature
may urge to Marriage fooner.
The Right to contraft Marriage (which
is the next thing to be confidered) will be
impeded either by a prior Marriage ftill fub-
lifting 5 or when the Parties are within the
Degrees forbidden by the Law of God. Thefe
are fettled Points. But here lies the grand
Queftion. Is the Dijfent of the Pare?:t a
Bar againft the Child's Marriage, fuppofing
him otherwife qualified ? Hath Nature given
A3 to
( 6 )
to Parents fuch Power ? hath the pojitive
Law of God given them any fuch Power ?
or can Civil Laws give it them ? To juftify
the Laws of many Nations it Jhould be fo.
But Right is not to be decided by Examples
in Practice, how great or how many foever
they may be ; but Practice ought to be di-
redted by Right and the Rule of Right in
this, and all other Cafes, is the universal
Law of Nature, by which Men and
States ought to govern themfelves, where the
pojitive Law of God interpofeth not. Let
us hear then what one of the greateft Ma-
fters in this Science hath faid concerning the
natural Right of Parents ; I mean Grotius,
in his Book De "Jure Belli, &c. Lib. ii. Cap.
v. § 2 to 7.
[h] lc There are three Periods of Time to
4< be diftinguifhed in the Age of Children.
[/?] Diftinguenda autem funt in Liheris tria tempora.
Primum tempus imperfedti judicii—dum abeft vis elec-
trix. — Secundum, tempus perfedti judicii, fed dum
tiiius pars manet familiae parentum — Tertium, poft-
quain ex ea Familia exceflit. In primo tempore omnes
Liberorum adtiones fub dominio funt Parentum ; aequum
enim eft, ut qui fe regere non poteft, regatur aliunde—
At alius naturaliter inveniri non poteft cui regimen com-
petat, quam Parentis.
" The
( 7 )
Cl The firji is, tempus imperfeBi judicii, the
*c Age of imperfedi judgment, whilft the
cc vis ele&rix [i. e. that Strength or Force
u of Reafon, which is neceflary to qualify
<c them to judge and chufe for themfelves]
cc is wanting. The Jecond is, tempus perfeBi
u judicii, the Age of perfeff Judgment,
<{ but whilft the Child, however, continues
<c to be a Part of the Father's Family. The
" third is, when the Child hath removed it-
" felf out of it. In the Jirfi of thefe Pe-
c< riods, all the Adtions of Children are
In fecundo tempore, cum jam judicium aetate ma-
turuit, fubfunt Parentum imperiis, non aliae adtiones,
<^uam quae ad familiae paternae aut maternas ftatum ali-
quid momenti habent. iEquum enim eft ut pars con-
veniat cum ratione integri. In caeteris autem adtioni-
bus, habent turn Liberi r/cev, id eft, facultatem
moralem agendi ; fed tenentur tamen in illis quoquc
ftudere Temper ut Parentibus placeant. Verum hoc de-
bitum cum non Tit ex vi facultatis moralis ut ilia TuperL
ora, Ted ex pietate, obTervantia, et gratiae rependendae
officio ; non efficit ut irritum Tit, ft quid contra Tit Tac-
turn, ftcut nec irrita eft donatio rei a quocunque domino
fadta contra parfimoniae regulas.
In tertio tempore Filius in omnibus eft dvT2<;%<Ti®*
Tuique juris, manente tamen Temper illo pietatis et ob-
Tervantiae debito cujus cauTa perpetua eft —
Quicquid extra haec eft, a lege eft voluntaria quae alibi
eft alia.
A 4 <s under
( 8 )
under the Dominion of their Parents •, for
it is neceflary that they, who cannot go-
vern themfelves, fhould be governed by
others; and there are (naturally) none
fo fit to govern Children as their Parents.—
In the fecond Period, when the Under-
ftanding is grown ripe by Age, no other
Adions of Children are under the Domi-
nion of their Parents, than thofe which
influence, in fome Sort, the State of the
Father's or the Mother's Family; for it is
but reafonable that the Part fhould com-
port to the Ratio of the Whole. But in
all other Matters Children have a Will
of their own, or the moral Faculty of di-
reding their own Adions; in which, ne-
verthelefs, they are bound always to ftudy
to pleafe their Parents. But as this Debt
arifes not (as in the former Period) from
the want of the moral Faculty, but from
the Confiderations of Piety, Reverence,
and Gratitude -y a Negled in this Cafe
will not go fo far, as to create a Nullity
in what is done contrary to the Parents'
Will, any more than a Gift will be void,
if a Man throws away his Money againft
the Rules of Frugality—In th z third Period,
a Child is in all Refpeds abfolute Matter
" of
( 9 )
*c of himfelf, except only that he ftill flands
<f obliged to the Duties of Piety, and Reve-
<c rence to his Parents, which are Obliga-
" tions that can never die — Whatfoever is
<c beyond all this, arifes from pofitive Laws,
cc which are different in different Countries*"
Thus far this great Lawyer and Cafuift.
With the firft of thefe three Periods we
have Nothing to do. For Nature herfelf
will not permit a Child to marry till it hath
Underftanding fufficient to difcern between
Good and Evil. But beyond this there is
a Period, during which the Laws of fome
Countries will not permit Children to marry
without the Confent of their Parents, though
otherwife they may be qualified, that is,
though they have what Grotius calls the vis
dedrix, or moral Faculty of adting -y tjy
which he is not to be fuppofed to mean per-
jed Wifdom> or perfed Difcretiony (which,
comparatively fpeaking, very few ever come
at) but fuch a Ripenefs of the Underftand-
ing, as competently well qualifies Perfons
to tranfadl common Affairs, to Buy or to
Sell, or to make a Bargain y and fuch a Senfe
of Right and Wrong, as will enable them
to know that they do ill, when they cheat,
or when they Ileal, or when they break
their
( 10 )
their Faith, and the like. When this Ma-
turity of Underftanding comes, it is im-
poftible to fettle by any general Rules; for
it comes in Some fooner, and in Others la-
ter; but whenever it comes (as it common-
ly does far within the Period which mod
Nations affign to the Age of Minority) it
conftitutes the moral Faculty. For without
this, a Perfon is capable of no moral Obliga-
tion -j and yet Grotius tells us, that Minors
may fall under moral Obligation. His
Words are thefe: cc Madmen, and Ideots, and
61 Infants cannot bind themfelves by Pro-
cc mifes •, but Minors may ; for though they
cc are fuppofed not to have fufficient Strength
4C of Judgment,-^-yet this is not always
<c true, nor will therefore the fingle Confi-
deration of a Perfon's Minority, be fuffi-
<c cient to invalidate his A£l. [c]" It is true
that the Laws of Society will not fupport
a Contract made by a Perfon, during his
[r] Furiofi, et Amends, et Infantis nulla eft promiffio.
Aliud cenfendum; eft de Mineribus. Hi enim etfi non
fatis hrmum judicium habere credantur,— id tamen
nec. perpetuum eft, nec per fe fufficit ad a<ftus vim
elidendam. De Jur. Bell. Lib. ii. Cap. xi. §. 5. It is
well worth confidering what Barbeyrac fays, in his
Notes upon Puffendorf, De Jure Nat. Lib. iii. Cap. vi.
Minority $
v
, C ")
Minority ; but that is Nothing to our pre-
fent Purpofe, which is only to fhew what
it is that creates the j?ioral Faculty, or what
§ 5. numb. 5. cc Ifayoung Man, before he arrives at the
Age fixed by Law, [/. e. during his Minority] borrow
any thing, is he bound to pay it when he comes of
Age ? Air. Placette feems to have determined this
Queftion very well, in thefe Words, In the fir ft
Place ccnfider, whether he with whom we have [the
Minor hath] contracted, lofeth any thing otherwife
by the breaking the Bargain. For if he lojeth Nothing,
but all the Damage he fuffersy is only that his Hopes
are dijappointed, I believe we are not obliged to make
good the'Promife we have made in.that Manner. But
if he lofes any Thing (as it ordinarily happens in
borrowings we tnujl look at fomething elfe. Hath he
lent willingly, and without any ill Defign P Did he
firefee the ill Ufe that was likely to be made of what he
lent ? If he did forefee it, and did lend with an evil
Intentions he ought to lofe what he lent, and impute the
Lofs to himfelf. But if he had no ill Defign^ and lent
freelys 'tis my Opinion he ought to be paid; and
1 am perfuadeds to do the contrary, and take the
. Advantage of the Laws Is a Faults which not only a
tender Confidences but an honefl Man in the Efteem of
the Worlds ought to be ashamed of."
It is, I fuppofe, under fome fuch Reftridtions as thefe,
that Mr. Barbeyrac is to be underftood, when he fays
roundly elfewhere; that cc If a Adinor has borrowed
any thing without the Confent of his Guardian, the
Creditor can demand Nothing of him in Juftice, [/. e.
legally'] but the Minor is ftill obliged by natural
Degree
( 12 )
Degree of Knowledge is required, to bring
a Perfon under the Force of moral Obliga-
tion. T hat there may be a fufficient De-
gree of it within the Age of Minority, is
what Grotius here aflerts; and that the fim-
pie Confideration of a Perfon's Minority
will not difcharge him in all Cafes, is the
Confeffion of all Nations and of all People*
By our own Laws, Minority is no Difcharge
in Cafes of Felony; and every Man who
marries his Daughter during her Minority
eonfeffes her capable of moral Obligation;
which is full to the Point. For if the Parents
Confent Jhould be allowed neceffary to ere-
ate a Right to con trad Marriage (which is
the Queftion now under Deliberation) it
cannot influence the moral Capacity to make
the Contrad, which the Parents Confent
prefuppofes, as that without which, (the
Parents Confent notwithftanding) the Con-
tra£t, would be ipfo facto null.
Now to return to Grotius, who fays, in
the Paffage above cited, that in the middle
Right, or in Confcience, to pay what he has borrow-
" ed." Puff. Book. iii. Chap. iv. § 5. Num. 5. in
Net. Compare An Enquiry into the Force and Operation of
the annulling Claufes in a late Afi for preventing clandef
tine Marriages, pag. 18.
Period
1
( *3 )
Period of Life, when the moral Faculty
fhewsitfelfj no other Aftions of Children
are (naturally) under the Dominion of their
Parents, than thofe which influence, in fome
Sort, the State of the Father's or the Mo-
ther's Family: If this is true, then the ACt
of contracting Marriage is not under the
Dominion of their Parents; becaufe this is
not one of thofe Things which influence the
State of the Father's or the Mother's Family.
Things of this Sort are here fuppofed to be
fuch as operate whilft Children are a fart of
the Father's or Mother's Family; for fothe
Reafon carries it. JEquum ejl ut pars con-
'veniat cum ratione integri. But when a
Child difpofes of himfelf in Marriage, he
ceafes, by the 'very A5l> to be a Fart of the
Father's or Mother's Family; as Grotius
himfelf obferves a little after. §>ui Uxorem
ducit extra Familiam abit. But what need
is there to deduce by Confequence, what
Grotius lays down in exprefs Terms? At
the Tenth Paragraph of the fame Chapter,
he applies his general Principles diredtly to
the Cafe \ and fays, " [d] A Queftion arifes
id] Quseftio oritur de parentum confenfu, quern, ad
validitatem conjugii quafi naturaliter quidam requirunt.
Sed in eo falluntur \ nam quae adferunt argumenta ni-
" concerning
( H )
u concerning the Confent of Parents, which
tc forne infill upon as neceflary by the natu-
<c ral Law, to the Validity of a Marriage
<c Contradl. But in this they are miflaken ;
<c for the Arguments theyalledge only prove
<c this, viz. That it fuits the Duty which
<c Children owe to their Parents to obtain
<c the Parents Confent; which I readily
cc grant, with this Provifo, that the Parent
cc advifes Nothing but what is juft.---But
<c it does not follow from hence, that the
cc Child hath not that Right which I call
<c the moral Faculty, or Dominion; for he
cc that marries, is fuppofed to be of Ripenefs
<c of Age, and goes out of the Family, and
€C therefore is not, in this Cafe, fubjedt to
hil aliud probant, quam officio filiorum conveniens
eile, ut parentum confenfum impetrent : Quod plane
concedimus cum temperamento, nifi manifefte ini-
qua fit parentum voluntas—Sed hinc non fequitur jus
illud, quod Facultatis aut Dominii nomine explicatur,
deeiTe filio. Nam qui uxorem ducit, et maturae efie
debet aetatis, et extra familiam abit, ita ut hac in re
regimini familiari non fubjiciatur. Solum autem reve-
rentiae officium non efficit ut nullus fit a£us qui ei
repugnat. Quod autem a Romanis aliifque conftitutum
eft, ut qu3edam nuptis, quia confenfus patris deficit,
irritae Tint, non ex natura eft, fed ex juris conditorum
Voluntate. Ibid. § ic. i. 2.
" the
( *5 )
<c the Family-Government -y and the finglc
" Confideration of filial Duty, will not go
<c fo far as to annul any Adt that is done
<c contrary to it. As to that which obtain-
<c ed among the Romans, and in other Na-
u tions, that certain Marriages were declar-
<c ed null, becaufe the Parents Confent was
<c wanting, this was not from the natural
" Law, but from the Will of Civil Legifla-
tc tors." Puffendorf treads exadtly the fame
Path. For having put the Queftion,—May
Children marry without the Confent of their
Parents? he anlwers thus, [e] " We rauft
" here diftindlly confider what filial Piety
[f] Diftin&e confiderandum eft, quid requirat offi-
cium pietatis: quid obfequium dominio refpondens:
quid juris fit patribus ut talibus; quid ut capitibus
familiarum. Poteftatem patriam, ut taiem, diximus
naturaliter tantam efte, quanta opus eft, ad libero-
rum educationem, et gubernationem [Supple von au-
tern aut quid fimile] eoufque fe extendere, ut matri-
monia liberorum poftit declarare irrita; quippe quae
praefupponuntur iniri abs talibus, qui jam plenum ratio-
nis ufum obtinent. Equidem officium pietatis ac reve-
rentiae requirit, ut confilium parentum heic adhibeant
liberi, nec ipforum voluntati reluctentur.—Non tamen
ftatim irritum eft et nullum, quod contra officium iftud
fuit admifliim, nam obligatio audiendi et reverendi al-
terius confilium, non ftatim poteftatem dere fua difpo-
nendi adimit. De jur.Nat. Lib, vi. Cap. 2. §. 14.
requires •
( 16 )
" requires what Obedience as relative to T)o~
c< miniony what Right Parents have as fnch •
<c and what as the Heads of Families. I
i( have already faid; that naturally the pa-
<c rental Power is juft fo much as is neceiTa-
<c ry to the Education, and Government of
" the Children ; but it does not extend fo
<c far, as that the Parent can reverfe the
<c Marriages of his Children; which are
<c prefuppofed to be made by thofe, who
<c have arrived to the full Ufe of their Rea-
c< fon. Filial Piety and Reverence does
<c indeed require that Children fhould con*
<c fult their Parents in fuch Cafes, and con-
cc form themfelves to their Wills,—never-
cc thelefs, if they fhould noty what they do is
<c not therefore null and voidy for the Obli-
cc gation to liften, and fliew Reverence to
" another, does not take away a Man's Pow-
ct er to difpofe of his own as he pleafes."
I defire the Reader will take Notice how
carefully thefe Writers have diftinguifhed
between Right, and Duty -y between what
the Child may be bound to do, out of Reve~
rence to his Parents, and \vhat Parents may
challe?ige of their Children, as having Do-
minion over their Perfons. Certainly a very
neceflary Diftinition it is, and one would
think
( *7 )
v
think as plain a one. It is the Duty of a
Child to maintain his Father or his Mother,
if they are unable to maintain themfelves;
but will you therefore fay, that the Father
* or the Mother has a Right to the Son's Ef-
tate ? Bp. Fleetwood, in his Relative Duties,
has negledted this Diftindtion ; in which,
though as a Cafuijl he is defective, yet as a
popular Preacher he may well be excuied.
For it may be more neceflary for common
Ufe, in fuch Cafes, to prefs Obedience in
Children, than to Ihew the Limits of the
Parents Power.
Let us now go on with Puffendorf; who
having confidered the Right of Parents as
fuch, proceeds to fhew, what Right they
have as Majlers of Families, but ftill fepa-
rate from any Civil Eftate. Upon which
he fays, that [/] " as in States, every Man
*
[/] Ut in civitatibus libera matrimoniorum inter
quofcumque facultas, ut et migrandi licentia, intelligitur,
ubi in contrarium exprefTa non extat lex aut legi aequi-
pollens confuetudo; ita, cum in familiis fegregibus
plerseque rationes legum civilium, circa matrimonia inter
certas perfonas contrahenda, ceffent; haud quidquam
patrifamilias jus videtur efle prohibendi aut refcindendi
matrimonia fuorum liberorum, quae nullo alias vitio
laborant, fi modo ifti parati Tint familia paterna facefle-
re, — Quod fi tamen fuam autoritatem, a liberis citra
C V'5 << is
(1*)
cc is underftood to be at Liberty to marry as
f£ he pleafes, and remove as he pleafes, if
'£ no Law of the State, nor Cuftom equiva-
££ lent to a Law, intervenes to hinder ; fo
<£ in a private Family, fince mod of the
*£ Reafons for civil Appointments concern-
££ ing Marriages, [to hinder them from being
<£ contracted] between certain Perfons, have
<£ no Place; it fhould feem that the Mafter
£c of the Family has no Right to prohibit of
<£ refcind the Marriages of his Children, de-
" feCtive in no other Point than this, [that
ct they were contracted without his Confent]
" provided the Children, fo marrying, are
C£ ready to go out of the Father's Family. —
<£ But if Children, without the weightieft
<c Reafons, fhall defpife the Parent's Autho-
<c rity, he may, as a Punifhment for their
cc Offence, turn them out of Doors and dif-
<c inherit them." There was no need for
the Author to put in the Provifo of the
Child's being ready to go out of the Father's
Family; for every Perfon that marries, by
that very A£t fhuts himfelf out of the Fa-
ther's Family, as has juft now been obferved.
gravifiimas rationes fpretam viderit pater, poeriae loco
familia et haereditate excludere immorigeros non prohi-
betur. Ibid.
2 As
( 19 )
As to the Father's Right to difinherit a
Child that marries againft his Content, nei-
ther is it difputed, nor does it fall within
the prefent Queftion. Yet I will beg leave
to fay thus much to it by the Way,i;/z. That
it {hould always be done with Difcretion and
Tendernefs. For the Child does but exercife
its natural Right, and he would be an unnatu-
ral Father,who, becaufe his Child takes an ho-
nejl Liberty, could {land by and fee it ftarve.
We have feen then how far the mere na-
tural Right of the Parent goes. He cannot
forbid or annul the Marriage of his Child,
where there is Nothing to hinder or impeach
it, but barely the Want of his Confent. We
muft next fee whether Parents have any fuch
Right, by the pofitive Law of God. Some
have Recourfe to the general Directions in
Scripture, that Children {hould obey their
Parents. But general Rules can never de-
termine particular Cafes, becaufe almoft all
general Rules admit of and require Limita-
tions, as this does, in a Variety of Inftances
that might be given. Others alledge the
Style of Scripture, that fuch a one gave his
Son or Daughter to fuch a one in Marriage ;
[g] which is not more to the Purpofe. For
[£] See Bp. Fleetwood for both. Relat, Duties, p. 32.
C 2 admitting
/
( 20 )
admitting the Right ftridtly fpeaking to be
in the Child -y Parents always have had,
and always fhould have, fo much to do in
thefe Matters as will juftify the Ufe of fuch
Expreflions. By our own Laws, every
Man that marries a Woman, muft receive
her from the Hands of her Father or her
Friend,, which is a very proper Expreffion
of the Duty which Children owe to their
Parents and Friends in fuch Cafes. But
did any one ever look upon this Ceremony
as a Declaration of Righty or think that, if
the Parent's Confent was wanting, the Mar-
riage would be null ? Our old Laws fpoke
©therwife: Again: The Jewiih Law is ap-
pealed to, which fays, that if a Woman vow
a Vow unto the Lord, and bind herfelf by a
Bond, being in her Father s Houfe in her
Youth — and her Father difallow her in the
Day that he heareth -y not any of her Vowsy or
cf her Bonds Jhall ft and. Numb. xxx. 3, 4,
5. But this Law hath no Relation to Mar-
riage. For 1. Marriage is not a Vow unto
the Lord. It is not once fo called in
Scripture. It is a Contradl (or Vowy if you
like that Word better,) between the Man
and the Woman. 2. This Law relates to
married Women as well as to Virgins, as it
follow?,
Hi i'
id*1
id
( 21
follows ver. 6, 7, 8. If fie had at all d
Hufband when fie vowed, — and her Hufiand
difallow her on the Day that he heard it %
then he fiallmake her Vow of none Effect.
Bat a married Woman cannot make a Mar-
riageVow; for {he cannot have more than
one Hufband at once. 3. The Vow here
mentioned concerns fomething that was to
be done during the Woman's continuance in
her Father s Houfe. But by Marriage, a
Woman ceafes to be of her Father's Houfe,
and puts herfelf under the Power of her
Hufband. Nor does it avail what Vinnius
objefts, that " if a Promife made to God, is
" voidable at the Parent's Difcretion ; much
u more a Promife made to Man in Prejudice
<c of the Parent's Right; [h] for it does not
tc yet appear, that a Contract of Marriage,
<c made by the Child without the Pa-
" rent's Confent, is a Breach of the Pa-
<£ rent's Right." Puffendorf under flood this
Matter better, when he faid, [/] " the Rea-
[£] Hue facit quod promiflio Deo fa&a parentum
arbitrio irrita fit, Num. xxx. Tanto enim magis irrita
eile debet promiflio Homini fadta cum lafione juris pa-
ierni. Comment. in hiftitut. Lib. i. Tit. 10.
{/] Cujus [legis] Ratio non haec folum fuit ne impru-
dens setas, inconfulta pietatis fpecie mota, fe ipfam,
c 3 " %
( 22 )
<c fon of this Law was not only left Women*
<c in their imprudent Years, milled by a
<£ Shew of Piety, fhould undo themfelves
<c by vowing more than their Fortunes
<c would bear ; but alfo left the paternal
i£ Eftate fhould be burthened by fuch Vows,
€c or the neceffary Affairs of the Family
<c hindred. So that this Power thus far did
<c not flow from pofitive Laws, but from
*c natural Reafon ; nobody that is fubjedt to
<c another having any Right to difpofe of
" thofe Things which are the Property of
c; him to whom he is fubjedh" You will
fee the meaning of this, if you will read the
xxviith Chapter of Leviticus, where the feve-
ral Kinds of Vows are fet down. A Man
might vow himfelf or his Children wholly to
the Service of God in the Tabernacle, or
Temple; he might vow his Beaji, his
IIoufe> his Field; in which Cafe the Thing
devoted was either adtually to be applied to
mia vovendo, fortunis everteret; fed etiam ne vel pater-^
na bona votis ejufmodi onerarentur, vel operae debit#
interciperentur. Sic ut haec poteftas ha£tenus non ex
lege pofitiva, fed naturali ratione profluat; cum nemo
qui alteri fubjedtus eft, valide difponere queat circa eas
ies in quibus alterius poteftati fubjacet. Lib. vi. § 12,
See alfo Patrick in loc.
facrecl
i ? * '
(23)
facred Ufes, or to be redeemed by a Sum of
Money. So that in all thefe Cafes the Fa-
ther's Property was concerned, and therefore
a Vow made by the Child whilft in the Fa-
ther's Family, could not bind without his
Content. But in Marriage, a Child dif-
pofes of Nothing but his or her own Perfon.
He neither comes to the Father to fupply
him with the Means to perform his Vow,
nor flays in his Family ; and therefore there
is not the fame Reafon for the Neceffity of
the Parent's Confent in this Cafe, as there is
in thofe. But if you will fuppofe that one
Reafon of this Law was, left Women fhould
imprudently ruine their Fortunes, and will
argue that, for the fame Reafon, the Father
ought to have Power to forbid or annul the
Marriage, if they chufe improperly; my
Anfwer is, that the Argument will not hold;
for the Cafes ejjentially differ. To make a
Vow was an Adt perfectly free. The Law
of God did not bind a Woman to make it.
She might forbear if the pleafed, without
any Prejudice to herfelf. But a Woman
may be obliged to marry to preferve her
Chaftity; and if the Father hath Power to
withfland it, the Confequence will be, that
either flie muft continue fmgle at her own
C 4 Peril,
( 24 )
Peril, or muft marry fornebody, perhaps,
whom fhe does not like, which is the worfe
Evil of the two; there being no ftronger
Temptation to Wickednefs, nor any one
Thing more fruitful of Mifchief to Fami-
lies, than when Perfons marry againft their
Inclinations. There are other Paffages col-
leCted by Vinnlus,, upon which I need not be
particular : For there is one DefeCt common
to thefe which I have mentioned, and to
all the reft, which fpoils them (at lead: for
cur Ufe,) viz. that they relate to Children,
not of this or that particular Agey but of
all Ages without DiftinCtion. Which
fhews, (in my Judgment) that thefe Paffages
are rather Declarations of Practice founded
upon natural Duty -y than of any fuch Right
in the Parents, as can affeCt the EJfence of
the Contract -y which Kind of Right I do
not find given to Parents in any one plain
Paffage of Scripture. I read that Parents
difpofed of their Children in Marriage, and
might give or refufe their Confent as they
thought fit, which is right. But I read of
no Decijioiiy that if Children contracted
Marriage without their Parents Confent, the
Contract was null, nor any Thing tha,t
implies it
I think
( 25 )
I think then that we ftand clear of any
pofitive Law of God to hinder the natural
Law from its natural Operations, in this
Cafe. Let us next confider, whether Soci-
ety can give to Parents a Right, which neither
God nor Nature has given them. I fay a
Right: for concerning the Duty of Children
towards their Parents, we have no Difpute,
as has afore been obferved. And here we
muft take Puffendorf alone for our Guide;
for Grotius goes no farther. He then enters
upon the Point thus: [k] <c what Right
<c thofe Fathers of Families have in this Mat-
cc ter, who live in Civil Societies, muft be
" learnt from the Laws of particular Com-
" monwealths." What are we to learn
from the Laws of particular Common-
wealths ? Bp. Fleetwood fhall anfwer — [/]
" they do indeed fufficiently evidence the
<c Power and Authority that Parents exer-
<c cised in the Difpofal of their Children ;
<c but they do not fhew the Reasonable-
<£ ness of fuch Authority." One need go
no farther than to Puffendorf himfelf to fee,
♦
[£] Quid juris heic competat patribus familias, qui
in civitatibus degunt, ex fingularum legibus eft cognof-
cendum. Ibid,
[7] Relat. Duties, p. 36.
that
( 26 )
that there is no Point upon which States
have made more different and contradictory
Laws than this of Marriage ; which is fuf-
ficient abfolutely to exclude them from the
Right of Decifion in this Cafe. I fay the
fame Thing as to Fathers and Councils,
whofe Opinions or Decifions Nobody takes
in the Grofs \ and if once you come to Dif-
tin&ions, and will take what you like, and
rejeCt the reft, this is bringing the Matter
to naiural Sen]} ; and by that I defire it may
be tried. To the Law of Nature then let
us return, and confiaer what Power, by Vir-r
me of this Law, States have to oblige Chil-
dren to wait the Parent's Confent in Marriage.
Vuffendorf delivers his Opinion in thefe
Words j [m] "It is certain that as civil
" Laws can invalidate certain Contracts,
" either becaufe fome Solemnities are want-
" *ng [which are required by Law,] or be-
" caufe the Law forbids certain Perfons to
[w] Ccrtum eft, quemadmodum leges civiles effice-
re pofiunt, ut invalids ineantur contractus quidam, vel
quia folennibus quibufdam deftituuntur, vel quia certis
perfonis eofdem inire interdicitur; ita pofTe eafdem va-
liditatem matrimonii, inter filios-familias initi, a pa-
rentum confenfu fufpendere, ut, illo non accedente,
matrimonium civiliter pro nullo hafceatur, ac re-
fcindi queat. Ibid.
S( make
( 27 )
<c make fuch Contrads; fo they may make
" the Marriage Contrad entered into by
<f Children, whilft they are in the Father's
" Family, fo to depend upon the Parents
" Confent, that without it the Marriage
<c fhall, in civil Estimation, be null
<c and void." He fays the fame thing in
another Place; where, having mentioned fe-
yeral Reftraints which Civil Laws may lay
upon Marriage, he adds, — [n\ which
Laws may have this Effed, that a Mar-
€C riage, contraded contrary to them, fhall be
diverted of certain particular Privileges
" annexed by the civil Law to Marriage, or
cc be declared [in civil Eftimation,] abfolutely
" null and void."
I defire it may be obferved upon thefe
Paffages, that the Limitation of the Nullity,
which Laws may declare againft Marriages
in certain Cafes, to civil Effeds only, car-
ries with it a Confeflion, that no Ad of Law
can deftroy the vinculum Matrimonii, as it
lies in Conscience; which likewife prefup-
[»] Quarum legum ea vis efle poteft, ut quod con-
tra eafdem contrahitur connubium, cert is effedtibus,
per jus civile alEgnatis, deftituatur, vel etiam omnino
pro invalido, et quod refdflionem admittat, declaretur.
Lib. vi. Cap. I. § 8.
( 28 )
pofes, that the Confideration of a Parent's
being under Society gives him, in this Ref-
pe£t, no more Right over his Child than he
had, or would have, out of Society; for if
it did, and the Child, by an Aft of Society,
was put abfolutely under the Parent's Will,
the Marriage of fuch Child, without his Con-r
lent, would be void in [o] Confcience as well
as in Law. I want therefore to have a
Reafon, why Pujfendorf lays it down fo po-
litively, that the Law may annul the Mar-
riage of a Child as to all Civil Effects, merely
becaufethe Parent's Confent is wanting; and
a Reafon he has given us, or what is to pafs
for one. It is this. He fays, that [p\ " car-
[<9] Becaufe in that Cafe the Contract will be circa
rem alicnam ; of which Puffendorffoys thus ; " Facultas
" moralis — ad praeftandum quid nos obligandi, deeft
cc circa res et a&iones alienas, quippe quae non noftro,
" led alterius arbitrio funt fubjedtae. — Nec fuper meis
" rebus aut a&ionibus, in quas jam alteri jus fuit quae-
iC fitum, tertio validc polfum promittere. — Pofterius
pa&um redditur irritum per prius ; vel potius, prius
oftendit, pofterius nullum efle pofTe." Lib. iii. Cap. 7.
§ 10,11.
fp] Copula carnalis, et confenfus cohabitantium,
ubi leges civitatis obftant, non magis validum reddunt
matrimonium, quam per contra&um pupilli, et tradi-
tionem, citra autoritatem tutoris facfam, valide et ir-
nal
.( 29 )
€C nal Knowledge, and the Confent [or Mar-
" riage] of the Perfons cohabiting together,
cc where the Civil Laws contradict, can no
<c more render fuch Marriage valid, than a
<c Sale and Delivery made by a Minor,
<c without the Confent of his Guardian, can
*c pafs away the Title of his Eftate." Valid ?
In what Senfe ? not in Confcience for that is
out of the Queftion. He muft mean then
civilly valid and in Fa£i it is true, that
when once the Law has declared a Marriage
null, the Confent and Cohabitation of the
Parties can no more give fuch Marriage any
civil EffeCt, than the Sale and Delivery of a
Minor can pafs away his Eftate. This is
all that Puffendorf fays. But this advances
Nothing 3 for the Thing in Queftion is,
by what Right the State makes fuch a Law
as Jhall hinder a Marriage from obtaining it»
civil Effects, only becaufe the Parent is not
confenting? and in this it is plain that the
Author gives us no Satisfaction. If Pvffen-
dorf had given a Reafon why the Law may
reftrain a Minor from pafling away his Eftate,
and then fhewn, that the fame Reafon will
hold to prove, that the State may deny its
revocabiliter dominium rei pupillaris transfertur. Lib.vi.
Cap, 2. § ult.
Protection
( 3° )
Protection to his Marriage; this would
have been to the Purpofe. But he hath
done neither the one nor the other.
We muft try then, if we can go to the
bottom of this Matter. And here I think
we cannot do better than to call the Author
back to his own Principles. It is well known
that his whole Syftem of Law ftands upon
this Foot, that by Nature all Men are equal;
that all civil Authority is founded in a mutu-
al Compaff between the Governing and the
Governed; and conftjquently that nothing
ought to be impofed as a Law, but what
may be refolved into the Confent of the Sub-
jedl, either tacit or exprefs. [q] Now there
are two Queftions which I would afk of
thofe who favour this Opinion. The firft is,
whence comes the Confent, which gives Force
to a Law declaring a Nullity upon a Marri-
age made inconfulto pat re F Suppofe a Num-
ber of Men met together, to form them-
\
[iq] Ut actu conftituatur irnperium, fadtum aliquod
humanum antecedere oportet — Nam homines natu-
rali libertate ex & quo gaudent j cujus diminutionem ut
jjatiantur, neceflum eft ipforum consensus, expreiTus
vel tacitus, aut interpretativus accedat, aut aliquod ip-
forum fadtum, quo aliis jus fuit qusefitum, eandem vel
rnvitis eripiendi. De Jur, Nat. Lib. iii. Cap. 2. § 8.
felves
C 31 )
felves by mutual Compaft into a Body Po-
litic ; and tell me, who among them has a
Right to propofe and eftablifh fuch a Law*
The Fathers ? It cannot be ; for a Father
(as we have feen) has no fuch Power with-
in himfelf, and therefore can convey no
* *
fuch Power to the Society. If the Que-
ftion was limply concerning a Law of Dif-
herifon, the Father might be a Party in the
Contract $ fo far at leaft as his own Eftate
is concerned 5 and therefore fhould a Law
now pafs to this Effedt, that if a Son mar-
ried againft his Father's or his Guardian's
Confent, he fhould forfeit the paternal In-
heritance; the Father's Confent to fuch a
Law might be prefumed. But a Nullity
goes a great deal farther than a Dijherifon.
It reaches to the Fruits of the Son's own
Labour and Induftry, which the Iftue can-
not claim by Inheritance (as by the natural
Law they may) but ftand in the Rank of
Strangers. Such a Power as this can never
pafs from the Father, who, tho' he may
difpofe of his own Eftate as he pleafes,
cannot difpofe of the Eftate of his Son, nor
fubjedl it to Limitations of any kind what-
foever, without the Son's Confent. If then
the Confent in this Cafe rauft come from
the.
( 32 )
tiie Son (and the Father once excluded, it
can come from nobody elfe) the next Que-
ftion I would afk is, By what Rule of Con-
ftrudion a Prefumptio?i will lie, that the
Son, who, in entring into Society, muft
he underflood (and is, by Puffendorj him-
felf fuppofed) as having referved to himfelf
his natural Right to contrad: Marriage, con-
sents, that in cafe he (hall find it proper to
make ufe of this Rightj a Difherifon fhall
pafs againfl his whole Iflue, and that him-
felf, with the Partner of his Bed, fhall be
expofed to the Shame and Punishment of
thofe who live together in a State of Forni-
cation ? Is there any thing more unnatural
and abfurd than this ? You may as well tell
me, that, when a Man has referved to him-
felf (as every Man muft) his natural Right
to chufe his Religion, and to worfhip God
according to his own Judgment and Con*
fcience, his Confent may neverthelefs be
prefumed to a Law which will expofe him
to Banifhment, Confifcation, or any other
Species of Perfecution, in cafe he Should
not think it reafonable to comply with the
Religion of his Country. Puffendorf Should
have remembered his own Reafoning in the
fourth Paragraph of this Chapter ; and if he
had
( 33 )
had applied it to this Point, poffibly he would
have feen his Miftake. What he fays there
is, that ££ if a new-born Infant had been fur-
<c nifhed with the ufe of Reafon, and had
<c feen that his Life could not be preferved
<£ without the Care and Government of his
<£ Parents, he would willingly have con-
££ lented to fubmit himfelf to their Autho-
lc rity; which Confent, as it may rational-
" ly be prefumed, is equivalent to a Confent
<£ in exprefs TermsAnd this is one of the
two Sources from whence he derives the pa-
rental Authority. By Parity of Reafon,
then, if a Cafe can be put in which the
Child's Confent may not rationally be pre-
fumed, he is not under Authority, in that
Point; and if this is not such a Cafe, I
know not what is. It may be fit to obferve
here, that this prefumed Confent, which Puf-
fendorf Locke, and others have laid as the
Foundation of civil Authority, is indeed a
FiLtion in Law, which fome People (and
Barbeyrac among the reft) cavil at. But to no
Purpofe; for it has Senleand Truth at bot-
torn: And the Senfe is, that nothing fiiould
be impofed as a Law but what a reafonable
Man ought to confent to; in other Words,
that reafonable Creatures fihould be governed
D by
( 34 )
by reafonable Laws. Let me add, that Gra-
tius [who is not reckoned the mojl favourable
to the popular Scheme) makes ufe of the
fame Fidlion; Lib. i. Cap. 4. § 7. numb. 2.
where having put the Queftion, An lex de non
refijlendo obliget in gravijjimo difcrimine;
anfwers that " this depends upon the Will or
<c Confent of thofe who were the first
c< Founders of Society, from whom the
<c Sovereign Authority flows; who (fays he)
if they were asked whether they
<c meant to lay this Burden, &c. I queftion
<c whether they would fay they did," &c.
De "Jure Belli & Pads.
It is fcarce needful for me to obferve to vou
¥
the great Difference that there is, between this
Cafe and that of incapacitating Minors to dif-
pofe of their Eftates. For what does the
Law here ? Why it takes the Eftate in trujl
for the Minor's ufe, who is maintained out
of it during his Minority, and to whom the
whole Emolument reverts when becomes of
Ase. Such a Power as this may pafs to the
Society from the Father, who has the abfo-
lute Difpofal of his own Eftate, and may
tranfmitit to his Son under what Limitations
he pleafes. It may pafs even from the Son9
who may well be prefumed to be contenting
to
( 35 )
to a Law made for his own Benefit. But
what does the Son confent to in this Cafe ?
Why he ties up his own Hands from fpend-
ins his Eftate before he has Difcretion to ufe
it, which he may do; but he neither bars
his Right to the Eftate, nor baflardizes his
Ifiue, which no Man in his right Senfes ever
can do, whilft there is no Default in any
Matter in which the Society has a Right to
require his Obedience.
But after all it may be afked; May not
the Confent we are feeking after be well un-
derftood as implied under that general Confent
which every Member of Society, as fuch,
muft be fuppofed to have given, to recede from
his private Right when it comes to ftand in
Competition with the publick Good ? A
Minor, (you fay) cannot be prefumed as
confenting to baftardize his Ifiue. True; but it
muft be underftood with this Exception, un-
kfs the Publick Good requires it. I find, in-
deed, this Rule in Authors, viz. that £C in a
£C Commonwealth, ail have fubmitted their
" Wills to thofe who hold the fupreme
<£ Adminiftration, fo as to have bound
<£ themfelves to do whatfoever they fhall
<• command in Things which concern the
D 2 <£ publick
( 36 )
<c PUBLICK SAFETY [r]. ButhoW will JOM
apply the Rule to this Cafe ? Obferve, that
the Right to marry is out of the Queftion.
This is a Right which the Minor cannot
[j] give up. The Queftion only concerns
the civil Incapacity, whether, in confe-
fequence of his general Allegiance to Society,
he is not to be prefumed as confenting to
oajlardize his Children if he Jhall marry?
Now to bring this to the Point, it will be ne-
ceflary to (hew what Connexion the annul-
[r] In civitate omnes fuam voluntatem fubrniferunt
voluntati imperantium, circa negotia ad falutem civitatis
facientia, ut velint facere quicquid ill! voluerint. Fuf~
fend. De Offic. Horn, et Civ. Lib. ii. cap. 7. § 2.
[ j] Becaufe it is not an alienable Right. See the En-
quiry^ p. 13, 14. to which add what Burlamaqui fays in
his Principles of Natural Law, p. 74. Engl. Edition.
«« There are Rights which may be lawfully renounced,
4C and others that cannot. — The Reafon of this Dif-
" ference is, that there are Rights which of themfelves
" have a natural Connexion with our Duties, and
are given to Man only as a Means to perform them,
cc To renounce this fort of Rights would be therefore
" renouncing our Duty, which is never allowed. But
<c with refpeft to Rights that no way concern our Du-
" ties, the Renunciation of them is lawful and only
fi a Matter of Prudence.—JTis with thefe Modifications
<c that we muft underftand the common Maxim, that
<c it is allozv able for every one to renounce his RightsP The
Application of this to the Matter in hand is obvious.
( 37 )
ling a Minor's Marriage has with thepublick
Good ; in which 1 confefs I want fome Affift-
ance. I fee plainly enough one ufe of fuch
Laws, viz. That they help to fave Eftates in
private Families. But how is the Publick
concerned with this ? What one Family lofes
another gets, who may be as ufeful Mem-
bers of Society. — But be the Point admitted,
that it is for the publick Good that Minors
(hould not be fuffered to marry without their
Parent's Confent; muft the Minor therefore be
prefumed as confenting to bajtardize his Iffue
if he does marry ? I will put a well known
Cafe, which may give us fome Light into
this Matter. *
By the Law of God (which no Law of
Society can reverfe) every Man has a Right
to worlhip God according to his own judg-
ment and Confcience; but before the Revolu-
tion the Law faid, that every Man that ab-
fented himfelf from his Parifh-Church
(hould pay Twelve-pence a Sunday. This
was thought hard upon thofe fcrupulous
Men, who could not in Confcience conform to
the eftablifhed Worfhip; and therefore it
was removed by the A£t of Toleration ; and
fhould the Revival of fuch a Law, or any
Thing like it, be attempted in thefe Times,
D 3 no
( 38 )
no doubt it would be cenfured as an unreafo-
nable Law. But furely the Publick is at leaft
as much concerned, that, to prevent thofe
Mifchiefs which may arife to the State from
a Di verify of Opinions in Religion, God
fhould be publickly worfhiped in one uni-
form Manner; as to prevent a Gentleman's
Son from marrying his Father's Maid, or
bis Daughter from running away with his
Foot-man ; and if in Virtue of h is A lie-
giance to Society a Separatift may be prefumed
as confenting to fuch a Payment, there will be
no Pretence to complain of Hardfhip. How
comes it to pafs then, that a Separatift fhall
not be prefumed as confenting to pay Fifty
Shillings a Year for the fake of Publick Good,
and that a Minor fhall be prefumed as con-
fenting to bajlardize his Iffue for the Sake of
the Publick Good ? This (hews (and it is all
I mean to (hew) that according to the com-
mon Senfe of Mankind, the Rule of receding
from private Right for the Sake of the Pub-
lick Good, (how generally foever laid down
by Writers of Politicks) has its proper Limita-
tions fomewhere. Wher# to fix them I know
notj and therefore I (hall leave it to Legis-
lators, who fhould be prefumed befit to
know how far they may go, and when it will
be
( 39 )
be fit to flop. "Extraordinary Cafes may hap-
pen where a Man may be bound to hazard
every thing for the Publick Good; but every
Man will fee that ordinarily there mujl be
fome ejfential Points of private Right, with
which it will be abfurd to fuppofe that the
Publick Good fhould interfereotherwife
Government will lofe its very End. Whe-
ther the Right of Marriage, with its civil
Eflfedls, be not one of thefe eflential Points, is
aQueftion very proper to be confidered.
Proposition II.
No Marriage can claim the Protection of the
State> unlefs the Contract be made accord-
ing to the publick prefcribed Form.
BEFORE any Society can yield its Pro-
tedtion to a Marriage Contract, it is ne-
ceffary that the Society fhould know that fuch
a Contract is made. And becaufe every
Form of Words which Men may contrive for
themfelves may not have the Force of a
Marriage Contradt, therefore every Society
has a Right to prefcribe its own Form. It is
further neceffary, that when the Contradfis
made, it fhould be notified in fuch a Manner
as the Law fhall prefcribe; becaufe if every
D 4 Man
« 1
( 4° )
Man was left to his Liberty in thefe Points,
and the Society fhould be obliged to treat all
Perfons as married, who fay or pretend that
they are married \ the State might yield its
Protection to thofe who cohabit without
Marriage \ which is by all means to be avoid-
ed in every well-governed Commonwealth.
When the Form of contracting Marriage,
and the Manner of promulging it, is once let-
tied in any Commonwealth, every Member
of Society mud be prefumed as having con-
fented, that, unlefs he marries according to
fuch Form, and the Marriage be publickly
notified in the Manner that the Law pre-
fcribes, if he fhall cohabit with any Wo-
man as his Wife, he renounces his Right to
be treated as a married Man; otherwife the
appointing a Publick Form, and the Man-
ner in which a Marriage fhould be promulged,
will be of no Ufe. And the Prefumption is
reafonabie. For a Man may reafonably be
prefumed as confenting to lay himfelf and
his Children under any Inconveniences or In-
capacities, to tie up his Hands from doing
unlawful Things. Upon this Principle all
penal Laws are grounded ; and there is no-
thing new in it in refpeCt of the fpecial
Matter that is now before us. For by the
i Old
( 4« )
Old Laws does not every Man who unlaw-
fully cohabits with a Woman bajlardize his
Iffue ? But it fhould be obferved, that this
Argument fuppofes, that the legal Form of
contracting Marriage lies open to the Ufe of
all who have a Right to marry. For he that
ftipulates to ufe a Form, mufthe underftood
as ftipulating not to be hindered in the Ufe
of that Form $ and fhould the State fay,
Tou Jhall marry by this Form, and yet on
Pain of a Nullity deny the Ufe of fuch
Form it would by neceffary Conftru&ion
(fo far as Law$ can go) be a Prohibition of
Marriage. For the State cannot by any
flronger Act forbid a Marriage than by taking
from it all civil Exijlence. Nor can it in any
other Senfe annul a Marriage. For though
it hath been faid that the Law may declare
what is or fliall be Marriage 3 this is true in
no other Senfe than this, that the Law may
declare what Contradl it will prohibit3 what
Contracts it will fupport, as Marriages3 for
Marriage hath a fixed, determinate Nature of
its own, which no Laws in the World can al~
ter. Hear Bifhop [t] Fleetwood5 who ha-
ving obferved that there is fomething in
9
[f] Oner, in Folio, p. 672, 673. See alfo the En-
Marriage
( 42 )
Marriage peculiar to each Country, adds —
" But there isfomething common to them all \
<c and that in which they all unite, muft
€t needs be that which makes the Marriage
" Contract valid and obliging. And what is
" that but that a Male and Female (hould be
tf< at Age to confent, and at Liberty to confent,
" and fhould actually confent to give to each
cc other the Ufeand Dominion of each others
c< Body, exclufive to all the World befides, fo
long as they both fhall live ? This is pro-
<c perly the Marriage Contract, and
<£ common to all Nations and Religions ; and
<c all beyond this is Matter of Ceremony,
Ci Decency, and Prudence, and ordered by
Ki the Legiflative Powers of different Coun-
€t tries as they fee convenient," &c.
Here then a Queftion arifes. Is it lawful
for a Sovereign Prince to forbid his Subjects
to marry, when no Law of God intervenes to
hinder ? And let Pujfendorf fpeak to this
Point, who gives this general Anfwer, that [u]
[u] Nec minus id liquidum, non injuftarn mcdo, fed
ct ftolidam, fore legem, fi quis omnibus civibus matri-
monio velit interdicere, uti et fi quis v. g. primogenitis
duntaxat matrimonium vellet permittere, deinceps geni-
tis omnibus promifcue coelibatum indicere. Nam ut
<c it
\
( 43 )
cc it would be both unjuft and foolifh to
<c make a Law forbidding all Subje&s to
" marry 5 as likewife to make a Law, by
£C which only the firjl-horn [in every Family]
££ fhould be permitted to marry, and the reft
££ tied down to a State of Celibacy." I fup-
pofe that all the World will confent to this
Determination; but the Reafon he gives for it
is well worth Attention. It is, becaufe t£ it
<£ cannot be that fuch a Number of Men
<c fhould be qualified to live chastly in a
££ State of Celibacy." Pray obferve here
that the Author makes no reckoning of the
Publick Good, though the very Paftage fug-
gefts a Cafe, in which it "might be for the
Publick Good that Marriage fhould be for-
bidden for fome Time, viz. if <£ the Nation
<£ fhould be overftocked with Inhabitants;"
in which Cafe he alike condemns t\iQ - Prohi-
bit ion of Marriage — the expofing Infants
(as was the manner of the Greeks) and •—.
procuring Abortion, which Ariflotle com-
omnes ifti per naturam Tint idonei fuflinendo cafto coe-
jibatui fieri non poteft. Neque vero multomollius id foret
remedium reprimendae civium exuberanti nimis multi-
tudini, quam dirifTimum quondam inflitutum Greeds
valde familiare, prolem recens natam exponendi; aut,
quod Arijicteles fuadet, abortus procurandi. De Jur.
Gent. Lib. vi. Cap. I. §8.
L • mends.
(44)
mends. No doubt every reafonable Man will
think the two laft of thefe Methods to be in-
tolerable. But why fhould not the Ufe of
the Marriage-bed befufpended for fome Time
in fuch a Cafe as this ? He tells you ; it can-
not be that fo many fhould have the Gift of
Coh 'nency. A very fufficient Reafon, no
doubt ; for it is faying, in Effefl, that it is
againft the Law of God ; and he fuppofes (as
I reckon) that the Publick Good can never
be hurt by following the Law of God. But
with the Author's Leave, if this is a good
Reafon to fhew that the Civil Authority can-
not forbid all the Subjects to marry, or any
confiderable Part of them; it is juft as good
to prove that it cannot forbid any one Perfon
to marry; for who can tell who has or who
has not the Gift of Continency ? Upon what
Principle then are Minors prohibited ? Will
he fay they cannot want the Gift of Conti-
nency ? How thefe things are to be reconciled
I cannot tell; and I fo much the more won-
der that the Author did not fee this Inconfift-
ency, when I find him, but a Page before he
wrote thishard Law againft Minors, apply-
ing this very Argument to the parental Au-
thority, and faying, that " it would be a
<c wicked Thing if a Father fhould force his
« Child
( 45 )
tf£ Child to a way of Life, unfupportable to
c< human Nature, as Celibacy is without the
" Gift of Continency pzfl]." I eafily grant,
that what the Author had in his Mind in this
Place was the common Cafe of forcing Chil-
dren into Monafteries. But the Affinity there
is between the two Cafes ffiould have made
him paufe at leait, before he laid down fo
peremptory a Rule, unfupported (as I have
(hewn) by any one Reafon in the World.
But one Thins; I ffiould take Notice of, in
juftice both to him and to the Subjed:,
which is the Caution he gives at the clofe of
the Argument, which ffiews that he him-
felf felt the Severity of his own Law.
Quanquam reffie cordatiores monent, Paren-
tes, etiam ubi talis Potefas ipfs indulgetur,
circa ejufdem Exercitium circumfpedlos nec ri-
gidos nimis efe debere; i. e. " prudent Men
" well advife, that where the Laws indulge
" fuch a Power to Parents, they ffiould be very
<c circumfpe£t and moderate in the Ufeof it.''
My Argument is at an End; and I ffiall
now leave it to the Friends of Liberty to
[it;] Nefarium eft invitos Liberos compellere ad
genus vitae — communi hominum incloli intolerabile ;
uti eft ccelibatus citra donum conlinentia. Ibid. Cap. ii.
§ r3«
confider,
( 46 )
confider, whether the annulling Claufe as to
Minors will ftand with the Principles of Li-
berty. I am very Lorry that there is Room to
afk fuch a Queftion; becaufe other wife I fhould
have preferred the annulling Claufe to any other
Method, as it would (I conceive) have anfwer-
ed the full End and Purpofe of them all. It is
not for me to propofe Amendments of the
Law. This is the Work of Authority, to
which I fubmit. And therefore leaving the
Law as I find it (which will bell; become me)
I {hall only offer a Word or two of Advice to
thofe who are principally concerned in it.
As to Parents; they fhould be advifed,
to deal by their Children as they would have
thought it reafonable to have dealt by them,
if this Law had never been made. The Law
hath given them great Power; but the Law
does not oblige them to make Ufe of it; and
there are fome Laws of which it is unjujito
take the legal Advantages. To give you one
for an Example. The Law fays, that if a
Debt is not demanded within a certain Time,
the Creditor (hall not recover. Would an
honeft Man make Ufe of this Law, to ex-
cufe himfelf from paying a juft Debt? I
think not: And I as little think that an ho-
nefi: Parent will by the Aid of this new Adt
obllrudt
( 47 ) ,
obftrud: the reafonable Defires of his Child in
the Point of Marriage, which would be at
leafl as great an Ad of lnjuftice, as to refufe
the Payment of Money bona fide lent ; or
the Price of Goods fold and delivered.
Confider, Gentlemen, the Power which
God and Nature hath put into your Hands;
and which if you uie properly, you will
find no great Want of the Aid of Laws. Na-
ture hath placed your Children under your In-
fpedion and Care 5 always within the Reach
of your Advice and Authority; which
fhould be employed in giving them a fober
and virtuous Education, fuitable to their
Rank and Quiality, which will naturally dif-
pole them to fet a iuit Value upon them-
ielves, and to think themfelves difgraced
when Offers of Marriage are made to them by
Perfons of inferior Condition. Add to this,
that you are Mailers of the Eflate and For-
tunes of your Families, which will always
be a great Check upon your Children, ordi-
narily fufficient to keep them back, when
they begin to find their Inclinations running
contrary to your judgments. Experience
fhews this. For look abroad into the World
and what will you fee? Why (ordinarily) the
Poor marrying among the Poor, the middle
4 Rank
( ) '
Rank among the middle Rank, and the Rich
and the Noble among the Rich and the Noble,
The World naturally runs this way without
the help of Laws. The lower Claffes of Men
have it not in their Power to marry above their
Rank, or very rarely. The Rich and the Great
have as rarely fo little Pride as to permit them
to marry below theirs—Tut fometimes it hap-
pens otherwife ; and you would have a Law
to prevent it. Well; you have it; and what
will you do with it? The Law adds nothing
but Force ; Force is abhorrent to human Na-
ture ; and may draw upon you and your
Children Mifchiefs which you will fureiy
repent, and for which you will find no Re-
medy. For Mifchief (give me leave to fay)
there may be, unlefs you could find a Nullity,
which, like a magic Wand, would make
every thing it touches vanifh and difappear,
as if it had never been. I am afraid that the
general Conftru&ion upon this Adt will be,
that if a young Gentleman fhould marry a
Woman againft his Father's or Guardian's
Confent, he may marry another with as little
Scruple, as if he had only gone to Bed to a
common Proftitute. But this will be a dan-
gerous Miftake. For if the Law cannot
reach the Vinculum Matrimonii as it lies in
Confcience,
i
t
tie
as
lis
plcaf:
\
X
( 49 )
Confcience, but only regulates it's Civil Ef-
feds (which, I think, is a fettled [at] Point)
it is clear that the only Thing a confcientious
Parent will have to do in fuch a Cafe, is to get
the Couple married in thz legal Form as fad
as he can. But to what ufe then ferves the
Law? Therefore when the Matter once
comes to this, that Children are headdrone
1 o
and lelf-willed, and that neither Advice, nor
Perfuafion, nor Authority will hold them ;
I fee no Help but they mud be left to them-
felves. In which Cafe you mud underdand
the great and Sovereign Difpofer of all Things
as taking the Matter out of your Hands into
his own, who hath not made this World to
pleafe every Body, but hath left fome Things
[*] " Matrimony (fays Bifhop Stillingfleet) being a
<s Contract of a Civil and Publick Nature, it is very
juft and fitting that the Civil Society and the Chrif-
Cc tian Church fhould appoint Rules and Orders for the
cc decent Performance of it, and may appoint Penal-
" ties to the Breakers of thofe Rules ; fo far as to ille-
t: gitimate the Children born of fuch Marriages, which
" is nulling the Contradt as to the Civil Ejfett of it.
But I do not fee how either Church or State can
ct null the Contract as to Conscience, fo as to
" make it lawful for fuch Perfons to marry others."
itlijcell, Difcourf. p. 73.
E fas
( 5° )
(as it is fit hefhould) to humble the Pride of
Man, and to exercife his Patience.
There would be no Difficulty in this Mat-
ter, if EJlates were put out of the Queftion.
Whilft Nature continued in her firfl Simpli-
city, and all maintained themfelves by their
own Labour, there could be no other Rule
than this, That every Man fhould chufe his
own Wife and every Woman her own Huf-
band, as beft pleafed them. Parents were
at hand to advife and affift their Children in
this, as in all other Matters, but they could
compel nothing. When Families began to
gather themfelves into larger Societies, and
Property grew to be very unequally divided,
Avarice began to interpofe and to difturb the
Ways of Providence; and many chofe Wives,
not as the conjugal AffeCtion dire&ed, but
with a fingle View to advance their Fortunes.
This was a manifeft Deviation from the Ori-
ginal Inftitution of Marriage, which has
been, and is to this Day, one of the mod
fruitful Sources of Unhappinefs in the mar-
ried State. I deny not that Inequality of
Fortunes fuggefts a different Rule of Pru-
dence in contracting Marriage,; which de-
ferves the Attention both of Parents and
Children.
( 51 )
Children. Go then as far as Prudence will
direCt; and there flop. Your Children are
reafonable Creatures; and you are not to tie
them up as you do your Cattle.
What I have faid to Parents will more
ftrongly enforce itfelf upon Guardians, who
have but a borrowed Right, which therefore
they ought to ufe more tenderly than if it
were their own. But perhaps few will now
be willing to accept fuch a Truft, in the
Execution of which it may be fo difficult in
many Cafes for a Perfon to fatisfy his own
Confcience, and the Expectations of thofe
with whom he is concerned. To manage
an Eftate for the Benefit of Minors, and to
take Care of their Education, are Things in
which a Man may jujlify himfelf, and
which an honeft Man might be willing to un-
dertake to ferve a Relation or a Friend.
And yet I have obferved of late Years, that
fcarce any Body cares to take fuch a Charge
upon himfelf, but under the Direction of the
Court of Chancery. How much more diffi-
cult mufl be fuch a Truft now, when in a
Matter of mere Prudence, a Perfon may be
called upon to fit as Judge to determine the
Fate of a whole Family? That bad Men
E 2 may
J**#*
( 52 )
may find their Account in fuch a Trull is
obvious enough-, but good ones can get no-
thing but ill Will. It is true the Minor has
an Appeal to Chancery; and it may therefore
be prefumed that no Guardian will refufe his
Confent to a Match, unlefs there be that Dif-
parity in Point of [y] Fortune, as will yield
a good Prefumption that the Court will con-
firm his Judgment. Yet on the other hand
it may be fuppofed, that the Minor will not
make the Appeal without fome reafonable
Plea, though there be not that Equality of
Fortune which a ftiff Guardian may require.
So that the fhorteft and the fa fed: Way will be,
as Chancery challenges the lajl Refort, to let it
have the Jirft too, where Children will be in
fafe Hands, and the Judgment lefs liable to
Envy.
[y] The Words of the A& are a proper Marriage.
In a printed Bill that I have feen it ftandsproper and ad-
vantageous, which feems to have Refpeft to For-
tunes. There is certainly another Exception againft the
Propriety of a Marriage which a wife and a good Man
would lay more Strefs upon, than a Defe£b in Point of
Fortunes j and that is a bad moral Char abler. But
whether a Court of Chancery would attend to fuch an
Exception, or whether it may be fafe to offer it, the
Learned in the Law muft determine.
To
( 53 )
To Minors, as they have no Choice left,
my Advice will be fhort; let them fhew
Reverence to their Parents and to the Law.
The Avenues to Marriage by the legal Form
are fo carefully guarded by this Ad, that I
fcarce fee a Poffibility of their coming at
it, unlefs their Parents or their Guardians
are confenting ; but (hould it be poffible, the
Ruine that follows is certain and infallible.
\
The Man will have no Claim to one Shilling
of the Woman's Fortune ; nor the Woman to
one Shilling of the Man's, who may deferther,
whenever hepleafes, as a Strumpet, and turn
her and her Baftard-children (for fuch they
will be deemed in Law) out to the wide World.
In vain will they exped Help from their Pa-
rents, who cannot, by any After-confenty
make that Ad: good which the Law hath
annulled. As the Law flood before, when
Parents were reconciled to a ftolen Match, all
was well. The Man had his Wife, and the
Woman had her Hufband ; and many happy
Marriages have arifen from fuch unfavourable
Beginnings. I fhould not have thought it a
Fault, if this Law had allowed (to Parents at
leaft) the Liberty of an after Reflexion, for I
could never enter into the Sentiments of thofe
i who
( 54 )
who fay, that, of all Perfons, the Parents are
the moft unfit to be trufted in fuch Cafes.
Thefe Gentlemen feem to me to miftake the
Matter. They treat the Marriage of a Child
without the Parent's Confent, as if it were an
Offence againft the State, and not (as it really
is) an Offence againft a private Family only.
If a Son be charged with Felony or Treafon, I
fhould think his Father the moft unfit Perfon
in the World to fit as Judge over him. His
natural Affedtion might obftrudt Juftice. But
if the Son's Offence be only this, that he has
difgraced his Father by marrying beneath
his Fortune and Quality, and He to whom
the Offence is given is willing to overlook it,
and be reconciled to him; what Mortal upon
Earth befides can have any thing to do with
it ?
But thefe Reflexions come too late. It is
otherwife ordered by that Authority, to which
it is your Duty to fubmit; and therefore
never fuffer yourfelves to entertain a Thought
of difpofing yourfelves in Marriage, without
the Leave of thofe under whofe Jurifdidtion
the Law hath placed you. The Law has
fecured your Eftates\ it is your Bufinefs to
take Care of your Virtues \ and be very
cautious,
C 55 )
cautious, that when your Parents have kept
you from making bad Bargains till you are
paft One and Twenty, you do not make
worfe after you are Thirty.
FINIS.
rr
VINDICATION
O F
The Power of States
T O
Prohibit ClandestineMarriages
Under the Pain of Abfolute Nullity ;
Particularly the Marriages of Minors, made with-
out the Confent of their Parents or Guardians:
In ANSWER to
The Rev. Dr. Stebbing's Differtation on the Power
of States to deny Civil Protection to the Marriages
of Minors, etc.
WITH
occasional remarks
O N
An Enquiry into the Force and Operation of the
annulling Claufes in a late Aft for the better pre-
venting of Clandefline Marriages, with RefpeCt to
Confcience.
In a LETTER to the DOCTOR.
By JAMES T U N S T A L L, D. D.
Re£tor of Great Charte in Kent.
To come at the Bottom of this Queflion, <we muft confider how
the Right of Marriage fands upon the Foot of the natural Laiv,
antecedently to Society ; and then enquire what Alteration the
Intervention of Society will make in the Cafe. Enquiry, etc. p. 4.
LONDON,
Printed for J. and J. Rivington, in St. PauFs Church-Yard.
-
M DCC LV.
[Price One Shilling.]
*r
■-
\
'
mx va
w •• W
V
■
. . • - ■
,
I
7
w ^
A
a
VINDICATION
o f
TheP ower of States, etc.
S I R,
IT AKE the Liberty to fend you a few
Thoughts, which occurred to me upon
reading over your Difertation on the Power
of States to deny Civil Protection to the Mar-
riages of Minors^ made without the Confent oj
their Parents or Guardians*; the profeffed
Defign of which Dijfertation is to (hew, that
the Legiflature hath exercifed an unwarrant-
able Power, a Power to which no Civil Com-
munity can be entitled, in ena&ing, in the
late Marriage-Adf, that all fuch Marriages
Jhall be abfoluiely null and void to all Intents
and Purpofes whatfoever*
* Lend. 1755*
B What
( 2 )
What I have to fay upon this Subject may
be comprized under thefe two .Heads of In-
quiry, viz.
Firfl, Concerning the Nature and Rights
of Marriage j which of thofe Rights are creat-
ed by the Law of the Civil State; and what
the Power of the State is to annul Marriage.
Secondly, Concerning the Power of the
State to annul the Marriages of Minors, made
without the Confent of their Parents or Guar-
dians.
SECT. I.
Concerning the Nature and Rights of Marriage \
which of "thofe Rights are created by the Law
of the Civil State; and what the Power oj
the State is to annul Marriage.
RRIA G E, you fay has a natural
Exifence of its own, antecedent to, and
abfiradled from all the Laws of Civil Society.
—Marriage there was before Civil Societies be-
gan; and Marriage there would be again, if
all Civil Societies in the World fhould be de-
firoyed. Here you are undoubtedly fpeaking
* Dijf. p. i.
4
of
(3)
of Marriage, as that Inftitution either aClually
did fubfift, or, at leaft, might have fubfifted
upon the Principles of the Law of Nature
only. For to no other Species of Marriage
can the Characters belong, that, in Force of
any univerfal Law*, it has a natural Exiji-
ence of its own, antecedent to all the Laws of
Civil Society ; and that it was before Civil So-
ciety began.
But when you, immediately afterwards,
come to declare the Rights or Obligations of
Marriage, you then confider Marriage in a
quite different Light; not as this Inflitution
would fubfifl upon the Principles of Nature,
but as it fubfifts upon the Principles of the
Chriftian Revelation, or as it is appointed by
the Laws of Civil Societies. The Rights, vou
O ' ^
fay -f, which naturally a rife from the
Marriage- Contract, are principally thefe, viz.
1 he Parties contracting are bound to live to-
get her in conjugal Love and Fidelity, during
their joint Lives ; the Wife may challenge
Maintenance and Protection from the Hufband -9
the Iffue may challenge Maintenance from bothy
* Concerning the State of Primaeval Marriage, fee
Grotius De "Jure Belli, etc. ii. 5. 9. 1, 2, 3, etc.
t Diff. p. 2.
B 2
( 4 )
till they are able to maintain themfelves; and
they are entitled to the Subjlance of the Parents,
when deady againf all Strangers, except fo far
forth as they may ft and excluded by fome ACt of
the Parents themfelves.*—Now the firft of thefe
Rights arifing from the Marriage- Contract,
that the Parties contracting are bound to live
together in conjugal Love and Fidelity, during
their joint Lives; is a Right of the Inflitution
of Marriage, not as it fubfifts upon the Prin-
ciples of the natural Law, but as it is im-
proved and enjoined by the Law of the Chri-
flian Revelation; the only univerfal Law we
know of, whether natural or inftituted, which
hath fo entirely prohibited Polygamy, and
regulated Divorce, as to render the Marriage-
Contract an Obligation of the Parties to a
mutual and perpetual Fidelity. The fecond
of the Rights above enumerated, the Wife's
Claim of Maintenance and Protection from the
Hufbandy beyond the Limits of the natural
Marriage hereafter defcribed, is the Right of
Marriage as it is differently ordered or allowed
by the Laws of different Civil Societies. The
laft of thofe Rights, the Claim in the Iffue of
neceffary Maintenance from their Parents, and
the Right to fucceed to their Subfiance, except
Jo
( 5 )
fo far forth as they may jland excluded by the
Parents themfelves $ thefe Rights, if confidered
abftraftedly from the Appointments of Civil
Communities, which differently regulate Sue-
ceffions, in Support of Civil or Legal Mar-
riage, and from other Confiderations of general
Utility ; are in Reality Rights not naturally
arifmgfrom the Marriage-Contrail. They are
Rights naturally arifing to the Iffue from
their Parents as fuch, not as they are Pa-
rents joined together in a State of Marriage.
Their Claim of neceffary Maintenance arifes
from the Principle of natural Law, which
exadts from Parents the Support of that Being,
which they themfelves have given * ; and the
Claim of Succeffion ab intejlato to the Re-
mainder of the Parents Subftance, if it is not
intirely the Creation of the Law of the Civil
State -j-, muft naturally proceed only upon the
reafonable Preemptions of the Will of the
* Qui dat formam, dat quae ad fcrmam funt necefiaria ;
dictum eft Ariftotelis: quare qui caufa eft ut homo exiftat,
is, quantum in fe eft, et quantum necefTe eft, profpicere ei
debet de his, quae ad vitam humanam, id eft, naturaleni
ac focialem, nam ad earn natus eft homo, funt neceftaria.
Grot. De Jur. Belli etc. ii. 7. 4. 1, 2.
f See this Point moft ingenioully argued in an excellent
Treatife, entitled, Some Confiderations on the Law of For-
ffiture for High-Treafon, etc. pp. 11—21. 3d Edit.
Parents
( 6 ) .
Parents confidering their furviving Reprefen-
tatives as a Sort of Propagation of their own
Perfons*. Nature therefore, in the Matter of
Succefiions, difcerns not the Differences of
legitimate and illegitimate, Male and Female
Iffue as is obfervable in the Ufe of Succefiions
to thofe Kingdoms, which have been poflefled
in Patrimonio, where Nature and the Rights
of Nature and Nations only could take Place
Some of thefe Obfervatiqns may be ufefu!
hereafter to a more diftindt Apprehenfion of
the Nature and Effedts of a Nullity in Law
of the Marriage-Contrail. I am now con-
fidering, as diftinitly as may be needful to our
prefent Inquiry, the three feveral Species, or,
* Hinc fit, ut ctiam, citra auxilium jegis civilis, prima
bonorum fucceflio libei is deferatur; quia creduntur pa-
rentes illis, ut corporis fui partibus, non tantuni de necef-
fariis, fed et de his, quae ad vitam fuavius honefliufque
tranfigendam pertinent, quam ubcrrime vcluiffe profpe-
cfum, ab eo rnaxime tempore, quo ipfi rebus fuis frui non
poflent. Grot. ib. ii. 7, 5. 2.
f Grotius therefore, fpeaking of Marriage as an Inftitu-
tion provided to afcertain the Genuinenefs of the Off-
fpring, adds—Et, fi alio quovis modo conffet, quis fuerit
pater, aut pater id pro explorato habuerif, naturaliter is
partus, non minus quam alius quivis fuccedct. Jb. 8. 1.
v. et § 12, 16.
I may
1
Situ
hf
Mar
Chri
Law
Law
Confoc
Oblig
aferta
.
seitier/;
in either
lit, or
U 1
1 filled in
'Sal#
■ k p
fnap
dfejfiiaff
j'U
I
Ij.f
* tie Mi
djyeic
lii 1
® one o{
4g,
. * "u», fit
4i"*
• ( 7 )
I may call them, Degrees of the Marriage-In-
ftitution, in Reference to the three feveral
Laws, which.have properly Concern in this
Matter; the Law of Nature ; the Law of the
Chriftian Revelation, ufuallv called the Divine
1 J
Law and the Law of Civil Society. By the
Law of Nature, Marriage is a Contract of
Confociation between the Sexes, extending the
Obligation of Fidelity fo far as is neceflary to
afcertain the Genuinenefs of the common Off-
fpring*. Here the Obligation of Fidelity is
neither mutual in the Parties y, nor perpetual
in either Party. By the Chriftian Law Mar-
riage, or the Marriage-Contract, is well de-
fined in Bifhop Fleetwood's Words \ A Contract
* Ratio aliqua re peri end a fait, qua probabiliter con-
ftaret, quis eftet partus cujufque pater. Ea ratio eft con-
jugium fumptum in terminis naturalibus, id eft, confo-
ciatio, qua femina fub maris cuftodia conftituitur. Ib. ii.
7. 8. 1.
f What is it—which conftitutes the Marriage-Contrail ?
I anfwer (with Grotius and others) it is that Faith by
which the Man and Woman bind themfelves to each other
to live together as Man and Wife. Enquiry into the
Force and Operation cf the annulling Claujes9 etc. p. 5*
Now, in one of the two Paftages referred to, Grotius fays,
AccejJit fides, qua fc femina mari ob/iringit. Ib. ii. 5. 8. 2.
In the other, Conjugium verirn ejje poiuitjfi femina—fidem
marito dedijjei. Ib. 15. 2.
(2)
or Confent of a Male and Female to give to each
other the Ufe and Domi?2ion of each other s
Body, exclufive to all the Wor Id bejides, jo lo?2g
as they both Jhall live But what is fubjoined
by that great Prelate, that this is properly the
Marriage-Contraff, and common to all
Nations and Religions 5 is an Error very
eafily conceived from the Attention's being
wholly fixed on Chriftian Ideas, from which
you might have abftra&ed with lefs Difficulty,
when you were profefledly confidering Mar-
riage, as having a fixed, determinate Nature
of its own, which no Laws in the World can
alter — It is indeed certain, that the Civil
Laws of a Community of Chriflians cannot alter
this fixed, determinate Nature of a Chrifiian
-Marriage - Contradl j but yet they may and
mufi add to it, as you both fuppofe, feveral
Matters of Ceremony, Decency, and Prudence,
as necefary to be obferved in every Contraft
of Marriage, which jhall be acknowledged, as
Juch, in any particular Civil Community oj
Chrifiian Men. In fuch Cafe Marriage, befides
its natural and Chriftian, will receive its third
* Fleetwood Op. in Fol. pp. 67 2, 3. as eited Dijfert. pp;
41, 2.
+ e>ijj~.p. 41.
... Degree
( 9 )
Degree of Exiftence, its diftind Civil Exift-
ence; when it is folemnized under fuch Qua-
lifications, and according to fuch a Form, as
the public Wifdom has thought fit to make
effential to Marriage in the Community over
which it prefides.
And as there is a certain Order of Afcent
in thefe feveral Species, or Degrees of Per-
fedion, in the Marriage-Contrad; fo is there
fuch Agreement and Confiftency among them,
that a Marriage according to the Chriftian
Law pre-fuppofes the Qualifications of the
contrading Parties, neceffary to their marrying
according to the Law of Nature; and a Mar-
riage according to the Civil Law of a Com-
munity of Chriftian Men pre-fuppofes the
Conditions of the contrading Parties, neceffary
to their marrying according to the Law of God.
The Qualifications of the contrading Parties,
neceffary to their marrying according to the
Law of Nature, are a competent Share of
Underftanding and a Liberty of Will, which
are effentially required to every moral or obli-
gatory Ad whatfoever; and moreover the
moral Faculty *, or rightful Power of dif-
* The Dodfor, againft the Ufe of Grotius, whom he
tranflates, and of all the moral Writers, when they fpeak
C pofing
( 10 )
poling themfelvcs, which is effentially required
to their contracting the particular Obligation
of Marriage. The Conditions of the contract-
ing Parties, neceffary to their marrying ac-
cording to the Law of God, are that they be
Jingle Perfons, and not within the prohibited
Degrees j that is, that they retain the moral
Faculty of difpofing themfelves, which the
D ivine Law admits 5 and that they ufe it ac-
cording to the Rule, which the Divine Law
prefcribes.—On the other Hand, it is of great
Importance to be obferved, that, fhould the
Contraft of Marriage, which is required by
the Law of Nature only, be made by a Chri-
itian, without the two Requiiites of Marriage
appointed by the Law of God 5 his Marriage
of The mora! Faculty^ by Way of Eminence, makes moralis
facultas to iignify, firft, what the fame Grotius calls the
vis cleftrixy or Faculty of Choice which conftitutes a free
Agent \ and, afterwards, to iignify the Maturity of Un-
dot/landing, which conftitutes an intelligent Agent. Dijf.
p. 8, 9, ic. But moralis facultas fignifies neither; but
the rightful Power of doing a moral Action, or of con-
fractins; a moral Obligation : whereas the other Faculties
c o
are no more than a hure Capacity of doing thefe Things ;
and thus the Doctor himfelf obferves, that Maturity of
XJnderJlanding corf i tut es the moral Faculty \ for without
this a Perfon is capable of no nor a I Obligation, p. 10.
muft
( 11 )
muft needs be null and void in Chriftian Efti-
mation, and to all the Purpofes of Religious
Society. In like Manner, (hould the Contrad
of Marriage, which is required by the Divine
Law only, be made by a Member of a Civil
Community of Chriftian Men, without the
Requifites of Marriage appointed by the Law
of that Community; his Marriage muft needs
be null and void in Civil Eftimation, and to
all the Purpofes of Civil Society.
Little more need be faid on this Head,
fince, whatever you may judge of the Pre-
miffes, you have already admitted of, nay,
contended for the Conclufion; namely, the
Power of the State to make Marriages null
in Law, or to deny to them Civil Protection.
Upon this Principle you could affert the Rea-
fonablenefs and Expediency of the late Mar-
riage-Ad, with Regard to the Claufes annul-
ling MarriagesJolemnized in illegal Places, and
without Banns or Licences *. Indeed you very
commendably prove the Principle, as we fhall
fee hereafter, from the Neceflity the State is
under of appointing^ certain Solemnities and
Circumflances as necejfary to a Marriage good
* D'ljf. Prcf, p. ii.
in
( J2 )
in Law. Taking therefore for granted the
Neceffity, and confequently the rightful Power
of the State to declare what is or Jhall be Legal
Marriage from what has been laid down, and
what is equally admitted by us both, I would
briefly account for and juftify thofe feveral
Confequences, which you have well enume-r
rated, as necefarily following from a Nullity
of Marriage in Law. The Confequences are;
The State will 720t enforce Cohabitation of the
Parties, but punifio it\ and the Parties, for
ought that the Law will hinder, may marry
again \—the Wife canfue for no Maintenance ;
-—the Law will not oblige the Parents to pro-
vide for the Children, any further than is ne-
ceffary to prevent their being chargeable to the
Public;—nor Jhall the Children be entitled to
anyEf ate as by Inheritance fromfuch Parents *.
Now, in admitting all thefe Confequences, or
EfFedts of a Marriage declared 72ull and void
in Lawy what does the State but what fhe has
the Power, or unqueftionable Right to do ?
Does fhe take away or deftroy any Rights be-
longing to Marriage, as that Inftitution has
a fixed, deter7ninate Nature of its own ; an
puxifience antecedent to} and abfiraffed from
'
*D'JF- pp 3- „
( *3 )
all the Laws of Civil Society ? That this is not
the Cafe has already appeared. Even the Right
of Inheritance, or Succeffion ab intejlato to
the Parent's Eft ate, which is either the free
Contribution of the Law of the State, or, at
leaft, ftridtly fpeaking, is no natural Right of
Marriage; yet this very Right is ftill left to
proceed upon the probable Conjefture or Pre-
fumption concerning the Parent's Will, which,
in the State of Civil Society, where no contrary
Signification is given by the Parent, is reafon-
ably prefumedto have been no other than what
the ftanding Law of the Public has appointed
touching Succefiions*. In the next Place, as
the State does not deprive the Marriage, which
is antecedent to Civil Laws, of any of its in-
herent Rights; but only confers certain Rights
upon the Marriage, to which, on Confidera-
tions of Policy both neceflary and juft, (he has
*
* Illud—tenendum eft, quoties voluntatis exprefiiora indi-
cia nulla funt, predi quemque id de fua fucceftione ftatuiile,
quod lex aut mos habet populi, non tantum ex vi imperii^
fed ex conjeftura. Grot. Dejur. Bell. &c. ii. 7. 11. 1. A
Dilherifon reaches to the Fruits of the Son's own Labour
and Induftry, which the I flue cannot claim by Inheritance, a-,
by the natural Law they may. DiJf. p. 31. Now the
Iffiie cannot xlatm9 by the Force of the natural Law itfelf,
upder the neceflary Circumjlancei of Civil Society.
thought
/ » J \
V J4 )
thought fit to give the Sandlion of a legal
Eftablifhment; fo are the feveral Confequences
of a Nullity in Law the necefifary Appendage
of the legal Eftablifhment of Marriage. Hence
the Cohabitation of the Parties, in confequence
of a Marriage difallowed by the State, may be
punifkedas a continued Difobedience to the Law
of the State ; nor is the State obliged to enforce
the Divine Law of Marriage, as it is a Contract
of mutual and perpetual Fidelity and Affift-
ance, further than is conducive to her Civil
Interefls, much lefs to her Prejudice *; as
neither is Hie obliged to enforce the natural
Law of Parents providing for their Children;
any further than fhe has Intereft in the Pre-
fervation of every Individual, and any further
than is necejjary to prevent his being chargeable
to the Public.
Let us now fee whether we can advance
flill a Step further. I faid, you have well
maintained the Power of the State to make
certain Marriages null in Law, or to deny to
them Civil Protection. Before any Society,
* So the State denies Civil Protection to Marriages,
where either of the Parties (hall abfent him or herfelf,
without Notice, for feven Years; or, even with Notice,
{hall be continually remaining beyond the Seas.
you
( '5 )
you fay *, can yield its Protection to a Mar-
riage-ContraB, it is necejfary that the Society
fiould know, that [itch a ContraB is made,
And becaitfe every Form of Words, which Men
may contrive for themfelves, may not have the
Force of a Marriage-ContraB 3 therefore every
Society has a Right to prefcribe its own Form,
It is further necejfary, that when the Cent rati
is made, it fiould be notified in fuch a Manner
as the Law fall prefcribe3 becaufe if every
Man was left to his Liberty in thefe Points,
and the Society fiould be obliged to treat all
Perfons as married, who fay or pretend that
they are married 3 the State might yield its
Protetlion to thofe who cohabit without Mar-
riage 3 which is by all Means to be avoided in
every well-governed Commonwealth—-Now here
you affert, not only that the Solemnities of
making and publishing the Marriage-Contrad,
prelcribed by the Public, are abfolutely ne-
ceffary in order to its being capable of Pro-
tedion from the State 3 but that the State ads
within her proper and rightful Province 3 nay,
that fhe is discharging an indifpenfable Duty,
both in prefcribing and maintaining thofe So-
lemnities3 if {lie would avail herfelf of the
* D'JT. p. 39-
falutary
( i6 )
falutary Inftitution of lawful Marriage, and
avoid yielding her Protection to thofe who co-
habit without Marriage $ which is by all Means
to be avoided in every well-governed Common-
wealth: That is, the State has a Right, and is
moreover obliged to prohibit unlawful Mar-
riage, which, you fay, {he cannot do by any
Jlronger Aft than by taking from it all Civil
Exifence * -> and therefore {he has a Right to
the Obedience of her Subje&s, with Regard to
the eflablifhed Solemnities of Marriage, in Vir-
tue of the Allegiance which they owe to the
State, not only for Wrath, but alfo for Con-
fcience Sake. My Inference is, that a Nullity
in Law of any Marriage-Contrad, between
Parties in lawful Subje&ion to the Civil Power,
is likewife a Nullity in Confcience; or that
there is properly no Vinculum Matrimonii
arifing from a Marriage prohibited by the State,
and declared by her to be null and void to all
Intents and Purpofes whatfoever.
*
A Nullity in Law of fuch Marriage you
juftify as follows, viz. Every Me?nber of So-
ciety muft be prefumed as having confented, that
unlefs he marries according to the Formy and
. 1
* p* 41*
the
( i7 )
the Marriage be publicly notified in the Manner
that the Law prefcribes, if he jhall cohabit with
any Woman as his Wife, he renounces his Right to
be treated as a married Man.—-And the Pre-
fitm pt ion is reafonable. For a Man may re a-
fonably be prefutned as confenting to lay himfelj
and his Childre?i under any Inconveniences or In-
capacities, to tie up his Hands from doing un-
lawful Things. Upon this Principle all penal
Laws are grounded*—But itis not the Civil In-
convenience or Incapacity,that is, thePenalty an-
nexed, which renders any Law of the State
a purely penal Law; i.e. a Law, which is equally
fatisfied, whether Obedience is paid to it, or
the Penalty is undergone. In the Cafe before
us, particularly, the Laws appointing, under
the Penalty of a Nullity, the neceffary Regu-
lations of the Marriage-Contrad; thefe Laws
being enjoyned by the State for the Mainte-
nance of her Virtue, her Peace, her Well-be-
ing, that they may attain their full End, the
Subjed muft be fuppofcd to be, in Conscience
and Juftice to the State, obliged to render to
them an adive Obedience. An Ad of Con-
trad in Violation of this neceffary Duty of O-
bedience, is itfelf null. For here is no Room
* Diff. p. 40.
D - for
( i8 )
for the Application of the Rule, Fieri non de+
buity faftum valet; which Rule can be juftly
applied to thofe Adts only, which offend a-
gainjl the Rule of univerfal Juflice, or of human
Virtue at large, not to thofe Adts which vio-
late the Dues of Juftice flriSily and properly fo
called, or are injurious to another s Right.
Thus a Donation, that is prodigal, or againft
the Rules of a juft Oeconomy, will be valid;
not a Donation of what is the Property of
another.
To be more particular : There are two
Conditions of any moral or obligatory AdI,
which alike render it invalid, or incapable of
exerting its obligatory Force *. The one is,
a moral Defedt in the Agent, or a Want of
the Facultas moralis, the rightful Power to
do the A eft, either becaufeit is fubjedt to the juft
Authority of another, or becaufe it is otherwife
injurious to his Right. The other Condition
is, a moral Defedt, or Vicioufnefs accompany-
ing the Efeft or Obligation of any moral Adt;
* Meminifle debemus, non omnia, quae juri naturae repu-
gnant, irrita fieri jure naturae, ut exemplo prodigae donationis
apparet; fedeademum, in quibus deeft principiumdans vali-
ditatem aftui, aut in quibus vitium durat in efFe&u. Grot«
19ejure B. ii, 5. 10. 1.
as
( *9 )
as becaufe the Effedt of it is Sin, or the Obli-
gation of it is an Obligation to commit Sin or
Injury. In the Matter of univerfal Virtue,
fuch an Obligation would be an Obligation to
commit Sin ^ which Obligation annuls itfelf.
In the Matter of Jlritt Juftice towards Society
or Individuals, fuch an Obligation would be an
Obligation to commit Injury, or, in your Ex-
predion, an Obligation to do unlawful Things%
which, you fay, every Man 7nay reafonably be
prefumed as confenting to tie up his Hands from.
Now to confine ourfelves to the Cafe before
us: An Obligation arifing from a Marriage-
Contract prohibited and alfo difallowed by the
Civil Community, in a Member of that Com-
munity, is an Obligation to do unlawful Things.
It is an Obligation creating a State of Difo*
bedience to the Laws of a juft Authority, and
of an Authority juftly difpenfed. Thus is a
Vinculum Matrimonii, a fubfifting Obligation
of a Marriage, which is prohibited by the
ftronge/l Ati of the Law, null and void in
Confcience-, there being a moral Vicioufnefs
perpetually accompanying it: And what is
ftill more, there is a moral Vicioufnefs ac-
companying it, which muft occafion inter-
fering and impracticable Obligations. The
P a Paw
( 20 )
Law of the Contrail obliges the Parties
one way, and the Laws both of God and Man
oblige them another *. They Jland bound
together as Man and Wife before God-f
and yet the State has a Right to confider and to
treat them as unmarried. Do not tell me here,
that thefe Circumftances of Perplexity are in-
cident to the common Condition of Life ; that
the Public, for Inftance, may be obliged in
Confcience to ejiablif a Religion, and private
Subjedts, at the fame Time, may be obliged
in Confcience to diffent from it; that both the
Parties in War may be obliged in Confc'ence. to
profecute their refpedtive Pretenfions, which
they think to be juft. For here Error in Judg-
ments, on one fide or the other, reconciles all
Inconfiftency. Hence perfonal Obligations
may interfere, but Truth and Right never cans
contradictory Truths and abiolutely interfering
Rights having alike no Place, either in the
* If two Ferfons, in contempt of the Laws of Society,
whilft the legal Forms are open to them, fhall cohabit together
as Man and Wife, under a private C'ontratt, it is an OJ~ev.ce to
God, and one Species of that unlawful Commerce, which the
Scripture calls Fornication. Enquiry into the Force and Opera-
tbn of the annulhng Claujes, p. 2:.
i lb. p. 24.
Principles
■ (21)
Principles of the human Mind, or in the Rea-
lity of Things.
The other Condition of any moral orobli-
gatory Act, which renders it ftill more clearly
and unquestionably invalid or null, is the mo-
ral DefeCt in the Agent or contracting Party;
the Want of a rightful Power adequate to the
particular Species of the ACt or Contract under
Confideration. If a SubjeCt of Society is de-
ftitute of the rightful Power of contracting a
Marriage difallowed by the Law; you admit
the Confequence, that there is no Obligation
arifing from fuch Marriage, either in Law, or
in Confidence; or, in other Words, that fuch
Marriage is, in Truth, n o Marriage, being
defective in a Point ejfential to Marriage, viz.
A Right to contraB it* Thus the Right to con-
traB Marriage will be impeded by a prior
Marriage Jlill fubjijling; becaufe that Right
has been paffed away by each Party to the other,
irrevocably, during their joynt Lives. Now as a
Party in Marriage paffes away to the other the
natural Right of contracting Marriage Abfo-
lately; fo may a Member of Society be rea-
fonably prefumed to have paffed away to the
* Dif- V- 3-
Public
( 2« )
Public his natural Right of contra&ing Mar-
riage in certain particular Cafes, and under
certain particular Circumftances > in thofe par-
ticular Cafes, and under thofe particular
Circumftances, where the Public, in Confi-
deration of its own important and indif-
penfable Interefts, finds it neceflary to prohi-
bit and difallow Marriage. We are both, I
think, agreed, that every Right of Govern-
ment, and, I add, Property too, mud be refolv-
ed into fome original Confent or Compofition,
either aftual or implied, between the Govern-
ing and the Governed, the Proprietor and the
Community : And as nothing ought to be impo-
fed as a haw, but what may be refolved into
the Co?ifent of the Subject, either tacit or ex-
prefs *; fo the Exercife of every natural Right
in the Subjedt is fuppofed to have been re-
drained, by the very Contract of Civil Society,
fo far as the public Convenience and Utility,
much more fo far as the public Neceffities
fhall require. I know not how the Applica-
tion can be evaded by any one, profefiing, as
you do, the Neceflity of inftituting and main-
taining legal Marriage to every well-governed
Commonwealth♦
* Dif. p. 30.
A Limi-
( 23 )
A Limitation then of the natural Power of
contracting Marriage, in every SubjeCt of a
Civil State, to the Solemnities and Circum*
(lances of Marriage, which the Civil State
has, upon juft and cogent Reafons, thought
fit to appoint as necejfary, being implied
in the original Contract of Civil Society;
it is plain, that the SubjeCt has not the right-
ful Power of contracting a Marriage declared
by the Law to be abjolutely ?iull and void.
Should he therefore contraCt Marriage, that is,
fhould he attempt to contraCt it, in Oppofition
to the Law; no Obligation of a Marriage-
Co?itra£l, no not in Confcience, can poffibly
arife from the ACt, which in Reality is no
Marriage. Nor is this to affert more, than a
Maxim mod acknowledged in the Cafuiftical
Science, that no fubfequent Obligation * can
take Place in Prejudice of & prior one; or, in
other Words, that no Man has a Right over
the Property of another. In fhort, the Sub-
jeCt of Civil Community retains only a condi-
tionate Right or Liberty of contracting Mar-
* A prior Contra# fubfifting with the Society, all Tub-
fequent Contracts made in Contravention to it, muft be
Void. Enquiry, p. II*
riage;
ftem5S13£^
( 24 ) '
riage; the Right or Liberty of contracting it
in J'ome certain Refpecls, being, by his own
Aft and Deed, paffed away to the Public.
• «
A Marriage then between the Subjefts of
Civil Society, however complete in the Quali-
fications required by the Law of Nature, but
deficient in Qualifications appointed, as necej-
fary, by the Law of the State ; does not car-
ry with it the Force of a Marriage in any Re-
fpeft whatfoever. In like Manner, a Vow,
however complete in the Qualifications re-
quired by the Law of Nature, but deficient in
Qualifications appointed, as necefiary, by the
Divine Law, which was the Law of the Jewifh
State ; carried with it no Force of a Vow, either
in Law, or in Confidence*. If the Huiband
* Numb. xxx. 6, &c.—1 have often heard it faidy that
a Marriage-Contrail, though,—before this Ail was madey it
would have been Marriage, by the Intervention of this Ail
will be no Marriage. Enq. p. 17. In like Manner, it may
be faid, that a Vow, though, before the giving of this Di-
vine Law, it would have been a Vow, by the Intervention
of this Law would be no Vow.—Nor does any Difference
in the Cafes arife from the peculiar Quality of the latter
Law, as it is Divine; the fame Author declaring, that
No Law in the W orld can make that which in
the Nature of it is a Contrail to be no Contrail; or that which
in the Nature of it is binding not to be binding. p. 19. So
difallowed
ten
ice
V,
( *5 )
dtfallowed the Vow of his Wife, on the day
that he heard it $ her Vow is declared to have
been abfolutely of none EffeSl: And that upon
this certain Foundation of natural Right, that
the Divine Law, the Civil Law, as I faid, of
the Jewifh Nation , which here prefcribes the
Bounds of her domejlic Subjeilion ; had rejlrain-
ed in the Wife her original Power of making a
Vow, and left her poffefied only of a condidonate
Power. I need not, to juftify the Parallel,
fhew by what Implication of Contradt the
natural Right of Vowing, in a Subjedt of the
Jewifh State, might in Part pafs away to the
Divine Legiflator or the Jewifh Republic. But,
I doubt not, the fame Rules and Maxims of
, . V ' f
r
that, according to him, the Divine Law itfelf could not
conftitute any certain Form or Solemnities, as neceffary to
Mauriage. For he fays, If you fay, that a Man has no Right
to marry, except he marries in the legal [Divine] Form , it will
le faying (in Effect) that the Form gives the Right, which
is very abfurd. The Form does not give, but fuppofes, the
Right, and only diretls the Ufe of it. ib. p. 22. N. B.
Add, The Form direfis the Ufe of the Right, under
the Pain of a Nullity, and then there will be
nothing abfurd; there being no Abfurdity in fuppofing the
For?n to be as effential as the Matter in the Conftitution of
either a natural or amoral Entity.
E mora!
( 26 )
moral Interpretation will juftify the States's
Power, to a certain Extent, over the Mar-
riages of her Subjects, who will be under an
Obligation of Confcience and Juftice to Laws
fitly ordered for that Purpofe -y thefe Laws
direCtly deriving their Force from the original
Law of Nature, which is undoubtedly Divine.
Concerning the Power of the State to annul
the Marriages of Minors, made without the
Confent of their Parents or Gurdians.
E have been hitherto, in great Meafurc,
agreed with regard to the Power of
the State, to annul the Marriages of thofe in
Subjection to her, made without her own Con-
fenty that is, prohibited and difallowed by the
Law. Thus, in a certain RefpeCt, is every
SubjeCt placed under a Sort of tutelar Prote-
ctionand Reftraint in the important Concern of
Marriage. But the common Authority of the
State refpeCis the Conditions of Marriage, as
they are chiefly directed to her own Peace and
Well-being; there is moreover an Authority
SECT. II.
I
more
( 2 7 )
more efpecially difpenfed, not without a View
to the public Good, but dire&ly and chiefly
for the Safety and Benefit of thofe, who are
the immediate Objects of it. This is the Con-
ftitution of a Truft, prefiding over the Mar-
riages of Minors, and affifted with thofe San-
dtions of Nullity, which the State had found
neceffary to provide in Support of legal Mar-
riage. The execution of this Truft is, with
great Propriety, appointed, in the firft Place,
to refide in the Father -y both as he is a Parent,
and as he is the fuperior Parent. As he is a
Parent, the Child is by Nature obliged to a
general Honour, Duty and Obedience, en-
deared by reciprocal Affedtions, continually
enforced by the ftrongeft Motives of Gratitude,
and particularly grounded on the true Principle
of Duty and all ingenuous Obedience, a moral
Afiurance of a judicious and affectionate Condudt
for its trueft Good. As he is the fuperior Pa-
rent, he is naturally poffeffed, not only of the
chief Authority to govern the Family, but of
the fole Power to difpofe the Family-Eftate:
which Power of Difpofition is the mo ft effica-
cious Means, in the Hands of Civil Govern-
ment, of enforcing the Neceffity of legal Mar-
E 2 riage.
( 28 )
riage*.The Father's Reprefentatives, In the ma-
trimonial Truft, fucceed in a juft Gradation
accommodated to the Regards of his Right,
to the Claims of Nature, and to the Arbitra-
tion of public Equity; but for Defedl of
fome one or more of thofe Foundations of
Authority, above recited, peculiar to the Fa-
thery the Truft devolves with Abatement of
Power,and under a Referve of the State's judicial
Interpofition to direct an irregular Adminiftra-
tion to its proper End: A very feafonable Re-
ftraint upon the unreafonable and defigning,
but no juft Difcouragement to thofe who are
difpofed to anfwer the Confidence of their de-
ceafed Friends with a Care and Fidelity pro-
portioned to fo facred and inviolable a Charge*f%
* Why the Father fhould have the Right of Confent to
the Son's Marriage, befides the Degree of Paternal Au-
thority peculiar to the antient Rowan State, there was an-
other Principle of the Roman Law, or rather of natural
Equity, viz. Ne cui invito fuus heres agnafcatur. Injt. L. i.
Tit. x. Whence it followed, that when the Grand-father
adopted any one Nepotis loco, if the Son was continuing in
the Father's Power, the Son muft be confenting to the Ad-
option ; Ne ei [Filio] invito fuus heres agnafcatur. Tit.
feq. § 7. et Vin. in loc.
t That bad Men may find their Account in fuch a Truft,
js obvious enough; but good ones can get nothing but
111-will. Dijf p. 52.
• • ? And
C 29 )
And on thefe Terms, and for thefe Reafons
chiefly, has the State thought fit to annul the
Marriages of Minors, made without the Confent
cj: their Parents or Guardians.
T h u s is the Conftitution of this Species of
Tutelage over Minors, wholly the Effect of
the Civil Power; and fo Tutelage in general
has been accounted of in the mod civilized Na-
tions, being always appointed by their Laws*.
What has been faid of the Reafons of commit-
ting the Truft to Parents or their Reprefenta-
tives, tended only to fhew their peculiar §>uali-
fcations in Nature for that End, not to aifert
their Right. Accordingly there are Inftances,
in the Cafes of thofe who are of eminent Con-
cernment to the Public, where States exercife
the Power exclulively of the Parent's Interpo-
fition. Baron Puffendorf,\ therefore, very
juftly fays, What Right thofe Fathers of Fa-
milies have in this Matter, who live in Civil
Societies, mufl be learnt frotn the Laws oj par-
\
* Eft autem Tutela, ut Servius definivit, vis ac pote-
ftas in capite libero, ad tuendum eum, qui peraetatem fei-
pfum defendere nequit, jure civili data ac per??iijfa. Inji.
L. i. T. xiii. 1. Et Tutelam et curam placuit publicum
manus ejje. T. xxv.
ticular
( 3° )
ticular Commonwealths *. Nor need you be
difturbed with their different and contradidiory
Laws, which, in Matter of Decency, Conve-
nience, or Neceffity, might well anfwer their
refpedtive Ends, and all of them confift with
the Principl es of natural Honefty. At the
fame Time, the general Agreement of civi-
lized States in appointing the Subjiance, how-
ever they may differ in the Circumjiances of a
tutelar Adminiftration of Marriage, is a very
good Argument both of the Reafonablenefs
and Juftice of the Inflitution, and its Civil
Utility.—I will only obferve, by Way of Co-
rollory, that we have hence a clear Account,
why a Minor's Marriage, which the Law
hath annulled for Want of the Parent's Con-
fent, ought not to be made good by his After-
Confent -j-; and, likewife, upon what Grounds
the Minor's illegal Adt fhould be treated, as if
it were an Offence againjl the State, and noty
as you coniider it, againfi a private Family
only jj. The Right of ordering Marriages, as
* Pujfend. De jure Nat. L. vi. c. 2. § 12. cited Dijf.
p. 25.
■f DljT. p. 53.—Confenfum habeant Parentum, in
tantum, ut juffus Parentum pra;Cedere debeat. Injl.
L. 1. T. x.
( 31 )
the Right of Life and Death, is the eflential
Prerogative of the fupreme Civil Power; but
the Adminiftration of them may be committed
in different Degrees and to different Perfons or
Orders of the Common-wealth, according to
the different Exigencies, or the particular Ge-
nius and Conflitution of each relpedtive State :
And the Adminiftration of them both, in the
greateft: Plenitude and Extent, was accordingly
exercifed, partly from Commifiion, partly
from Connivance of the State, by Fathers and
Matters over their Families and Dependents
in the Roman Republic.
It was therefore of fmall Importance to our
prefent Difpute, to prove fo elaborately as you
do from Grotius that Parents have not na-
turally the Right of Confent, neceffary to the
Validity of their Children's Marriage. For
though they may not have that Right by Na-
ture, yet Nature does not hinder, but that it
may be derived to them from the pojitive Will
of thofe who have the Right ; and then it is
affuredly the Parent's Right by the Force of
the natural Law itfelf. For the fame excel-
* Dijf. pp, 6—15.
lent
X
( 32)
i
lent Perfon, in defcribing the Law of Nature„
very well obferves, That the Law of Nature
does not only refpeB thofe Things, which fubfifl
independently on pofitive IVill; but many Things
likewife, which are the Confequences or Effects of
it. So Property, as it is now in Ufe, was firf
introduced by the pofitive Will of Man; but
now it is introduced, it is an Offence againftthe
Law of Nature to violate it —He had juft
before faid, that fome Things are belonging to
the Law of Nature ; not properly, but, as the
Schools fpeaky reduBively; fuch as bear no Re-
pugnancy to that Law: Or, in other Words,
there is a Law of Nature Preceptive, and a
Law of Nature Permiffive. Now that every
Perfon that marries, by that very AB ffuts
himfelf out of tkeFathersFamilyf-, and, in Con-
fequence, that the Adt of the Son's Marriage
is not under the Father'* Dominion ||; thefe
are Principles, not of the Law of Nature Pre-
ceptive, but of the Law of Nature Permiflive;
and they are true Principles, not abfolutely,
-but on Suppofition ; or, on Condition of the
pofitive Will of thofe, who have juft Authority
* Grot. De Jure Bell. See. i. I. 10. 3, 4*
+ Diff.p. 18.
I lb- P- 8.
in
( 33 )
in the Cafe, not interpofing to the contrary.
The Law of the Roman State, therefore, a&u-
ally did, as it very juftly mighty interpofe to
hinder the Son's legal Independence on his
Father's Family till the ASt of Emancipation ;
and, on the fame Principle, the latter might
retain under his Dominion the Grand-Child,
and, confequently, the Aft of his Marriage, as
well as his other legal Adts. For as it is a
Principle of the Law of Nature Permifiive
only Qui uxor em ducity extra familiam
abity and which will vindicate the Son's Li-
berty of Marriage in a State of mere Nature ;
So the other Principle, alledged by GrotiuSy to
fhew both the Reafon and the Limitation of
the parental Power, whether in a State of Na-
ture, or of Civil Society, JEquum eft, ut pars
conveniat cum ratione integri; this is a Prin-
ciple of the Law of Nature Preceptive, and
of abfolute and immutable Truth. Hence you
* The fame may be faid of the Rule laid down, DiJJl
p. 31. viz. That//;? Father, though he may dijpofe of his own
Ejtatey as he pleajeSy cannot difpcfe of the Ejiate of his Sony
nor fubjefl it to Limitations of any kind whatfoevery without
the Son s Confent.—Ut omnes res liberorum Parentibus ad-
quirantur, non naturale eft, fed ex quorundam populorurn
legibus. Grot. De jure Bell. &c. ii. 5. 2. 2.
F may
( 34 )
may obferve, with what Accuracy Pujfendorf
had afferted, that the Majler of the Family has
naturally no Right to prohibit or refcind the
Marriages of his Children, defective in no other
Point than this, [that they were contracted
without his Confent] provided the Chil-
dren, so marrying, are ready to go
out of the Father's Family*. And
upon the fame Principle Vinnius argues in Be-
half of the Parent's Authority over the moral
ACts of his Child, not of this or that parti-
cular Agey but of all Ages without Dif
tindlion -f-.
The Tutelage of Minors, with refpeCt to
their Marriage, in the State of Civil Society,
appearing thus to be the EffeCt of the Civil
Law ; Confiderations of Nature or Utility, of
public or private Policy, are apt to determine
different States either to limit or to extend its
Duration. According to you, If the Law
Jkould fay, that no Woman fall marry till Jhe
is fourteen Years oj Age, nor any Man till he
is fixteen, it would be a very Jafe and a re a-
* Puffend. De Jur. N. L. vi. c. 2. § 14. cited Diff. p. 18.
^ Vinnius in Inji. L. i. T. x. cited Diff. p. 24.
4 finable
( 35 )
finable Law *. The Marriages made withia
thefe Periods refpedlively muft, confequently,
be null. When you farther obferve, that in
fixing the Age of Marriage, Care fhould al-
ways be taken rather to fall a little below the
Standard oj Nature, than rife much above it 3
this is very true, in fixing the Age, within
which Marriage (hall be null Abfolutely. But
in fixing the Period, within which Marriage
{hall be null when made without the Confent
of Parents or Guardians; the general Reafon
of the Minor's Security, and Reafons peculiar
to Families or States, may determine rather to
rife, in a greater or lefs Extent, above the
Standard of Nature, than to fall below it.
The Benefit of the Minor, which is chiefly
intended in this, as well as every other Species
of Tutelage, would naturally extend its Dura-
tion to the Period of Ripenefs of Judgment
and deliberate Choice, which is fufficient for
his tranfading every other important Concern
of Life. And if Experience and Obfervation
muft be confulted, to know at what Age Pet fins
ordinarily arrive at this Period -j~; I prefume
they have been conf ulted in ftating the fame
* Dijf. p. 5. lb. p. 4.
F 2 Period
( 36 )
Period for the Determination of two Trufts^
between which there appears to be a juft A^
nalogy.
I fay, there is a juft Analogy between the
two Trufts, the one inftituted for the Security
of the Perfon of the Minor, with Regard to his
Marriage; the other inftituted for the Security
of his Civil Interefts They both proceed
* In the Roman Law, Tutela, which continued till the
Minor arrived at the Age of Puberty, was fupplied by
Curatio till the Age of twenty-five Years. Tutor primario
Petfonae; fecundario : Curator primario Rei; fecunda-
rio Perfonae dabatur. Now the tutelar Truft of a Mi-
nor's Marriage has Refpe£I to his Ejlate* Thus Diff.
p. 54. in its Addrefs to Minors, fays, The Law has fecured _
your E/bates. And the Perfon in vetted with the Truft
may be called upon to fit as "Judge to determine the Fate of
a whole Family, p. 51. Hence is feen the great Propriety
of this Truft, in order to attain the Ends of a general
Guardianjhdp. But the Author of the Enquiry will not
allow, that becauje the Law may fettle the Lime when a
.Minor foal I come to the U/e of his Eft ate, therefore it may
as well fettle the Time when a Minor ft:all marry. For
what, fays he, is it that the Law fettles ? Why, not
the Commencement cf the Minor's Right to
the Ejlate,—w hich arifes not from the Law, but from the '
Pe rfon wide r zvh om the Mi no r claims ? p. 18. Not. Bu tike
Law, or the Community, does fuftain the Perfon of the
Minor, and confequently the Right to his Ejlate; as it
likewife fuftams for him the Right cf contracting Mar-
l iage ; in order to tiifpofe them equally for his Benefit.
upon
( 37 )
upon the common Reafon of the Imperfe&ion
of his Judgement and Experience, and of the
Temerity of his Youth. In Remedy of thefe
For Grotius well obferves, AJotandum et hoc, ft folum jus
naturale fpeftamus, dominium non dariy nifi in eo, qui ra-
tione utitur. Sed jus Gentium ob utilitatem communem in-
troduxit, ut et infantes et furic fi dominia accipere et retinere
pojfenty perfonam illorum interim quafi fuftinente humano
genere. De jur. Belli, etc. ii. 3. 6. TheDo£tor indeed may
feem to think, that the principal, or rather only Reafon of
the late Conftitution of a tutelar Truft over the Minor's
Marriage, was the Confideration of his Ejlate ; fince there
would, he fays, be no Difficulty in this Matter, if EJlates
were put out of the fhtejiion* Diffi, p. 50. Yet he fuggefts
an Exception againfl the Propriety of a Marriage, which
a wife and a good Man would lay more Strefs upon, than a
Defeft in Point of Fortunes \ and that is a bad moral Cha-
rafter: But he doubts whether a Court of Chancery would
attend to fuck an Exception, p. 52. Note y. Notwithftand-
ins; that Exception may well be implied in the Words of
the Act,—a proper Marriage\ and notwithftanding it
has been attended to in Courts of Juftice. Diflentiendi a
patre licentia filiae conceditur, fi indignum moribus, vel
turpem fponfum ei pater eligat. Digg. L. xxvi. T. i. i.§ 1.
Laftly, The Parallel between a tutelar Truft of Marriage
and a general Guardianfhip may hold with regard to the
frequent Recourfe, which, he predicts, will be had to Chan-
eery, on the Occafion of the former; for the fame Refort
he has obferved of late Years, in the Management of an
Ejlate for the Ben eft of Minors, and the Care of their
Education, p. 51.
almoft
( 38 )
almoft univerfal Infelicities, Society is able to
provide another Help, befides leaving him to
himfelf \ or the fovereign Difpofer of Things
who has every where been pleafed to ferve the
great Ufes of his Providence by the beneficial
Contrivances of human Policy. The fame
common Reafon then, which will {hew why
the Law may refrain a Minor from pafjing
away his Efate, will likewife hold to prove,
that the State may deny its Protection to his
Marriage -f, ovreftrain him from unadvifedly
pafjing away hisPerfon for Life. And to fhew,
that there is nothing peculiar in the Marriage-
Contract to deftroy the Analogy; Puffendorf
judicioufly obferves, that carnal Knowledge
and the Confent of the Parties cohabiting to-
gether, where the Civil Laws difallow, can no
more render a Marriage valid, than a Sale
and Delivery made by a Minor, without the
Confent oj his Guardian, can pafs away the
Title of his Efate J.
* Diff. p. 49. t lb. p. 29.
+ De fur. Nat. L. vi. 2. § ult. cited Diff. p. 28.
The State of Marriage arifes immediately upon the Con*
tra<5f, binding the Confciences of both Parties, especi-
ally if Consummation follows. Enquiry, etc. p. 6-
As if a Delivery (analogous to Confummation) could give
Validity to a Bargain, null in itfslf or annulled by the Lam.
We
( 39 )
We come to confider the Extent and Foun-
dation of the Nullity of a Minor's Marriage,
which Nullity is declared by a ftanding Law
of the State. Firft, Is it a Nullity in Lawy
or does it extend to Conjcience ? I anfvver.
There is no fubfifting Obligation of Marriage,
arifing from the Minor's A£t, either in Law,
or in Conjcience. This Puffendorf himfelf de-
clares in the very Paffage, which you have
recited from him in favour of a different
Opinion; where fpeaking of public Laws,
which difcourage or wholly , difallow fome
particular Species of Marriage; Which Laws,
fays he, may have this Effe£fy that a Marriage
contracted contrary to them, fall either be di-
vefted of certain Civil Privileges, or Ejfelts; or
elfe be intirely refcindedy i. e. made utterly null
a?id void *. For it has been ufual with States,
from Maxims of Civil Policy, to diflinguifh
fome Kinds of Marriage, or Marriage of cer-
tain particular Perfons, with Civil Privileges,
which other Marriages were divejled of though
* Quarum legum ea eiTe poteft, ut quod contra
eafdem contrahitur connubium, certis effe&ibus, per jus
civile affignatis, deftituatur, vel etiam omnino pro invalidoy
et quod refajfionem admlttat, dedaretur. De Jur. Nat.
L. vi. c. i. § 8. D'tJJ] p. 27.
they
\
C 4° )
they were not fo much as difafproved by the
State *. Other Marriages were diveded of
particular Civil Privileges, which the Law
confered on approved Marriage, that they
might be difcouraged, but by no Means annul-
led. Laftly, There were Marriages difcouraged
and prohibited under the Pain of a Nullity.
Of the two latter Species, the Baron was here
fpeaking; and had he been confining himfelf
to the Confideration of Cbrijlian Marriages, I
may venture to prefume he might perhaps have
confejjed, that no VJ& of Law can dejlroy the
Vinculum Matrimonii, as it lies in Conjcience,
when it has not difjolved itfelf by the Exigence
of an Event originally implied in the Contract
of Chrifian Marriage ; but he would have af-
ferted at the fame Time, that the ftanding
Law of Society can impede the Vinculum Ma-
trimonii from ever taking Place at all, and
confequently from deriving on the Contractor
the lead Obligation of a Marriage, either in
Law, or in Conjcience.
* Juftae nuptiae fervili contubernio opponuntur; non
quod non liceat—fervo tecum mulierem habere in con-
tubernio ; fed quod-nuptiae folennes peculiates quofdam ex
jure civili ejfeftus habeant. Grot. De Jure Belli y etc. i.
3. 4. I.
Against
( 4i )
Against the Nullity in Law, in the Cafe
of a Minor's Marriage, you argue by demand-
ing; By what Rule of Confirudlion, /. e. of the
original Contract of Society, a Prefumption
will lie, that the Son, who, in entering into
Society, ffzw/? underjlood as having referved
to kimfelf his natural Right to contract Mar-
riage, consents, in cafe he Jhall find
it proper to make life oj this Rights a Difherifon
fijall pafs againfl his whole ljfue, and that
himfelf with the Partner of his Bed, Jhall b?
expofed to the Shame and Punifhment of thofey
who live together in a State of Fornication * ?
What ? Mufl then the Son, in entering into
Society, be underjlood as having rejerved to
himfelf his natural Right to contrail Mar-
riage ? What ? As having referved to himfelf
the Right to contract Marriage, before he is
arrived at the Age of fixteen Tears, againfi a
reafonable Law -f- ? As having referved the
Right to contract Marriage folemnized in illegal
Places? Marriage without Banns or Licences?
If the Son mud be underftood as having re-
ferved to himfelf the Right to contract Mar-
riage under all thefe Circumfiances, which is
undoubtedly his natural Right 5 where then
* D'JF- P- 32* t lb. p. 5. . ;;
G is
( 42 )
is the acknowledged Wifdom and jiiftice of
Laws annulling fuch Marriage * ? Pray, Sir,
confider, that a Per/on may have Right in
himfelf] and yet, in the Ufe of that Right, be
tinder a Variety of Obligations to others -j*; of
Obligations of JlriEl JuJlice to Society, which
can as juftly> at leaft, (for that is fufficient
for our prefent Purpofe) prefcribe, in certain
Cafes and Circumftances, the Ufe and Exercife
of the Right, as the Poffeffor of it can be fup-
pofed to have it in himfelf
But, if it was your Intention to demand.
Can the Son, who, in entering into Society,
muft be underflood as having referved to him-
felf his natural Right to contrad: Marriage,
fuch Marriage as flail be allowed by the Law
cf the Community to which he made himfelf fub-
jeCl; be prefumed to have confented, that, in
cafe he fhould find it proper to contract Mar-
riage, fuch asJlands utterly prohibited and difal-
lowed by the Lazv of that Community, a Dif-
herifon fhall pafs againft his whole Iflue, and
that himfelf, with the Partner cf his Bed,
(hall be expofed to the Shame and Punifh-
ment of thofe, who live together in a State
* Pty* P) gf- p- ii. f Enquiry, etc. p. 9.
of
( 43 )
of Fornication? I anfwer dirediy, that the
Son can be prefumed, and that he mujl be pre-
fuined to have contented to all this. On the
one Hand, the State is certainly inverted with
the Power, received from the Son himfelf, to
prohibit certain Marriages under the Pain of a
Nullity: On the other Hand, a Man may
reafonably be prefumed as conjenting to lay him-
felj and his Children under any Inconveniences
or Incapacities, to tie up his Hands from doing
unlawful Things * ? And particularly ; Does
not every Man, who unlawfully cohabits with a
Woman, bajlardize his Ijfue -f*.
*
Lastly, Should your Meaning be to afiert,
or rather to affume, that the Son, in entering
into Society, muft be underftood as having re-
ferved to himfelf his natural Right to con-
tradl Marriage without the Confent of his
Parents or Guardians; then your Argument,
completed, as before, in its Form,will be found
to depend wholly upon the illegitimate Foun-
dation of a palpable Petitio Principii. For
would Baron Puffendorf\ think you, or any
one in his right Senfes, who is aflerting the
Power of the State to make the Confent
** Dljf. p. 40. f lb. p. 41,
G 2 of
( 44 )
of Parents necessary to the Son's Mar-
riage j fuppofe neverthelefs, that the Son, in
entering into Society, muft be underftood as
having referved to himfelf his natural Right to
contradl Marriage without that Confent ?
And yet this very Suppojition, as palpable a
Petitio Principii as it appears to be, is arbi-
trarily laid down, and feveral Times infilled
on, as allowed by your Adverfaries. Thus
you fay, No Man in his right Senfes ever can
be prefumed to be confenting to a Law, to bar bis
Right to his Eft ate, and to baftardize his IJfue;
whilst there is no default in any
Matter, in which the Society has a
Right to require his Obedience*. And
quickly after, The Right to marry, i. e. with-
out the Parent's Confent, is out of the ^ueftion.
This is a Right which the Minor cannot -f*
give up,
* Diff. p. 35-
-j- lb. p. 36. So p. 19 .TheChild does but exercife its natu-
r alRight? and be would be an unnatural Father,who,becauft
his Child takes an honest Liberty, could ft and by and fee
it starve, i. e. difinherited.—Where three Things are
obfervable. 1. The Parent, neither by the Law of Nature,
nor by the Law of Society, can ftand by and fee his Child
flarve, i. e. difinherited as to the Neceffaries of Life ; ex-
cept the Child has committed a Crime deferving Death.
In
( 45 )
In fhort, your Adverfaries muji maintain^
in Confiftency with their Principles; and fo
muft you maintain, in Confiftency with yours,
concerning the Power of Laws to annul Mar-
riages folemnized in illegal Places, and with-
out Banns or Licences -9 that every Perfon, in
entering into Society, muft be underftood as
having referved to himfelf only fo much of his
natural Right to contradt Marriage, as the
public Wifdom, diredted by the Maxims of
good Government, and in order to obtain the
important Ends of Civil Society, has thought it
fitting to allow: And therefore in cafe he
ftiould find it proper to con trad Marriage,
contrary to the Obligation of his own Adt and
Deed, and in Violation of a Right of great
Concernment to the Civil Welfare 5 he muft,
2. The Child takes a Liberty that is honeft, and e^ercifes
what is a Right, in a State of Nature only, not in a State
of Society. 3. The Parent exercifes a Right, which he
hath both by the Law of Nature and by the Law of Soci-
ety, in difmheriting a difobedient Child : Nay, a Right,
which the Dodtor himfelf, muft think reafonable to be ex-
ercifed,if he fays to Parents with any juft Meaning; You are
Majiers of the Eft ate and Fortunes of your Families, which
will always be a great Check upon your Children, ordinarily
fufficient to keep them back, when they begin to find their In-
clinations running contrary to your Judgments, p. 47.
f46)
in like Manner, be underftood as having con-
fented, to admit all theConfequences of a Mar-
riage null and void in itfelf > the Civil Inconve-
niences and Incapacities, upon himfelf, his
Iflue, and the Partner of his Bed, which the
Community has an unqueftionable Right to
infiidl, and which it has accordingly denounced
by a {landing Conftitution, in the neceffary
Support of the legal Inftitution of Marriage.
A Subject of Civil Community is here
underftood to have confented to a Limitation
of his natural Liberty of Affiing ; but he can-
not, in like Manner, be underftood to have
confented to a Limitation of his natural and
necejfary Power of Thinking; in Conformity to
the Appointments of public Wifdom. So that
a Man cannot be underftood as having referv-
ed to himfelf his natural Right to contract
Marriage, in the fame unlimited Extent, as he
may> and indeed mujl be underftood as having
referved to himfelf his natural Right to chufe his
Religion, and to worjhip God according to his
own Judgment and Confcience *. But to avail
yourfelf of a Comparifon between the Cafes of
* Dif. p. 32,
a publicly
•II
16
fell
( 47 )
a publicly eftablifhed Religion, and a public-
ly eftablifhed Law of Marriage you muft
{hew, that the exadted Payment of Fifty Shil-
lings a-year* is as proper a Means of rectifying
Error in diffenting from the eftablifhed Worfhip,
as bafardizing the Iffue of an illegal Cohabita-
tion of the Sexes is of corredting Licentioufnefs:
And that Banifhment, Con fife at ion ^ or any other
Species of Perfecntion of thofe, who think it
not reafonable to comply with the Religion of
their Country J3 can either be necefiary for the
Support of the national Religion, or, by Force
of any Principle of good Government or natu-
ral Juftice, be inflidted by the State upon thofs
her Subjedts, who could not but referve to them-
felves their natural Right to chufe theirReligion
and Worfiip 3 and who intitle themfelves to an
equitable Share of the common Protedlion, by
the Pradtice of a religious Worfhip, which is
not injurious to the Civil Peace, and by giving
to the State all the religious Securities of Civil
Obedience -j*.
* lb. p. 38. J lb. p. 32.
f Every Man muft worfhip God according to his own
Judgment and Confcience. This Principle fhuts out from
Society all epprefftve Laws, to compel Men to this or that
particular Manner of Worfhip 3 and no other Principle can.
Enquiry, &c. p. 12. Yes, there is another Principle,
And
C 48 )
And, in general, by Rating with Mo-
deration and Candour, what natural Rights
are unalienable, and cannot be given up to
Society, and how far the alienable Right
muf be given up to it, in fupport of its benefi-
cial Eftablilhments, whether religious or civil;
we may difcover, what there certainly is, ac-
cording to the common Senfe of Mankind, viz. the
Rule of receding from private Right for the
Sake of the public Good} and its proper Li mi-
tationsThe Queftion of public Utility we
will leave to be confidered by Legiflators> who
fould be prefumed beflto know how far they may
go, and when it will be fit to flop. I would
only obferve, that if it be admitted to be for
the public Good, that Minors Jkould not be fuf-
fered to marry without their Parent's Confentf ;
a /landing Inftitution of real Utility to the P11-
blic bids very fair for not interfering, either
which /huts out all oppre/fwe Laws, viz. the Inojfenfivenefs
of the Worfhip different from the eftablifhed one, and
its Confiftency with the Civil Peace and Welfare. And
as this Quality of the Worfhip will entitle it to a Toleration
from the State, fo a contrary Quality of a Worfhip or Re-
lisfion, however according to Mens /judgment and Confcience^
may as juffly deferve to be refrained from being injurious
to Society,
* D'JJ-' P. 38- + Dlff- P- 3/•
2 With
k
•To
til
( 49 )
with the unalienable Rights of Individuals, or
with any certain Principles of natural Honefty.
Enough has been faid to juftify the Prefum-
ption of the Minor's confenting to a Law ap-
pointed for his particular Benefit, where, for a
momentary Abatement of natural Liberty of
little Worth, he receives in Exchange the dur-
able Privilege, either of fecuring his Perfon,
againjl his Inclinations, from a rafh Difpofition,
or elfeof difpofing it agreeably to * his Inclina-
tions, under the Condudt of a Difcretion and
Affedtion, which generally both can and will
didtate his true Interefts, - and will not, by the
Aid of a delegated Power, objtruft his reafon-
able Defires\. Nor is it extraordinary in Life,
much lefs unfuppofeable in Law, which gene-
rally prefumes People to have done what, in
Reafon and from the Nature of the Bufnefs,
they ought to have done, that a Perfon, under
a Confcioufnefs of his Temerity, Inability, or
Liablenefs to be deceived to his Harm, fhould
tie up his Hands even againjl him/elf-, which
has accordingly been done by thofe, who have
* To Minors, as they have no Choice left, my Advice
will be fhort. Dijf. p. 53.
+ lb. p. 47.
H been
( 5° )
been poffeffed of Sovereign Rule, even as to the
rnoft immediate and diftinguifhed Ads of their
Sovereignty *.
Eut is not the Right of Marriage one of
thofe effential Points of private Right -f, which
cannot be given up ? Is it not like the unalien-
able Rights of Food and Raiment, which were
given for the neceffary Prefervation of the In-
dividual, and of which no one can make a Gef-
fon to another ^fo as to bind himfelf to be fed or
cloathed as that other pleafes J?—The Right
of Marriage is an unalienable Right; and
therefore it would be both unjujl and cruel to
make a Lav/ forbiding #//, or any Number
of Subjeds to marry, who, not having the
Gift of Continency, muft be forced to a
Condition of Life unfupportable to human Na-
ture|[. Upon this Principle all Vows of Celi-
bacy of an abfolute Meaning and Extent, be-
fides that they carry the Depravity of a mi-
* Erat Antiochi tertii Regis refcriptum ad magiflratus,^
parerent, fi quid Legibus adverfum jufliflet; et Conftan-
tini, ne pupilli aut viduae cogantur venire judicii caufa ad
Comitatum Imperatoris, etiamfi Imperatoris refcriptum
proferatur. Grot. De jure Belli, See. i. 3. 18.
t 39. % Enquiry, pp. II, 2.
I D'I- PP- 43> 4» 5-
ftaken
( 51.)
ftaken Piety and the Injury of an Inftitution
unfavourable to the Good of Societies, are in
themfelves unlawful and vain. On the very
lame Principle I cannot but difapprove what
you would have enjoyed as a very fafe and
a reafonable Law, viz. that no Man fall marry
till he is Sixteen Tears of Age * : Since, as
you yourfelf confefs, in Effedt, the Confe-
quence might be injurious and intolerable
to a few. Nor can indeed any Handing and
perpetual Law, abfolutely prohibiting Mar-
riage within a certain Period of Age, be fo
contrived as to be beneficial to the Public,
and not at the fame Time intolerable to many
Particulars.This is the very Evil,which the Con-
flitution of a tutelar Government over Mar-
riage was provided to redrefs ; it being the only
Expedient imaginable, whether it is admini-
fired by the Magiflrate or the Parent, to af-
ford occafionally an adequate Supply of Reafon,
for the Conduct of a blind and precipitate Paf-
fion, and to moderate between the Rigour of a
Rule eftablifhed for the general Benefit, and a
mifchievous Deviation from it agreeably to the
Bent of particular Inclinations. And mufl not
the Ufe and Exercife of the mod inherent and
* lb. p. 5.
H 2
effential
( 52 )
eflential Rights of Human Nature, of the
Rights of Rating and Cloathing\ be fubjed
to fundry Sorts of Regulation ? Mud they
not be fubjed to Regulation regarding the
natural Good of the Individual, the Regula-
tion of Temperance and Ufefulnefs ? Muft they
not be fubjed to Regulation regarding his Eftate,
the Regulation of Oeconomy ? Muft they not
be fubjed, in the moft efpecial Place, to Re-
gulation regarding Society; that the Manner
of Gratification be confiftent with Decency,
and that the Means of Gratification be not either
forbidden by the Law, or injurious to private
Property ? And what is there abfurd or impra-
dicable in a like Regulation of the Right or
natural Appetite to Marriage f An Appetite, to
which Nature herfelf will not permit a Child to
liften till it hath Under/landing fufficient to dif~
cern between Good and Evil* ; and which the
innumerable Occafions and Circumftances of
Mankind, in every fuppofeable Condition of
Life, muft require very frequently to fubmit
to Refolution, or to be fubdued by Labour,
Abftradlion, and reafonable Self-denial ? Is
not this Appetite, in a far lefs limited Extent,
fubjed to the Difcipline of perfonal Virtue,
* D'J- p- 9.
analogous
ifeut
W4e£
X
( 53 )
analogous to Temperance ; the Regulation of
Chaftity ? Is it not capable of being fwayed
or reflrained by Confiderations of Prudence, of
private Duty, of public Good -y and efpecially
of juft Authority ? If this is not the Cafe, to
what Purpofe do you advife Minors to Jhew
Reverence to their Parents, and to the Law j
and never to fuffer themfelves to entertain a
Thought of difpofng themfelves in Marriage,
without the Leave of thofe under whofe Jurif-
didion the Law hath placed them*.
But this fur if didion may pofjibly be ab-
ufed; and a cautious and timorous, a cruel and
unnatural Parent may obftrudt, not only the
reafonable, but the necefary Defires of his
Child -f. This is placing the Argument in its
ftrongeft Point of View. This, it mud be
owned, is an Inftance of Extremity, for which
the Law has not provided: And is it not an
inherent Imperfection of all human Laws; is
not the Execution of the beft Laws fo liable to
be perverted by Error, by Paffion, by Acci-
* D'tjf.pp. 53, 4.
f See Enquiry into the Force, etc. p. 26. Note. Yet
the Do£tor declares^ that there would be no Difficulty in this
Matter, if EJlates were put cut of the ££ueJlion, Diff. p. 50.
dent.
( 54 )
dent, that they cannot provide for all the Ex-
tremities incident to the human Condition?
May not Parties, of whatever Age or Eftate,
be pojjibly fo circumftanced, as to be rendered
incapable of obtaining /<?gW Marriage ? Mar-
riage in authorized Places? Marriage with
Banns or Licence ? Every P erf on, who is of
Age to marry, is of Age to work, and may be
compelled to maintain himfelf and Family, fo
far as his own Labour and Indujlry will go.
But if this is not fufficient, he Jlands for the
rejl as an Objedl of the charitable AJJiJlance of
thofe who abound *. I afk then ; If thofewho
abound do fo far abufe the Truft, which Pro-
vidence has committed to them, as not to
afford him and his Family necejjary Food and
Raiment-, how is the natural Right of Eating
and Cloathing provided for in this Cafe ? Cafes
are very obvious, in which the Law of Society
can make no Provifion: The Law of Nature
almofl always does. To the real Neceffities
of Nature every thing of pofitive Inftitution
yields. In the certain and imminent Danger
of a Community from the Injuftice of the go-
verning Powers, all Regards of inftituted Au-
thority fubmit to the unalienable Right of Self-
/
* Enquiry, etc. p. p.
De-
( 55 )
Defence, The fame Right of Nature arms a
private Perfon with a temporary Power of
judicial Execution againft an unjuft Aggreffor.
So does the univerfal Law of Property, fup-
pofed to be introduced by Men confcious of the
Infirmities of human Nature, and fenfible of
the Uncertainties incident to the human Con-
dition, undergo a temporary Sufpenfion in
Favour of Indigence, neither relievable by
Induflry, nor relieved by Benevolence. This
is a Decifion undoubtedly true in Theory;
but it belongs to Society to judge, whether it
ought in Pra&ice to hearken to the Plea of real
Neceffity, for Fear of encouraging falfe Pre-
tenfions, to the Diffolution of good Govern-
ment, and to the Violation of private Right.
Civil Judicature therefore {hall have Cogni-
' zance of the Janftified Trefpafs; and, as the
Cafe may require, or the Nature of the Civil
^ Conftitution direct, relieve by a mitigating
Interpofition of Law, or recommend to the
Relief of a benign Prerogative. Exadtly paral-
clot" Jel is the Cafe of a Marriage-Contradt, which
i# an unfeigned Neceffity entitles to a temporary
ceoi': Exemption from the Civil Law of Marriage :
irl'^ But a Concern of fuch Importance to Society
juftly claims the Cognizance of the Legiflative,
rather
( 56 )
father than the Executive, Power; and, after
4
mature Confideration of what the Extremity
of Circumftance may or might require, and
what the Order of Society can admit, Civil
Law may fupply a Redrefs by a timely Inter-
pofition or by an equitable Retrofpedt. In
fuchan Extremity,unredreffable by a timely In-
terpofition; a Cafe barely fuppofeable, and in
Favour of which a juft Policy would no more
provide an Exception from the general Law of
Marriage, than it would provide an Ex-
ception in Favour of offending, in like Cir-
cumftances, againft the univerfal Law of Pro-
perty: In fuch an Extremity only, may the
Parties in a Contract of Marriage, publicly
prohibited and difallowed, be juftified in ac-
counting themfelves Man and Wife before
God*; there being, in this Refpetty a tempo-
rary Ceflation of their legal Relation to So-
ciety; and there being in themfelves neither
real, nor intended Difobedience to the Law of
Society; efpecially if Society is permitted its
effential Right of Cognizance in the laft Re-
fort. And I will ftill further add, that in the
Cafe of interfering Neceffities, of public, on
the one Hand, and of private, on the other $
* See Enquiry into the Force, etc. p. 19.
the
'jit
"Ji
br.
sji
«ft
p
[I
of US
km*
U'<ti'
• I f/'
era v
1*1*
( 57 )
th'e former muft prevail, no lefs in Rights than
in Fatt. For would you, for the neceffary
Relief of Hunger, extort from your Father
his Morfel, without which he muft inevitably
ftarve? 1 anfwer for you -y You Would not.
In the Place of your Father put your Country,
our common Parent with his Family of Mil-
lions!
In jfhort, I obferve once for all, that the
i
Right of Marriage is a natural Right, but the
Obligation arifing from a Contract of Mar-
riage is a pojitive Obligation. Now all pofi-
tive Obligations whatfoever are both fubfequent
and inferior to the Obligation arifing from the
original Contract of Society. For Man is an
idnimal, but a rational and a Jocial Animal $
and as no Demands of the animal Nature can
be complied with, but thofe that are agree-
able to the Dictates of right Reafon; fo the
Dictates of right Reafon, in the firft and moft
efpecial Place, oblige us to the Cultivation of
orderly Society. On any other moral Foun-
dation it will be impoftible to reconcile the
interfering Considerations of perfonal and focial
Good, and to eftablifh an Harmony of the
Virtues under the Defcription of an univerfal
Benevolence. On the fame Foundation public
I Necef-
i9-
(58}
Neceffities prevail againft all private Right;
Civil Laws can controul all the pofitive Means
of Obligation between Man and Man; and
every private Affedion is both comprehended
under, and to be regulated by, the Love of
our Country
To apply thefe Obfervations to our further
Ufe.—The Obligation of Society being thefirft
and the fovereign of all Obligations arifing
from the Ad and Will of Man ; the Jlrongejl
Aft of Society, prohibiting Marriage under the
Pain of abjolute Nullity, muft needs, like a
magic Wand -f-, make to vanijh and difappear,
or rather, not extinguifh or deftroy, as if it
was once in Being; but prevent and preclude
the very Exigence of every Obligation, in Lazv
or in Confcience, of the prohibited Marriage.
For what magic Quality is there peculiar to
the Con trad of a Marriage, which fhould
exempt it from the univerfal Law of Contrads,
made with ever fo great Solemnity, and even
confirmed by an Oath? The general Conjlru-
dtion therefore upon the late Acl^ that if a young
* Cari funt parentes, cari liberi, propinqui, familiares;
fed omnes omnium caritates patria una complexa eft. Cic.
Ds Offic. i. 17. 4
+ D'JJ- p- *8- „ ,
Gentle-
. ( 59 )
Gentleman Jhould marry a Woman againji his
Father s or Guardian s Confent, he may marry
another without the leaji Scruple *; as it is a
Confruftion agreeable to the general Confent
of Mankind, fo it is warranted by the mod un-
contefted Principles of Juflice and Government.
For has not the JlrongeJl Aft of Society fully au-
thorifed the Right of the Parent's or Guardi-
an's Confent, as an ejfential Ingredient, or one of
the confiituent Properties of the young Gentle-
man s Marriage ? It is not the Confideration of
the Parent's being under Society fimply and ab-
folutely "j-, but it is the Confideration of his
BEING UNDER A SOCIETY, WHICH HAS
THUS AUTHORISED HIsRlGHT of CONSENT,
that gives him the Power over the Marriage of
his Child; whofe Ad of Marriage therefore,
being deftitute of the Property now made ef*
fential by the Law of Society, can neither exijl
at firft under the Nature of a Marriage, nor
derive a fubfequent Obligation of Marriage,
either in Law, or in Confcience.
This is a dire ft Proof of the Point in Que-
ftion. You have afforded me another Proof,
arifing ab abfurdo. For, you fay J, If the Law
* Dijf, p. 48. f lb. p. 28. % lb. p. 49.
I z cannot
( 6o )
cannot reach the Vinculum Matrimonii, as it
lies in Confciencey but only regulates its Civil
Effects y it is clear, that the only thing a confci-
entious Parent will have to do, in Cafe of his
Child's marrying without his Confent, is to get
the Couple married in the legal Form as fajl as
he can. You very pertinently here afk, But
to what TJfe then ferves the Law ? Allowing
your whole Argument, that it then ferves to
no Ufe at all * ; I will make it the Foundation
of the Conclufion, that the Law certainly muft
reach the Vinculum Matrimonii, as it lies in
" « - *
lr
Confcience.
To inftance in a Divine Law. If a Woman
vow a Vow unto the Lord, and bind herfelf by a
Bond, being in her Father's Houfe, in her
Youth;—if her Father difallow her in the Day
that he heareth, not any of her Vows, or of her
Bonds—foall ftand -f*. Here is a Vow, let the
Mattef of it be what it will, of religious or
fecular Quality, made, with all proper So-
* Nay, the Doctor goes further. The Lawy fays he,
adds nothing but Force ; Force is abhorrent to human No-
turey and may draw upon you and your Children Mifchiefs.—
For Mifchief there may be9 unlefs you could find a Nul•
lity, etc. Dijfi. p. 48.
| Numb. xxx. 3, 4, 5.
^ lemnities,
( 61 )
lemnities, by a Woman placed under two
Circumftances of Incapacity, her being in her
Father s Houfe, or in a State of Subje&ion .
and her being in her Youth, or in a State of
Minority. With regard to the former Cir-
cumllance of Incapacity, the Vow, according
to Vinnius's Defcription, which is very juft, is
a Pro?7iife made to God, in Prejudice of the
Parent's Right *. Now I would alk you, by
the by, whether upon the fame Principle of
domeftic Government, the Marriage of the
Child, without the Parent's Confent, would
not be an Engagement of Contract made to
Man only in Prejudice of the Parent's Right;
even naturally provided the Child fhould chufe
to continue in his Father s Houfe ; or civilly,
provided he continued a legal Part of his Fa-
ther's Family; as obtained by a handing Con-
ftitution in the Roman State. If you anfwer in
the Affirmative ; is there not the fame Efficacy
of an exprefs Law of the Land to conftitute
the Child, as to the Concern of his Marriagef,
under a temporary Subjection to his Parent's
Power £ ?
* See Dijf. p 21.
f So there is in the Rowan Law, Curatio certae ret.
J Bifhop Stilling feet well obferves, that the Scripture
only informs &x, that Marriage was a divine Infitution,
The
( 62 )
T ft e other Circumftance of Incapacity,
mentioned in the Divine Law, is a Woman's
being in her Youth, or in the State of her Mi-
nority ; with regard to which Circumftance
efpecially, I prefume, Puffendorf had afiigned
theReafon of the Law, which you are willing
to admit, viz. Leji Women in their imprudent
and that not merely to continue at P lea fur e, hut to he a perpe-
tual Bond of Society between a Man and his Wife \ and upon
this Principle he did not fee how either Church or State can
null the Contraft, as to Confcience, fo as to make it lawful
for fuch Perfons to marry others. Mifcel. Difc. p. 72.
Afterwards declaring, that the Child hath no Power to
difpofe of himfelf in Marriage before the Age of twenty-one,
according to the Canons of our Churchy without the Parent's.;
Confent ; and, in Favour of that Conftitution, alledging
the Authority of the Civil Law, the Teftimonies of Na-
tions not fubjedf to the Roman Empire, the Opinions of
Fathers, and the Practice of the Greek and other Chriftian
Churches to this very Day; he concludes with telling us,
that, notwithjlanding all this, the Cancnifls and Cajuifls,
although they do not defend the Lawfulnefs of fuch Mar-
riages; yet fay they are not void, nor can be void by the
Dijfeni of Parents, But there are two particular Reafons,
which moved thefe to reject the Necejfty of Parent's Confent;
Firil, Allowing them the Power to enter into religi-
ous Vows, without and againjl the Confent cf Parents,
to which they found this Case parallel: Secondly,.
Making Matrimony a Sacrament, and fo bringing it wholly
under the Church's Power, lb. p. 7S. etc.
Years>
( 63 )
Years, tnijled by a Shew of Piety, fhould undo
them/elves by vowing more than their Fortunes
would bear; or, in your Words, imprudently
ruin their Fortunes *. Now, not to infill again,
that the fame Reafon will more ftrongly en-
force a Reftraint over a Minor from impru-
dently ruining both his Happinefs and his
Fortunes too; I fay, Did the Divine Law dif-
charge the Woman from the Obligation of her
Vowy as it could lie in Confcience; or it did
not ? If it did fo difcharge her; the Appii-
cation is at Hand: If it did not difcharge her,
then, I afk, To what Ufefervedthe Vow? And;
Would not the only Thing a confcientious Pa-
rent would have to do be to get the Yow per-
formed as fajl as pojjible?
I KNow,fome over-fcrupulous Commentators
upon the Text have imagined, that the Wo-
man's Vow would recover its Efficacy of Obli-
gation, at lead in Confcience, upon the Event
of her becoming free from her Father's Domi-
nion. But befides the Reafon jult now infilled
on, that then the Law could ferve to no Ufe-9
as it is exprefsly faid, that the Lord would for-
give her the Performance of her Vow, fo, if
* Pujfoid. De Jur. Nat. vi. 2. 12. Dijf. pp. 22, 3.
there
( H )
there could remain to her any Obligation what-
foever, touching that Concern, it muft be an
Obligation to render fome religious Service of
Charge or Repentance, in Attonement for the
Rafhnefs and Indifcretion, the Undutifulnefs
or Irreligion of an incompetent Vow. In like
Manner, I by no Means deny, that, though from
the Subjlance of every Species of Marriage, pro-
hibited under the Pain of abfolute Nullity,
there certainly does arife no Obligation whatfo-
ever, to be fulfilled according to the Law of
Marriage; yet from the moral Qualifications
or Dilpolitions of the Parties contracting, and
from the Circumjiances attending the whole
Tranfa&ion of fuch Contract, there may arife
fome fort of inferior Obligation, to be fulfilled
according to a L aw derivedfrom the more dijfu-
five and univerjal Sources of commutative Ju
ftice. Even a Contrad: of Debt or Alienation,
made in Minority or otherwife, which the Law
does not prohibit *, but barely not d/fifty will
* It is of great Importance, in this whole Difpute, to
attend to the Diftinction of the Law's prohibiting and an*
nulling, and of its barely not ajjijiing certain Acts of Obii-
gation. If a Minor makes a Contrail to pay a Sum of
Money after he conies of Age, the Contrail is void, in Lain.
And yet (as the Cajc may be put) Confcience binds him. So
if a Alan executes a Bond, defective in tome effmtial Ctr~
admit
( 65 )
admit, in Confcience, of a Variety of Modi-
fications, both of a commercial and of a penal
cranfiance as to Form, the Debt is no Debt in Law: But he
is a Knave that does not pay the Money. It is in this Light
that I confider the [Marriage] Act,and it can Jiandinno other.
Enquiry, See. pp. 18, 9. Now the Law does barely not
effiji the two Species of Obligation abovementioned ; but
it does not. prohibit either the Acts of contracting thefe O-
bligations, or the Difcharge of the Obligations in Confe-
qucnce of the ACts of ContraCt. Hence the Difference is
cjjential between the Laws refpecting thofe Obligations
and the Claufes of the ACt annulling prohibited Marriage.
—On the other Hand, if the Law does barely prohibit,
but not annul any ACt or Contract; the Act or ContraCl
may derive an Obligation notwithftanding the Prohibition.
Thus, Our EnglifnLavas, before this Statute [the Marriage-
Act} was made, forbad indeed clandefine Marriages, but?
when made, admitted their Validity, and allowed the Per-
fons fo married the civil Privileges alfo of the married State.
Enquiry into the Force, &c. p. 17. Note. Agreeably to
which Grotius fays ; Si lex humana conjugia inter certas
perfonas contrahi prohibeaty non ideo fequetur irritum fore
matrimonium, fi reipfa contrahatur. Sunt enim diverfa,
prohibere, et irritum quid facere. De Jur. Bell. ii. 5. 16.
I. The Reafon is, that the Law, though it did not ap-
prove thefe Marriages (conjugia inter certas perfonas, Mar-
riages, for Inftance, between Subjects and Foreigners,
between Citizens and Slaves) as the bejl; yet it admitted
them as tolerable. But there can be no Place for fuch Con-
ftruCtion of Laws prohibiting certain Marriages by one of
its:JirongeJi Acts, under the Pain of ahfolute Nullity ; and
K Quality,
( 66 )
Quality, arifing from the Equality or Inequa-
lity of the Conditions of Contra51, or from the
Circumjlances of Ignorance, Inconfideration
and Deception; of Force, Appetite, and Ne-
ceffity in the contracting Parties. As to a
Minor, in particular ; as foon as he is advanc-
ed to the Age of difcerning Good and Evil,
he is undoubtedly capable of moral Obligation*.
In the Scale of Obligations there is a new De-
gree of Afcent, proportionable to every De-
gree of Increafe of his moral Capacities, and
to every Acceffion of Power over his ACtions
and Things in commercio. Though, therefore,
he may not be poffeffed of a Meafure of the
moral Faculty adequate to the making of a
Marriage-ContraCt, which is by the ACt of juft
Authority fubjeCted to the Will of another;
yet he may be poffeffed of a Meafure of it ad-
equate to the Work of another Species of
especially Marriages greatly prejudicial to Society, with re-
gard to which there was an allowed NeceJJity of reforming
our Englifh Laws. DifT. Pref. p. i. And a Law prohibiting,
under Pain of Nullity, Grctius himfelf allows to be efte-
dlual to invalidate 2 Marriage. Sciendum fimul eft, non
quod vetitum eft fieri lege humana, ft fiat, irrituni quoque
efte, nifi et hoc lex addiderit aut fgnifcaver it, lb. 14.4.
* DlJJ- P> 12.
Contract;
( 67 )
Contract; and thence there may be an Obli-
gation in Confcience, to be fulfilled agreeably
to the Dictates of the natural Law Concerning
Contracts. Again, By our own Laws Minority
is no D if charge in Cafes of Felony * ; whence
'tis evident, that a Minor may be capable of
a penal Obligation, which he will be in Con-
fcience bound to difcharge to the injured Party,
agreeably to the Dictates of the natural Law
concerning 'Trefpafs or Wrong. But to ftate
thefe Varieties and Meafures of Obligation,
which Obligation is far from being exempted
from the Force of Religion and the Cogni-
zance of Confcience; but yet, like all other
Obligations of a purely civil Quality and
Import, may either entirely determine bond
gratia, and by mutual Confent, or elfe be
equitably adjufted in the approved Ways of
Compofition and Satisfaction; would open a wide
Field of Debate of little Relation to our Sub-
jedt. This Subjedt I have confidered difpaffi-
onately, and without Application to the Pafii-
onsof other Men. I am now, however, obliged
to abide the Iffue of your Appeal -f to the Friends
of public and private Liberty, whether the
* B'ljf. p. 12. f Dijf. p. 46.
K 2 annulling
' ? ■
( 68 )
annulling Claufey as to Minors, w/// not well
/land with the Principles of both j of public
Liberty, which cannot fubfift but in Confi-
ftency with good Government and of pri-
vate Liberty, the only valuable Branch of
which is, toadt in Conformity to a reafonable
Law, in all human Probability, the mod ef-
ficacious to the true Interefts of the Perfons
particularly concerned. Every other Species
of Liberty is either a Liberty of Indifference
to their Happinefs, or elfe a Liberty of creating
Mifchief and Mifery to themfelves. It might
be wifhed, you had entered more deeply into
the Syftem of Liberty, which poffibly might
have ended in quieting your Scruples upon
that Head; and then you had, happily for
the Public, prefered the annulling Claufe to
any other Method, as it would, in your Opinion,
have anfwered the full End and PurpofeoJ them
all*.
I am, Sir,
Your obedient humble Servant,
JAMES TUNSTALL.
* Dijf. p. 46.
SF*9i*4 A- *'♦
Marriage in Society
STATED;
WITH
Some Confiderations on Government,
the different Kinds of Civil Law s, and
their diftindt Obligation in Conscience.
i n
A Second LETTER
t o
The Reverend Dr. STEBBING,
Occafioned by his Review, &c.
' 1 ■■ ■■■ ■ ■ ■ I. ■ I . I „ . I I 4
By JAMES TUN STALL, D. D.
Redtor of Great Charte in Kent.
LONDON,
Printed for J a m e s and John Rivington5
in St. Paul's Church Tard,
M dcc l v.
[Price One Shilling.]
r
I
• '.i '
- - '
c
~ ... ... - . .
■
.
f "
BHioi
Conviftion
fcent
ration of
which are
•\ .. wu'wi a
• ■
<
.
ft ■*
>
v ^
( I)
i! r
I;
Marriage in Society
STATED,
i <
S i R,
HERE being no Means more likely
to attain the only juftifiable End
of controverfial Writing, namely, the
Convidtion of the Party in Error and the Efta-
blifhment of the Truth, than a careful Sepa-
ration of the Points in Difpute from thofe
which are agreed on, and contended for, on
both Sides; in my former Letter to you, I
confidered diftindtly, in the firft Place, the
Power of States, or the Efficacy and Obli-
gation of Civil Laws, in the Concern of Mar-
riage in general: And then I made the Ap-
plication to the particular Cafe of the Mar-
riages of Minors. Your Conduit in your
late DUTertatiGn, which determined me to the
A Ufe
(?)
Ufe of that Method, I find to be ftill the fame
throughout your Review, in which your Prin-
ciples, upon the SubjeCt of Marriage and the
Marriage-a<3:, have at length received their fi-
nal Reformation and Perfection *. The fre-
quent and exprefs Declarations, made in both
thofe Performances, would naturally induce
one to think, that the fingle Point now re-
maining in Difpute between you and your
Adverfaries is, whether States have the Pow-
er of annulling the Marriages of Miners f.
But to ftrengthen your Oppofition to the affir-
mative Side of the Queftion, you endeavour
every where to embarras it with all thofe Dif-
ficulties and Objections,' which tend to take
from States the Power, acknowledged and
even contended for by yourfelf £, of granting
to Marriage any legal Eftablilhment enforced
with the Sanction of abfolute Nullity. Now
%■
* Pref, p. ii.
f The Quejlion is, whether a Marriage Contract, made
by Perfons [Minors] to whom the Law has forbidden
the Ufe of Marriage, is void. Rev. p. S. See Dip.
Pref. p. ii.
| If I was of Opinion, that Laws had fuch a Power as this
(of fufpending the Minor's Right to the Ufe of Marriage]
I fhould not difpute, whether they could annul Marriages
Rev. Ib. See Diff. p. 39, 40.
whether
6.
re-
're-
m
mi®
( 3 )
whether all this Appearance of Contrariety in
your Opinion is to be imputed to any Want in
myfelf of ajuft Dilcernment of Confequences,
or rather to the accuftomed Difguifes of the
Art and Myftery of School-Polemics; I am
periuaded, it will be found, upon due Confi-
: , deration, to be univerfally true, that the very
fame Principles of Morality and Government
will vindicate and maintain, and the very fame
extraordinary Cafes and Circumftances of Ne-
rr„ ceffity in the contracting Parties will fufpend
and fuperfede, the Force and Operation in Con-
fcience of all human Appointments, to reftrain
or annul, indifferently, the unlawful Marriages
of Minors, and every other Species of clandefine
Marriages.
To begin with your general Dodfrine con-
cerning Marriage. Marriage, you fay *, is
fimply and folely the' mutual Confent of the
Parties which is in its own Nature bind-
ing upon Confcience. fhe Intervention of
Society neither adds to this Obligation, nor
lui f can diminifh from it $ but dire Sis the Form
^ - and Manner of making the Contradi; fo as to
draw it under civil Cognizance. With a Vlew
to this Diftindlion, Marriage, as it fubfifts in
Society, may be called a mixed thing partly
* Rev. p. 36, 7,
A 2 civil,
;ff£
Sf
wr
(4) ;
civil, and partly ■ religious: Religious, with
refpeCi to the Contract, as binding in Confci-
cnce ; and Civil, with refpeCi to the outward
Forms, by which Marriage lays claim to Civil
Protection. But thefe two Things mujl always
be kept feparate in our Ideas, and each EjfeCt
refered to its proper Principle: the NegleCl
of which has created great Confufion in
treating upon this SubjeCt; whilft the Obli-
gation in Confcience is iransfered jrom the
ContraCi, to which it properly belongs, to the
TJfe of the public Forms, with which it has
nothing to do. This is the fame Thing, as
if you JJjould transfer the Claim oj Civil Pri-
vileges from the public Forms to the fimple
ContraCi, which, every one will agree, is a
great Abfurdity.—I have given here the whole
of your Reprefentation of the Matter, to
which I am oppofing another Reprefenta-
tion, agreeably to my own Principles; in
order to fupply the Deficiencies of the former,
and to correct its Miftakes.
Marriage then, out of Society, is fimplyand
folely the mutual Confent of the Parties to
conjugal Cohabitation *. It is the Confent of
* In the Words of the excellent Bifhop Fleetwood's De-
finition, which the Docfor has approved, Marriage is the
Confent of a Male and Female at Age to confent, and at
Parties
(5}
Parties both naturally and morally capable of
giving it to each other, or of making the
Contradt. They are morally capable of giving
the Confent to each other, when they are ca-
pable of giving it conjijlently with every Law,
which can, in this Refpedt, juftly challenge
their Obedience. The Parties, out of Society,
mujl be fubjedt to the Law of Nature and
they may be farther fubjedt to the exprefs
Law of God: And, when they can, confift-
ently with thefe Lawsy give a mutual Confent
to conjugal Cohabitation ; fuch their Confent is,
in its own Nature, binding upon Confcience.
But the Intervention of Society, or rather of the
Law of Society, can both add to this Obliga-
tion and diminijh from it, or totally preclude
it. For there is an unqueftionable, I pre-
fume, an unqueftioned + Power of Society
Liberty to confent, to give to each other the life and Do*
minion of each other's Body, exclufive to all the World befidesy
&c. DifT. p. 42. .This is obferved, becaufe the Do£tor
aflerts, [Rev. p. 39.) that he that contracts Marriage pri-
vately, is bound by the Law of Marriage, but he is
not entitled to Cohabitation. A Contradi&ion in
Terms! Cum regulariter uxor in continuant cum marito
cohabitationem confentiat, &c. Buff, dejur. Nat. vi. 1. 22.
f DiJJiy. 39. Quinleges civiles contraftui matrimoniali
certa quaedam capita poflint fuperaddere, quibus deficien-
tibus idem in civitate invalidum et nullum ha beat ur, aut
to
( 6 )
to dire£fc the Form and Manner of making the
Marriage Contract, fo as to conftitute them
abjolutely necefjary to the Validity of the Con-
tradl, or under the pain of Nullity. Mar-
riage then, as it lubfifts in a Society thus di-
reBing the Form and Manner of contraBing ity
is a mixed Concern ; each Party in the Mar-
riage being, of Neceffity, to be confidered not
other wife than as a mixed Perfon. He is not
to be confidered fimply and folely as a Many
or as a Chrijlian Man 3 but he is to be con-
£dered' as a SubjeB, or a private Member of
the Civil Community. Hence he is bound
Naturaliter, as a Man 3 by the Obligation of
mutual Confent, according to the Law of
flature : And he is moreover bound * Chili-
sertis effectibus deftituatur, ap^rtum eft. de jure
Nat. viii. 1. 3. Here in civitate means In the State of Civil
Society, in ContradiftincHon to the State of Nature. So
the fame Author 3 Nullas habebit vires jurata promiffio de
re, quae eft illicita jure natural! et divino, imo humano quo-
que ifti non adverfo, fijuransin civitate vivat. Ib. iv. 2. 9.
*—Ut—matrimonium civiliter pro nullo habeatur, et re-
fcindi queat. Puff, de jure Nat.v\. 2. 14. Wherefore our
Author fhould conftrue the Word civiliter, in Civil EJli-
Tnationy and not by the Civil Authority, I cannot compre-
hend. ObfervationSy &c. p. 14. Civiliter never fignifies by
the Civil Authority 3 but Civilly, or in fome Civil Refpetf•.
Rev. p. 16. Civilis obligatio aliquan<jo notat talem, qu»
ter
(7)
ter, as a SubjeB-, by the Obligation of Allc-
giance to the Civil State, according to the Law
of Society. Now the Operation of the Law
of Society is diftinguifhable in two very dif-
ferent Effedts. The one Effedt is the Sub-
jedl's Obligation in Confcience, anfwerable to
the Power, or rightful Authority of thofe
who prefide over Civil Communities; the
other Effedt is Civil Cognizance or furifdiBion,
anfwerable to the penal Enforcement of their
Laws Accordingly Laws appointing the
requifite Solemnities of Marriage produce this
• -
non in mero jure naturali fundatur, fed ex jure civile
oritur ; — aliquando notat talem, — ex qua etiam afiio in
foro civili oritur. Puff. lb. iii. 4. 5. Crviliter quoque
obligari ex adtu fuo dici quis poteft, aut eo fenfu, ut ob*
ligatio procedat, non ex mero jure naturali, fed ex jure
civili, vel ex utroque ; aut eo fenfu ut in foro aflio inde
detur. Grot, de jurey &c. ii. 14. 6. 2. See the preceding
Note.
* Praefupponimus, ut imperium efFe£hi fuo potiatur, re-
quiri turn vires naturales, qua [quibus] fubjeftus—reprafert-
tato aliquo malo polfit cogi; turn titulumy ex quo jure aliis
praeftandum quid aut omittendum queat injungi\ cui in
iftis refponaet obligatio ejufde?n juffis obfequendi. Puff. &c,
Vll« 3* 1 • Etfi primario obligation^ naturalis fit cotifci-
entiam bominis Jlringere; eadem tamen efpcacia obligations
quoque civili communicatur.—Deinde in hoc utraque ob-
ligatio convenit, quod homo ultro et ex intrinfeco velut
motu debeat implere ea, ad quae per illam tenetur. In qup
praecipue obligatio a coaftione differt, lb. iii.4. 6.
4 double
( 8 )
double EfFe<ft. They create a new Oblige
tion in Gonfcience confpiring with the Obliga-
tion, which arifes to the Parties naturally
from their mutual Confent3 and they confti-
tute a Jurifdi&ion over Marriage, drawing it,
as you obferve, under Civil Cognizance, or en-
titling it to Civil ProteBion. But it mud be
the Conjijlency and friendly Agreement alone
of the two Obligations in Confcience, that can
ordinarily produce their genuine and perfect
Offspring 3 Marriage in Society. It is
contrary to the Nature of Man, that there
fhould be Marriage without the mutual
Confent of the Parties 3 and it is contrary to
the ejfential Order of Society, that there fhould
be Marriage of its SubjeBs, which its rightful
Laws do wholly difallow, or declare to be
abfolutely null and void: And where the Obli-
gation in Confcience, which other wife would
be created by the mutual Confent of the Par-
ties, does irreconcileably interfere with the Ob-
ligation in Confcience arifing from the juft
Authority of the Civil Legiflature 5 there the
latter Obligation muft prevail to invalidate
and extinguifh the Obligation in Confcience of
a Marriage Contract 3 as it certainly does and
muft prevail to invalidate and extinguifh the
interfering Obligation in Confcience of all
1
1
( 9 )
pofitive Afe and Contracts whatfoever, be-
tween Parties in lawful Subjection to the Civil
Community*. So that, upon the whole,
where the Solemnities of Marriage are pu-
blicly prescribed with the Sanction of Nullity,
there is no transfering of the Obligation in
Confcience from the Contrail to the Ufe of the
public Forms. For there is, in reality, a prior,
a fuperior Obligation in Confcience to the Ufe
oj the public Forms; not indeed an Obliga-
tion founded in the intrinfic Nature of the
Forms themfelves, which may be indifferent
in moral Quality, though not in their Ufe and
Importance to Society, as to their Matter or
Circurnftances ; but an Obligation derived to
them from the inherent and indifpenfable
Authority of the Civil State, to which Sub-
jects, by the Law of their Allegiance, are
obliged to render an aCtive Obedience, in its
falutary Appointments of the requifite Solem-
nities of Marriage I have, in a Manner,
! ■ ' t. ■
* Poftquam—quis fummum imperium civile jam fubiit,
nullo modo poteft alteri potejlaiis quid in fe concedere, quod
adverfus jus fummo irrrperio qutefitum valeat j cum hac ra-
tione duos dominos non fubordinatos acciperet, quibus
fimul quis fervire nequit. Puff. &c. iii. 2. 9.
f Obfervandum, uti leges civiles alios quoque contra-
&us certis folennibus ac ritibus veftire folent, qui, ubi ab-
fuerint, iidem in foro civili pro invalidis cenfentur ita et
B tran-
( 1° )
tranfcribed thefe laft Sentiments from Fujjen-
dorf\ who here refolves, as you exprefly de~
dare, the Obligation of the Subjett, to comply
with the eftabiifhed Solemnities of Marriage,
into that general Obligation [in Conference, I
prefume, as it is an Obligation derived from
the Law of Nature, *] which all Subjects lie
under to obfer've the Laws of their Country -j*.
And unlefs you will maintain, that there may
be Obligations in Confidence, at the very fame
Time, carrying Subjects quite contrary Ways;
inuft not the general Obligation to comply
with thofe Solemnities, which the Laws of
their Country have made necejfary to Marriage,
diredly infer a Defedl, as to the Validity of a
clandeftine Contrad: of Marriage in foro Con-
fci entice ?
Thus I have placed, as it were in Contrail:,
our general Principles upon an interefling Part
matrimonio talia quaedam, in civitatibus nonnullis, depre-
hendi adjuncla, ut, fi ilia abfuerint, pro legitimo idem
non habeatur, aut faltem quibufdam erFectibus in foro civili
careat. Ilia folennia etfi a jure naturali ignorentur; ta-
men cum idem jus leges civiles obfervari jubeal ab illist
qui iifdem fubjiciuntur \ indifferentiam juris naturalis heic
nequicquam allegant qui poteflatem ferendi aut abrogandi
leges civiles non habent. Puff. Sic. vi. i.in fin.
* Thcjusfiatur#—is the Law of Confcience. Rev. p. 2,1•
+lh- P- 39-
of
( II )
of the Controverfy, viz. <c Whether a Mar-
riage Contradl, annulled by the Civil Au-
ct thority, is void in Confcience, as well as in
tc Law." The annulling Law, you affirm
has not [aid, nor indeed could it fay, that
the Nullity Jhall reach to Confcience, though
fome of its Defenders have. In the number of
thefe Defenders I profefs myfelf to be ; and
that upon the following Principles, which I
lay down in Difproof of both the Members
of your Aflertion; viz.
Firji, Becaufe Society has a rightful Power
over Marriage, and can reftrain in Subjects
the LTfe of their natural Right of contracting
it; whence the Contract will, in certain Cafes,
be null and void in its Principle.
Secondly, Becaufe Society has a rightful
Power over fome of the Rights or Obligations
ejfential to a Marriage Contract; and therefore
can, in certain Cafes, viciate the Contract in
its Effedls: And,
Thirdly, Becaufe the Intention of Society, to
exert both thefe Atfts of its rightful Power, is
declared, under fuitable Circumftances, by its
legal Eftablifhment of Marriage with the San-
clion of abfolute Nullity.
Firf, Society has a rightful Power over
Marriage. The public Regulations of Mar-
* ib. P. 48.
B 2 riage,
( 12 )
riage, as well as the judicial Cognizance arif-
ing from the penal Enforcement of thofe
Regulations, are confefledly within the Pro-
vince of the Civil Legiflature. Now the
Meafure of Civil Subjection does exaCtly tally
with the Extent of the Magiftrate's Right;
and a Compliance with the Conditions, under
which the Marriage ContraCt in Society is re-
gulated, according to the declared Intention of
the Civil Legiflature, is an indifpenfable Article
of the Subject's Allegiance. Hence a Mar-
riage ContraCt, which is manifeflly difallowed
by the Laws of any Civil Community, is null
and void in itfelf; being made by Parties ?ion
fui Juris in that particular Cafe, or being de-
flcient in the Principle eflential to every obli-
gatory ACt or ContraCt ; the Right of con-
traCting the Obligation intended by it. Morals
admit not, that an Obligation to a third Perfon
be contracted in Prejudice of any prior Right;
let that Right be vefted either in a private or
a public Perfon, that is, the Community.
Here the Right of Society is prior in Time, to
every Obligation contracted by the pofithe
Will of the SubjeCt; for he is a Subjedi pre-
vioufly to his exerting any ACt of Will what-
foevem. And the Right of Society is prior in
Dignity to every human Right, as the Rela-
tion of Society is the moil eflimable and effen-
tial
( *3 )
tlal to the Nature and Condition of Man. I
have hardly advanced one Pofition on this
Head, which is not fupported by the Autho-
rity of the bed Mafters in the moral Science*.
I may add the Authority of yourfelf, who af-
fert what will juftily the whole, that the Law
may in many Cafes take away the Right to contract
and then the Contraffi is void of itfelf -j-. But,
Secondly, This Efficacy of the Law to
take away, in certain Cafes, the Right to con-
tra£l, will more eafily proceed in the Concern
of a Marriage Contract; " becaufe Society has
* Conjundlio maris cum fcemina, per quam propagatur
genus humanum, digniftima res eft legum cur a. Grot.
de Per. Rel. Chrijl. ii. 13. Nos examuflim ftbi invicem
refpondere afferimus poteftatem regis legitimam et officium
civium ; adeoque pernegamus a rege jure quid pofle impe-
rari, quod fubjetftus jure poftit detre&are. Puff. &c. vii,
2. 11. Ubi juratum fuit fuper rebus et adfionibus, qua
direSiioni fuperiojis Jubfunt, juramentum a confenfu — fupe-
rioris vim mutuabitur, qui illud irritum declarare poteft.
Hinc lege Hebraeorum, Num. xxx. Pater poterat refcin-
dere vota jurata filiaefamilias, maritus uxoris, dominus
fervi, ft videretur. Ib. iv. 2. 24* Nec fuper rebus mcis
aut adtionibus, in quas jam alteri jus fuit qucsfitum, tertio
valide pofium promittere.—Illud tritum, qui prior tempore,
potior jure, &c. Ib. iii. 7. 11. In examinando jure naturae
primum videndum, quid illis natures initiis congruat;
deinde veniendum ad illud, quod, quanquam poft oritur,
dignius tamen eft, [i. e. re<fta ratio et natura focietatis. j
Grot.de jure, &c. i. 2.
f Rev. p. 35.
Cf a right-
( )
cc a rightful Power over fome of the Rights
cc or Obligations effential to that Species of Con-
<c trad; and therefore can in certain Cafes, vici-
c< ate the Contrad in its EffeStsF
This is your exprefs Dodrine. He that
contracts Marriage privately, is bound by the
Law of Marriage, but he is not entitled to Co-
habitation; which (till he has complied with the
public Forms, i. e. made neceffary to Marriage)
will be vicious even under the Seal of Marriage *.
The Title then to conjugal Cohabitation is con-
feffedly in the Power of the Law. A Con-
ceffion ample enough to fhew the Nothingnefs
of a Diftindion, which would feparate the
ContraSl of Marriage, from the ejfential Attri-
bute of Marriage ! For what does that Diftin-
dion amount to ? Why, to this weighty Pofi-
tion, neither more nor lefs; " That Subjeds
<c may make a private Contrad about fome
cc Bufinefs or other; but, where the Law dif-
<c allows, they cannot make a Marriage Con-
<c traSl --jV Now we may, by the by, ob-
* Rev. p. 39.
f V fupra Not. ad p. 4. Ut aliqua proprie alieriui
uxor dici queat, necejfum videtur ita ipfam velut in manus viri
convenifle, ut ea ta?iquam uxore pojjit utL Puff. &c. vi. 1.14.
It is remarkable, that the Dodor formerly feemed to think
aftual Confummation to be neceffary to the Contrad of Mar-
riage; (Enquiry, p. 6.) now he will not allow even the
Right to it to be neceffary.
4 ferve,
IMJ
( J5 )
fcrve, that there being an allowed Vicicujnefs of
Cohabitation,that is, an Unlawfulnefs of it in Con-
fcience, under the Seal of what you call a private
Marriage; wherever Puffendorf aflerts to Civil
Laws, the Power of declaring Marriages abfo-
lutely invalid or null, he muft mean invalid or
null with refpedlto their internal Obligation, as
well as with Refpect to their Privileges or Ef-
fedts in foro externo *. Puffendorf exprefly pro-
nounces it an Abfurdity, that any vinculum paffii
fhould fubfift, when no Part of the Obligation
arihng from the Contract either can or ought to
be difcharged -f*. He goes farther ftill: He pro-
nounces it no lefs than a Violation of the Law
* Quarum — legum ea vis effe poteft, ut quod contra
eafdem contrahitur connubium, certis effedtibus, per jus
civile afiignatis, deftituatur; vel etiam omnino pro inva-
lido, et quod refcijfionem admittat, declaretur. Puff". See.
vi. I. 8. Declaretur; ut fupra, did queat, i.e. fit. The
fame maybe obferved of the Words, pro nullo habcatur,
cited p. 6. though the Docftor will have them to fignify, not
that the Marriage is nothing, but that it fnall reckoned,
esteemed or accounted as nothing. Rev. p. 17- Equally
good Criticifm and Law ! For pray how can a Marriage ad-
mit of Refcijfion, or be juftly reckoned as nothing? Why, he
will tell you, (Enq. p. 21. Not. that in the Cafe ofUn-
faithfulnefs to the Marriage Bed, the Contract voids itfelf ;
the Law only declares it void, i. e. the Contract muft be void
by the Force of Law, before a judicial Sentence can pro-
perly declare it fo.
f Abfurdum—eft dicere, vinculum pafti adhuc fubftftit ;
et tamen nulla pars ejus debiti,quod ex eo padfo fluit, prseftari
poteft, aut debet. Puff. &c. vi. 1. 22.
( 16 )
tf Nature, for the Cruelty and intolerable
Difpofitions of the Parties, to make a Separa-
tion of them from Bed and Board; the Mar-
riage Obligation in Conscience fo remaining,
they cannot marry again He fpeaks in-
deed of an abfolute Separation; and makes a
reafonable Conceffion in Favour of a temporary
one, for the moral Ufes of Difcipline, Cor-
retSion, and Punifhment. But let it be re-
membered, that I am only reprefenting
Puff'endorf's Opinion, both as to the fpecial
and juftifiable Caufes of Divorce, and as to the
Extent of a Divorce from the Bond of Matri-
mony once in ablual Exijlence. He is plainly
- no Friend, no more than you are when it
fuits your Occailons, to the Decifions of the
Canonifts diftinguifhing the civil from the
moral Operations of fuch Divorce ; that is,
* Juri naturali repugnat, ob mores intolerabiles et ni-
miam faevitiam conjuges feparare a confortio menfa thorique-,
falvo tamen vinculo matrimonii, quo de alia conditione fibi
profpicere prohibeantur; nifi forte qd. tempusy et in vicem
caftigationis ea feparatio fit injun£i;a. Ib.
■f—Ut non folum lsefa pars cum perfida conjuge nonam-
plius teneatur cohabitare, fed et lselse parti tranfire ad fe-
cunda vota lie eat; quicquid in contrarium jus Canonicum
nugetur. Puff. Ib. c. 21. In the Cafe of Unfaithfulnefs
to the Marriage Bed, the innocent Party lies under great
Hardfhips: But what is it that precludes him from the
lawful Remedy ? Why, the civil Laivs of Jome Nations.
—The Author takes, it for granted, that our Laws are right.
he
( l7 )
he is plainly no Friend to your favourite Di-
ftination of Obligation in Confcience, and Nullity
in Law, of a Marriage, which a ftanding Con-
ftitution of the State has declared ipfo faclo null,
or which fhall be refcinded, purfuant to a legal
Conftitution, by the regular Sentence of an
authorized Judicature,
To return to the Argument. We are agreed,
that the conjugal Cohabitation, in confequence
of a Marriage publickly difallowed *, has a
moral Vicioufnefs perpetually attending it; that
it is a Contempt of the rightful Laws of Society,
and a72 Offence to God, being one Species of that
unlawful Commerce, which the Scripture calls
But, perhaps, I might more reafonably bring my Principle
as an Objection to thefe Laws. Rev. p. 27.
* Should it be faid, that conjugal Cohabitation needs
not to be, in Faft, the Confequence of the Contract: I
anfwer, that the Right to it in the Parties being implied in
a real Contradt, the Doctor's Hypothecs introduces contra-
diftory Rights; the Right of the private Parties, 011 the
one hand, and the Right of the Public, on the other, to
the fame individual Thing at the fame Inftant of Time.
See Vindicat. p. 20. Farther; though the clandefline Con-
tract be a mere Nullity, yet the very Attempt, or Aft of fuch
Contract is injurious to Society, and therefore punifljable by
it. Si adtus, qui lege aut praecepto interdidtus erat, et
valere vetiius, interdici aequo jure potuit, jam irritus erit
adtus privati ; fed puniri tamen idem poterit, ideo quod
promilit id quod jui juris non erat, maxime fi juratus id
fecerit. Grot.de jur. &c. iii. 23. 5.4.
C Fornica-
( 18}
Fornication -J*. Now fuch a Vicioufnefs of
EfeEl, as long as it continues, does utterly in-
validate every moral Adt or Ccntradt whatfo-
ever. For it is impoffible, that any Perfon,
in any Cafe whatfoever, fhould be placed, by
his own or any other's Adt, under a moral
Obligation to commit Sin. The Vicioufnefs
of Effedt may fometimes have the formal Na-
ture of Injury againit the Right of a third Per-
fon; and then it annihilates the Obligation
arifing from any moral Adt, or, in other
\V ords, the Adt will be ipfo faffo null, as has
been already faid, through Defedt in its Prin-
ciple, the rightful Power of the Agent or con-
tradting Party. And fuch is the real Cafe of
the Effect of an unlawful Marriage Contract
fince conjugal Cohabitation, in confequence of
that Contradt, is againit the acknowledged
Right of Society. But that a Vicioufnefs of
Effedt fhould annihilate the Obligation arifing
from any moral Adt, it is not neceflary, that
the Effedt fhould carry with it the Idea of
Injury; provided it carries with it the Idea
of Sin, which indeed is Injury againit God,
Thus the famous Corban of the JewiffiCafuifts,
a folemn Vow never to perform, for the Pi me fa
come, the Offices of Liberality or the Re-
turns of Gratitude to a neceffitous Parent, has
t Enq. p. 22,
a Si fa
( J9 )
a Sinfulnefs of Effedt perpetually attending it,
and is ipfo fafto null though the Parent has>
in Stridtnefs, no Right to the Child's Eft at e^.
A finful Adt may, for Reafons both politic
and juft J, derive upon the Agent an Obliga-
tion, not only to the buffering of Punifhment,
but to the transfering of his Right; but as
God has given to no Man a Licence to Sin, fo
he has given to no Man a Licence to oblige
himfelf to the Commiflion of Sin; which
would be the ready Way to deftroy all mo-
ral Obligation, by making it to depend upon
the precarious and corrupt Determinations of
the human Will.
I will here prefume to offer one Remark
upon a celebrated Paffage of that eminent
Scholar and Cafuift, Bithop Stillingjleet.
—C£ Matrimony," fays he §, "being a Con-
cc tradf of a Civil and Public Nature, it is very
" juft and fitting, that the Civil Society and
\
* Matt. xv. 5.-—Peccat quidem qui illicit a promittit, fed
bh peccat qui eadem pr&Jlat. Pujf> &c. iii. 7. 6.
f Diff. p. 17.
| Srepe enim indecentia eft major in adtu quam in
effedtibus : fsepeetiam incommoda, quae refciftionem fe»
quuntur, majora quam ipfa indecentia, aut incommodum
adrus ipfius. Grot, de jure, &c. ii. 5- *6. 2- So it is ge-
nerally better, that Prodigality fhould fometimes diftipate
an Eftate, than that imprudent Perfops fhould be reftrained
from the Difpofal of their own.
§ Mifc. Difc.p. 73.
C 2 " the
( 20 )
ffc the Chriftian Church fliould appoint Rules
41 and Orders for the decent Performance of
C£ it, and may appoint Penalties to the Breakers
cc of thofe Rules; fo far as to illegitimate the
<c Children born of fuch Marriages, which is
cc nulling the Contract as to the Civil EffeCt of
ct it. But I do not fee how Church or State
can null the Contract as to Conscience, fo as
ct to make it lawful for fuch Perfons to marry
<c others.''—The Obligation in Confcience of
a Chriftian Marriage Contract, in aCtual Exift-
ence confidently with every Law human and
divine, cannot be nulled by an occafional In-
terpofition of Law * ; any more than the Ob-
ligation of a Subject's Oath, touching a Mat-
ter independent on the Power of the Civil Le-
giilature-f. But as the late Marriage ACt did
not null, nor ever intend to null, the exifting
Obligation in Confcience of any Marriage Con-
traCt, or even Precontract of Marriage, through-
out E?jglandy fo the Bifhop's Decifion, if ca-
pable of an Application to your Purpofe, la-
* Can a Contract lawfully ?nade be diflolved by Law ?
I fay it cannot. Rev. p. 35. So fay I too (except where the
Marriage Contradt has voided itfelf) and almoft every Body
elfe. But what is that to the Purpofe ?
f Apparet—juramentum, quod in fe nullo laborat vitio,
fidhimque fuit fuper re, de qua in jurantis arbitrio ejl pro
lubitu difponere, a fuperiore non pofle refcindi. Puff*
iv. 2. 24.
i bours
( 21 )
bours under two effential Defeats. Firfl, the
Queftion is, not whether the Civil Society
can null, as to Confcience, a Marriage Con-
trad: adually made and fubfifting in due Force;
but whether it can appoint public Rules and
Orders as necejjary to the origmal making of the
Contrad; and confequently, whether it can
render the Ad of contrading, in Defiance of
thofe Rules, wholly ineffedual in Law and in
Confcience, through the Defed of its efficient
Cauje, the Right of the Parties Secondly,
the Civil Society not only can appoint Civil Pe-
?7alties to the Breakers of the Rules, fuch as
Illegitimacy cf Children, &c. but it can with-
hold a Right, or countermand an Obligation
effintial to the Marriage Contract; and there-
fore render the Contrad wholly ineffedual
through the Vicioufnefs of its Effed.
The remaining Inquiry is, how it may be
fufficiently known to the Subjed, that the
Civil Society does adually intend to exert
both thefe Ads of its rightful Power (the
Ad of reftraining in Subjeds the Ufe of
their natural Right of contrading Marriage,
and the Ad of withholding the Right or of
countermanding the Obligation effential to the
D C?
Marriage Contrad) in the legal Eftablifhment
of Marriage And, 'Thirdly, this Intention of
the Civil Society is declared, under fuitable
Circum-
( 22 )
Circumftances, by its eftablifhing Marriage
with the Sanction of abfolute Nullity,
Here it may be proper to confider, as di-
ftin&ly as our propofed Brevity will admit of
and the prefent Occafion requires, the genuine
Force of Obligation in all Civil Laws 5 and how
and in what Meafure that Force is exerted, a-
greeablv to the Intention of the Civil Legiflature,
in the great Diverfity of their Kinds and pe-
culiar Qualities. That Civil Laws, when
they are rightly made, that is, when they
are limited, in their Matter, to the proper
Sphere of their Activity, and fitly ordered to
attain the legitimate End of Government, the
Good of the Community, have an internal or
moral EfteCt upon the Minds of Subjects, or
do oblige their Confciences * ; you will hard-
ly in Serioufnefs and cool Reflection deny:
though under the Perfon of a Difputant, and
for Argument's Sake, you carry a very ftrong
Appearance of denying it I (hall however,
* Leges civiles —- confcientiam afficiunt. — C'bligatio
a coa£tione differt.—Quae—ex obligatione facimus, ilia ex
intrinfeco animi motu, et velut propria judicio approbates
fieri debere intelliguntur. Puff. Sic. iii. 4.. 6.
f The Rule of Right, in this and all other Cafes, is the
univerfal Law of Nature, bv which Men and States ought
' j a
to govern themfelves, where the pofitive Law of God inter-
pofeih not. Dill. p. 6.—Beyond which [natural Rights] if
the Laws ot Society go, they are contradictory to the natu-
for
"
-. . .
( 23 )
for the prefent, reft the Matter upon the Au-
thorities alleaged in the Margin; and make
no fcruple of aflerting, that all Civil Laws, I
mean, all rightful Civil Laws, do create a
certain Obligation in Confcience. The Di-
verfity of Opinions upon the Subject has ge-
nerally been owing to the Want of confidering
to what 'Thing, and in what Meafure, Civil
Laws oblige, agreeably to the real and certain
Intention of the Legiflature 5 and this Intention
ral Lav/. Rev. p. 14.—So that we mud part with our old
Diftintftion, with Regard to the poftive Law of'Man,
which can appoint prater naturam multa, contra naturam
nihil.—Lex civilis, fays Grotius, quanquam nihil poteft:
praecipere quod jus naturae prohibet, aut prohibere quod
praecipit, poteft tamen naturalem libertatem circumfcri-
bere, et vetare quod naturaliter licebat, &c. De jure, Sic.
ii. 2. 5. Notandum id quidem penes reges efie,—multa, quae
funt extra leges naturales, jubehdo jufta, vetando injufta
facere. Puff. &c. viii. 1.5. Does not the Dodfor know,
that moft of the Rights of Authority and Property, now in
being, were firft introduced by the Laws of Society ? And
can he defend the Magistrate's Power to command any
thing mcrally indifferent, of civil or religious Concern,
without allowing human Laws to be, in certain Cafes, the
Rule of Right, by which Men ought to govern themfelves?
As to States, <c generally all Laws human," lays Hooker,
*e which are made for the ordering of politic Societies, be
either fuch as eftablifh fome Duty, whereunto all Men
c' by the Law of Reafon did before ftand bound, or eJfe
i( fuch as make that a Duty now, which before was none?
Eccl Pol. i. p. 88.
is
( 24 )
is difcovered from the different Kinds and
peculiar Qualities and Circumftances of Laws.
Firft, fomeLaws arc purely permijjive. They
folely and fimply mean either to take away,
or to deny an Action in a public Court of judi-
cature, for the Punifhmentof an Offence againft
the natural Law, or for the fironger Enforce-
ment of any natural Obligation*. Thefe
Laws barely permit the Tranfgreffion which
they do not punijh, and the Difcharge of a
Duty which they do, not encourage and ajjijl.
In the State of Society, whenever the Civil
Interefl is not direCtly concerned, or whenever
it cannot be fo well confulted by the Interpol!-
tion of a coercive Law; the Dictates of na~
tural Confidence, and of Confcience informed
by the exprefs Law of God, are generally left
to fubfift upon their feparate Foundation -fx
The Matter of Obligation in Confcience,
created by a permijjive Law, is only that no
Perfon, either private or public, fhall abridge
the Liberty, or counteract the Exemption,
which the Law fecures to, or confers upon,
* Notandum id quidein penes reges effe, legihus natu-
ralibus vim juris civilis in foro humafio exfcrendam addere vel
demere, addita fanEtione pcenali vel dernpta. Pujf*
viii. i. c.
T In civitatibus ob violatas leges naturales, quibus auto-
fit as legis civil', s data mm eft, nemo convenitur aut punitur.
Ib. % i. • " ■ ' i " i-'
another *.
( 25 )
another*. Thus the Law merely permits %
it neither affirms nor denies it neither dif-
charges nor affifts the Obligation of a Contradl
made by a Minor to pay a Sum of Money—after
he comes of Age; or the Obligation of a Bond
defective in fome ejfential Gircumfance as to
Form -f*. Where Obligations in Confcience
arife from fuch Adls of Contradl, on which
the Law has confered an Immunity from Civil
Cognizance\ I fay, where Obligations in Con-
fcience really do arife, (which mufl appear
from the Circumftances) there it is praife-
worthy, and more fo becaufe not legally ne-
ceffary $ it is natural Honefly and natural
Juftice to difcharge them. And when they
are difcharged, fuch is the permifjive Genius
of the Law, that it will not ufually affift to
the Revocation of what is paid as a Debt, but
a Debt which was not recoverable by Law §.
* Permiftio proprie non actio eft legist fed aftionis ne-
gatiOy nifi quatenus alium ab eo cui permittitur obligat ne
impedimentum ponat. Grot, dejur. 3cc. i. 1. 9. Conf. Puff.
&c. i. 6. 15.
ft Rev. pp. 10, I. Enq. p. 19.
§ Fieri natura honeftum eft, quanquam non vere debi-
turn,—legata integra fine detradtione Falcidise praeftare,
folvere debitum quo quis in pcenam creditoris eratliberatus,
vicem beneficii rependere, qu<e omnia ceffare faciunt con-
diet ion em hidebiti. Grot, de jur. &c. ii. 14. 6. Puff. &c.
i. 4. 5.
D Under
r
( 26 )
Under the Species of permiffive Laws falls
Chap, io, of the famous Statute 1 J. I. as
far as it declares to what Inftances of Marriage
the Penalties there provided againft Polygamy
Jhall not be extended. Of the very fame Cha-
rafter and Efteft is the Claufe of the Mar-
riage Aft, in which it is enafted, that fit ltd
Cafe tnljatfoeviec tballany @utt or proceed
fog be bab fit anpCcclefiafitcal Court,in or-
der to compel a Celebration of anj) Carriage,
in facie Ecclefiae, bp reafoit of anp Contract
of S^atrtmonp fobatfoeber, mbetber per ver-
ba de prasfenti, 0£ per verba de futuro.—I
need not here fpeak of a Contraft ofMatri-
mony per verba de prcefenti, which, being
made without the Qualifications required, as
of Neceffity, by the Aft, will more properly
fall under it's annulling Claufes to be confi-
dered hereafter. The Claufe juft recited is
purely permijjive with regard to the Precon-
trail of Matrimony, as that Word fignifies,
in its Propriety, repromijjio futurariirn nuptia-
rumy a mutual Promife or Engagement of the
Parties to afuture Marriage. Here it is not
the Intendment of the Law to affeft their Con-
fciences, either to the Hindrance or the En-
forcement of the fpecific Performance. They
are left, in this Refpeft, to the Diftates of
their own Minds, fuggeiling to them either
the
( 27 )
the Reality or the Meafure of their Obli-
gation, agreeably to the Prefcriptions of the
natural Law concerning Contrails. And as
the Obligation, however real, is not the Ob-
ligation of a Marriage, but a mutual Engage-
ment to a future Marriage; fo this Engage-
ment has not the Property, peculiar to Mar-
riage, namely, Indiffolubility; and therefore
may, like Contracts in general, for Reafons of
mutual Duty, Inclination, or Convenience, be
fatisfied or difcharged by mutual Confent.
You can difcern a juft Diftinilion between a
Minor's aitual Alienation of his Eftate inpra-
fenti, and a Contrail de futuro to alienate
when he {hall become of full Age *. It is
Pity you did not difcern a like Diftinilion
between a Precontrail of Marriage, or a Con-
trail de futuro to alienate one's Perfon for Life,
and an aitual Marriage or prefent Alienation-f-j
nor a correfpondent Diftinilion between the
* A Contrail made by a Minor as to the Enjoyment of
the Eftate in preefenti is null;—but I fee no Reafon why
a Contrail de futuro—will not bind, I mean in Confcience.
Rev. pp. 10, I. Qui—de futuro ftc dicit, Cras dabo, eras
donabo; aperte fignificat fe jam non dedijfe. Puff. &c.
iii. 5. 8.
f There is effentially no Difference between a Precon-
trail and Marriage; a Precontrail importing that the
Parties do, and from thenceforth will, hold themfelves as
Man and Wife. Enq. p. 19.
D 2 Force
( 28 )
Force of the Claufe above recited permijfve
with refpedt to a Precontract, and the Force
of the Claufes of the Adt annulling adlual,
clandeftine, Marriages. The Effedl of the
permijfive Claufe is Nullity in Law under an
Obligation in Confcience, if the Circumftances of
the Contradt fo require 5 the Effedt of the an-
nulling Claufes is abfolute Nullity. By faying,
that the Effedt of the permiffive Claufe is Nul-
lity in Law of a Precontradt, under a poffible
Obligation in Confcience; I mean, it is Nul-
lity in Law, only in a certain Refpedt; name-
ly, as the Claufe takes away one fingle Species
of A dt ion or Proceeding, in order to compel a
Celebration of the Marriage in facie Ecclefias ;
in order to fatisfy the Engagement by a fpe-
cific Performance; which Engagement may
ftill obtain a legal Effedt of another Kind, and
that by Proviiions of the legal Conftitution
ftill remaining in their antient, undimi-
nifhed Force.—Should you now alk, of what
Ufe is fuch a permijfve Claufe ? I anfwer, of
the fame Ufe, which you afiign for the Law
incapacitating the Minor to pafs away his
Eftate *. It is to prevent Precontradts made
* If it be afked, of what Ufe then are fuch Laws? I an-
fwer, to prevent fuch Contracts: And they do it effectually:
for who ventures his Money when the Law will give him
no Security? Rev. p. n,
* 4 under
( 29 )
under the undue Circumftances of Minority,
Conftraint, Deception, or unlawful Com-
merce. And is it not, in this View, a very
feafonable Security of the Minor's Liberty,
and a fovereign Prefervative of the public Vir-
tue *, for which you may have fhewn a be-
coming Zeal in your three Pieces; however
you have been miftaken in projecting the Means
of its Improvement ?
A-kin to permijjive Laws, in their Want of
Civil Effeff, are thofe which dired by Com-
mand or Prohibition but yet have not the
Enforcement of a pofitive Penalty. I fpeak
not of thofe Cafes, where the Penalty of
Tranfgreffion is not explicitely declared, but the
Tranfgreffion is punifhable in the Way of In-
didment for Contempt, and at the Difcretion
of the Magiftrate. There are Laws, though
Puffendorf indeed feems fometimes to exprefs
a different Opinion "f% which are enforced by
no penal Sandion either flated or difcretionary:
And thefe are called by Civilians imperfeB
Laws, as appearing to want one of the effen-
* I hope the offering my Affiftance will not be thought
foreign to my Profeftion, confidering how much the public
Virtue may be concerned in it. Ib. p. 48.
t Civiles leges pcenam in violatores Temper habent con-
junclam, dum vel expreffe defignant genus multas aut fup-
plicii, vel, eo non definito, idem arbitrio judicis legumque
executoris relichim innuunt.—Supervacuum eft dicere,
Hoc fac, fi praeterea nihil fequatur. Puff. &c. i. 6. 14.
tial
(f 3° )
tial Qualifications of Law, its Power to oblige,
that is, to compel Obedience *. But neither
£re thefe Laws deftitute of all Power of
Obligation. They oblige the Confcience.
Their Obligation is fuftained pudoreet comitate,
by the Virtue and Ingenuity of thofeupon whom
it is exerted. On the fame Account, all
thofe Virtues, Gratitude, Candour, Generofity,
general Benevolence, and fuch like, are rec-
koned of imperfect Obligation. For the pecu-
liar Quality of thefe Virtues is fuch, that,
though they carry an indifputable Obligation
in Confcience, yet the Effects of them cannot
be exatfbed from us as matter of ftriCl Right -f- j
and what is done in Contradiction to their
Maxims will be criminal in the Judgment of
Confcience, but neverthelefs valid, by the Law
of Juflice. The Foundation of the Diffe-
rence of Duties of perfect and imperfect Ob-
ligation is laid in that Utility, which, when
rightly underftood, may be juftly looked upon
* Jurifconfulti Romani quafdam leges fac i u n t /mperfeftas^
quibus nempe fandiio pcenalis deeji; qualis memoratur lex
Cincia, cui nulla alia fertur adjedta claufula quam haec,
qui fecus fecerit, improbe fecijjevidebitur. lb.
f Sciendum eft, ft quis quid debet, non ex jujlitia pro-
pria, fed ex virtute clia, puta liberalitate, gratia, miferi-
cordia, diledtione, id ficut inforo exigi non potefl, ita nec
armis depofci. Grot, dejur. &c. ii. 22. 16.
as.
( )
as the common Mother of them both*. The
Meafure of the Duties of perfeff Obligation is
the Law of fir iff pfuflice; the Meafure of thofe
of imperfeff Obligation is, over and above,
the Law of univerfal Reffitude: And the Ob-
ligation of the former is perfeff, becaufe the
Difcharge of them is necejfary to the Being;
whereas the Difcharge of the latter is condu-
cive only to the Well-being and moft flourifh-
ing Condition of human Society -f-y Juftice,
like the Bones in the human Body, extending
the Proportions and fuftaining the Stability of
the focial Syftem, whilft Equity, Benevolence,
Liberality, Gratitude, and univerfal Virtue
promote the freeft Communications of benefi-
cial Influences through every Member of
that Syftem, and perfect its Comelinefs, Health,
and Happinefs. Now fuch being the De-
grees of Utility of the diftindt Offices of Life,
there is a correfpondent Subordination of their
Force of Obligation. The Ufe of Right will
avail in an illiberal or a prodigal Difpenfation ;
but Liberality mult never difpenfe itfelf at the
*— Utilitas jujii prope mater et ami,
+ Animi afEdtio fuum cuique tribuens, atque hanc,quam
dico, focietatem conjundtionis humanae munifice et aeque
tuens, jujiitia dicitur; cui adjunffa funt pietas, bonitas, li->
beralitas, benignitas, comitas, quseque funt generis ejufdem*
Cic. de Fin, v. 23.
Expence
( 32 )
Expence of another Perfon's Right.—^To re-
turn. The Laws, of which we now fpeak,
are of that imperfeSl Obligation above de-
fcribed. Obedience is the Duty of Subjeffs,
but an Adt of Tranfgrefiion fhall neverthelefs
avail in its moral Effedts. Thus a Man muft
ordinarily have the Liberty of fpending his own,
whether to the vicious Indulgence of a difor-
derly Appetite, or againft the prudent Regu-
lations of a fumptuary Law. It is, indeed,
the Authority of the Law, ?iot the Penalties of
the Law, that binds the Confcience -f* ; Yet the
Penalties of the Law are a good Rule of judg-
ing, how far, in the Intention of the Lawgiver,
the Authority of the Law fhall extend to oblige
the Suojedt in Confcience, and where it fhall
not prevail to the Diminution of his Right 3 as
we fhall quickly fee.
Of a Quality quite oppofite to thefe are
Laws purely penal 3 with refpedt to which I
muft obferve, that the combined Confidera-
tion of the Subject Matter of a Law, and of
the Civil Penalty annexed to it, will ordinarily
afford us the moft perfeft Criteria of its true
Intendment, and conlequently of the Extent
and Effedl of its Authority. Where there is a
moral Indifference of the Subjedt Matter of a
f Rev. p. 43.
Law,
( 33 )
Law, commanding or prohibiting under &
Civil Penalty; and where the Penalty, on the
other Hand, is, in the Eflimation of the
Community, of a Value equivalent to the
adlive Obedience of the Subject; there, ex-
cept in certain extreme Cafes, the life of the
Law, and coniequently the Intention of the
Lawgiver, is equally fatisfied by either Part
of the Alternative; or, in the Words of
Grotius, the Command or Prohibition of the
Law will exert its whole Force by its Penalty
Examples of this Species of Laws are frequent
in the common Bufineffes of Life; for Inftance,
the Laws obliging a Perfon to ferve an Office,
or to pay a Fine; to labour in Perfon on the
High-ways, or to pay the Hire of a Labourer;
to ferve in the Militia, or to fend one to ferve
for him. The Conditions of thefe Laws are,
that either Part may be chofen without Fault,
and that the Penalty is accepted by the Com-
munity under the Notion of a Tribute, or
valuable Confideration for the public Ser-
vice*f*.
* Prohibitio vim fuam exerere poteft per poenam, vel
exprefTam, vel arbitrariam. Grot, de jur. occ. ii. 5. 1.
t Obfervandum — in hoc genere legum, quae fan&io
pcenalis videri poteft, revera efte^ipjiar tributi ; dum in
arbitrio fubjedlorum relinquitur, pecuniam lege diclatam
exfolvere velint, an aclu aliquo ahftinere. Puff. &c.
viii. ±,
E It
( 34 )
It is not, however, to be prefumed con-*
cerning any Law, that it is purely penal\ with-
out its exprefs Declaration to that Effect, or
unlefs the fame fhall appear from the evident
Reafon of the Things. The general Intention
of Laws is to diredt a Condudt morally honeft or
publicly beneficial; and when fuch is the Sub-
jedl Matter of Laws, it is abfurd to conftrue
their penal Sanction, rather as adminiftering
the Means of commuting for, and therefore
authorifing Tranfgreffion; than as inducing a
new Force upon their native Obligation in
Confcience. This is Puffendorf's Obferva-
tion upon the noted Cafe of the wild Roman
Youth, who enquiring of the Prcztor, what
pecuniary Muldt was to be paid for an Adt of
Battery, depofited the Money, and committed
the Outrage upon the Magiflrate himfelf ~f\
Others have been as extravagant in our Days,
adting as if they thought, that a Difcharge of
the legal Penalty might be the Purchafe of a
Licence for a determined Meafure of inculpa-
* Nifi exprefTe in obligatione haec alicui fit libertas con-
lejja., ut aut faciat quid, aut licentiam diverfum faciendi
certa multa redimat, poena haudquidquam a crimine pu-
rum iftum prseftiterit, lb. iv. 2. 23.
•f Leges regulariter id tantum per poenam intendunt, ut
cives a peccatis abfterreantur.—Leges fuper injuriis non fo-
lent eo modo ferri, ut licmtia injuriam alteri inierendi certa
ptcunia redimatur. Ib. viii. 3. 4.
ble
( 35 )
ble Indulgence in prophane Curling and Swear-
ing. Now, on the other Hand, it may be
affirmed with a great deal of Truth, that, next
to the moral Character or public Utility of the
Subject Matter of Laws, the molt rational
Rule of ftating the particular Degree of
Strefs, which the Legiflature lays upon them,
and confequently of defining the true Extent
of their Obligation is the Greatnefs and Qua-
lity of the Civil Penalties enforcing them *.
Accordingly the public Occafions require, at
different Times, different Degrees of Punifh-
ment for the very fame Adtions; and moreover
thefe Puniffiments to be mealured by Rules
different from thofe, according to which Pu-
nifhments, in a moral Confideration, and
therefore in the divine Confideration, ufually
do proceed -f*. There is indeed another Rule,
* Maxime confervanda eft ea [lex,] quae diUgentiJJi?ne
fancfa eft. Cic. de Inv. ii. 49.
f A Law there is mentioned amongft the Grecians,—
that he which, being overcome with Drink, did then
ftrike any Man, fhould fuffer Punifhment double as much
as if he had done the fame Thing being fober. No Man
could ever have thought this rcafonable, that had intended
thereby only to punifh the Injury committed, according to
the Gravity of the Fafl: For who knoweth not, that
Harm advifedly done, is naturally leis pardonable, and
therefore worthy of fharper Punifhment ? But — it was
for their public Good, where fuch Diforder was grown,
E 2 and
( 36 )
and that a very obvious one, of collecting the
Mind of the Legiflature, concerning the Ex-
tent of the Subject's Obligation intended by
any particular Law; and that is from the ex-
prefs Declaration, or the Words of the Law
itfelf. As when, for Inftance, the Law tefti-
fies an Intention to plTiCitt what it prohibits ;
and that on Account of the gtC&t 30tfcf)t0f!£
mm 3|nconUemeneesf, which Ijatic arifctt
from it.
It is hardly needful to make the Applica-
tion of what has been alledged upon this Head
to the particular Cafe of the late Marriage Aft;
in order to prove, that it is not a purely penal
Law with regard to the feveral Inftances of
prohibited Marriage. The Law itfelf is ex-
p efs in declaring its true Defign. The pu-
blic Utility; nay, the abfolute Neceflity of the
eftablifhed Solemnities in making and ♦pu-
blifhing the Marriage Contraft, is a Principle
. allowed on both Sides; and the Penalties ap-
pointed for every Party in Tranfgreffion and
Confederacy to defeat the true Defign of the
Legiflature, are fuch as are neither to be exempt-
ed from your invidious Aggravations, nor to
leave the leaft Uncertainty, what that Defign
is. Can the Law then, I do not fay^ upon
to frame a pcfitive Law for Remedy thereof accordingly.
4looker} Eccl Pol. i. 10.
I any
. ( 37 )
any Principle of Philofophy or Government,
but upon the Principles of common Senfe, be
capable of a Conftruftion, that the Subjeft,
if he tranfgreffes the Law, fatisfies his Allegi-
ance by fubmitting to the Penalty ? Can it
be fuppofed, that, by the very SuperinduBion
of this Penalty, it fhould vacate the previous
Obligation in Confcience of, what it was mani-
feflly made in Aid of, the old Laws, and Con^
ftitutions, ejiablifhing regular Marriages and
prohibiting clandeftine ones ? Not to mention,
that the Admiffion of the Penalty with all its
natural Confequences *, in the immediate
Parties to the prohibited Contract, places the
Tranfgreffors in a Condition of Guilt, declared
by the Sentence of Confcience, and punifhable
by the Laws both of God and Man. The very %
Exiftence of this Condition, the Sufferance
of the Penalty, is fo far from being to Society
a Benefit equivalent to Obedience, that it ra-
ther aggravates the Guilt of the Offender by
creating to Society a new Accefiion of Injury :
Juft as the Guilt of the Party, defervedly fufferr
ing Imprifonment or Death, receives a new
Increafe from the Confideration, that Society,
befides the Mifchiefs fhe has already fuftained
* Thefe are a Difnerifon cf the whole Ijjue of the un-
lawful Marriage, and, in the contracting Parties, the
Shame and Punijh?ncnt of thofe^ who live together in a State
of Fornication. See Dijf. p. 32.
from
( 38 )
from the Injuries for which he fuffers, is put
to the hard Neceffity of impairing her Pro-
fperity through the Want of his beneficial
Services, or of mutilating her Copftitution
by cutting him off from her Body.
Now the Penalty in the immediate Parties
to the prohibited Marriage Contract is the
abfolute Nullity of their unlawful Ad:; and
from the peculiar Efficacy of this Penalty
arifes a new Clafs or Order of Civil Laws,
of great Account to eftablifh the juft Subordi-
nation of the Offices of focial Life. 'The State,
you obferve cannot by any stronger Act
forbid a Marriage than by taking from it all
Civil Exifence, To illuftrate your Obferva-
tion, Ulpian has diftinguiffied three Degrees
of Strength or Operation in Laws. Thofe,
which are deflitute of all penal Sandtion, we
have already called imperfect upon the fame
Authority. Others approach nearer to Per-
fedtion, which have the Aid of an inferior
Penalty; but thofe have the higheft Degree of
Perfection, which prohibit under pain of ab-
folute Nullity *f*. Indeed by a Conftitution
of the Emperor Theodofus this Diftindtion of
Degrees of Perfection was, in great Meafure^
.* Dijf, p. 41.
-j- Lex irrogans peenam, nec tamen attum refcindens,
minus quam perfefla ; omni fandtione poenali deiiituta im-
perfect a dicitur. Ulpian, Fragm. i. 1. apud Heinec. Elem.
Jur. Civ. P. 1. xcix.
taken
( 39 )
taken away; a bare Prohibition, enacted in any
preceding Law, being declared fufficient of it-
felf to invalidate any Contrad or Agreement
between private Parties*. But Grotius very
well obferves, that this nullifying Efficacy was
not inherent in the prohibitive Quality of the
former Laws and Conftitutions, but commu-
nicated to them by the Force of this general
Law, which was a new Exertion of the legifla-
tive Authority Jt is then the lingular Pro-
perty of the Penalty of Nullity, that when it
is fuperinduced upon the bare Prohibition of a
Contrad, for Inftance, a Marriage Contrad,
or upon a Prohibition already inforced with
other Penalties; it annihilates in Subjeds the
moral Faculty of making the Contrad, and de-
clares the Refolution of the Legiflature not to
tolerate it in the Civil Community—Is it not
* Nullum — pa£tum, nullam conventionem, nullum
contradfum inter eos videri volumus fubfecutum, qui con-
trahunt lege contrahere prohibente. Quod ad omnes etiamle-
gum interpretationes tam veteres, quam novellas trahi ge-
neraliter imperamus. L. 5. C. de LL.
t Haec intenfio non fit ex vi folius prohibitionis, fed ex
1ji nova legis, quam alii populi fequi necelfe non habent.
Grot, de jur. Sic. ii. 5. 16. 2. PuffendorJ.\ alluding to this
Paflage, obferves ; Nemo fefe potefl: valide obftringere ul-
terius quam ipfi eftpoteftas. Aft qui lege atftionem prohi-
bet, adimit fane poteftatem earn fufcipiendi et de eadem
praeftanda obligationem in fe recipiendi.—Etfi et aliquan-
do, a£tu contra leges fufcepto, multa quidem aliqua impo-
natur eundem fufcipientibus, ipfe autem a<ftus non refcin-
datur. iii. y. 6.
now
( 4° )
now pleafant to hear you deliver this fenten-
tious Piece of Cafuiftry? Quodfieri non debet,
4c faBum valet, was the Dodtrine [before the
Marriage A£t;] that is, Children did ill,
<c and contrary to their Duty, in marrying
" without their Parents Confent; but the
" Act done, it could not be refcinded. If
<c you fay, there was then no Law obliging
" Minors not to marry without their Parents
C£ Confent; I deny it. The Canons were
<c againft it: The Rubrics (which are Statute
<c Law) were againft it: So that the Claim of
" the Parents to an abfolute Negative had all
<c the Authority that Law could give it. All that
" the late Adt has done, is only adding a civil
<c Penalty*."—Yes, I muft tell you, again
and again, the late A5l has added the civil
Penalty of absolute Nullity. This
new Exertion of the legiflative Authority eft a-
blifhes the Parent's Claim with the San&ion
of Neceffity to the Minor's Marriage, which
former Laws had not done. And with what
Pertinence can you plead the Se?ife of all our
eld Laws, as wellfince as before the Reforma-
* Rev. p. 42. The Queftion is, Whether a Marriage
Contract made by Perfons to whom the Law has forbid-
den theUfe of Marriage, is void. p. 8.—Thus the Do6tor
generally ftates the ^uejiion at the End of a Contro-
verfy ; and yet ftates it wrong. He may make his a Que-
ftion, if he can get any Body to difpute it with him.
tion **
Ml
m
fit
jltfl
4
( 41 )
ion*; when you have not produced one
Tittle from thofe Laws to prove, that the
annulling Claufes of the Act are fundamentally
inconfftent with the Principles of Religion and
Liberty -{- ? When the Act breaths the very
lame Spirit, and fpeaks the very fame Language
with the former Laws, fuperadding only a
more perfect Sanction, a new Degree of Strength
to them 5 which, you fee, happened to the
whole Syftem of the Roman Law by one Dafh
of a Pen, and yet Hiftory does not fay, how
many Enquiries, Dijfertations and Reviews
were excited by fo invidious an Alteration,
never, as far as appears, formally reverfed to
this very Day? In a Word ; The Law may, you
agree, in many Cafes take away the Right to
contra51. Tell me then, I pray, how the
adiual Exertion of this its unqueftionable Pow-
er, in inflidting the Penalty, can be other-
wife declared than by a literal Denunciation
of Nullity upon the prohibited Contract.
Before I clofe the Confideration of the Pow-
er of Laws over Marriage, it may be proper
to make a Remark or two concerning the Ori-
gine of this Power, the Conditions of its Ex-
ercife, and the particular Cafes exempted from
the Reach of its directive Influence. There is
a very difcernible Analogy between this Power
* Rev. p. 39. f Ses Poftfcr. to Remarks, &c. p. «;o.
F "in
•> ,:
r".'. " * » • « ' ' ' ^ki(. < •
( 42 )
in thofe, who prefide over States, and the
Authority of the Parent, confidered as the
Mafter of his Family, in a fuppofed State of
Independence on the Civil Society. It is, on
all Hands, allowed, that the Subjeds of do-
meflic Government, whether they are natu-
rally fo, as Children, or artificially, as Ser-
vants, are non fui Juris in all thofe Adions
and Concerns of theirs, which muft be fub-
mitted to the Superior's Jurifdidion, as re-
fpeding the Well-being and orderly Conftitu-
tion of his Family. It is no lefs allowed, that
the Concern of their Marriage would fall un-
der that Charader and Condition of Reftraint,
on the bare Suppofition, that the Parties in
the Contrad did adually continue, either of
Right * or by their free Confent, to be undi-
vided Parts of the Superior's Family. Now the
Subjeds of the Civil Community are the undi-
vided and perpetual Parts of the Family politic-p.
.—And this F oundation of the Power of the State
!•
*1
* Uti pater prolem familia ejicere non debet, citra gra-
viifimas caufas; ita et proles non nifi bona cum venia patris in
aliam familiam tranfibit. Puff. &c. vi. 2. 17, Ut invifam
fibi nurum in domo fua toleret paterfamilias, nemo ab
ipfo poftulaverit. § 14.
+ In Allufion to this Analogy patria is called major pa-
renSy as by Varro, in a Railage particularly adapted to our
Purpofe: Si qui patnam^ major em parentem, extinguit, in
co eft culpa; quod facit pro fua parte is, qui feeunuchat,
over
?
It
,(43)
over Marriage, being implied in the very No*
tion of Subjection and orderly Society, extends
it indifferently to all Subjects, as fuch; to
thofe, over whom (he exercifes it by herfelf
in her public Regulations of Marriage; and
to thofe, over whom fhe exercifes it by Dele-
gation, in the Conftitution of a tutelar Truft
over Minors *.
A farther Confirmation and Enlargement
of what I may call the primeval Power of
States are created from Circumftances of great
Weight both in private and politic Delibera-
tion, which having had, in FaCt, noExiftence
in a mere State of Nature, may be juftly look-
ed upon as the peculiar Attributes of Civil
Society. As they are States, the conftitution-
al Order of Property in Poffeflion and by
Inheritance, efpecially the Order of Inheri-
tances fometimes eftablifhed to the Diminu-
tion of the Right of the prefent Poffeffor; and
as they are Chrijlian States, the divinely ap-
aut aliqua liberos producit, i. e. as I interpret thefe laft
Words,—-from vague Luji. Non. in voce Eunucbare. So
Cicero has the Exprefiion, parricidiuni patriae. De Oft.
iii. 21.
* The Harmony between a civil and a tutelar Pro-
te&ion arifes from the Unity of their End. Ut enim tu-
tela, fic procuratio reip. ad utilitatem eorum, qui com-
mifti funt, non ad eorum, quibus commifta eft, gerenda
eft. Cic. de Off. i. 25.
p 2 pointed
( 42 )
in thofe, who prefide over States, and the
Authority of the Parent, confidered as the
Majler of his Family, in a fuppofed State of
Independence on the Civil Society. It is, on
all Hands, allowed, that the Subjeds of do-
meftic Government, whether they are natu-
rally fo, as Children, or artificially, as Ser-
vants, are non fui Juris in all thofe Adions
and Concerns of theirs, which muft be fub-
mitted to the Superior's Jurifdidion, as re-
fpeding the Well-being and orderly Conftitu-
tion of his Family. It is no lefs allowed, that
the Concern of their Marriage would fall un-
der that Charader and Condition of Reftraint,
on the bare Suppofition, that the Parties in
the Contrad did adually continue, either of
Right * or by their free Confent, to be undi-
vided Parts of the Superior's Family. Now the
Subjeds of the Civil Community are the undi-
vided and perpetual Parts of the Family politic^.
.—And this Foundation of the PowTer of the State
* Uti pater prolem familia ejicere non debet, citra gra-
viitimas caufas; ita et proles non nifi bona cum venia patris in
aliam familiam tranfibit. Puff. &c. vi. 2. n. Ut invifam
J
fibi nurum in domo fua toleret paterfamilias, nemo ab
ipfo poftulaverit. § 14.
f In Allufion to this Analogy patria is called major pa-
rens, as by Varro, in a Paffage particularly adapted to our
Purpofe: Si qui patriam^ major em parentem, extinguit, in
co eft culpa j quod facit pro fua parte is, qui feeunuchat,
over
t
:\
it-
re-
QtU-
that
\m■
iDflf®
jjtp
Jtoouf
(43)
over Marriage, being implied in the very No-
tion of Subjection and orderly Society, extends
it indifferently to all Subjects, as fuch; to
thofe, over whom {he exercifes it by herfelf
in her public Regulations of Marriage -y and
to thofe, over whom fhe exercifes it by Dele-
gation, in the Conftitution of a tutelar Truft
over Minors
A farther Confirmation and Enlargement
of what I may call the primeval Power of
States are created from Circumftances of great
Weight both in private and politic Delibera-
tion, which having had, in FaCt, noExiftence
in a mere State of Nature, may be juftly look-
ed upon as the peculiar Attributes of Civil
Society. As they are States, the conftitution-
al Order of Property in Poffeflion and by
Inheritance, efpecially the Order of Inheri-
tances fometimes eftablifhed to the Diminu-
tion of the Right of the prefent Pofleffor; and
as they are Chriftian States, the divinely ap-
aut all qua liber os producit, i. e. as I interpret thefe laft
Words,—-from vague Lujl. Non. in voce Eunucbare. So
Cicero has the Expreftion, parricidium patriae. De Oft.
iii. 21.
* The Harmony between a civil and a tutelar Pro-
tedlion arifes from the Unity of their End. Ut enim tu-
tela, fic procuratio reip. ad utilitatem eorum, qui com-
miHi funt, non ad eorum, quibus commifTa eft, gerenda
eft. Cic. de Off. i. 25.
F 2 pointed
( 44 )
pointed Limitations of Marriage and its fingu-
lar Quality of indijfoluble Obligation, confpire
all together to render it of indifpenfable Impor-
tance to the Public and every Individual, on a
facred and a fecular Account,to afcertain,by the
higheft Authority, both the fuitable Solem-
nities of making the Marriage Contract, and
the Sufficiency of Evidence in the Publica-
tion of it for Civil Purpofes. Thefe Confi-
derations, which are properly adventitious,
plead ftrongly, in particular, for the Parent's
civil, though not for his natural, Right over
the Child's Marriage. By the Intervention
of Society, the Parent's Authority is, in this
Refpedb, reduced beiow the Standard of Na-
ture, in proportion as he is abridged in the
Difpofition of his own by the Law of Entails
or other legal Reftraints over a difcretionary
Alienation *. It is fitting therefore, that where
the juft Influence of parental Direction has
* Remarks, &c. p. 35.—Si—fuam autoritatem a libe-
ris citra graviflimas rationes fpretam viderit pater, pcenae
loco fatnilia et bereditate excludere immorigeros non prohi-
betur. Ruff- &c. vi. 2. in fin. But this natural Privilege
of the Parent, to diftnherit a difobedient Child, was in
fundry Ways impaired by the Roman Law, particularly by
the A6hon of Querela infjiciyi tejtamenti \ whence the
Parent's Right over the Child's Marriage was confidently
aiTerted by that Law, ne cut invito fuus heres agnajcatur.
S«e Vindication, &c. p. 28. Not. *
buffered >
a lk-
( 45 )
fuffered, as in fome Degree it does fuffer,
more or lefs, in every State; it fhould be fup-
ported with an adequate Supply,and, as it were,
Exchange of Aid from Society in itsTurn ; and
this Supply is provided in a Way moil; oinex-
ceptionable and familiar to human Laws*,
when the Parent's natural Authority and Apti-
iude for the tutelar Truft are improved into a
Right; and Perfection is added to that pre-
exiftent Obligation, by which the Child is na-
turally bound, from the Regards of Gratitude,
Reverence and the filial Relation itfelf, to ren-
der the Duty of a general Obfervance and
Obedience to the Parent's Will. Of fuch
Operation of Law we have daily Experience,
particularly in the Laws providing for the
Maintenance of the Poor; whence the volun-
tary Difpenfations of Beneficence put on the
Form of a Debt> in the ftridt Senfe of that
Word, to be difcharged, not only to the
Community, which legally exadts them, but
to the unhappy Objedts themfelves of helplefs
Indigence and Infirmity.
On the Behalf of the Minor, a judicious and
afiedlionate, that is, a parental Superintendence
over his Marriage, for his own particular Be-
* Multa, quae ex virtute quapiam, imperfe&am dun-
taxat obligationem pariente, debentur, legibus civilibus et
padtis fanciri frequentiffimum. Puff* &c. iii. 3. 8.
nefit,
( 46 )
nejit, proceeds, more eafily in Society, upon
the reafonable Profpedt of fecuring his Eftate
from the Danger of a prodigal Diffipation,
the general Foundation of the tutelar Truft * -9
and efpecially upon the lingular Quality of a
Chrijlian Marriage, which infers an Obliga-
tion of his Perfon during the joint Lives of
the Parties. Hence the great Importance of
his not undertaking that Obligation unadvifedly,
lightly or wantonly. And hence, we may pre-
fume, the primitive Reception of Laws, in
Favour of the Parent's Right, would have
prevailed univerfally in Chrijlian Countries,
had not the Canonifts thought fit to introduce
a new Theory of religious, or rather political
Cafuiftry, accommodated to their corrupt
Dodlrines, which aflert to Matrimony the
Nature of a Sacrament, and to Minors the
Right of entering into religious Vows of
v, +
* In the Roman Law, theprodigt9 fuch as were judici~
ally fo declared, were ranked with the furiofi, who were
incapable of the Management of their own Concerns. Fu-
riofi quoque et prodigi, licet majores viginti quinque annis
fiat, tamen in curatiom funt agnatorum ex lege duodecim
tabularum. JuJi.bji. i. 23. 3. And they might be inca-
pacitated on a public as well as their own private Account;
quia reip. intereft, ne quis re fua male utatur. Puff- See.
v. 9. 5. This Reafon is given againft excellive Gaming?
and is the Foundation of the Conclufion ; Igitur penes re-
clores civitatum eft difpicere, quoufqueludi permittendi fint,
aut quantte fummae deponi debeant.
perpetual
/
( 47 )
perpetual Celibacy without the Parent's Con-
fent Now the joint Operation of the two
Confiderations abovementioned, the one Civil,
the other Sacred, in a politic Community of
Chriftian Men, will fo far dernonftrate the
Equity of thofe Laws, as to enable us to affert,
" That if a new-born Infant was furnifhed
<c with the Aid of Reafon, and could fee that
<c he would probably plunge himfelf into
<c many Inconveniences by the Ufe of his na-
" tural Right to contra£t Marriage; he would
<c willingly confent to fubmit himfelf to the
" Authority of his Parents or Guardians —
Other obvious Occafions for the Interpolation
of Law, to hinder Marriages between parti-
cular Parties, in Aid of the pofitive Laws of
God, or in View of the Public Utility J, in.
each refpe&ive State, or in every Situation of
States with refpect to each other; it is not my
Defign to confider more particularly in this
Place.
But when we aflert to States any Degree of
Right, inherent and underived, over Marriage:
how is this confident with the general Princi-
* See Stillingjleet's Mifc. Difc. pp. 77, 8. Find. pp. 6i.
Not. J.
f Dr. Ibbetfor?s Obfervaticns, &c. p. 22.
% Cum in familiis fegregibus pier & que rationes legum ci*
milium circa matrimonia^ inter certas perfonas contrahenda,
cejjent) &c. Puff. vi. 2. 14.
pies
/
(48 )
pies of Policy laid down by Puffendorf, Locke
and others, viz. that Society breaks out from the
natural State, and has no more Power than what
every Man yielded up to it by Confent or Com-
paffi * ?—That Society has no more Power than
what every Man did confent, actually or vir-
tually, that Society Jhould have; is an incon-
tefled Principle of true Policy, but nothing to
your Purpofe. For every Man is prefumed to
have confented, that there fhould be vefted in
Society all the Power eflential to the Supre-
macy conftituted over the Community, and
expedient to attain the End of Civil Govern-
ment. But if you mean, that Society has no
more Power than what every Man had origi-
nally in himfelf and transfered to the Society ;
this would be much to your Purpofe, but
ever was and ever will be Herefy, as you Ufe
the Expreffion, both in Politics and common
Senfe. " It is," fays Puffendorf " a very filly
" Notion, that, in Morals, when a Right or
<c Quality is faid to be confered upon another*
" you muft necefiarilyfuppofe it to have lome-
ic where a diftindt Exiftence before it is con-
" fered Again, <c It may and does often
* Rev. pp. 13, 4.
fValde puerile eft credere, in rebus moralibus, quando
jus quodpiam, aut quaevis qualitas moralisiii alterum collata
dicitur, neceftum effe, aut eadem prius alicubi feparata
exiftat. Puff. &c. vii. 3, 4.
4 <c happen,
( 49 )
Cc happen, that a moral Quality, fuch as is
c< the Right of Government, is produced in
" another from the Confent of thofe who had
" not the Quality formally pre-exifting in
££ themfelves ; as Voices of many Perlons
<£ produce Harmony, which they feparately
<£ had not."—<c And fince Government is the
££ Reiult of the Patience and Permiffion in
<£ Subjedls of a Power of Difpofition over
££ their Liberty and Property; it is plain, that
<£ the Seeds of Supremacy lie, as it were,
<f fcattered and undifcerned in Individuals, but
££ that it is promoted to Maturity by the com-
c£ bining Force of Compacts Can you
now pleafe yourfelf with the Thought, that
an Affertor of thefe Principles is fading back
into the Politics, which you defcribe as the Pa-
litics of a hundred or. two Tears ago -jT Or,
can it be fuppofed that a Writer, fo experi-
enced as you are, on the Subject of Civil Go-
* Et fieri poteft et foiet, ut quaiitas moral is, qua clafTe
imperium cenfetur, in alio producatur confpiratione ilio-
rum, qui illud antea formaliter in fe non habebant. Sicuti
et multorum voces invicem temperatse harmoniarn produ-
cunt, quse in finguiis non extabat. Et cum imperium
refultet ex non-refiftentia fubje£lorum, et conceffione, ut
imperans circa vires opefque ipforum diiponat; facile ap-
paret, in finguiis velut difperfa latere femina fummi im-
perii, quod per pacta combinantia excitatur et progermi-
nat. lb. § 5. et vi. 1. 12. j
f Rev. p. 13.
G vernment,
( 5° )
vernmcnt, Should be fo fhort-fighted in your
View of the Several Parts and Dependencies of
a political Syftem, as not to know that you
are actually afferting the very Politics, which
you would appear to rejedt ? This puts me in
Mind of what Cicero relates of a Pair of Ro-
man Pleaders, each of whom might be feen,
to the no little Entertainment of the Court,
contending with Might and Main againfi the
other for thofe very Points, which made di-
redly for the Ruin of his own Caufe *. That
you are not dishonoured by the Companion,
will appear very evidently, when you refled,
that the Principles, juft now alledged from
Puffbidcrj\ are thofe Principles upon which it is
irrefragably maintained, and upon which only
it can be maintained, that Society breaks cut from
the natural State. They are the Principles ac-
tually oppofed, by the rational Author him-
felf, to the Jure divino Scheme of Govern-
ment, afferted by j. F. Hornius upon no bet-
ter Foundation than the Impojjibility of Mens
confituting a Civil Supremacy in Another,
*Muitas hcras expecxavit—et riclens et flomachans
Scaevola, cum—alter plus—petebat, quam quantum lex in
duodecim tabulis permiferat; quod cum impetralTet,
eaulacaderet: alter iniquuin putabat plus fecum agi, quam
quod erat in aclione ; neque intelligebat, fi ita eilet actum,
litem adverfarium perditurum. Ds Orat. i. 36.
2 v which
( sO
which they had not feparately in \Themfelves
Thus you hold it impofiible, i. e. upon the
Principles of the popular Syftem, to fettle the
Power of States without fhewing what are
natural Rights, and how, and hGW far, Juch
Rights were, by the Original Compaff, trans-
fered from Individuals, and roefied in the
Body politic Let the fame orthodox Law-
yer anfwer you.—<c It muft be obferved," fays
he, £C that as, in natural Bodies, from the
££ qualified Mixture of Simples there may re-
<c fult a Compofition endowed v/ith fuch Qua-
££ lities, as were in none of the Ingredients;
u fo like wife may Bodies politic become the
££ Subiedt of Right, which did not fpecifically
££ fubfift before in any of the Individuals com-
£C poling them; which Right refides in its
" proper Subjedt, the Head of, thofe Bodies.
c£ So no one would affirm, that the Individu-
££ als have a iegifiative Power over themfelves;
££ yet from their joint Subjection of their Wills
££ to the Will of the Supreme, there arifes a
* Operas pretium — fuerit expendifie, quid folidi fubfit
argumentis J. F. Hornii de Civitate. Puff". Szc. vii. 3. 3.
•—Inter quae palmarium eft, quod cum nequefinguli homines,
neque multitudo dijjoluia majejlatem hakeant, eandem nonpof-
fint in regem confcrre. § 4. — Ut craflum valde fit negare,
ideo fammum imperium ah hojninibus [ non] fumcreoriginem^
quia in facultatibus hominis naturalibus illud non deprehen-
datur. lb.
f Rev. p. 14.
G 2 " iegi dative
( 52 )
€t lcgiflative Power prefidiag over the whole
cc Community. In like Manner may fubfift
in the Head of the Body politic the Power
of penal Coercion over the feveral Individu-
tc als, who had none of them the fame Power
C£ in their Separation from Community
The Author's Hypothecs is well known con-
cerning the Origine of the Right of Punifh-
ments, that, as this is a Difpenfation of a Su-
• perior, as fuclo, it cannot be pre-exiftent to
Civil Government,. but is a neceffary Appen-
dage of it "f. And is not all this very con-
lift en t with his 'whole Syjlem cj Law and
Government, which derives the Civil Authority
from the Competition of Individuals, and fup-
pofes it inverted with every Power neceffary
to the legitimate End of its Inrtitution, the
Good of the Community ; whence every Adt
of Government, legislative or executive,
which is duly exerted for the Attainment of
that End J, derives again upon every Indivi-
* Sciendum, quemadmodum in naturalibus ex com-*
mixtione et temperatione plurium fimplicium provenire
poteft compofitum quid, cui tales ad tint qualitates, qus in
nullo fimplicium mixtionem ingredientium deprehendun-
tur -y ita et corpora moralia, 6cc. Puff- &C. viii. 3. 1.
+—Jus poenas fumendi efTe diverfae naturae a jure fei-
pfum confervandi; cumqueillud exereeatur in fubjefios^ in-
telligi non pofie quomodo jam turn in ftatu naturali exti-
terit, ubi nemo alteri fubj^&us eft. Ib. & § feqq.
£ Mihi quidem videntur hue omnia eiTe referenda iis,
dual,
' 1
( 53 )
dual, in Virtue of his Original Confent, a pro-
portionable Obligation in Confcience * ?
But the Confideration of Subferviency to the
End of the Inftitutionof Government will limit
the Extent of the directive Influence of Laws,
at the fame Time that it can inforce their re-
gular and falutary Prefcriptions with the indif-
penfable Obligation of Confcience To aflert
to Society a Power of Legiflation, which Jfhall
avail to religious Obedience, or in the Judg-
ment of Confcience, and fubfift upon the
Maxims of an equitable Policy, is to fuppofe
an Adminiftration of that Power conflftent
with the natural and revealed Laws of God J,
qui prasfunt aliis, ut ii, qui erunt eorum in imperio, ftnt
quam beatiftimi. Cic. Ep. ad (L F. i. i. 8.
* Quippe cum, qui civitatem fubierunt, omnem pote-
ftatem in fe, quantum quidem ad naturam civitatis necejjd-
rium erat, in fummos imperantes tranftulerint. Puff- &c.
iii. 2. in fin.
f Neque enim rex plura jurzjubere poteft, quam quae
cum fine focietatis chilis inftitutae congruunt, aut congruere
judicantur. Ib. vii. y. II.—Dicfto illi, qui poenas Juo arbi-
trio jure fumit) jure omnes cogit ad omnia, quce ipfie vult; limi-
tatio eft addenda ex fine civitatum, ut fc. fumrnum imperium
habens non aliavelle pofte intelligatur, quam in quibus fana
ratio aliquam convenientiam ad ijlum finem invenire poteft.
Ib. 4. 3.
% Moderatori reip. beata civium vita propofita eft ; ut
opibus firma, copiis locuples, gloria ampla, virtute honejia
fit. Cic. Ep. ad Att. viii. 11.
with
( 54 )
with the Conditions of the Marriage Inftitu-
tion required by thofe Laws refpectively, and
with the Virtue, the Order, and the Happinefs
cf the Civil Community.——This Part of our
Debate indeed might have been fpared, had
you fiddly adhered to your feeming Intention
of not entering into thcfe Cafes, which fuperfede
common Rules*. This is no more than the
Tuftice, which is due to every human Law ;
for no Law, for general Uie, was ever yet
invented by the Wit of Man, which would
anfwer every Occafion of its Subjedt Matter,
and never be fuperfeded by extraordinary Con-
tingencies -p. But fmce you have thought fit
to place here the main Strength of your
Reafoning againft the Claufe of the Law re-
O O
fpedting Minors, I will briefly confider the
Cafes of extraordinary Contingency, which can
fuperfede the general Obligation of an active
Obedience to human Laws; nay, fometimes
to the politive Laws of God himfelf J. Thefe
are otherwife called Cafes of Necefjity. A
#70/77/Neceffity fuperfedes the Obligation of all
* Rev. p. 47.
j Generates—leges interpretatione benigna.ita accfpi-
ends funt, ut cafus fummae necellitatis excludant, Grot,
de jur. &c. iii. 23. 5. 3.
J Leges etiam Dei quaedam, quanquam generaliter pro-
latae, tacitam habent exceptionem fummae neceffitatis. lh.
i. 4. 7.
human
( 55 )
human Laws abfolutely and in all Cafes. The
natural Neceffities of private Perfons fuper-
Cede it, in thofe Cafes only, where they are
not over-ruled by the public Neceffity T
Suppofe then Chrijlians living under a Nero,
or Tyrant heathen Emperor, who fhould ap-
point, in the Celebration of Marriage, the
Ufe of finful and idolatrous Ceremonies; and
that under the Pain of Nullity : What? May
not they enter into a private Marriage?—.! an-
fwer without Hefitation ; They may enter into
fuch Marriage. For—Non hcec in fcedera.—
Can it be fuppofed, that, in flipulating a Com-
pliance with the Laws of Society, they did
not fecure to themfelves the Exception of a
moral Neceffity ? Or, which is the fame
Thing, that they made a Renunciation of all
the Laws of Nature, and of all the Laws of
God? There is a Decifion of irrefiflible Evi-
dence and univerfal Application, Adls v. 29.
We ought to obey God, rather than Men —
* Non negoa legeetiam humana quofdam virtutis atfhis
pofTe praecipi Tub certo mortis periculo, ut de Jiatione non
deferenda. Ib. § 2.
t The fame Rule was laid down by Moralifts, but with
far lefs Advantage of Enforcement, upon other than rell-
glous Principles. Eft appetitio quaedam principatus, ut ne-
mini parereanimus bene a natura informatus velit, nifi prs-
cipienti, aut docenti, aut utihtatn can fa jufte et legitime im-
peranti. Cic- de Off, i. 4,
Nay,
( 56 )
Nay, I may go farther, in afferting, concern-
ing the fame Chriftians, that, except in fome
uncommon Exigencies of Society, they did
not wave their Privilege of a natural Neceffi-
ty. Suppofe the heathen Magiflrate fhould
publicly prohibit under Nullity every Con-
trad of Purchafe, which is not made at the
Staple. Reafons of public Utility might ex-
tend his Commiffion fo far, in which Cafe
the internal Obligation of the Subject would .
be unqueftionable. Suppofe farther a perfe-
cuting Spirit fhould make an Addition to the
Law, that no Viduals fhould be purchafed at
the Staple, but what had been confecrated to
idolatrous Ufes, in order to be made the ge-
neral Teft of religious Profefiions: — What ?
Might not the Chriflian Subject, under a de-
termined Perfuafion of the Unlawfulnefs of
eating 'Things offered, to Idols fupply him-
felf with the Necejffaries of Life by making a
clandeftine Bargain ? And would not the Con-
trad be both juftifiably made, and available
in Confcience, notwithflanding its legal Nul-
lity ?
For the better Illuftration of the Subjed, I
have confidered the Cafes of each Kind of
Neceffity, as they arife from the Inftances of
immoral, opprefiive, and perfecuting Laws.
— _ -rv~-
* I Cor. viii. i, &c.
But
( 57 )
Bat fuch is the allowed Obligation in Confci-
ence of even an erroneous Perfuafion of Reli-
gion; fo immenfe and unforefeen is the Va-
riety of Situations and Circumftances of Indi-
viduals in the State of Society; that Laws the
j 7
mod righteous, the modi equal and publicly
beneficial; Laws introduced and approved by
the univerfal Confent of Mankind, and that
for the moft valuable and univerfally defirable
End, the necefiary Prefervation of Life and
Property; thefe Laws are yet fubjedt to the
common Imperfections of all pofitive Laws,
and mud admit of a benign Interpretation, in
Favour of Individuals, under Circumftances
of Extremity, whether natural or religious.
Now in thefe extreme Cafes, fo far as Ne-
ceflity does really extend to their inward Jufti-
fication in tranfgreffing the Law, there is a
temporary CeJJation of their * legal Relation
to Society; juft as when a Perfon is obliged to
execute his own Quarrel fe defendendo, at the
Expence of the Life of an unjufc AggrefTor,
there is a temporary Cejfation cj his Relation to
* I fay, Legal; for there is a natural Relation to Society,
which cannot ceafe, or be fufpended, in any Cafe whatfo-
ever. Man is effentially focial, as having a natural Appetite
to Society; but then it is not an Appetite altogether to Civil
Society. '"A&gwjroq — t57 (£va&i cvvovxrixh vj ttohiTizov.
Arijlot. Eth. Nic. viii. 12.
H Civil
( J8 )
Civil judicature *. Yet the Cejfaticn is paf-
tial, fufpending only the Obligation of Obedi-
ence to Society's pofitive Inftitutions and Laws:
And the Ceffation is temporary, as Society muft
be permitted its ejjential Right of Cognizance in
the laft Refcrt even of the Adt of the Subjedt
authorifed by all Laws human and divine.
But in the Concern of the univerfal Law of
Property, Civil Laws cannot, with equal
Propriety and Safety, previoufly authorife> or
rather ^xa^Tranfgreffion; left by eftablifhing
a Plea of real Neceffity, they ffiould encour-
age falfe Pretenfions, to the Difolution of good
Government, and to the Violation of private
Right j~. Here Civil Judicature muft indif-
penfably exercife its Fvight of Cognizance of
every Trefpafs; however it may be fanBifed
in Confcience by a Neceffity, which neither
Induftry can remove, nor a feafonable Bene-
volence relieves. As exadiy parallel to fuch
Inftances of Extremity I confidered the Cafe
of a Marriage Contradl, which an unfeigned
Neceffity entitles to a temporary Exemption from
* CeJJat—judicium momentcinee, aut continue. Mo-
mentanee cefiat, ubi expedlari judex non poteft fine certo
periculo aut damno. Grot, de jur. he. i. 3. 2 .
f Satius — erat a.paucis etiam jullam excufationem
non accipi, quam ab omnibus aliquam tentari. Seriec. de
Benef. vii. 16. Vindication, he. p. 55.
the
m
/
( 59 )
the Civil Law of Marriage *. Nor, after all
your Exceptions to my Refolution of the Cafe,
can I yet fee how it materially differs from
your own, where you emphatically decide,
that the Party tranfgrefing the Law, is bound by
his Allegiance to fubmit to the Penalty; but
the Contrail will hold him in Confcience *f\
Yqu are fuppoftng the Cafe of a moral Ne-
fefiity, in which a Minor, for the Prefervation
of his Chaftity, may be obliged to enter into
a Marriage publicly prohibited and difallowed.
For the Refolution of this Cafe we need not
to deviate into the By-paths of cafuiftical Sub-
tlety or polemic Chicane. It matters not,
whether the Incapacity of complying with the
legal Forms arifes from anunreafonable Scruple
of Religion, or from the like unreafon-
able Will of a Parent; provided it is a real
Incapacity, under as real and unfeigned a
Want of the Gift of Continency. Then, and
then only, are Chriftian Parties in a private
Marriage, which the Law has annulled, Man
and Wife before God-, on Condition, however,
that before God they contract the Bond of
perpetual Fidelity; and on Condition that they
are fo juft to Society, as to contract it accord-
ing to Law, as foon as the Incapacity is re-
moved ; fubmit ting to the Penalty infl idled by
* Vindication, &c. pp. 55, 6. f Rev, pp. 47, 8.
Hz " the
( 60 )
the Law, or accepting the Mitigation of Ri-
gour afforded by the Adl or conftitutional Or-
der of Society, which muft be Judge of the
Circumftances either pleading Neceffity or
folliciting Relief, as well as of what it ought
to admit of in Confideration of its own Con-
venience and Well-being.
But as it is not a Privilege, peculiar to the
Minor, that his Right of Marriage is unalien-
able 3 fo neither is he privileged in being ex-
empted from the Difcipline and Obligations of
that Chaftity, which he means to fecure, in a
Cafe of certain Extremity, by the legally prohi-
bited Ufe of his Right. The Validity of the
Plea of Neceffity muft be the Refult of a barely
poffible indeed, but very extraordinary Situa-
tion of Parties under the Condudt of a mode-
rate Law, or a parental Direction; confidering
efpecially that Chaftity is a Virtue, like her Sifter-
Virtues of Temperance, acquirable by all Men
and neceffary to every Condition of Life. Accord-
ingly it is evinced from common Experience,
and the Senfe of Mankind ; it is luppofed by
the Laws of God, and by the Conftitutions
* J
of all civilized Nations, that the Appetite of
Marriage is fo far fubjed; to Will, as, in the
ordinary Courfe of Things, to be capable of
the Government both of private Difcretion and
the Laws of the Land: And where theleLaws
4 can
' . (61)
can appoint Regulations of Marriage, between
Parties in Minority, or otherwife, and a&u-
ally do appoint them with the declared Sanction
of Nullity j there the Parties in unlawful
Marriage are notonly criminal in their Oppofi-
ti< n to a rightful Authority, but they ufurp a
Right, or rather the Ufe and Exercife of a
Right, over which Society has a difcretionary
Superintendence; and therefore they do not
onlyjuftly fuffer the Civil Penalty of Tranf-
grefnon,which in the State of Society muft often
be the Portion of Innocence itfelf; but their
unlawful Adt of Contradl does not carry in
Con Science the Obligation of a Marriage Con-
tradi.
The Foundation of this Conclufion being a
Defedt of Right in the Parties to make the
unlawful Contract; it follows that the Minor's
a&ual and prefent Alienation of his Perfon in
Marriage, as well as his adtual and prefent
Alienation of his Eftate by a proper Inftru-
ment, is ipfo fadio null ; though made only
the Day before he comes of Age *. But can Laws
fx the Dime when it may be ft that Perfons
Jhould marry -f ? Fix the Dime when Celibacy
will be juftifiable, or not, according to the
Law of God ? They cannot fix a Time, which
Shall be Suited to every particular Perfon, in
* See Rev. p. 9. f lb. p. 23.
every
( 6l)
every particular Circumftance or State. But
Is the Time of Marriage for that Reafon an in-
competent Subject of Laws ? Is that an incom-
petent Subjedt of Laws concerning Marriage,
which is the general Subjedt of all human
Laws; a Subjedft incapable ot a precife Defini-
tion in Quantity and Degree, accommodated
to all the Exigencies of the Matter or Parties
concerned * ? Should you argue; if the Laws
can fix the Time of Marriage at Twenty-one:
Why not at Twenty-five ? Why not at Thirty ?
W hy not at F or ty years of A ge?—My An fwer is3
XJfus fenfufque repugnant.
Cadis elufus rati one ruentis Acervi.
* Quod honefeum dicimus, p^o materiae diverfitate, mod©
(ut itadicam) in pundto confiftit,— modo liberius habet
fpatium;—ferme quomodo ab hoc ejje ad hoc non ejje fta-
tim fit tranfitus, at inter aliter adverfa, ut album et nigrum,
reperire eft aliquid interpofitum, five mixtum, five redu-
ctum utrinque. Et in hoc pofler.iori genere maxirne occupari
folent leges turn divinae, turn humanae, See. Grot, de jure,
Sze. i. 2. I. 3. Leges—fatis habent id quod plerutnque acci-
dit refpicere, ut aiebat Theophraftus, quo et illud Gatonis
pertinet: Nulla lex fatis commoda ejl: id modo quaritur, fi
majori parti et in fununa prodeft. Ib. 4. 3. Now the Pro-
portion required by Cato will be vaftly exceeded, when we
confider, in Favour of the Law refpe&ing Minors, " that
<c there are infinitely more Children, who in the Heat
" and Folly of Youth, will marry improperly, than
*.c there are Fathers, who will oppofe reafonable Matches,'®
See Bailees Di£t. in Pienne. Not. H.
V ' .....
You
N
J
fisiiiti
? 4
fib*
f63}
You ufe a Species of Argument invented
to perplex, not to afcertain any Matter of
Debate; particularly delufive in moral Sub-
jedts, the Subjects of Civil Intercourfe and
the daily Bufineffes of Life. Are not the
Vices of Intemperance, of Drunkennefs and
Gluttony, or other Extravagance, fubjedt to
Civil Animadverfion and the Cognizance of
Law ? But can you precifely fettle the Boun-
daries of thofe Vices, for univerfal Practice
and Execution; always as to the very Quality
of the Things abufed to unreafonable Gratifi-
cation * ; but ever as to the Quantity, the
Number of Morfels, for Inftance, or the
Number of Glades, which maybe innocently
taken by every fingle Perfon, and which fhall
not be exceeded without a criminal Mifcon-
dudt or with legal Impunity ? Now I will un-
dertake to difcredit the Laws, provided in
mod Countries for the Reftraint and Punifh-
ment of thefe and fuch like Offences againft
the Rule of perfonal Virtue, with all the Mi-
* Illud planum eft. Tub leglbus comprehendi, non folum
qu.-e ad juftitiam proprie dictarn pertinent,—fed et quae ad
alias virtutes fpe<51ant;—qua ratione leges contra ebrietatem
et alias intemperantiae fpecies —ferri poffunt et folent.
Hue pertinet lex Zaleuci: Si quis Locrenfium cegrotam vi-
num merum bibijjet, nifi jubente medico, etiamfi ad prijli-
nam vaiiiudinem rediijfet, mors a fupplicium erat conjlitu-
tuhun. Pvjf. i. 6. 4.
nuteneffes
( 64 )
nuteneffes of a long exploded Sophi&ry, which
compofe the main Subftance of your Proof
againft the Pradicablenefs or Expediency of
the Claufe annulling the Minor's Marriage
made without the Parent's Confent.
I have endeavoured, in the Courfe of the
Argument, to affert a Civil Power of enabling
this and the other annulling Claufes of the
Ad:, as the genuine Refult of the Principles
of free Policy, which derives all the Force of
Laws from the original Compofition and Con*
fent of Individuals in the firft Formation and
Conftitution of the Civil Authority. The ce-
lebrated Patron of this political Syflem does
not admit it as a neceffary Confequence of his
fundamental Pofition, that after the Conftitu-
tion of that Authority is once fully eftablifhed
by free Confent, nothing ought to be impofed
by it as a Law, but what may be refolved
into the Subjeffs Confent *, either exprefsly or
preemptively given to the particular Matter of
the Law For if, for Inflance, the Matter
of the Law fhould happen, in any Part, to
be of a penal Quality; Piinijbment is, in its
Nature, the Objed: of Averfon, and mall
* &'ff P- 3°-
f Non abfurdum eft, meo confenfu poteftatem aliquam
conftitui, quae poftea adus quofdam in me invitum queat
exercere, Etfi quod in earn poteftatem ipfe confenferim,
faciat, ut queri non poftim, ft ifta deinceps in me vires
fuas exierat. Puff, &c. viii. 3. 5.
• • te
( 65 )
be inflided again]} the Tranfgreflor's Con-
fent *; which is the Reafon alledged by him,
why the criminal Party is not in Juftice obliged
to deliver in an Information againfi himfelf,
nor fubmit himfelf, without Force, to the
Execution of a juft Sentence; though Socrates
would not efcape, when he innocently might,
the Execution of an iniquitous one, from the
Didates of a more than ordinary, and, in the
View of Juftice, more than necefiary, Ma-
gnanimity and Charity -J*. I have no Occafion
to enter into the Difcuflion of a Principle,
which the Subjed in Queftion by no Means
requires. Laws, and Ufages, not exadly cor-
refponding with the Theory of perfed Redi-
tude, do fometimes obtain ; nor is it always
wrong, in the main, that they fhould obtain,
from a companionate Senfe of Diftrefs in the
calamitous, however guilty, Party ; and from
the Indulgence of Candour due to the irrefiftible
Power of Self-love. I doubt not, the fame
Power of Self-love might carry the Parties in „
* Poena ftgnificat aliquid, quod invito eft imponendum,
et voluntatis averfionem ab ilia involvit. Ib. § 4.
f Hoc confequitur, quemadmodum quis, ubi damnum
a fe datum farcivit, haudquidquam feipfum deferre tenetur,
quo poena a legibus ftatuta in ipfurti dccernatur : itaob ean-
dem rationem negatione, occultatione,aut perfugam ifti fefe
fubducere citraullius obligationis violationem licere. — Quae
—Socrates difputat cum Crito fugam e carcere fuafiftet,--'
magnanimitatis di&ata funt. lb.
I irre-
( 66 )
irregular Marriages, under the adtual Feeling
of the Inconveniences and Incapacities, which
they have brought upon themfelves and their
Pofterity; to complain of Hardfhips from a
Law which had been the Occafion, though
the accidental Occafion, of their Sufferings:
Notwithftanding the fame Parties might very
reafonably ccnfent, and are, therefore, very
reafonably prefumed to have confented> to the
fpecial, to the unfavourable and penal Con-
tents of the Law ; would they view it with
the Eye of Community, and, abftradtedly
from their own particular Cafe, confider its
Ufefulnefs to the Virtue, the Order, and the
Happinefs of Society *, as well as its real
Foundation in the uncontroverted Principles of
that Juftice, which muft never be violated,
as maintaining the very Being of Society
itfelf.
I conclude with refering it to your fecond
* There is an equal Force and Propriety in Doctor
IVarlurtords Defcription of tc the late falutary Law, folely
" calculated for the Support and Ornament of Society; by
Cc which the juft Rights and Authority of Parents are vin-
cc dicated ; the Peace and Harmony of Families preferved i
44 the irregular Appetites of Youth retrained; and the
ct worftand bafeit Kind of Seduction encountred and de-
" featedand that by its rendering nidi and void
all pretended Marriages, not folemnized as the wifdom of our
antient Corf hut ion directs, Serm. on the Marr. Union,
p. hi.
Con-
( 67 )
Confederation, whether, in order to expofe
the Inconclufivenefs of your Method of arguing,
the moft fallacious of any, by Comparifon,
it was not pertinent to obferve to you, " That,
" in the Inftance of Marriage, a Subjed of
" Civil Community is underftood to have con-
" fented to a Limitation of his 7iaturalLiberty
cc of AEling; but he cannot, in like Manner,
<c be underftood to have confented to a Li-
<c mitation of his natural and necejfary Power
u of'Thinking *; in Conformity to the Ap-
<£ pointments of public Wifdom. So that a
" Man cannot be underftood as having referv-
<c ed to himfelf his natural Right to contrad
" Marriage, in the fame unlimited Extent, as
" he may, and indeed mujl, be underftood as
" having referved to himfelf his natural Right
<c to chufe his Religion, and to worfhip God
£c according to his own Judgment and Con-
* Here the Right and the Ufe of the Right are neccftariiv
infeparable from each other. It is otherwife in innumerable
Inftances of private Right. So; Ufusfruclus a proprietate
feparationem recipit; idque piuribus modis accidit, &c. Jujt,
Lnfi. ii. 4. 2. So; Dominium, quod favore infantium —
introducftum eft, ftat intra adum primum, nec ad adtum
fecundum—poteft pertingere; id eft, ad habendi, non ad
per fe utendi jus pertinet. Grot, de jur. ii. 3. 6. So;
" The Law fuppofes the decifive Right of contracting
" Marriage to lie" in the Parties ; " it only reftrains the
" Ufe and Exercife of this Right." Dr. Ibbetfon s Obferv.
PP*3> 4*
I 2 c< fcience.
( 68 )
Cf fcience. But to avail yourfelf of a Compa-
<c rifon [as ftated by you] between the Cafes
<c of a Religion publicly eflablifhed [with
" pecuniary and perfecuting Mulcts,] and of a
" Law of Marriage publicly eftablifhed [with
<c the Sanction of Nullity ;] you muft fhew,
that the exacted Payment of fifty Shillings a
ct Tear * is as proper a Means of rectifying
<c Error in difienting from the eftablifhed
<c Worfhip, as baftardizing the Iflue of an il-
<c legal Cohabitation of the Sexes is of correct-
<c ing Licentioulnefs: And that Baiiifhment,
<c Confifcation, or any other Species of Per/ecu-
<{ tion of thofe, 'who think it not reafionable to
ce comply with the Religion of their Couritry ft-;
<f can either be neceflary for the Support of
<c the national Religion, or, by Force of any
<c Principle of good Government or natural
Jufticc, be inflicted by the State upon
<c thofe her Subjects, who could not but re-
<c ferve to themfelves their natural Right to
<c chufe their Religion and Worfhip ; and
(t who entitle themfelves to an equitable fhare
<£ of the common Protection, by the Practice
* How comes it to pafs, that a Scpciraiijl (hall not be
prefumed as confenting to pay fifty Shillings a Year for the
fake of Public Good, and that a Minor pall be prefumed
as confenting to bajlardlze his IjTue for the Sake of the Pub-
lie Good ? D'-Jf. p. 38.
f I'o. p. 32.
I cc of
BA
( 69 )
<c of a religious Worfhip, which is not inju-
<c rious to the Civil Peace, and by giving to
<c the State all the religious Securities of Civil
" Obedience Iam,
%
$
SIR,
*
Your obedient humble Servant,
;
JAMES TUNSTALL.
* Vindication, &c. pp. 46, 7.
ERRATUM.
1
P. 36. /. 24. dele the latter are,
Lately P
by the fame Author;
' f
A Vindication of the Power of States to prohibit
Clandeftine Marriages under the Pain of Abfolute
Nullity; particularly the Marriages of Minors made
without the Confent of their Parents or Guardians: In
Anfwer to the Rev. Dr. Stebbing's Dijfertation, &c. In
a Letter to the Do£tor» Price i r*
mum > \
•••••
a
V IN DICATION
OF THE
PowERof Society
T O
Annull the Marriages of Minors,
ENTERED INTO
Without Confent of Parents or Guardians;
IN WHICH
The Objections made thereto, in two Pamphlets
lately publifhed by the Rev. Dr. Stebbing, are
fully confidered.
By joseph sayer, Efq.
Conjugium vocat; hoc praetexit nomine culpam.
LONDON,
Printed for A. Millar in the Strand«
MDCCLV*
[ Price One Shilling. ]
- : • / ' ; • ' ' r
J „ t
.2 H : -
i '
* 7 t
■ C O • -
V
' p "<
O T 7. I r: 1 - T'l'i 2 '
/
Ii j ■ i: . / 11 -
. . . L »■• *
'*iri -
%4 ■ «. i
r -*««
1 .o ... ' I:■.
,\.y. > \ ' i - t, J
J. I - - A . . i <-
. : .: C .. .1
. . S ) t-..".'I ]
(I )
A
VINDICATION
O F
The Power of Society, etc.
IF the great importance of Matrimony
not only to the peace and order but to
the very being of fociety be confidered,
it muft be allowed, that it is the indifpenfable
duty of legiflators to make from time to
time proper regulations therein. It was
agreed on all hands that certain abufes had
crept into this inflitution, and that, the old
laws being in fome things deficient in others
eluded, it was high time to put a flop to
thefe by a new one : yet was the utmoft at-
tention neceffary that, fo far as human pru-
dence could forefee and guard againft it, no
new inconvenience fhouldbe introduced.How
far the late acl for the better ■preventing clan-
B deftine
( 2 )
defline Marriages will anfwer thefe two pur-
pofes time will fhow: but with great de-
ference to Authority it may be faid, that it
was not paffed with fo much deliberation as
the making new arrangements in an affair of
fuch confequence deferved. It has, as it
might be expedted, been the fubjedt of much
converfation: and fome things have appear-
ed in print. Amongft the reft, two pam-
phlets have been publifhed by the learned
Dr. Stebbing: one called An Enquiry into the
force and operation of the annulling Claufes in
a late Aft for the better preventing clandefine
Marriages with. refpeCt to Confcience: the
other, A Differ tat ion on the power of States to
deny civil protection to theMarriages of minors,
made without the confent of parents or guar-
dians. The two principal things which he
has endeavoured to make out are, that if any
perfon fliall marry in any other way than
this act diredts, the law by declaring fuch
Marriage null does not difcharge confcience
from the obligation : and that the ftate has
no power to deny civil protection to the Mar-
riages of minors made without confent of
parents or guardians. To examine and re-
fute what he has advanced in fupport of this
laft propofition is the prefent defign: but in
order
( 3 )
order thereto it will be neceflary to take fome
paffages in the Enquiry as well as the Differ-
tation into confideration*.
After laying it down as one eflential by
the law of nature to Marriage, that there be
a fufficiency of knowledge or underftanding
to qualify the parties to contract, the Do&or
goes on in thefe words: £< bExperience and
<c obfervation mull: be confulted, to know at
<c what age perfons are ordinarily of fuffici-
<c ent underftanding to make the marriage
ct contract; and lawgivers ought not to adt
" againft fuch experience, but be dire&ed by
" it; in which care fhould be always taken
" to keep as near as may be to the ftandard
" of nature ; and rather to fall a little below
" it, than rife much above it. If the law
<( fhould fay, that no woman fhall marry till
t{ {he-is fourteen years of age, nor any man
<c till he is fixteen, it would be a very fafe
<c and reafonable law; for few (in thefe parts
" of the world at leaft) ever think of mar-
" rying fo foon. But if it fhould be declared
" that no perfons fhall be adjudged capable
* The reader is defired to remember, that when any
thing is cited from the Enquiry, the letter E. is prefixed
in the margin to the number of the page : all other paf-
fages are from the Dijjertation. b P. 5.
B 2 CJ of
( 4 )
41 of contracting Marriage, till they are up-
fc wards of twenty, it would be very unrea-
"fonable: for nature may urge fooner."
Without going into a nice enquiry at what
precife age thefe urgings of nature are felt,
one may venture to fay that very few oi
thofe the Dodtor calls women feel them before
the age of fourteen ; and that very few of
thofe others called boys feel them before that
of fixteen: and it may be admitted that both
fexes are fenfible of them fome time before
they are twenty one. A law then to hinder
the latter from marrying till fixteen, and the
former till fourteen, fo far from being rea-
fonable would be quite nugatory: for to
what purpofe is it to reflrain by a general
law when few ever think of doing it fo foon.
If the gratifying thefe urgings was the only
thing to be confidered all laws would be un-
reafonable, for nature would bell fix her own
time: but if by fuflicient underflanding to
make the Marriage contract is meant fuffici-
ent underflanding for the other conjugal du-
ties as well as the procreative, a law that
perfons fhail not marry till they have this is
both fafe and reafonable. It is indeed faid,
(t c that this capacity of knowing the true end,
c E. p. 7.
" ufe
and the
jeing iw-
Sot to
ifd
it [oh
(iflfc
( 5 )
cc ufe, and effeCt of the Marriage contract,
ct follows clofe at the heels of the capacity of
<c procreation, and the natural appetite of
tl Marriage. Every man confeffes this who
" marries his daughter at fifteen, fixteen, or
<c feventeen years of age, (which there is
u fcarce a parent in the kingdom, who
" would not do for the fake of an advantage-
<c ous match,) and the reafon is plain, for the
" contract arifes not from the parents con-
<c fent, but from theconfent and will of the
child ; which confent, if the child were
" not in a capacity of contracting, would be
" abfolutelyof no force.1' That the DoCtor is
of opinion that thefe capacities follow each
other very clofely, no one who has read
thefe pamphlets can doubt: but has he
fhown they do fo ? Some do indeed marry
their daughters at the ages he mentions;
which may be a confefiion that thefe were
in the judgment of their parents of fuffici-
ent capacity, or that they were tempted by
what they judged an advantageous match to
marry them before they were fo : But it can
never prove that children in general are fo at
thofe ages. This which is called a plain
reafon, far from concluding to the point
that thefe capacities follow each other fo
clofely,
•i
———BO—I
( 6 )
clofely, amounts to no more than a naked
affertion, which fhall hereafter be confidered,
that if the adt of the child himfelf is not va-
lid the confentof parents cannot make itfo.
One would think the Dodtor muft be mif-
taken, when he fays there is fcarce a parent
in the kingdom who would not marry his
daughter at the age of fifteen, fixteen, or fe-
venteen for the fake of an advantageous
match. It feems abfurd that they fhould adt
fo inconfiftently in their private with what
they do in their publick capacity: for where-
ever the people have any {hare in the legifla-
tive power, every adt of this (houldbe confi-
dered as the adt of parents in fuch capacity.
There is perhaps no one thing in which the
laws of all civilized nations have been more
uniform, than that thefe capacities donotfol-
low each other fo clofely. In this country, by
confulting experience and obfervation it has
in all ages been found, that in general nei-
ther fex is capable of knowing and perform-
ing the duties of the married life till they
are twenty one. The confequence has been
laws to prevent marriage before that age;
and in this it cannot be denied that they have
rather fallen below the ftandard of nature
than rifen above it: for as minors have
been
( 7 ) '
been conftantly held unequal to trifling con-
trails, they muft be fo to this mod impor-
tant one, on which the happinefs or mifery
of great part if not the whole of their lives
depends. It being however fuppofed, that
by the law of nature parents were judges
when they had the proper capacity, the civil
power has in conformity thereto ufually
left it in the power of parents to permit
children to marry before the time fixed by
law. An uncommonly early ripenefs of
underftanding, or fome other circumftance,of
which they are the beft judges, may make
the exercife of this expedient: but it cannot
be fairly inferred that, becaufe a few do
this, the united wifdom of parents in all
times and countries has been miftaken as to
this matter.
The fecond thing la id down by the Dodlor
as an effential by the lav/ of nature to Mar-
riage, is a right to contrad. In treating of
this, he fays, " d here lies the grand queftion;
" Is the diflent of the parents a bar againft
" the child's marriage, fuppofing him other-
" ways qualified ? Hath nature given to pa-
" rents fuch a power ? hath the pofitive law
"of God given them any fuch power? or
" can civil laws give it them ? To juftify the
d P- 5-
u laws
( 8 )
ct laws of many nations it fhould be fo ; but
" right is not to be decided by examples in
€c practice, how many or how great foever
" they may be; but practice ought to be di-
cc redted by right; and the rule of right in
" this, and all other cafes, is the univerfal
<c law of nature, by which men and flates
" ought to govern themfelves, where the
" pofitive law of God interpofeth not."
This grand queftion is quite unfairly put; for
by fuppofing the child otherways qualified it
begs all that is in contefl: the parental pow-
er being founded on a fuppofition that they
are not qualified to engage in an affair of fo
great confequence. It fhould properly have
been, and in that light it {hall be confidered,
Is the diffent of parents a bar at any age to
the child's Marriage, and to what age is it fo?
Before he enters on the firft of the three quef-
tions, which the principal one divides itfelf
into, hath nature given to parents fuch a
power? theDodtor would have itunderftood
that the general confent and pradtife of nati-
ons is of no weight in it ; for that this right
refts on the univerfal law of nature. The
latter of thefe afiertions I admit: but beg leave
to differ from him as to the former. The
learned
I
\
( 9 )
learned Grotius fayse, (< there are two ways
" of proving any thing to be part of the law
<£ of nature, a priori and a pojieriori. Of
u thefe the former is a more refined, the
il latter a more ufeful way. The method
" a priori is to (how the neceflaty agreement
u or difagreement of any thing with a rational
41 and focial nature : by the other a pojieriori>
c< which if not an abfolutely certain way is
41 a highly probable one, that is taken to be
" part of the natural law which amongfl: all
tl nations, or all the more civilized, has been
t£ fo efteemed : for an univerfal effect mufl
have an univerfal caufe, and there feems
u to be no other caufe of this fo general an
" opinion than that fenfe which is called
" common fenfe.'' This do&rine of Grotius
is confirmed in his ufual manner by many
e De jure bell: et pads, lib. i, ch. i. § 12. Efle
autem aliquid juris naturalis probari folet turn ab e©
quod prius eft, turn ab eo quod pofterius. Quarum
probandi rationum ilia fubtilior eft, haec popularior. A
priori ft oftendatur rei alicujus convenientia vel dif-
convenientia neceftaria cum natura rationali et fociali;
a pofteriori vero, ft non certiftima fide certe probability
admcdum, juris naturalis efte colligitur id quod apud
omnes gentes aut moratiores omnes tale efte creditur.
Nam univerfaliseffectus univerfalem requiritcaufam, talis,
autem exiftimationis caufa vix ulla videtyr efTe pnster
fenfum ipfum communis qui dicitur.
c »f
( 1° )
of the beft authorities. It is not done from^
4
an apprehenfion that this kind of proof will
be wanting: but it was proper to fhow that
authority, when founded on the congruity
of nations, is not to be fo entirely difregarded.-
To prove that nature hath not given parents
fuch a power, it is faid f, " if the right of con-
" trailing Marriage does not lie in the child
" it muft (in a ftate of nature) lie in the pa-
" rent. It can lie no where elfe. But the
right cannot lie in the parent. For
° though the being of the child comes from
the parent, the rights of the child, as a
* diftindt individual, do not. Every body
<l underftands that rights may accrue to the
" child, feparate from the rights of the pa-
" rent. If a friend gives my fon an eftate,
" the eftate is his and not mine nor is he
<c in the ufe of it fubjedt to my controul.
cc Now can you tell me of any thing which
Is more a man's his than himfelf ? Nothing.
" An eftate given to my fon is his, by the
gift of the donor. Himfelf is his (by the
inftrumentality indeed of the parent, bui)
by. the giiV of God. Otherways a parent
tl might at his pleafure maim, dilmember, or
murder- his child, which no reafonable man
are not high violations of the na-
It'' ( 11 )
cc tural law." The right of contracting
Marriage is undoubtedly in the child ; yet
what abfurdity follows from holding that he
(hall not exercife it, till he knows how to do
fo, without prejudice to himfelf. Can a
child have a greater right to the ufe of any
natural parts than his legs? But he is in the
exercife of this fubjeCt to the controul of his
parents. It muft from the neceffity of the
thing be fo; for if the power of walking
comeson before the capacity of knowing where
to walk with fafety, a power of hindering
his going into a river, or into the fire, muft
be lodged fomewhere ; and where could it
be fo properly as in the parents. This pa-
rental power muft, in the nature of the thing,
laft till children are capable of knowing and
avoiding danger. If it fhould be afked at
what age they are fo ? the anfwer is, that pa-
rents are, in a ftate of nature, the judges of
that: for if a child fhould be at liberty to fay
to them, I can walk very well, I won't have
a maid always after me, but will go alone
where I pleafe, the ufe of it would be loft.
As one of fix years of age might fay this, one
of four might, for a child can go alone
even before that time ; and many would be
loft by being left to themfelves too foon. In
C 2 fociety
( I2 )
fociety legiflators may fix the time when
children fhall be trufted alone: but to make
it effectual, the duration of this power muft
in a ftate of nature, as there is no judge to
appeal to, be in the difcretion of parents.
To apply this. If the difpofition to Marri-
age comes on before the capacity of entring
into that ftate, it is equally neceffary that the
child fhould be prevented from doing this.
I do not mean to compare Matrimony to the
being burned or drowned; but it may be
faid, that it had been better for either of
thefe to have happened to him in his infan-
cy than to enter imprudently into it. If a
friend gives my fon an eftate, it is to be fure
his and not mine; yet I have in a ftate of
nature a power over it: for if he may fquan-
der it away before he knows the proper ufe
of it, my friend might as well have done
nothing; the fame neceflity taking place
here as in all cafes to which his capacity is
not equal. Himfelf is indeed his by the
gift of God : But, by the appointment of
the fame God, parents are to take care of
him, and all that concerns him, till he is
able to judge for himfelf; and it is their in-
difpenfable duty to prevent, as far as they can
forefee, his doing any thing deftrudtive to his
life
( '3 ) * -
life or happinefs. There is a wide difference
betwixt a power to defend a child from in-
juries, and a power to injure him. His ina-
bility to conduct himfelf makes the firft ne-
ceflary : but it cannot be inferred, that there-
fore parents may maim, difmember, and
murder him at pleafure. It is faid, that his
opinion in this matter " s fo far as he knows,
" concurs with the fenfe of the ableft mafters
f£ in natural law." If this be fo, the Dodtor
has been extremely unlucky in choofing his
authorities; for the few he has produced are
not to the point, or conclude againft it. The
firft of thefe is, " h liberty is in no cafe fo ne-
c< ceffary as in Matrimony." This is in ge-
neral true but not to the purpofe; for if the
place in Grotius 1 whence it is taken be
looked into, it will be found that this is
cited from Quintilian to prove, that where
the fon has the moral faculty, which in ano-
ther place is defined the being at the age of
perfedt judgment, the confent of parents is
not neceflary to the validity of his Marriage.
Another is from Bilhop Fleetwood. iC k But
b E. p. ii. h E. p. io.
» De jure belli et pacis^ lib. ii. ch. v. § 10. Nufquam
tamen libertas tam neceflaria quam inmatrimonio eft.
kP. 42.
«' there
( H )
a there is fomething common to all nations
and religions; and that in which they all
unite muft needs be that which makes the
" Marriage contract valid and obliging. And
€t what is that, but that a male and female
*c fhouldbe at age, and at liberty to confent,
" and fhould actually confent to give each
" other the ufe and dominion of each other's
" body, exclufive to all the world befides, as
long as they both (hall live?'5 If this
paffage does not prove it neceffary, even
to the validity of a Marriage contrad,
that the perfon be of age and at liberty to
contract, it proves nothing. At what age
■they are at liberty to do fo, in a ftate of na-
ture, without confent of parents, fhall be af-
terwards confidered. 1 The next authority is
that of Grotius, and he feems to rely much
upon it: for he introduces it with thefe
words. " m Let us hear then what one of the
ct greatefi; mailers in this fcience hath laid
"concerning the natural right of parents
and after citing it faysn, " Thus far this
ip-7- MP. 9.
Grot, de jure belli et pads, lib. ii. cb. v. § 2
to 7. Diflinguenda autem funt tria tempora in liberis.
Pninum tempus imperfe&i judicii dum abeft vis elec-
" great
( *5 )
" great lawyer and cafuift. The pafiage is :
" There are three periods in the ages of chil-
" dren that ought to be diftinguifhed. The
" firft is the time of imperfedt judgment;
" whilft the elective faculty or power of
choofing for themfelves is wanting. The
" fecond is the time of perfect judgment: but
" whilft the fon continues part of his parents
" family. The third is the time after he is
c< gone out of the family. In the firft of
" thefe all the adions of children are under
" the dominion of parents: for it is right
" that they who cannot govern themfelves
trix—fecundum tempus perfedti judicii, fed dum filius
pars manet familiae parentum—tertium poftquam cx ea
familia exceffit. In primo tempore omnes liberorum
adtiones fub dominio funt parentum ;aequum enim eft ut
qui fe regere non poteft regatur aliunde—at alius natu-
raliter inveniri non poteft cui regimen competat quam
parentes in fecundo tempore cum jam judicium x
state maturuit, fubfunt parentum imperiis non alias
adtiones, quam quae ad familiae paternae aut maternae
ftatum aliquid momenti habent. iEquum enim ut ut
pars conveniat cum ratione integri. In caeteris aurem
aclionibus habent turn liberi facultatem moralem agen-
di j fed tenentur tarnen in illis quoque femper ftudere
ut parentibus placeant. Verum hoc debitum cum non
ex vi facultatis moralis ut ilia fuperiora, fed ex pietate,
obfervantia, et gratiae rependendae officio, non efficit ut
ifiit-um lit li quid contra fit factum, ficut ncc irrita eft
<< fhould
t
( 16 )
r€ fhould be governed by others • and there
<c are none to be found to whom the govern-
" ment fo properly belongs as to parents. In
<c the fecond, when the judgment is ripened
ct by age, no other adfions are fubjedt to the
c< dominion of parents, than fuch as have
<c fome relation to theftate of the father's or
<c mother's family: it being fit that a part
fhould conform to what concerns the
€C whole. In other things children have a
moral faculty of adting for themfelves :
11 yet even in thefe they are bound to fludy
" conftantly to pieafe their parents* As this
" duty however does not arife, as in the former
" period, from the want of the moral faculty 3
sc but from confiderations of piety, reverence,
<c and gratitude, it does not go fo far as to
" make what is done contrary thereto void :
4< any more than a gift by the owner of the
u thing given is void, becaufe he did not at-
tk tend to the laws of frugality. In the
<< third period the child is in all things maf-
" terof himfelf: yet the duties of piety, and
tc reverence remain, to the obligation, thefe
£C being perpetual." This, though not in his
- donatio rei a quocvmque domino facia contra pariimonbe
reguias. In tertio tempore filius eft in omnibus fui
juris. Manente tamen Temper illo pietatis et obfervan-
tiss debito cujuscaufa eft perpetua.
4 words,
( '7 )
Words, is tranflated as nearly as pofiible to the
original. It being hard to conceive any
inan, efpecially one of the Dolor's age and
character, of fo malevolent a difpofition as
to intend the mifleading mankind, under
the fandion of fo great an authority, in a
point of the utmoft confequence; it mud
be fuppofed, that in his eagernefs to main-
tain his notion he miftook the meaning of
this paffage. There is no other Way of ac-
Counting for his faying immediately after
citing it 5, <c with the firfl part of thefe peri-
" ods we have nothing to do* For nature
" herfelf will not permit a child to marry
" till it has fufficient underftanding to dif-
" cern between good and evil." No one
thing in the world can be plainer than that,
in the opinion of Grotius, all the addons of
children are, during the age of imperfed
judgment, under the dominion of parents,
and that fo far as to make what is done with-
out their confent void. Inftead then of hav-
ing nothing to do with this period, it is this,
and the duration of this alone, that has any
relation to the prefent queftion, What is
meant by underftanding to difcern between
\
! P- 9-
D ' Rood
( »8 )
good and evil he befl knows: but if the
Doctor means any thing lefs than to know
and perform the duties of the married flate,
it is only faying in other words what he faid
before, that this and the procreative faculty
come on together ; but this paffage proves no
fuch thing. He goes on: " 'But beyond this
c< there is a period, during which the laws
<c of fome countries will not permit children
<c to marry without the confent of their pa-
<c rents, though otherways they may be qua-
cc lifted, that is, though they have what
iC Grotius calls the vis eleclrix or moral
<c faculty of adting; by which he is not to
<c be fuppofed to mean perfedt wifdom, or
Cc perfect difcretion, (which comparatively
fpeaking very few ever come at) but fuch
a ripenefsof underftanding as competently
u qualifies perfons to tranfadt common
" affairs/' Where thofe countries lie, whofe
laws will not permit perfons to marry when
properly qualified, I have never heard but
this 1 am certain of, that they are very
ftrange countries: for it being for the good
of every country to encourage Matrimony as
much as poffible, there can be but one rea-
fon for laws to fay that a child {hall not
marry till a certain age without confent of
1 j P. 9. parents >
X
( 19)
parents; and this is, that till then children
are not in general qualified for it. Grotius
cannot indeed be fuppofed to mean a great
genius, or an uncommon underftanding:
but he means more than the Dodor is willing
to underftand, which is that the judgment
fhould be ripened by age. The perfedion
of judgments differs as much as the judg-
ments themfelves; yet every one may
be faid to be in fome meafure per fed:*
when it has attained, by age, a degree of
ftrength adequate to its own fize. We are
indeed told that the maturity of judgment,
which conftitutes the moral faculty k, comes
on far within the period ufually affigned to
minority; for that without this a perfon is
not capable of moral obligation, and to prove
that minors are, a paffage is cited from Gro-
tins: but when the whole of it is given,
which the Dodor has not done, it is far from
fhowing that minors in general have the
moral faculty fo early. After faying he is
going to confider what things are neceffary to
make a promife binding, that learned author
goes on: 1 " The firft thing requifite is the
k p. IO.
1 Lib. ii. c. xi. fed. 5. Primum requiritur ufus rati-
onis; ideo et furiofi, et amentis, et infantis nulla eld pro-
Da " ufe
, ( 20 )
w ufe ofreafon; therefore the promife of a
madman, an ideot, and an infant is null:
€C but it is otherways with regard to minors;
<{ for although thefe, like women, are not
<c fuppofed to have fufficient ftrength of
" judgment, that however is not always the
cc cafe, nor is that alone fufficient to annul
<c the a£t. It cannot be afcertained at what
tc precife age a boy begins to have the ufe of
« reafon: but this is to be learned from his
<c whole behaviour, or from what generally
cC happens in the country where he lives."
The meaning is, that the promifes of minors
are not in all cafes like thofe of madmen,
idiots, and infants void; and he gives two
reafons for this difference, that they may
fometimes have the ufe of reafon, and that
the want of this is not alone fufficient to
annul them. It feems to me, that this fe-
cond exception to the general rule, is an
miftio. Aliud cenfendum eft de minoribus : Hi enim etft
non fatis firmum judicium habere credantur, ut et fe-
minae, id tamen nec perpetuum eft, nec per fe fufficit ad
adtus vim elidendam. Quando autem puer ratione uti
ikcipiat non poteft certo definiri: fed ex quotidianis a<fti-
bus, aut etiam ex eo quod communiter in quaque regi„
one accidir, defumendum elk
gllufion
( 21 )
allufion to the power parents and guard!-
ans have of confirming the promifes* of
minors, and that he would compare them
to femes covert, whofe promifes are feldom
binding without confent of their hulbands:
for it would be abfurd to fuppofe that a wo-
man, if of years of difcretion and not mar-
ried, is incapable of binding herfelf by a
promife. Whether Grotius means this or not,
it is as clear as day-light, that theufe of rea-
fon is abfolutely neceflary to the validity of
any promife, and another thing is equally
clear, that the minor himfelf is not the judge
of this; for it would be downright nonfenfe
to refer him to his own adtions, or to what
generally happens in the country he lives in,
in order to judge if he has himfelf the ufe
of reafon. It {hall be afterwards (hown,
that parents only can, in a {fate of nature,
be the judges when this comes on. As it is
not contended, that the parental power con-
tinues after the fecond period or age of per-
fedt judgment comes on, it would have been
quite unneceffary to take any notice of what
is advanced to prove this, had not the Doctor
both mifcited and miftranflated a paffage
from Grotius, It fhould have been given
thus;
( 22 )
thusm: <c Befides n the moral faculty a
6 queftion arifes concerning the confent of
<c parents, which fome make neceffary by
the natural law to the validity of a marri-
€t age. In this they are miftaken; nor do
" the arguments they bring prove any thing
*£ more, than that it fuits with the duty of
<c children to obtain the confent of their
" parents. This we readily grant, provided
C{ they are not manifeftly unjuft in refilling
•
" Lib. ii. c. v. fedt. 10. Super facultate morali
quaeftio oritur de parentum Gonfenfu, quem ad validita-
tem conjugii quail naturaliter quidam requirunt: fed in
eo falluntur: nam quae adferunt argumenta nihil aliud
probant, quam officio filiorum conveniens efle ut paren-
turn confenfum impetrent: quod plane concedimus cum
temperamento, niii manifefte iniqua fit parentum volun-
tas. Nam fi in omnibus rebus filii reverentiam parenti-
bus debent, certe praecipue earn debent in eo negotio,
quod ad gentem totam pertinet, quale funt nuptiae. Sed
hinc non fequitur jus illud, quod facultatis aut dominii
nomine explicatur, deefle filio : nam qui uxorem ducitet
maturae efte debet aetatis, et extra familiam abit, ita ut
in hac re regimini familiari non fubjiciatur. Solum autem
reverentiae officium non efficit ut nullus fit adtus qui ei
repugnat. Quod autem a Romanis aliifque conftitutum
eft, ut quaedam nuptiae, quia confenius patris deficit,
irritae fint, non ex natura eft, fed ex juris conditorum
voluntate.
'B P. I i.
u it:
#it:
(23)
fc it: for if in all things children ought to
<c be advifed by their parents, they ought
more efpecially fo to be in an affair of fo
<c great confequence as that of Marriage is.
" It does not however follow, that the right,
<c which we have before called the moral
" faculty or power over his own actions, is
Ct wanting to the fon ; for as he that marries
<c ought to be of years of maturity, and
<c goes out of the family, he is not in this
<c affair fubjedt to the government of the
t{ family: nor does filial duty alone go fo
<( far as to annul every adt contrary thereto.
<c What is advanced by the Roman and by
" other laws, that fome Marriages are void
" becaufe the confent of parents is wanting,
" is not from the law of nature but from the
" will of legiflators." This paflage proves
undoubtedly, that when children are of years
of maturity they may marry without confent
of parents : but if this be all the Dodtor meant
to infer from it, why is it introduced with
very near an affertion that the ad! of contract-
ing Marriage is not under the dominion of
parents? There was too in that cafe no need
to leave out one part of the paffage, and not
to give the true fenfe of another: both which
whoever gives himfelf the trouble of com-
paring
/
(24}
paring it with the original will find to be
done. I am unwilling to charge the Do£ior
with unfairnefs; but I mud in juftice to my
fubjedt fay, that this is the fecond inftance
from the fame author, in which he has left
out part of a fentence. If this be accidental,
it is very extraordinary that a man fhould
twice omit that part which not only makes
againft himfelf, but for want of it the pafiages
are not com pleat. From theDo&or's ownau-
thorities it isjthen quite plain, that parents have
in a ftate of nature a dominion over all the
a&ions of their children till they attain the
ufe of reafon: and that fo far as to make
what is done without their confent void.
It is not faid at what age they do this,
nor indeed, as it muft be varied by climate
and other accidents, can the precife time be
fixed. The queftion then, and it is the only
one that can arife is, who in a ftate of nature
is to judge thereof ? As there is no authority
to be appealed to in fuch a ftate, the right
of doing this muft be in the parents, or in
the child. To fay it is in the fatter, would
ineffedt be faying there is no parental autho-
rity: for where is the difference between
none and fuch a one as is determinable at the
will of the child ? The fame necefiity on
which
oi m
A#
( 25 )
which it is founded, makes the continuance
of it proper over all fuch ads as he is unequal
to. A capacity of ufing a natural power
does not imply a right to do it: for the exer-
cife of fuch right may be deftrudtive to the
child; and it may be obferved, that moft of
the natural powers come on before the know-
ledge how to ufe them with fafety. This
has been illuflrated in that of walking, and
might be in others. In this cafe, it is not
enough that the child be capable of venery:
but the confequences to himfelf of entring
into Marriage are to be confidered. It
would be going into too large a field, to enu-
merate the various duties of huffiand and fa-
ther, mother and wife: and it is fufficient
for the prefent purpofe to fay they are many
and fome of them difficult to be difcharged.
The age then and experience of parents is
certainly necefiary, to judge when a child is
qualified for thele. A few parents may be
fond of continuing this power too long: but
the inconveniences arifing hence are not to be
compared with what muft follow, from fup-
pofing it in the power of every child to tell
his parents, Ifind myfielf inclined to marry,
I know myfelf wife enough for it, and I will
do it in fpite of your teeth. If in any cafe a
E child
■ 1? 1
(26)
child may, when he thinks himfelf man fuf-
ficient, rejed the parental authority anarchy
mud enfue: for as no other is acknowledged
in a date of nature, there would not unlefs
this is fupported be even the appearance of
order: but if this ought in general to beheld
facred, it ought more efpecially in the pre-
fent inflance, becaufe that which tempts to the
throwing it off is the mod violent of all the
paflions. Having thus endeavoured to fhow
that parents are, by the law of nature, judges
how long their dominion over the adions of
their children ought to lad, I (hall before I
conclude this head confider one paflage. It runs
thus: " b By our laws minority is no dif-
<c charge in cafes of felony; and every man
cc who marries his daughter during minority
<c confefles her capable of moral obligation;
cc which is full to the point. For if the pa-
« rents confent fhould be allowed neceflary
« to create a right to contrad Marriage
« (which is the quedion now under delibera-
<c tion) it cannot influence the moral capaci-
" ty to make the contrad, which the pa-
<£ rents confent prefuppofes, as that without
ct which (the parents confent notwithfland-
c? ing) the contrad, would be ipjo faflo
b P. 12.
null."
f,n
( 2 7 )
c< null/'* I (hould never have thought of
comparing matrimony to felony: but as the
Dodor has thought proper to do it, let us fee
how the comparifon holds as to the ufe he
makes of it; which is, that minority fliould
not be a dilcharge in the one cafe more than
in the other. To know that he ought not
to rob requires fome underftanding: but no
body will, I think, go fo far as to fay, that it
does not require more underftanding to guard
againft being overreached in a Marriage con-
trad, and to perform the duties of it. If
then a minor may be capable as to the firft
without being fo as to the other, the Dodor's
inference falls to the ground : for he may
richly deferve to be hanged for ading con-
trary to the knowledge he has, and yet does
not deferve to be married becaufe he has not
the knowledge thereto neceftary. There is
no need to repeat wrhat has been faid before,
e as to the confeftion of parents who marry
their daughters during their minority. It is very
true that confent of parents cannot influence
the moral capacity, or make the child, if he
is not fo in himfelf, capable of the con trad:
but it by no means follows, that, becaufe he
contrads before he has the proper capacity,
: See Paee e.
• E 2 the
( 25 )
the contra# is notwithftanding the confent
of parents ipfo fafto 'null. The Do#or
miftakes the thing, when he fpeaks of con-
fent of parents not being neceflary to create
the right to contra# Marriage: for the right
is in the child, and the confent of parents is
no more than a declaration that in their
judgment the child is capable of exercifing
it. They may, by judging too favorably of
his underftanding, confent to his contra#ing
Marriage before he is fit for it: yet, as they
are in a ftate of nature the only judges of this,
who (hall fay they are miftaken? If they
wilfully or corruptly misjudge, they muft an-
fwer for the abufe of this truft to their Maker
who inverted them with it 3 but as no one
has in that rtate a power to reverfe their
judgment, it cannot with any propriety
be faid that the contra# is ipfo faffo
null.
The next queftion which the grand one
divides itfelf into is, Has the pofitive law of
God given parents fuch a power ? To this a
fhort and full anfwer might be given, viz.
That the law of nature, as being the law of
right reafon, is the law of God, and confe-
quently as binding as any pofitive law can
be. If then it has been or can be fhown,
< tl.&t
( 29 )
that parents have by this fuch a power, it
c^n never be inferred although the fcriptures
were filent that therefore they ought not to
have it: but this is not the cafe ; for as one
great end of revelation was to revive and
republish the great truths of natural religion,
which were by various means obfcured and
fome almoft loft, thismoft important one was
the proper objedt and is in fact part of it.
There are fo many inftances in theOWTefta-
ment of its being exercifed by parents, that
it would be tirefome to mention them *
but it may not be amifs to give one, which
(hows that the parental power extended to
fons as well as daughters, and that the
father could delegate it to a guardian. If this
was not fo the great Patriarch Abraham
would not, as he does in the xxivth chapter
of GeneJiSy have obliged his fervant tofwear,
in the mod: folemn manner that his fon
\
(hould not marry any girl in the neighbour-
hood : but that he would get him a wife in
his father's native country. Of all the moral
duties that of obedience to parents is not
only enjoined by the firft commandment of
the fecond table, but the promife of one of
the greateft bleflings of life, length of days,
is annexed to it. One might have imagined
the
4
( 3° )
the general directions that children fhould
feverence their parents, and its being con-
flantly exercifed by thern, would have been
fufficient to evince that parents had fuch a
power: but as nothing lefs than an exprefs
declaration of Scripture will fatisfy fome per-
fons, it falls out that there is even this. It is
faid, Numb. xxx. 3, 4, 5. If a woman vow a
vow unto the Lord, and bind herfelf by a
bond, being in her father s houfe in her youth,
a?7d her father hear her vow, and her bond
wherewith fie hath bound her foul, and her
father fiall hold his peace at her: then all
her vows fhallfland, and every bond wherewith
fie hath bound her foul fiall fland. But if
her father difallow her in the day that he
heareth, not any of her vows or of her bonds
wherewith fhe hath bound her foul fhall
fland, and the Lord fhall forgive her becaufe
her father difallowed her c. "This law (it
" is faid) hath no relation to Marriage, for
<c 1. Marriage is not a vow unto the Lord.
" It is not once called fo in Scripture. It is a
<l contradl (or a vow if you like the word
<c better) between the man and woman. 2.
" This law relates to married woman as
t
" well as virgins, as it follows, ver. 6, 7, 8.
c P. 20.
( 31 )
sc If foe had at all a hujband when foe vow-
« ed — and her hujband difallow her on the day
<{ that he heard it; then he foall make her
<c vow — of none effeff. But a married woman
c< cannot make a marriage vow; for (he
" cannot have more than one hulband at
<£ once. 3. The vow here mentioned con-
<c cerns fomething that was to be done during
" her continuance in her father's houfe. But
C£ by marriage a woman ceafes to be of her fa-
" ther's houfe, and puts herfelf under the
<£ power of her hufband." It might be
fhown, that every vow or folemn engage-
ment may be properly faid to be made to
the Lord, it being always fuppofed that he
is a witnefs to and a punifher of the breach
of it, and that Marriage is the moft folemn
engagement that can be entered into: but
thefe truths are too glaring to ftand in need of
proof; and the DoCtor could never have
fpoke fo (lightly of Marriage as to call it only
a contract between the man and woman, if
he had recollected what he had faid in the en-
quiry. His words there are, {£ d Can you tell
<£ me of a contract in which God is not con-
" cerned? there is no fuch thing; the moft
" trifling bargain you make at market, or on
<c exchange, is under his infpeCtion, and
' E-p. si. "fubje£t
( J2 )
<c fubjed to his righteous judgment; and,
<c though all the laws in the world fhould re-
" claim,you cannot break it without offending
him. And (hall we, dare we, break a con-
<c trad made in the mod important affair in
<c the world, and under the moft awful fo-
<c lemnity of religion, amounting to nothing
lefs than a folemn oath ?" As to thefecond
objection that this law relates to married
women as well as virgins, either the Dodor
is miftaken, or Mofes did not underfland his
own meaning. There is indeed another law
which gives a hufband the fame power over
the vows of his wife, as this does a father
over thofe of his daughter: but it is plain,
from the Iaft verfe of the fame chapter, that
they are diftind laws and quite independent
of each other. It runs thus, fhefe are the
Jlatutes which the Lord commanded Mofes,
between a man and his wife7 between the
father and his daughter, being yet in her
youth, in her father s houfe, T o the third ob-
jedion it is fufficient to fay, that if the father
has by this law a power of making all con-
tradsand of courfe that of Marriage void, and
does exercife it, the Dodor's inference falls to
the ground: for the daughter in that cafe
neither ceafes to be of her father's houfe, nor
ha
( 33 )
has (he any hufband under vvhofe power (he
can put herfelf. This law mentions indeed
only daughters: but if parents have fuch
power over thefe, they ought a fortiori to
have it over fons. Many reafons are to be
given for this: but the Dodfor allows the
former to be forwarder in their inclination to
Marriage than the latter; for fpeaking of
women of fixteen he fays: " e Whatfoever
" may be faid of men who very rarely
" choofe to marry fo early, it feems to be a
very hard cafe upon them that they fhould
" be reftrained from Marriage till they are
" paftone-and-twenty." It cannot be denied
that the Jewifti law is in all1 things, except
fo far as it it repealed or amended by the
author of the Chriflian religion, fill bind-
ing on Chriftians: for his declarations that
he came not to deftroy it, and his frequent
references to it, plainly fhow that he intend-
ed to adopt part of it into his religion. This
being fo, there was no need of an exprefs
precept as to this matter in the New
Teftament.
In entering on the confideration of the
third queftion his grand one is divided into,
which is Can civil ftates give parents fuch a
* E- P- 25-
F power r
( 34- )
power ? the Dodtor takes it for granted that
neither God nor nature has given it them;
and the fubftance of his arguments on this
head is to (how that therefore fociety cannot.
When it is proved, which I fubmit to the
reader is yet far from being done, that pa-
rents had it not in a ftate of nature, it will
fall properly under confideration whether
fociety can give it them ? but if as I con-
tend they had it in that hate, the queflion is
reduced to this, Can civil ftates confirm fuch
a power to parents? this being admitted by
the Dodtor, who fays, " f There can be no
" doubt but that fociety may aid the parent
u in fuch rights over his child, as he natural-
ct ly has," it is unneceffary to go into the
proof of it. One thing however is proper to
be done, and that is to examine, whether
the inconveniences afcribed by the Dodtor to
the parental power do in fadt refult from
it ? for notwithftanding all his arguments to
fhow that the date has no power over natural
rights, I am perfuaded that, if greater good
would accrue to the publick from abridging
or taking it away than from continuing
the fociety has a power to do either.
fP. ii.
- ' The
C 35 ) - ,
The 21ft canon, which fays that no
children under the age of twenty one fhall
marry without the confent of their parents or
guardians, is cited, and, not content with
faying he has ever been of opinion it is too
hard, the Dodtor expreffes himfelf thus.
<{ e Quo jure ? God fays without limitation of
" time, Increafeand multiply: man fays yon
" fhall not till you are one and twenty,"
As every one, who refledts a moment, muft
have the higheft opinion of that great com-
mand increafe and multiply, and be convinc-
ed a few extraordinary cafes excepted of the
univerfality of its obligation ; it follows that
nothing thereto repugnant can confift with
found reafon and good policy. Thequeftion
then is, whether annulling the Marriage of
minors made without confent of parents or
guardians be fo or not ? It has been obferved
by thofe who have turned their thoughts to
fuch calculations, that the produce of the
intercoufe between a man and woman, fup-
poling it to be begun at a proper time of life,
is ufually four children. If other animals
multiply too faft, it is in the difcretion of
man the Lord of this lower world to leflen
their number: but as no earthly being has
.. fuch a power over the human fpecies, it
s E. p. 25. feems
'(36)
feems agreeable to the order both of nature
and providence that it {hould not increafe
too faft. As children are moreover for
many years abfolutely (hiftleis, it is fit that
no more fhould fall to the fhare of one
couple, than they can with comfort to them-
felves and without being overloaded with
care provide for. It cannot be denied, that
there is time enough to have more than
double that number without marrying be-
fore the age of twenty one. The propenfity
to the bufinefs of procreation does indeed
come on fooner: but like the other paffions
itencreafes gradually till it comes toaftate of
perfection. Many young perfons do not
arrive at their fall llature till near the age of
twenty one, and very few at their full
ftrength fooner : and it can never be right to
begin an a£t much before that time, the
due performance of which is an exertion of
all the powers of body and foul. The iflue
of an imperfecft animal mufi: in the nature of
the thing be imperfect. A woman may bear
children before the age of perfection : but it
has been obferved by good judges, that it
robs her of the nutriment neceflary to give
firmnefs to her whole habit, and is particu-
iarly injurious to certain parts. Thus by
( 37 )
having one or two, and thofe puny things,
too early, a fine conftitution is often fpoiled;
which with prudent management might have
blefled mankind with half a dozen, or half
a fcore, chopping children. The fame al-
though not quite fo obvioufly holds as to
men : for fo exftatick and tranfporting is the
conjugal carefs, that human nature in its
moft vigorous ffate can butjuft bear it. To
perform this command effe&ually, one man
and one woman ought to be content with
and to have the whole of each other ; for it
has been found by experience that the al-
lowing a plurality of wives, or having wo-
men in common, did not do this: but in or-
der to conftancy it is quite neceflary, that the
perfons and manners of the pair who engage
in a ftate of cohabitation (hould be agreeable
to each other. So far from being able to
form any judgment of that of another, very
few know their own temper till at leafi:
twenty one: and as to outward perfections,
the improvement in thefe is fo great between
the ages of fixteen and twenty one, that he or
fhe who was tolerable at the former, muff:
at the latter be defirable. Other things are
neceffary thereto, but no one thing imports fo
much to the conffancy of a married couple,
as
( 38 )
as the convincing each other at firft fetting
cut of their ability to give and fondnefs to
receive the perfed pleafure. What has been
faid of learning may with a very fmall alte-
ration be applied to this:
A little pleafure is a dangerous thing,
Drink deep or tafte not of t\i Hymenean /bring.
Between a lad of feventeen and a girl of fif-
teen it is but a lovelefs, joylefs, unfatisfado-
ry affair: nor vigour being neceffary can it be
otherways till the age of vigour comes on.
Indifference to each other follows, and with
it its never failing companion inclination to
change. This command alfo, as it ftands
conneded with others of training up and
providing for children, muff fuppofe the ob-
iedsof it capable of thofe duties. It would
anfvver no good purpofe that children be
born, unlefs they be taken care of and have
good principles inftilled into them : but can
a young fellow before he has fitted himfelf
for any profefiion or bufinefs, fo as to be in-
v dependent for fupport on his own parents, do
the former; and fome experience in the
world as well as ripenefs of judgment is
furely requifite to the latter. It may be al-
lowed, that the duties of the mother are not
fo
( 39 )
fo extenfive as thofe of the father: it cannot
however be pretended that a girl of fixteen,
or feventeen, is equal to the management of
ahoufe and care of a family. If fuch mif-
fortunes to particulars follow from the Mar-
riages of minors, they fall with collected
force on the publick ; for a fociety can never
flourifh, unlefs it be compofedof well-con-
ftituted and profperous families: and as the
avoiding all thefe does not interfere with the
fulfilling that command, it would be abfurd
to fuppofe them implied in it.
Having before fuppofed the right of
marrying as foon as nature urges to be in
children independently of their parents, the
Dodtor fays: "g The free ufe of this right may
" be as necelfary to fecure a man's virtues,
as the liberty to eat and drink as he finds
a mod convenient, may be to the preferva-
« tion of health and life; or the liberty of
<c worftiiping God in the way he mod ap-
tc proves may be to the fafety of his confci-
" ence. If you want authority for this, I
" will give you the higheft. It is the autho-
ct rity of Christ himfelf, Mattb. xix. 11.
" Jill men cannot receive this fayingfave they
" to whom it is given. Be pleafed to look
• E, p. 12,
" into
( 4° )
ff into the context, and you will fee what
cc this faying means. Eut St. Paul explains
4C it. i Cor. vii. 8, 9. 1 Jay to the unmarri-
<c edy — if they cannot contain, let them mar-
<c ry : for it is better to marry than to burn.
<c Which power of continence is here alfo
cc exprefsly mentioned as a proper gift of
44 God." His guarded manner of expreffion,
may be as neceflary, betrays a fufpicion in the
Dodtor himfelf of its being really fo ; and
the authority which I allow to be the higheft
proves no fuch thing. Continence is one-
inftanceof keeping our paffions fubjedt to rea-
fon, which laft being the gift of God, St.
Paul in his figurative way of expreffing
things calls it the gift of God: but if his
explanation is fuppofed to imply that con-
tinence is not in a man's power, it does not
agree with the explanation of Christ him-
felf who muft bed know his own meaning.
In the verfe next following he fays: For
there are fome eunuchs which were fo born
from their mothers womb, and there are fome
eunuchs which were made eunuchs of men;
and there be eunuchs which have made them-
felves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven s
fake. He that is able to receive it, let him
receive it. If he had intended to convey to
us
>
r
( 4» )
us the notion that fome are eunuchs by any
fupernatural influence, would he when reck-
oning up the ways of becoming eunuchs have
omitted that? The very expreflion, that fome
have made themfelves eunuchs for the king-
dom of heaven's fake, plainly fhows that they
could do this; and if it be not in a man's
t
power to abftain from women, it was quite
nugatory and unworthy of him to fay, he that
is able to receive it let him receive it. If as
this paflage fuppofes a man can, by the pro-
per ufe of his faculties, fubdue this paffion
through all the vigorous part of life, a fortiori
a minor may do this for a few years. To
fay that continence is not in a man's power
would be faying that adultery and fornicati-
on are not fins: for it might be eafily fliown
that a perfon cannot always marry when he
pleafes, and that abfences muft frequently
be between thofe who married; and as eafily
that a jufl: being cannot be angry with, or
punifh his creature, for doing what he could
not refrain from. It is faid a little further.
" h If you yet doubt pray tell me what you
" think of vows of celibacy, as pra&ifed in
" the Church of Rome. I fuppofe myfelf
cc writing to Proteflants: and as a Protefiant
h E. P. 13.
G " vou
( 42 )
<c you mil ft anfwer that they are unlawful
<f and null ab initio. But why are they un-
" lawful ? but becaufe they are a renuncia-
<c tion of the means appointed by God for
<c the prefervation of chaftity." This prac-
tice, whatfoever ufe may have been fince
made of it, feems to have been founded on a
laudable one of the primitive Church. In
the early and perfecuting ages of Chriftianity
fome men abftained from all commerce with
women, that their zeal for the propagati-
on of its dodtrines might not be thereby
diverted, and that, being unconnected with
wives and children, they might be ready
to give up their lives as a teftimony of
their fincerity. A notion being hereon built,
that if all in orders would do this they
might devote themfelves more entirely tofpi-
ritual things, the vow of celibacy was im-
pofed on the clergy. This is certainly un-
lawful; for as they are flefli and blood as
well as other men, it is not to b§ fuppofed
they fliould in general keep it: but it by no
means follows that, becaufe it is wrong to
prohibit a numerous body of men from mar-
rying during their whole lives, minors ought
to marry as foon as they pleafe. It is not
only in the power of every one to keep the
( 43 ) -
paffion for women within proper bounds: but
it is of the utmoft confequence to every one
that this be done. This paftion may be
compared to a high mettled colt, which
if at firft well broke affords his mafter ma-
ny delightful rides: but for want of this
is all his life long unruly, vicious, and dan-
gerous. A degree of continence is neceffary
even in matrimony; for, if equality of years,
and perfonable agreeablenefs are ever fo well
attended to in the conftrudfion of a match,
defire may not be and often is not equal.
When this happens, if the party in whom
it is flrongeft does not check it fo as to be
fatisfied with the other : but on a fuppofition
that the urging of nature is incontrollable
gives way to it, the confequence muft be fa-
tal to the happinefs of the married couple.
Abfences and other accidents which prevent
enjoyment muft alfo frequently happen j yet
will any one fay the parties may on fuch
occafions provide for the indulgence of this
paffion ? If continence then be in the power
of thofe who have tafted the paphian plea-
fure, it is furely much eafier for fuch who
have not done this to abftain. Upon the
whole it feems neceffary, that a habit of
fubiedting this paffion to difcretion and rea-
G 2 fon
(44 )
fon be fometime acquired ; and if this be fo
4
it mud be allowed, that it is eafier to do
this when it firfl affe&s young perfons, than
when by being indulged it has acquired
ftrength.
The DoClor fays in one place, that he
wants fome affiftance to fee the connection
between a minor's Marriage and the publick
good; and in another his words are:
<c ^Thefe gentlemen feem to me to miflake
" the matter. They treat the Marriage of a
u child without the parents confent as if it
<c were an offence againfl theftate, and not
" as it really is an offence againfl a private
" family only." Without tiring the reader
with any thing already faid, which may be
applied to this point, I will add three or
four of the many reafons which might be
given, to fhow that fuch Marriages are pre-
judicial to and confequently an offence
againfl the flate. If it be proper that in a
community refpeCl be fhown to elders, and
fuperiors, and efpecially to governors, every
method of inculcating this on young minds
ought to be pra&ifed. Now can any one fo
proper be thought of, as the compelling
obedience to the parental power ? if children
1 P- 54-
are
( 45 )
are to be fet loofe from this where will they
flop? Will magiftrates meet with refpedt,
when parents who are on fo many accounts
entitled to it do not ? At leaft three in four of
thofe, whofe crimes bring them toafhame-
ful end, confefs that difobedience to parents
was the firft ftep in their wicked courfe. As
civil authority was never fo muchdefpifed and
trampled upon as in thefe degenerate days,
there feems to be no way fo likely to reftore
its weight and dignity, - as to enforce the pa-
rental power which is the foundation of all
other. Inconveniences may follow from its
being now and then abufed: but thefe are
trifling if compared with what muft enfue
from children being in general freed from it.
Befides this particular one of reverencing
elders and particularly governors, it con-
cerns the publick that the minds of children
be formed to every other kind of virtue.
There may be fome inftances where the
judgment is ripe enough at fixteen or feven-
teen to do this: but as general rules always
provide againft the greater mifchiefs, it is
better that thefe fhould be left to parental
difcretion, than to give all minors liberty to
marry before they are capable of inftru&ing
and fetting a good example to children. It
I is
( 46 )
is alio of importance to a ftate to prevent all
adtions, by which individuals may be redu-
ced from affluence, or a near and almofl
certain profpedt of it, to neceffitous circum-
fiances; left fuch changes fhould drive
them into defpair or put them on fome
defperate adtion. On this principal all laws
againft exceffive gaming are founded: for
the publick lofes nothing by the fudden
tranfition of property from one to another,
except from the effedt it may have on the
parties concerned. Now if, as the Dodtor
allows, parents may difinherit children for
marrying without their confent, it concerns
the ftate, whofe province it is to prevent
the wretchednefs of its members, to hinder
their doing fo: for it can never be right for
them to do this, and for parents to ruin
them for fo doing. He indeed fays, " k That
cc every perfon who is of age to marry is of
l( age to work, and may be compelled to
" maintain himfelf and family, fo far as his
own labour and induftry will go. But if
" this is not fufficient, he ftands for the reft,
" as an objedt of the charitable affiftance of
c< thofe who abound." No law can compel
impoffibilities; and very few, if brought up
k E. p. 19.
to
( 47 )
to it, have fo learned to work at any trade or
bufinefs, at the age of fixteen or feventeen,
as to be able to maintain a family; but what
work is the fon or daughter of a gentleman,
who has been brought with an expe&ation
of never being obliged to do any, able to do
at that age ? the latter of thefe is for many
reafons moft liable to be feduced into fuch a
match, and, which makes it the worfe, he
whofeduces her is ufually in bad circumftan-
ces: for a man' of fortune has no occafion
and feldom does it. A perfon fcarce ever does
this f but with a view of gratifying his luft
at the expence of ruining an innocent girl,
or of bettering his circumltances. The former
is a villainous motive, the latter an ungene-
rous and a hazardous one 5 and if it fails he
in all probability deferts, and leaves her
fhiftlefs as fhe is to take care of one or two
helplefs babes. She is indeed told for her
comfort, but it is a very cold one, that the
parifh is bound to find her: for as to the be-
ing an object of the charitable affiftance of
thofe who abound, it is fo uncertain an affair
that no dependence can be had on it. To fall
thus! from the pinnacle of happinefs to the
lowefl pit of mifery! is it not enough to
drive the unhappy wretch to madnefs! or
to
( 4§ )
to do fome violence on her own undutiful
head ! This is not all: for the publick is per-
haps alfo robbed of an induftrious pair, and
their family of an indulgent father and ten-
der mother. Only they who have had
children, can tell what parents feel on thofe
occafions. Such is the compundtion, which
arifes from the confideration of the villainy of
the betrayer, of the ingratitude of the daugh-
ter, of the difgrace brought on themfelves
and the wretchednefs on her, that they mufl
be endued with uncommon fortitudepf mind
to ftand the (hock ; and if this be done, it
preys on their vitals and for the mofl part
brings them to a grave.
The hard fate of the woman and children,
in cafe a minor marries without confent, is
more than once lamented by the Dodtor.
" kThe man, he fays, may defert her as a
" flrumpet, and turn her and her baftard
c< children (for fuch they will be deemed in
<c law) out to the wide world." In another
place his words are. " 1 A nullity goes a
cc great deal further than a difherifon. It
" reaches to the fruits of the fon's labour and
cf induftry, which the iffue cannot claim by
" inheritance (as by the natural law they
' ?■ 51- 1 P- 31 •
<c may)
V
ad,
may)
( 49 )
" may) but ftand in the rank of ftrangers."
That a man may defert a woman, if
the directions of this aCt are not pur-
fued,.^is true; and this very thing fhows
the propriety of the a£t, which is to prevent
Marriage from improper motives: for the
doing fo proves he never loved her,and confe-
quently that he ought not to have married
her. A woman cannot hereafter be ignorant
that fuch a Marriage will be null; and that
to cohabit with a man in confequence of it
is the fame thing as to cohabit with him
without being married. If a woman then
will truft to the honour or confcience of a
man, (he ought to blame herfelf if he deferts
her: at leaft fhe cannot expeCt that the laws
of her country, which fhe has violated by
living openly in a ftate of fornication, will
give her any redrefs. It is no new difcovery
that children born out of wedlock are baf-
tards: but it is quite a new thought to ima-
gine that this aCt not only goes to the diflie-
rifon of the minor, but reaches to the fruit
of his own labour and induftry. It prevents
him from conveying fome kind of eftate to
his children: but it does not hinder his tak-
ingany thing. All eltate that is not in his
father's power will defcend to him jufl as if
this aCt had never been made; and as to
H what
•\ fl
i J
( 5° )
what is abfclutely in his father, he may as
he always could difpofe of it where he plea-
fes. The iifueofthe minor cannot indeed
take as heirs: but be may give them not
"only all that he acquires by his own labour
and induflry, but all the perfonal and all
the real eftate in fee, or which can by him
be converted into a fee, that defcends to him
from his anceflors. The hard (hips however,
although not fo great as reprefented, are it
mud be confeffed very great: yet were they
greater than they are on the few who offend
againft this law, for it cannot be fuppofed
that many will lay their children under fuch
difabilities, they are by no means equal to the
inconveniences arifing from a general difobe-
dience to parents. In this, as in all cafes, chil-
dren are involved in the difficulties which
the follies and vices of parents bring on fa-
milies: which being the conflant courfe of
things, there is no more reafon to complain
here than on other occafions.
Another objection is, that the bad con-
fequences of fuch Marriages cannot beat all
prevented by parents. The Do&or's words
are: <c a In vain will they expedt help from
u their parents, who cannot, by any after
<c confent, make that acS good which the
" law hath annulled. As the law flood
* P. 53. before,
( 5i )
" before, when parents were reconciled to a
" ftolen match, all was well. The man
<{ had his wife, and the woman her hufband,
" and many happyMarriages have arifen from
" fuch unfavourable beginnings. I fhould not
" have thought it a fault, if this law had al-
" lowed (to parents at leafi) the liberty of
<c an after reflection, for I could never enter
" into the fentiments of thofe who fay, that
" of all perfons, the parents are moll unfit to
" be trufted in fuch cafes." If this was fo
the parental power would in fome meafure
be abridged, but whatever fome perfons
may fancy the faCt is otherways: for the pa-
rent has, as he had in a ftate of nature, the
power of confirming the Marriage contract
of a minor by an after confent. This aCt
indeed makes a Marriage without confent
void: but it does not hinder the parents from
confenting to a marriage between the fame
parties; which as the firfl: ftands for nothing
may be celebrated at any time. Something
of the nature of fornication may, in confe-
quence of the fham Marriage, have paffed
between the parties which cannot be un-
done; yet they muft be very rigid cafuifts
to fay, that if the legal Marriage does not
quite cure the fornication, it (hall be looked
upon by the eye of confcience as a deadly
H 2 fin.
( 52 )
fin. Whenever this is confented to the hufband
and wife are entitled to all the privileges of
the married ftate; and the children born
afterwards are free from the difabilities of
this ad\ Parents then have the liberty of an
after refledion, and it cannot be doubted
that they will go, their motives fo to do be-
ing of the mofl interefting kind, as far aS
prudence will admit: but it does not follow
as the Doctor would have it, b that getting
them married in the legal way is the only
thing to be done. For in fiance. An artful
fellow having infinuated himfelf into the
good graces of an inconfiderate young lady,
he on a prefumption the father will in the
end confent proceeds to an illegal marriage.
If there be ftrong reafon to conclude that
the profpect of a fortune was the chief in^
ducement, and that he is of an extrava-
gant turn, it is certainly better for the pa-
rents to take back their daughter at firftj
with all the fbame upon her, than to do this
when all is wafied and {he has befides feveral
children. Happinefs there is no proba-
bility of; and (he has thus the chance of
being lefs wretched. A few inftances of
this becoming refolution in parents will
put a flop to the infamous attempts of
b P- 49-
daughter
( 53 ) . .
daughter or rather fortuneflealers. There is
here and there an inftance where a ftolen
match has done well: but, if a man means
to be happy, it is furely a wrong ftep to per-
fuade a girl to be undutiful to her parents;
for it may be expected, that (he, who pays
no regard to the filial duties, will but ill
perform thofe of a wife.
It isfaid, cc e if children are to be ruined,
" (as ruined they may be in fpite of all that
<c parents can do to prevent it)better it be done
t£ in their own way, than in ours, who in fuch
« a cafe, (hall have nothing to charge upon
« ourfelves from the event, and who fhould
" bear fuch difappointments with patience as
" we bear (or ought to bear) all other evils of
« God's fending." And a little lower, " One
" family rifes and another falls. Such is the
" fovereign will of God; and unequal mat-
" ches are one amongfl: the variety of inftru-
" ments, which he ufes to bring about the
<{ purpofes of his providence. We are to
"guard againft thefe things fo far asjullice
'< will permit, and as prudence (hall diredt:
u but it were a vain thought (in which we
<< (hall always find ourfelves difappointed)
<{ to pretend to make that ftrait which God
" hath made crooked. Confider the work of
e K. P. Q.
« God,
( 54 )
" God *, and before him let all the earth
" be filent." Children will certainly be
fometimes ruined in fpite of all parents can
do to prevent it; yet the latter ought to pre-
vent it as far as they can, and if their en-
deavours are not fufficient, it will be a con-
folation to them under the misfortune that
they did their duty. If they are, asundoubt-
edly they be, by the appointment or work
of God the directors of children till they
arrive at a fit age to condu<£t themfelves, it
feems a ftrange doftrine to hold that parents
ihould let them have their own way. To
fay it may not be effectual is faying nothing:
for, if it be the indifpenfable duty of parents
to exercife this power on all proper occafions,
they ought to do it and leave the event to
Providence. No one, wiro has made the
Icaft obfervation,can be ignorant of theinferu-
tabifity of the defigns of Providence, and of
the uncertainty of all human events: yet it
concerns parents to fave, as far as human
forefight can, their children from ruin. To
comply tvith the untoward difpofition of one
child will in all probability do him no good,
and it is an aft of great injuftice to other chil-
dren, who behave well, to be put upon an
equality with him. If it confifts with the
jtiftice of the father of all things, to make
the difference of heaven and hell between
* Ecclcf. vii, J 3. good
( 55 )
good and wicked men, it cannot be inconfift-
ent with human juftice, when a parent dif-
tributes the goods of this life in proportion
to the merit or demerit of his children. Too
much rigor is bad: but fo is too much unity;
for if a child will, in defiance of the laws
of God, nature, andfociety, adt for itfelf in
an affair of the utmoft confequence, it ought
to fuffer the confequences of its impiety and
rafhnefs. This may deter others; and when an
undutiful child has learned in the fchool of
affli&ion what is due to parents, and fhows
manifefl figns of repentance for what is paft,
there is no doubt but they will forgive, and
as far as aifcretion allows retake into favour.
It may be faid that this law punifbes the
children of difobedient children, and why
fliould it not be fo here as well as in felony or
treafon ? Rebellion to parents is of all rebel*
lions the mod unnatural, and mediately
ftrikes not only at all government but at all
order: fo that if a fociety would prefer ve itfelf,
it mull guard the parental power and make
it refpedtable.
The Dodtor hints in more than one place,
that parents and guardians cannot judge of
affedtion 5 and that they feldom regard any
thing but the equality of fortune. If they
cannot, who can ? for it cannot be faid that
2 the
is*)'
the minor can. How fhould the inexperience
of a young girl over head and ears in love,
which has in all ages been defcribed and
painted as blind, be able to judge of the
reality of the perfon's paffion (he would
marry? A parent or guardian muft be better
qualified to do this; and, as the happinefs ol
one and reputation of the other is concerned
in the fuccefs of the Marriage, there is no
room to fufpeffc their fhowing a due regard
to it. A ftrong perfonal affeCtion is fo effen-
tial to conjugal felicity, that one cannot be
without the other: but it is likewife necefiary
that there be a well grounded profpeft of
living comfortably. There is no afcertain-
ing what is lufficient for this; but it may
be faid that a perfon does not live com-
fortably, unlefs fhe lives as (he has been
brought up with an expectation of living. In
order to this, and that children, which are in
general to be fuppofed, may be provided for,
there (hould be fomething near an equality of
fortune. Too great exa&nefs in this may be
wrong, and a proper allowance ought always
to be made for fituation and profpeCts in life :
but experience fhews that matches where
the inequality is not great ufually fucceed belt.
Parity of fortune is befides one proof and
a very convincing one of fincerity ; for it
removes
\
viE Id
( 57 )
removes all fufpicion of the fortune on one
fide being the object of paffion on the other.
This fhould not be the onlv one: but, fince it
is not in mortals to pry into the heart, it can-
not be denied, that it is one good rule for
parents and guardians to be guided in judg-
ing of afledtion.
After fome reflections on the difficulty of
difcharging the duty of a guardian, the
Dodtor goes on a, <c How much more ,dif-
" ficult muff: be fuch a truff now, when in
" a matter of mere prudence a perfon may
<£ be called upon to fit as judge to determine
" the fate of a whole family ? That bad men
" may find their account in fuch a truff is
" obvious enough: but good ones can get
ct nothing but ill will. It is true the
" minor has an appeal to chancery; and it
<( may therefore be prefumed that no guar-
<{ dian will refufe his confent to a match,
" unlefs there be that difparity in point of
<c fortune, as will yield a good preiumption
" that the court will confirm his judgment. Yet
" on the other hand it may be fuppofed that
u the minor will not make the appeal with-
" out fome reafonable plea, though there be
<£ not that equality of fortune which a ffiff
<£ guardian may require. So that the fhorteft
* p. iS; J " way
v
———— —
.. : • - «;•
( 5§ )
way will be, as Chancery challenges.- the
cc laft refort, to let it have the firft too,
" where children will be in fafe hands, and
" the judgment lefs liable to envy." The
duty of a guardian is indeed troublefome
enough : yet as in the nature of the thing'
orphans muft frequently be, it is to be hoped
that, if it was much more fo, there will
never be wanting a relation or friend to take
care of them. Bad men cannot, an appeal
being given, find their account under this
ad, nor is there any thing in it to dif-
courage good ones. The difficulty affigned
is that of fitting judge on the fate of a fa-
mily : but where is the mighty difficulty for
one appointed thereto by his deceafed friend
or relation to determine according to the beft
of his judgment ? If the minor, or any on
his behalf, accufes the guardian of treachery
or cruelty in with-holding his confent, this
a£t furnifhes him with a ready and fuitable an-
fwer: viz. in my opinion this is not a proper
match : but if my ward thinks otherwife let
him apply to the court of Chancery. To talk of
this court's challenging the right of being ap-
pealed to is a little unintelligible. An appeal
fome where was neceffary,other ways the whole
power, which fo great an advocate as the
i Dodor
*it!
j
and
Ik
im
fcj
hoped
k V4
to &(•
.jjtl*
pofl«
( 59 )
Doftor is for minors could never approve of,
might be in the bread of a defigning guar-
dian ; and it has been thought proper, by the
legiflative power, that it (hould be to the
court of Chancery. Wherever there is a trud
it may be abufed: but into what fafer hands
could this affair of minors be put, than into
thofe to which other affairs of the greated
confequence to the publick are truded. In a
note on this paffage the Dodtor expreffes
himfelf in the following manner. <£ b There
<( is certainly another exception againd the
" propriety of a Marriage, which a wife and
" good man would lay more drefs upon, than
" a defect in point of fortunes; and that is
{< a bad moral charaBer. But whether a
T *• J
" court of Chancery would attend to fuch an
<{ exception, or whether it may be fafe to
<£ offer it, the learned in the law mud de-
u termine/' It requires no great learning to
determine, that the infinuation herein con-
tained is to fay no worfe of it quite un-
becoming: and as it would at all times
have been improper, it is much more fo at
this, when the dignity of prefiding in that
court is poffeffed by a man, whofe abili-
ties and application in his profedion have
been very feldom equalled, and whofe de-
b P. 52. \ crees
hf
'Xa&bna
(6d)
creeshave, daring the length of time he has
lat there, given as univerfal fatisfadtion as
thofe of any of his predeceflors.
At the end of the Enquiry, the Doctor
has collected the whole of the arguments
there made ufe of into five queftions. In
this he acts like an experienced general, who
after fkirmilhing for fome time draws up
all his forces into battle array, that by one
decifive flroke a compleat victory may be ob-
tained. Order and fituation are of vaft con-
fequence: but the fuccefs of an army muft,
if it comes to clofe quarters, depend on the
firmnefs of individuals. So here however
formidable thefe thus ranged appear, they
have every one a weak fide, and if properly
attacked foon give way.
Quejt, i. Is notfociety a mutual league for
the defence and protection of all natural
rights, and therefore of the natural right of
Marriage ?
Anfw. If fociety be a mutual league for
the defence and protection of all natural
rights, the parental power being one of thefe
ought to be protected.
2. If the natural right of Marriage
in all perfons who are in a capacity to con-
tract fubfifts as well in fociety as out of fo-
ciety,
( 6i )
ciety; are not all perfons, under that capa-
city, entitled to the protection of fociety, if
in purfuance of fuch right they (hall think fit
to contract Marriage ?
Anfw. Yes: but minors not being in a ca-
pacity to contract Marriage without the con-
fent of parents or guardians, they are not en-
titled to the protection of the Hate, if in defi-
ance of the laws of God, nature, and fociety
they fhall think fit to do fo.
Quejl. 3. Can any perfons entitle themfelves
to the legal rights of the married ftate, un-
lefs they be married in the legal form ?
Anfw. No.
Quejl. 4. Ought not then the legal form of
contracting Marriage to be left open to the ufe
of all who are in capacity to contraCt Mar-
riage; and will not the blocking up the ufe
of fuch legal form againft numbers who are
in fuch capacity, be a denial of natural juf-
tice, and a breach of the fundamental law
of fociety ?
Anfw. It ought: yet, as minors are not in
a capacity to contraCt Marriage without con-
fent of parents or guardians, the blocking it
up to them is no denial of natural juftice,
nor any breach of the fundamental law of
fociety.
( 62 )
Qjjeft. Which is worft? to put thofe
afunder whom God hath joined? or to for-
bid Marriage to thofe who by the law of
God and nature are permitted, and may be
obliged, to marry?
Anfw. Both thefe are bad enough: but
the annulling the Marriages of minors, made
without the confent of parents or guardians, is
doing neither.
Having thus confidered all, or every thing *
material, that is advanced by the Dodtor
againft this branch of the parental power, it
remains only to make a fhort recapitulation of
the whole. The queftion between us is, whe-
ther the confent of parents or guardians is ne-
ceflary to the validity of a minor's Marriage ?
In order to fhow that it is not, the Dodtor has
endeavoured to prove that the confent of pa-
rents was not neceflary in a ftateofnature: that
the'pofitive law of God has not made it fo:
and that fociety cannot make it fo. In this
vindication my bufinefs has been to fhow, that
the Dodtor has not made out either of the
two fir ft points. Till the firft of thefe is made
out all his arguments on the third ftand for
nothing, the fhtn of them being to prove,
that children, whom he fuppofes to have
had in a ftate of nature a right of marrying
r
when
( 63 )
when nature urges, have not given this right
up, and that fociety cannot take it from
them. As there is a wide difference between
confirming a natural right to parents, and
taking away one from children, it feemed
to me quite improper to be going into other
very exten five queftions, as whether this right
was or could exprefsly or tacitly be given up
by children, or by their parents for them on
entering into fociety? or whether fociety
could take it for them? for if the Dodtor has,
as it appears to me he has, failed in proving
that they had in a ftate of nature fuch a
right, there is an end of thefe queftions.
The reft of this vindication is taken up in
confidering the Dodlor's objedtions to the fit-
nefs of fuch a parental power. Whether on
the whole his notion or mine be beft founded
is of no great confequence to either of us :
but it is of vaft importance to the publick,
that the queftion, whether parents ought to
have fuch a power ? be well fettled. If what
I have done be in itfelf, or by putting fome one
better qualified on the confideration thereof,
in the leaft conducive to the doing this, it
will be a pleafure to me.
FINIS.
Page 16. line 24. read the obligation to thefe.
■
, . >
« . #*'•'.y''UT'
' /.* ■* , 1 v • # . •
<
1 A
; SiiP • • • •,
*
,
rn
n
-L V
•a
.
,
"
4107;
fp „! ,
m
'*ki
■ K
■ ;
*
' • ■ n
, f / * I
. . .7
.
.
RESOLUTION
TO A
FRIEND,
' Concerning the
MARRIAGE
O F
By jf OHN T V R N E Rlate Fellow of
ChriftS'Co/ledge iri Cambridge.
t
Cum opulenti loquuntur fariter atque ignobiles,
dem diffa, eademque oratio aqua non aque valet.
LOUD O N3
'rinted by H. H. for Walter Kettilbyi at the Bifbops Head in'
St. Pauls Church-Yard, i6$i.
■ nmnammsamsB
To the Reader.
I Am very for ry if the late Difcourfe which
I have publifhed concerning the Laws of
Nature, and the Reafons of their Obli
gation have given offence to any good or lear-
ned Man ; lut that Sorrow is not a Sorrow of
Repentance, lut of real trouble and concern
for them that Juffer themfelves to le fo far
carried away by prejudice and preconceived
Opinion, that they will not give Entertain-
ment to thofe Principles that are the Eternal
Pillars upon which Nature Jlands, and the
only true grounds of Duty and Obligation, to
which all particular Inflances being brought
for tryal, it will be impoffible, that either
Popery, Enthufiafm, or Atheifm fhould ob-
tain, but where thofe Principles are not be-
lieved\ and he that fubjlitutes any other crab»
led^ Scholajlicky and unintelligible words,
inflead of things and notions, i# f/tfir cr,
does but give a manifejl Advantage to all
three, &/■ /?iw pretend to never fo great
learning. Piety, or Zeal.
A 3 Tet
The Preface.
Tet notmthftandin^ the clearnefs and ir>
rejragable Demonft rat ion of what / have titkfl
written, that 1 may give the World all pojft- is, it
lie fatisfaflion, I (hall [end another Dif- ifed
courfe upon the fame Subjett, to the Prefs, y thoi
by which the fame thing will be ft ill more ful- iistn!)
ly, though 1 cannot fay more evidently, made iStlfh
out,, that Intereft underflood in that Lati- pica
tude in which I have explained it, u the only ntw\
true Principle, and the only intelligible \ktra
ground of Obligation, and that all men may Jim
le j fatisfeed, that I am no Oh angling, and that itGoi
thefe are not thoughts taken up of a fudden,
or as may be fufpelled by fome, defegned only ^ jg
to ferve aprefent turn, Imuft lit them know,
that the much greater part of this fame fe- Ly]
cond Difcourfe, for fo it is in the Order cffm.
Publication, was written full two years a- v^m
go, and as much as fence Auguft laft, and it ^ ^
was then written with the fame Defign to \tl. [
prove the unlawfulnefs of the Marriage of ;
Coufin Germans, as will appear by the Dif k
courfe it felf,, and as is well known to fome of
my Friends both in the CqIledge, and out of
it- ' " ' W
Neither indeed is this notion fo new, as
fome may think it, it is as old as David's
time; and he that was a Prophet, as well as
a King, a man after Gods own heart, as he
is called in Scripture, and a man that by
great
%
'«J l>«
Id all -Mj
tie Pre;;
wore ti'
Diientki:
*
it tkt L
I if, ifh.
11!) Wliji
bt al mi,
n^nitl
IIf if 4 fit
t k
The Preface.
great variety of Fortune and Events, could
not chufe but have a deep infight into humane
- n.» affairs, he lays down this as a never-failing
■Mfterfe] Ruie? pfaL rg# jyjen w^j praife thee
when thou doft well to thy fell ; which 1
think is only to Jay in other words as I do,
that Self-lnterefi in its true latitude,and mofl
Philofophical fenfe, is the root of Obligation.
And we may add to what the Pfalmift hath
faid, that men will not only praife him, but
he fball have praife of God, as well as men,
and that God will not only praife, but fave
him into the bargain ; for Salvation is not
annexed to intellectual Sy(terns, and vain
Imaginations 0/Platonick Haughtinefs, and
Metaphyseal Pride, but to a judicious and
prudent Conversation ; for fo the fame Prince
of Prophets and of Poets tells us in the very
next Pfalm, where it is God himfelf fpeaks
by a Poetical npo*w7x&txd/i# very frequently to
be met with in that admirable Book, Pfal. yo.
i]. Whofo offereth me praife, glorifieth
me, and to him that ordereth his Converfa-
tion aright, will I (hew the Salvation of
J God.
Mtiot ft w ' And now having done fo great a Service
]jelJ4sW to Loyalty and Religion, to this Age, and to
ffef, a *•' dl that are hereafter to come, by Jet ling the
Jyn heart) Principles of Human Life, and P rati ice upon
I; 0 tb*: djeir true Foundation, for the perpetual En-
j m
it
till tiro jffli
fat %
(k
H'i '
tit
ft
A 4
courage-
The Preface
couragement and Support of Truth and Ju-
flice, and to the indelible Reproach and jhame » ^
of Schifm, and Here fie, and Hyp^crifie, and
Lewdnefs, and every evil Work ; a Service
which Envy cannot blaftftor Time defiroy; I
could be glad to dye with.all my heartland to go ifflDbni
the next way out of a t roublefome and vexati«•
ous World*,and I wouldfingas I was going,with ilt&n
Reverence be it fpoken,though in another Senfe * n
then that in which old Simeon under flood M ten
it; I fay, I would flng as I was mounting
Lukez. t° the milky way , where the Spirits of
29,30,31, Jufl men have their Eternal Refl : Lord,
*z> now let tell thou thy Servailt ^depart in
Peace, according to thy word, for mine
Eyes have feen thy Salvation which thou
haft prepared before the face of all People,
to be a Light to lighten the Gentiles, and j ;C; :i.
tp be the Glory of thy People Ifrael. w
And as Peter Ramus, who hy Popifli
Cruelty, had an unfortunate end, did
in his Life time wijh, that it might be writ->
are
tvtr
ten upon his Tomb, That there lay the Author 16 .
of that Excellent Logick, that goes under
his Name; fo when 1 dye, I make it my Re«
quefl, if I be not in a Condition to be at the ::,f"
the Charge of a Monument for my J elf that
by the Kindnefs of fome Friend or other, ,j
thefe following Lines may be graven upon the- ff
Tomb of an unfortunate man. -
Hie
BBBpHP
1 The Preface.
• jk j
Wjfcawi Hie jacet Humani Divinique juris,
wjie, atj Interpres,Vindex, Afiertor, Propugnator,
I jScniiel Vis nomen hominis? nomen illi quondam
t ifrij; ;| Joanni Turnero fuit,
Nunc umbra vocatur & cinis,
m Et quicquid eft ufpiam recrementiticc rei.
Valebis & molliter, molliter calcabis,
aikr&i;.. Et humanae mifertus, hoc eft, tuse fortis,
on uirjk Arentem temperabis lachry ma favillam.
MS IMiimn;
it Spirits I But enough of this Melancholy, this dying
\ljilitolk, lut you will fay, parturiunt Montes,
il depart nafcitur Mus. Tou told us of a Book, and now
)rd, for QSfw think to put us off with a Letter ; lut,
I wbick foray good Reader, ha ve alittle Patience, and
ot alitor# Jhall have the Book too; hut why a Let-
Gastiks,jfcr? you will fay: to which 1 an fiver, and
jfeljkL dead the benefit of the Clergy, whofe cuftom
lb it I^t hath been for thefe twenty years lafi pafl,
wft mi, Whenever they are big with notion, to dif
fifljjllkwibrdenand deliver themfelves of the Theo-
^tt#>gical Minerva in a Letter to a Friend;
p tffdes, that being fo [mall a thing, it would
trjlto have look'd decently in any other fhape,
,Vifii'han that of an Epiflle ; and I defigned only
or fn) Iff,:;!t this ffort Effay, to apply with all the clear-
ifiu'ltr wfs and brevity I could, my Notion of the
rf0tp''4WS of Nature to the particular Cafe of
5 oufin Germans, and 1 hope 1 have done it
I h
The Preface.
fo as to fat is fie all fcruples, and to leave no'mf^
ground for any the leaft inconveniency by pre-
•venting fuch Marriages for the future, which1 trine
does not at all affett or prejudice what is dttp
pa ft already ; nay, I have ftated the whole'Id
cafe with fo much clearnefs, and by fo uniform'drivc
a Principle running through all the particu-fih)
lar inftances that concern it, that Idefire noMk
Favour or allowance from any, only let himfJ to t
ask himfelf the Quefl ion as he reads along, Wf
whether the Marriage of Coufin Germansim'fei
in ordinary cafes, and that is in all cafes, buMPerf
where there is ct pub lick Inter eft that it Jhoulkityfk
be allowed, be not againft the Inter eft of Man-ji^ Ci
kind > Let him likewife demand of himfelfpgltd
whether it be not highly reafonable, nay, ne-^
ceffary to the publick Peace, that all fuckkl y
Marriages already confummate by the Copula ^
Carnalis, fhould be good and valid, nay
and looked upon with as favourable and kinef^-
an afpeel as any other Marriages whatfoever^
Laftly, let him ferioufly examine what ^
own Thoughts would anfwer, if the queflio) ,
were propofed, whether it were not highly fdft ^
the Inter eft of the Publick, that a Prince iy !
either of the two Cafes I have mentioned^ •
fhould be allowed to Marry Coufin German ' W
1 fiy* let every man ask himftsjf thefe Que . '
ftions, and 1 doubt not, but the 4nfwer Iffy
will give himfelf, will 1$ very propitm
The Preface.
) ta and favourable to me ; and he will acknow
ncji^ ledge of his own .accord, that I have not ftrain- .
tire,»bj ed my Principle further than it will go ,
ice vht he will fee plainly, that it will go fo far,
Itk . whether I will or no ; and that neither he,
kjfow!'!^ lean drive it any farther.
! tie If you ft ill urge me further, to whom is this
tat life wonderful lufinefs of a Letter ? Though lam
,5iijfei not obliged to anfwer all the Queftions that
t reads x all the World Jhall ask me, yety Reader, be- w
Afa caufi I have heard a good Char alter of you
iiualci^foracivil Per/on, and you are faidto go in
jlkv the Countrey where you live, for a very Can-
did, Chriftian, Courteous and Gentle Thing;
cf therefore I will tell you under the Seal of Con-
Jlthat it was for your felf the Letter
tlflt u intended, but I did not know your Name ;
\\fkan^ they f*y> m ho'neft as you are, you have
a great many ; therefore I was forced to Print
Htili tuty Letter,that it might to come to
l^mr hands.
But this is not the Difh it felf which 1
intend you, it is at be ft no more than a Sop
ytflijjn Pan, which hath the relifh and favour
the Meat, and by which you may give no
y>ii¥r) uncertain guefs, what fort of Enter-
f-yMnment you are hereafter to expetl, for I
' ; already lying by me a great many Sheets
* I ^ ?aPer to which I jhall add a great deal
( t chiefly upon the Sub] ell of the Levitical
'^fS De-
7
/
The Preface.
Degrees, which cannot he pullijhed foon e* tf.te
nough to fat is fie the Impatience of the publick "Mat
Expectation ; and when it does come outyyet Hthif,
hy reafon of much Antiquity, and many laho~iyjort
riouSy though very clear Conjequences that <dt hit
will he in ity it will not he fitted to the Ca- nit ii
pacity of ordinary Readers^ and therefore I kp c\
chofe rather to fay infhort, as much as was'lttitli
fufficient to make out the pointy (for one Be-wy<} m
monflration is as good as a Thoufand) and to do% tkt
it with that plainnefs both of Exprejfion andf^jl
Thoughtj that every man might he his own^fWt
Judge in a Cafe wherein almofl every man * ^
may poffihly he concerned. cf
Be fides that great alterations can no more
be made of a fudden in the Minds of Men
than they can in the Cufloms or Manners ofagjjf
Nation ; and if it were fo*hard a matter to ^
perfwade the Irifli not to draw the Plough h)yr.f.
the tails of their Horfes^ much more will it ht^ "
difficult to conquer the received Opinion o fif
the Lawfulnefs of the Marriage of Couftf,..,^
Germans, wherein fo powerful an Intereft i,
engagedy and which being once unfetled awf f
overthrown, puts a new Bar to the ConcupiL:f'Af*
cenceofmeny which of all other Pajftons i fs ^
the bar deft to he reft rained.
!• f n
Therefore 1 intend to contrive the matte,
fothat the World may fwallow it hy degree.
and that it may make its Impre fions hy, *1
J. ! w
The Preface.
gentle Motions as thofe by which the Prayers
t piife of the Devout are fometimes found to leave
twt.\jjbe Marks of their Knees upon the Stone or
wit) lit Marble, ajort of Impreffort, which, though
wees it it be made but flowly, yet it lafts for ever;
to tktCi and when it is once made, it improves and
■ thercfiR grows deeper every day than othet, melted
wiick ai and entreated into foftnefs by Devotion, but
jtr m i never decays, and much lefs fills up any more.
However, though my chief Dedgn in this
ixjrtffm Taper with which I now prefent you, ivas to
life I'll remove the Prejudices that lye againfl myun-
j, my dertaking, and to apply the general Notion
[of the Laws of Nature to this Particular
ijWiM Cafe; yet becaufe it will be expelled, to fhew
tlstfithatfinch Marriages come within the Statute,
Itoerii that I fhould demonflrate their unlawfulnefs
J a by the Levitical Meafures; therefore this I
tk bave taken care very briefly to do, by confh
t0V* dering the Cafe of the Daughters of Zeio
tfJflfThehad, to which, though in my other Pa-
t^tfers, I have fpoken very largely, yet I have
10 mati enough in thefe to prove by unanfwerable
,i ^fliWce of Scripture and of Reafon , that all
Marriages were Levitically unlawful;
^ this, if it may be allowed to pafs the
Pikes of prejudice and private Inter eft that
be fureto oppofe it, it will give me en-
,fiy°uragement very fpeedily to publifh what
^,0 remains, but at prefent my Engagements are
The Preface.'
mJ 1)1(11
fo deep, and of fo many Kinds, there beinf ^
another Piece now in the Prefs, which is ver
importunate with me to let it go abroad . ..
that I mu(I be forced for a fortnight or there (r *
about s to give my Attendance upon it, anfi^,
Ifuppofe in thai time it will he as perfr'
as any thing can he expected from Jo iraperfec
an hand; and I do the rather divert m"f.
felf to thaty becauje it is upon an Argumen
very nighly related to this, the thoroug h ®
js
/ {hall conclude with a repeated Profejfto;
rsJ V « . • f M
n • u
underftand'tng of whichy will afford grea^
ftrengthy as well as light and clearnefs to it -
J • ( « « « • — — — '
•r
0/ wy ailing in this whole affair , aw*
Principle of Confidence, which, whatever per
failings I may have been guilty of :!m<lJ
hath always heen the meafure of my Beham^
viour with refpeft to others, to the truth
which as my whole life which affords man
Examples,™ afmall Fortune,of no"
Jufltce, Integrity ahd Honour, is one con""
tinual WitnefSy fo t he re felling upon the con J W,
fiancy and fleadinefs of my Temper in
midjl of dangers on the one fide, and Temptafifi
tions on the other y hath frequently afforded )t
J x jt* np ¥
me no fmall matter of Comfort, and give!} P
me mighty encouragements from the Satis
fattion which it felf affords, to perfevere
the end in a con ft ant Adherence to Loyalty') W1
Jnftice and Truthy let my Condition in th'^kt
oiit
\
The Preface.'
>n j fitward view of thofe that judge ly apped-
,|Jin'kw, he never fo calamitous or urifortu-
For I always confidered, that the feat of
•, lappinefs or Mifery is in the mind, and there-
,re if that he well, ^//ij right, let things
,r •, \pe ar how they will; dW as I have honeflly
J . . y. ^
deavourea many a time, uw?/1 have woun*
ff\imy Confcience ly tranfgrejjing the Rules
Virtue or good manners to lick my felf
V bole ly .Repentance , and arm my felf with
'f ] eater Vigilance and Refolution for the Fu-
- re, fo I /hall ferioufly and earneftly per-
ade you, my Reader, of whom , though I
Y' 11 you I have heard a good Character, yet
u£l,[ odNewsproves oftener to lefalfejhantrue,*
* W1, .at if you are a lad man, you would reflect
[' fide rate ly aud coolly with your felf upon
j'e Folly and Vnreajonallenefs of fin, and
"c j upon a fpeedy and effeftual Reformation;
J:,?'■t if you are that good man I take you to be,
'V nttnue asyqu are, you will find the Com-
qifMt ■ y 0j fo an y0ur concerns ; God will hlefs,
^ J men willpraifeyou, your Affairs will le
fperous, and your Bones fat, and your
wfyi eart merry, you will not le af raid of the
art, rrours ly night, nor of the Arrows that fly
re* & road ly day; you will have a perpetual
11 ftfa fa of Joy and Peace attending upon your
*( tifrfin, and a Seeurity which no Fears_ can
jhake,
*
m
The Preface,
/bake, will entrench and encamp it felf round
about your Habitation; it will be the befi
Comforter in your Sicknefs, the left —-
ration for Death, and the befi Advocate
the day of Judgment; therefore in the Nann
of God, and for the fake of ourfelvesfet us la rr,
afide all Perfonal and all Political Vices, anr
let us heartily repent us of our fins, and le iiffjff
^ « • • . I - f
perfeft Charity with one another
Farewei.
M
ttk i|
»Jf F
wtbeHi
bjitvi
;tlFm
A Letter of Refolution to
to & a Friend concerning the
O
Marriage of Con fin- Ger-
fllW
mans.
.SIR; .
I Have received fo many Teftimonies of
Kindnefs from you, that I cannot be-
lieve otherwife, but the Advice you
give me, not to trouble the World
with the Difcourfe I have promifed of the
Marriage of Coufin Germans, with which
you are pieafed to fay, I have threatned
the Nation, and am like to make aDiftur-
bance in it, proceeds from the famecaufe
likewife, your continued Goodnefs and Af-
Jeftiontome; but I allure you, lam fo far
from having any turbulent or unquiet Pro-
jetts in my Head, that a natural Inclination
to all the greateft Inftances of Peace and
Friendlhip, is a thing fo eflential to my
Conftitution, that I cannot take fo much
as a juft and neceffary Revenge without a
B great
2
A Letterconcerning the
great deal of real Trouble and Affli&ion to
my felf, much lefs would I give any the leaft ^
Occafion of Difpleafure to thofe from
whom I never received the lead Difobliga- tj
tion ; and you cannot but imagine, that I
am ,a Couftn German my felf to fome body or C, y,
other, and therefore have no reafon to be , ^
angry with the Name, unlefs I have a mind
to write Books againft my felf, as Mr. Bax- .' ^
ter does; but yet after all, I fee no Reafon ^-
to defiftfrom my undertaking, and that it '
may not be thought that what I do, is the •/
effed: only of an obflinate and wayward hu- ■ ^
mour without Reafon; therefore I hold my f
felf obliged to give you all the Satisfaction j
which the narrow bounds of a Letter will 310:
allow.
I am very fenfible what a mighty torrent ji]ni
of prejudice I am to fie mm, and that not. f'e
only from the Difpleafure of thofe, who"?011
are themfelves engaged in Marriages of this 1
Nature, or are defcended fromfuchas have?W(
been fo, but alfo from this, that all the ^
Learned men that have written, do general-'
ly determine contrary to me, infomuchy\fe
that even the Lutheran Churches * them-^Faitf
felves, which to avoid fcandal, do nottSErrant
allow the Praftice of it?yet it is the received • whic!
Opinion of aiLfcltek*JDtvmes. that all fucl' ^fcr
muil'^toos t
Marriage of Coufin Germans.
■ mult never (land up in the defence of Truth,
I when there is an Intereft engaged againfl it;
and if this had always been the Practice of
1 the World, then no vulgar Error could ever
have been corredted, nor any falliionable or
; 7; cuftomary Vice reproved. If this were a
Rule univerlally to be obferved; then our
1 V, Saviour fhould not have come into the
r World, whofe whole life after he entredup-
" on the Adminiftration of his Prophetical
Office, which hedid about four Years be-
juU-fore his Crucifixion, was a perpetual Com-
, bat with the Prejudices, and the Paflions,
etifdn- and the fajpe Motions of men. And, Sir,
<fv;: the Vindication of that Truth which I pre-
)iiu- tend to maintain, being , as I think , of
fomanifeft and undeniable Confequence to
itjfcthe Peace of the World , which was the
ireat Defign of our Saviours appearance
e ot tlA jpon Earth, and of all the Dodtrines which
Matriff1 ie delivered, there is fome Analogy, with
[oniW - ill humble Reverence and Duty, be ltfpo-
his, that fen, betwixt the Cafe of my great Lord
ittefl,^:,nd Mafter (the Author and Finifher of
^/iftur common Faith) and mine; for I ami
Chutcte -tnt on his Errant by the Appointment of
fcandal, • he Church, which hath thought fit to im-
^jstWefithe Prieftly Charadler upon me, as he
'/ason the Fathers; and the fame Meflage
t sit, ii^ommon to us both, to exhort people to
z love
jm
A Letter concerning the j>4 in <
love and be helpful to one another, and to1)0^
perfwade to theconftant Practice of thofe ;
Duties, which make both for Temporal and
Eternal Peace. ®or
If Prejudices, which will always be ftrong :3:I™
againft every Undertaking that is but new®50
and bold, were a fufficient Argument why ra:if
men lliould not attempt them, then the Re-*®on,
formation Ihould never have been begun,the »
CopernicanHypotheJisyzn&t\\zCartejtan Philo-^®
fophy fliould never have been communicated ^ cap
totheWorld;the Antipodes to this day would^ra,
have remained as great an Herefie, as it was--wr ft
in thofe times of Ignorance and Darknefs,;* A
when a Bilhop was removed from his Office JtleEie
andDignity for averting it;theCirculation oltfyiplt,
the Blood would have been as great a Secret wtkSt
now, as it was before Solomons time, whoir irtk j
one Learned Author more Ingenious than sltkl
Wife, would have to have been the Inven- ^
tor of it; or as it hath been ever fince til /^f
our late Famous Doftor Harvey difcoveret
it; if this Principle were always to be fo!y
lowed, Columlus had left a new World qnnoto lis
clefcryed; nay, if this Principle were th
general meafure of Aftion, that a
mull never fpeak,but in the common Roac;
t Ot tt
and as the Prejudices or the prefent Interefl;^, ^
of particular perfons would have him, the^j
no man fliould dare to oppofe aFa&ion
thoug
t, and
Marriage of Coufin Germans. 5
though in defence of his King, his Coun-
trey, or the Church; and {till the more dan-
gerousthat Faction is, the more pre/ling is
tipld this Argument which is drawn from the
Prejudices or the Paflions of men upon us,
ratek; to let them alone. But, we are not to
ukibe pleafers of men, but of God; and we
tgiort are to tread in the fteps of the Captain of
,'kiitkl our Salvation, who through much Tribu-
mtof lation, and through Death it felf, the mofl
painful and ignominious Death that Human
mm Mature was capable of enduring, led us the
tbisdavM-wayt0 Heaven; and who hath commanded
erejje^i: us to do our Duty with Chearfulnefs and
and Dai Courage, without either Fear or Favour,
iromhisOt whatever the Event and Confequence of it
be; The Dijc, faid he, is not above his Matth. i o.
^afier'> nor the Servant above his Lord: It
^^ is enough for the Difciple that he be as his 2/
Mafter, and the Servant as his Lord: Fear
fythem not therefore:but what I tell you in Dark-
V-'yinefsi that [peak ye in Light: and what ye
'fcghear in the Ear, that preach ye upon the
\ Houfe-tops. And if this were our Saviours
'^Injundhon to his Difciples, Twelve Poor
and Inconfiderable men of no Interefl or
Reputation in the World, and againft whom
^ /the Interefl: of the whole World was en-
_ ged, if they notwithftanding all the Dif-
[J^jouragements , and all the Dangers they
Pj
A Letter concerning the ^!l
met with, did yet, for all that, perfift in^®1
the defence of thatCaufe which they had^Prel'ei
undertaken ; and did nor only fight the good iIi:o'
Fight of Faith, but after having received i'®®
many heavy Stroaks and grievous Wounds, !$ve"
died manfully upon the Spot, and in the^ll!
Field, as became true Soldiers of that heari^
/ 1
venly Warfare; how much more are we®jK
obliged, when we have not fuch Difficulties,!0, n
or fuch Dangers to encounter with, to imi^pp
tate fo brave, and fo blefied an Example ?3r,itat
And what a fhame would it be, when they A an
have fhewn us the way through fo many \Hm
Tribulations into the Joys and Glories ofudo/t
the other World, if we ihould be afraid, "appear
when it is for the Publick Good, and for *,
rhe Peace of Mankind, that Coufin Germans toyed i
fhould not Marry, to oppofe fo fmall an In- ; nan
tereft as will be found upon Examination ngfo t
to be engaged for it ? • Jf i&jiti
But yet after all, it is very ftrange, thatiierelb
there fhould be any Prejudices upon this ac-ifon;
count, becaufe fo many are engaged to one;; i P
another in the Band of Matrimony, whcfetoti
Hand related in the Degree of Coufin jio fo
mans, or at leaf!:, that they fhould be fc^y,
prejudiced, as that this Prejudice of their:>%far
fhould be incurable, when the Principles Lj,,
have laid down are fuch, that they ferv'ee:js|j],ffi
very whit as well to confirm the Marriage;. 0f'
ahead'
Marriage of Coufin Germans.
already confummate by bodily Knowledge,
flu as to prevent thofe which are not yet en-
-got tered into, or thofe which being folemni-
cetytj zed in the face of the Church, have, not
m yet received their final Confummation; the
liai Reafon is this. It is for the Intereft of Man-
kk kind, thatFriendlliips lhould be fpread as
er far as may be, and that the Concerns and
Icfe Interefts of many men lhould be as much as
], toil may be, perplexed and entangled into one
if another, that fo the fame common Hopes,
m and Fears, and Ends, and Deiires, may pro-
tifo b duce an Harmony in Afleftion, and a com-
Glorrmon Band of Unity and Peace ,• and I /hall
be a make it appear evidently to the World in a
J, ani: very little time, that the Amorites were not
i»G?r onlydeftroyed by a Supernatural Judgment,
inalk but by this natural Caufe and Reafon alfo,
i^oiiithat being fo guilty as they were of ince-
ftuous Copulations, their Friendships and
their Interefts were confined within fo
jpontfeffnall a compafs, and they were fo divided
among themfelves, that they became an
eafiePrey to the Conqueror, and were di-
divided into fo many petty Principalities,
yjli each of which was no better than one pret-
jjttpiilty large Family; that what was fa id of
3Pfjuci: the Br 'itains, when Cafar made a defcent
i^la) upon this Ifland with his victorious Legions,
l^ci was true, of them; Dum fmguli pugnant,
A B 4
A Letter concerning the
tiniverji vincuntur; and I defire it may be
confidered, if, as the Amor it es were ufed al-
ways to Marry within fo narrow a compafs, »'
which was the true reafon of allthofe pet- W®
ty Principalities in ancient times, when f*
Abraham with his one Family was not on-
ly called a Confederate of four Kings, but
as appears by the event of the ftory, was
in power and ftrength fuperior to Five, and oil man
yet could not mutter above three hundred imifawi
men; I fay, if as the Amorites and other iiforA
ancient Nations were ufed to Marry within ^ likewi
thefe narrow limits, fo now it Ihould be s in the
theuniverfal Praftice for all men to Marry totFm
no farther off than Coujin Germans, or fe- .mndti
cond Coujins, it is very eafie to perceive Merem
how this would untie the ftraiteft Bands of mMi
Human Society, which begin in Genera- -aFriendfiti
tion, and are propagated firft by Conlan- trlmeas o
guinity, and then by Marriage ; neither are- erfons 1
there any Friendlhips fo trufty, nor any In- fu
terefts in the common Practice of the tn'acquir
World that may fo fafely be relied upon,
as thofe which depend by Confanguinity
Upon Obligations of Nature, or by Affinity ^trcif'ecf
upon the Matrimonial Contradf ; and if we
Ihould fuppofeall Families to marry witff
in themfelves, he mutt be blind that cannot -
fee, that there would be almoft fa many db
yided and difagreeing In terefts in the World,• -
and
Marriage o/Coufin Germans.
t»i] II and that there would be no end of E-
A. temal Feuds and Quarrels between one
compi Clan or Head of a Family and his Depen-
Mi f dants, and another; whereas, if you mix
a, thefe Families together, fo as fuppofe
raw# there be twenty Perfons allyed to one ano-
ther in the Degree of Coufin Germans be-
longing to two leveral Families,Ten of each,
tofm,E they lhall marry the Ten Males into Ten
nUt new Families with which they had no Con-
saadak fanguinity or Affinity before, and the Ten
ta]«i Females likewife into Ten others, and if
it m\you take in the external Dependances by
:n to Mr Trade, or Friendihip, or Obligation of all
km, oil thefe two and twenty Families, it is ma-
to percei nifeft, that here mult needs be a very great,
Bands nay, an alrroft incredible Advantage
a Geos given to Friendihip and Society among
bjte men, whereas on the contrary, if thele
neitkr^Twenty perfons lhall intermarry with one
• norany another, being fuppofed to be Coufin Ger-
feo\ mansy they acquire no newlntereft or De-
reyippendance by this Marriage; and as being
"^fCoujin Germans^being removed only by their
^immediate refpecfive Parents from the com-
j/ml monhead of the Family, this is a joyning
^rrjrfhe very firft partings of Nature , and a
ijttitaijreturn into the common Parent by thofe
I [om^ho are lb nearly related by Confanguinity
Ijitfiifo him, that all that can be truly affirmed
4 - of
1
A Letter concerning the F •
of their diftance, is, that they are not
immediately defcended from his Loyns.
And this, inftead of begetting Love in ' r
the World, does in reality produce Hatred
for when there is fo good Reafon why they
fhould Marry farther offj and fo plain a J-m
natural Demonftration, that it is exceeding-.'c: ^
ly to the Prejudice of Mankind for thems«'
to intermarry with one another, if after thisiBM
they lliall yet notwithftanding do it, thissMd
looks exaftly as if it were fome Grudge or ^jpt
averfion which they have taken inwardly^ tor
againftall other Kindreds or Families, but us the
their own; and whoever will give himfelflc«
the leifure of revolving, in his mind, noUisim
only the ftrength of this Demonftration tLtadybee
which is unanfwerable, but alfo the Proporv (tier
tion in which the Marriage of Coufrn Gewikk'
mans is prejudicial to Mankind, will ma*: l!ay, j
nifeftly difcern, that it is naturally unlavv^law
ful, if that be the true meafure of the LawiiDe:
of Nature, which I have aftigned, that theyjtyf
are all founded in the Intereft of Mankind i|yeV£1
and at leaft thus much mult of neceflity b»rii
granted, that it hath the fame Reafon
being forbidden, for which all Human Law
doforbid any thing in the World for thef.^,'
Laws in all their Prohibitions, as well
in whatfoever they command, do confide^
nothing but the Intereft of Human Socien 1,;
an
k Marriage of Coufin Germans.
^ ate r and the Welfare of thofe people that are
h>yns. to obey.
^Iavc! fhilo Jud&us in his Excellent Treatife
^Vm de Legifrus fpecialihm founds all the Prohi-
Irtvi: bitions of the Law of Mofes upon the Inte-
inife ju reft of Human Society; and fo does the Ci-
tisoriijvilLaw of Rome, as may be feen in the In-
kind for k ftitutes ol Juftinian, and in the Digefts
ier,ifjWi themfelves under the Title de Ritu Nuptia-
liagdo it, t as I could prove more largely, if bre-
oikMjS! vity were n#t the thing at which I now
takeniraaim; and for this Reafon, as well by the
)r Fillip Jewijh^ as the Roman Law, the latter of
riJigivebiswhich I can evidently prove, as to thefe
bis mini,! Cafes, was borrowed from the former, as
Jemonlte hath already been taken notice by Mr. Set*
alfothePro den and other Learned men, and as it
ictai? might ealily be proved by a particular in-
^rf du&ion; I fay, as well by the JewiJb, as
natutallvof^lie Roman Law, Affinities were forbidden
;iSirt5|ii: to the fame Degrees, that Confanguinities
and the Roman Laws were fo tender,
>J0f!fcwhich I believe was likewife borrowed from
ft oirfthe Jews> f°r they had likewife fuch a thing
j^s Adoption among them, that an adoptive
' ^irjChild was looked upon as a real one, and a
Worldsfeitnun could no more Marry his adoptive
.• flj^jDaughter than his own; the Reafon was,
1 , jg({jlbecauie by Adoption and Affinity men were
"uj^taken into that Family into which they
were
A Letter concerning the
were adopted, or to which they were al- '
lyed by Marriage,and fo they were all look- J®1
ed upon as Confederates one with another, pfa
and therefore for the Intereft of Human So-
ciety, and for the enlarging of Friendlhips lip
among men; it was more reafonable that it id
they ihould feek abroad for new Dependan- :f, ibi
ces and new Relations, than that they5,andi
Jhould intermarry at hqme with one ano- wit!
ther; and by that means fhut up their Inte- iiSti
reft in a more narrow compafs, when it was utifuis
capable of being farther fpreadto the great ^
Benefit and Advantage of Human Life. Jim
It is like wife further to be obferved in this a: tji
cafe, that the Egyptians, though other wife vujn
a people hated by God, or at leaft forfaken mio
and abandon'd by him, though the Divine jJUf
Nature be in it felf impafiible, are no where IKf)
charged with any inceftuous Crime, no ;iw
more are the Thiliftines or Moabites, or the
Sons of Ammon, or of Amalek, the Tyri- jmj*
ans, orthtSidoniatts; and it is well known,
that all thefe were potent and formidable r
Nations, whereas the Amorites by con-.^
fining their Interefts within fo fmall a com-
pafs, were a Prey to their Enemies, and toil
one another; and I can further make it un-
queflionably appear out of /Efchylus his 1
That the Marriage of Coufm Germans
was generally held to be unlawful and del
tellable all over the Eaft. II
!>e
wetti Marriage of Coufin Germans.
eilllot If you demand further of me, how far
»tk thefe Prohibitions extended? I anfwer,that as
tail it was for the Intereft of Mankind,that new
friendlhips fliould be made by Marriage, fo
likewife both Gratitude and Intereft would
require, that the old ones Ihould not be for-
n k to gotten, and that this was the Praftice of
fitlmui the ancient Mortals, appears from a Pafc
tuptheirlt fageof St Aujline in his de Civitate Dei: L
\ Fuit antiquis pat r ilus religiofte curcey ne ip-
aitotkp fa propinquitas fe paulatim propaginum or-
In Ik dinilus dirimens , longius aliret, ac pro-
AferveJit pin quit as ejfe defifleret, earn nondum longe
)Ugh other pofitam rurfits Matrimonii vinculo colligare
lew & quod ammo do revocare fugientem. And if
^ the Ik you lhall ftill further continue to demand,
what the true Barrier and Boundary of thefe
^Cti®, Prohibitions was? I anfwer, That it was
tynki/ SecondCoufins, who were called by the La-
tinesfiolrini^uafi S or or ini or Sororum filiijio
jtisnellfe intimate, that fo far they were looked upon
and fornii as Brothers and Sifters, and were prohibited
>0ittjift to Marry with one another, as I lhall make
fofmaSss it in due time undeniably to appear, by
:nemies, & c°rtiparing the Capitulars of Charlemagne
which are now Eight Hundred years old,
1with the Laws of the Ancient Wifigoths,
crMitand with the Practice of the Jews and Re-
nljik :■ m»*-
But
A Letter concerning the .
, & &
But though the Prohibition were extend- ^
ed generally thus far over all the Eaft, yet ^
it was more obligatory to the Jews than to JraU,
any other Nations, becaufebeing forbidden ^ p
Commerce with any of the idolatrous Na- *fjj0
tions, and being always at enmity with r.
them, they had the more need of a ftridt
Friendlhip and good Underftanding be- i
tween themfelves ; and if the Obligation 'f. f
were fo Arid: to the Jews, it is (till more fo 'v ;
to all Chrrftian people, becaufe the Defign^
of the Gofpel is Peace, and the Improve- "Ml^
ment of Charity and good Nature among"
men; but it is ftillof the greateft and molt ^
indifpenfable Obligation of all to this part : c
of Chriftendom, and to thefe unhappy times :
into which we are fallen, wherein almoft
every man is at Enmity with his Neighbour; -
that tor the compofing mens minds, and for :¥n
the allaying their Animofities by theCarefles :i!Srea£i
of Love,men fhouldMarry at a goodDiftance ron
from themfelves into a new Intereft, anda 3f°rn
new Dependance,and that the feveral Parties1'^
and Factions ihould intermarry with one
another, which added to a vigorous Exe-101 Soc
cution of the Laws with a conftant and im-
partial Juftice by the Civil Power, is pro^riitl],
bably the only way to allay our Heats and-iWam!
Divifions, and to bring us all to a more cha-liois,
ritable Senfe and Underflanding of one-id ia •
ano-
the Marriage of Coufin Germans.
*aeejanother. And I am humbly of Opinion ,
felaft, - that among all the wife Laws by which
State was governed, and was by
(W^degrees brought to that heighth of Great-
anc^ °f Power, there was none that
l ^ ^.contributed fo largely to that effefl, as that
rr;.,: Law which was palled by the great Wif-
lityffl::d°m and Policy of one of the Tribunes,
itkOtfc"^ Maritandis Ordinibus, whereby the Pa-
u\^lfir'lc'1'1 and t'ie flebei'ty who were before at
ta',^Mortal Jarrs, were made intermarriageable
"'" .jpwith one another, which was a very natu-
j M.J'l.'al Expedient of calming and compofing the
Difturbances, which the Animofities and
; ,1 . • nutual Refentments of the two Fa&ions
*'!'.'.iad created. And I do further propofe it to
'X? Jourmoft ferious and impartial Confidera-
* ^ ion, that it would have been impoffible
he Roman Empire fhould ever have arri-
,'ed at that greatnefs, that it lliould ever
lave been fo ftrong, and fo compacted at
tome, or fo formidable abroad, had not
ie\v I•; - ^hele Matrimonial Prohibitions been ella-
tfcfe • Jiihed byvtheir Laws and Cuftoms, to make
srniatfj ' he Cement 0f Society more ftrong and la-
11 J'that fince I have already laid it down
aco«si&s a certain Truth, that the Prohibitions a-
;il long the Jews and Romans were the fame,
lay ourHfc: lithe Queftion is, Whether Coufin Germans
saltoa^re included in the Roman Prohibition,
• " >im i • i
which
cspM
itiesbyd*Cw
.
Jflws
A Letter concerning the ^
which I will prove they were, out of a Paf-jjit; n
fage in Plutarch in his Queftlones Romance
and out of a Fragment of publifliedjiJCoi
by Pythaus, in the Author of the Collati-^tk
ons of the Mofaic and Roman Laws, and out^ruraJJ
of the Digefts of Juftinian, under the Ti^om
tie cfe Ritu Nuptiarum, and that this Pro^rfje]
hibition extended ftill further to Second™ fo
Coujins, I will make it very highly proba-),W| •
ble from a Paflage in Athenceus. $iikha\
There are other natural Reafons, whict^
may be afligned why the Marriage of Coa^j. ^
finGermans is unlawful, and which I
now purpofely omit, that I may not de-j. ^
tain you too long from your Occafionsj bu|'iH q
yet however fince the main Reafon, a
ftnce all the Reafons that can be afligned,;
Cn' # ij j j mi
founded in the Intereft of Human Socie%fjjM,
tfone gre
it is as much for that Intereft, that all th
Marriages of this Nature already confura
• * 'fi U UlLi/Ii j'
mate by carnal Knowledge, fliould ftan r "cj
good and indifloluble, as that all fuch Mai
riages lhould, de futur, be hindred,- naj
rather more, becaufe the Inconvenienc
It they 1
which the Diftolution of fuch Marriage
iioiit of
would produce, would be fo fuddain and" 1 J.:
prefent, as well as fo great, by branding I.','
many Families or their Dependents wii ' e
ignominious Names, and by punilhing the 'D:;;-
with other legal Inconveniences to the i
fini
Marriage of Coufin Gerrhans.
finite Detriment and Confuuon of the Ci-
vil State; whereas, as to the time to come,
thefe Marriages having had their ultimate
and final Conlummation in the Bed, are va-
lid upon the fame Reafons for which they
were naturally prohibited before, which na-
tljraj Inconveniency not having been com-
ttattL pUted by the Parties concerned; nay more,
her to they having been told by all the Lawyers
fhigbly p'5 and Divines, That it was Lawful, certain-
» ly men that have not leifure to make a par-
kkv ticular enquiry themfelves,' may very well
ttigwi ^ excufed; and they are fo far from having
ad which 1 any need to blufh, that they have done no-
1 miy «t thing, but what any honeft and good man
Occata in the fame Circumftances would have
in totoL done;neither do I fo much blame theDivines^
ak jffipnor the Lawyers neither, who in fuch Cafes
\totifcare ufed to follow one another; and the o«
rf, tkupinion of one great man, as, humanum efi
already currare, is ufually the meafure by which
jge, tfthey all proceed ; be fides that, they are
that all fad ther efore alfo the more to be excufed , be-
behiiiWtaufe what they have determined in this
^ [jcrfafe, was out of Charity and good Will,
i Vlrthat they might not create Difturbance
(0(uiii| though that according to thefe Principles
t bjbtf hey need not have done ) in the Common-
If^jait^aith, and becaufe they went upon that
M0jff C Prin-
a J '
de Reg
jur
I 11.
f
wion t
18 A Letter concerning the jinn
(a) c. Tit. Principle, of ( a ) Gajus in ; the Civil fat [do
•f5lt.sc Law, femper in dubiis benigniora prteferen-
2.. clafunt)and of (b) Paulus 1.16. ad Plantiumy fruo 1
(h) ib. 179.Lilertas omnibus rebus favorabilior eft; and ^mo
(cjib.191 of (V) Marcellus 1. 29. Digeftorum. In re du» ^f1
bia benignicrem interpretationem fequi non
minus juflius efl quam tutius; who likewhe
tells us in another place, in obfcura volun-
tate manumit tent is favendum eft Libert at i ^ffr
(<#)ib."i8 3. The meaning of all which, is plainly
this, That the Nature and Defign of all
Laws, being toputareiiraint upon human :,u
Liberty, they are conftantly to be expoun- ^ • •
ded in the raoft favourable fenfe, becaufe "lm
• to do other wife, would be to put a greater! y,/
Reftraint upon thofe, to whom the Law '
was given, then was perhaps intended by
the Lawgiver himfelf; and if men from the r
plain and unavoidable Signification of
•we it
Words, will have recourfe to what they
may poffibly fignifie, or to thepoffiblein-
m; it c
%tlie
tention of the Law-maker in them; this
siaDc
poflibility of Intention or Interpretation,^ a ^
thing of fo great Latitude, as makes the *;p/
Signification of every Law uncertain, and
confequently under pretence of laying a
greater Obligation upon men, it leaves %
them under none at all. rtjpj ftl
■Ntiilai
Bu'^tot
Marriage of Coufin Germans.
•.
But I do humbly conceive,that in this cafe
thefe Rules are not concerned: Fir ft, becaufe
it is by no means a doubtful Cafe, for I of-
fer to demonftrate as plainly as Demonftra-
.hrtfc j.jon feif^ Xhat Coufin Germans were inclu-
ded within the LeviticalDegrees; and only
tCM
r«jerefr\
'lautiiiR,
'ejl;E
to mention that Cafe riow, becaufe I cannot
ftayto infiftfo long upon it, as I intend to
ijl Ik: hereafter, I affirm that the Iflftance of
h, isjli t{je Daughters of Zelophehad does fuffici-
ently prove it.
for that being a Difpenfation in a parti-
:obeefi cuiar cafe [t js manifeft, that no particular
feofe, to Difpenfation ought in its Confequence to
put a gtc be extended further, than the reafon for
101a Act which it was procured, which being only
itirf forthe better Preformation of the Mofaicat
Partition of Inheritances in the fame Fami-
i^^lyand Line, it cannot be lawful in thofe
£ 10places where the fame fort of Partition, to-
} ttiepo®; gether withaDefign to preferveit to Po-
inttetterity, does not obtain; and this is a Rule
Vlpzany cfuce propter necejjitatem recepta
> astninon debent in argumentum trahi; and it
r^certiis likewifo another common faying among
,K ofl#ie Lawyers, exceptio firmat regulam in
|lflfof exxeptis; fothat this being a Difpenfa-
tion in a particular Cafe, it is manifeft, that
it ought not to be extended further than
C 2. that
»
A Letter concerning the
that particular exigence for which it was
procured. *t(
- - - ' * • • — r « «
Befides that had it been Lawful be-
fore, beingfo expedient as it was for the?®
Prefervation of the Mofatcal Partition, ^
Which was the Defign of fo many Laws,-'®1-
that againftUfury efpecially, and that a- "M
bout the Return of the Land, in cafe of«®
Mortgage^ at the year of Jubilee, upon:i,ePro
Which Laws I cannot now ftay to infift jt®*'
and yet for all this, Mofes and the Elders^ ^
not daring to determine this Cafe without*
applying themfelves immediately to God
himfelf, nor prefuming to aft otherwife^W
than by Divine Inlpiration, this is a De^ntk
monftration that it was a new cale, and sin? t
that it was not lawfultiefore; for that which frigs
was not only lawful in it felf, but alfo ex-in, w
pedient, nay, neceflary to the great end ofii), thai
10 many of the JewiJb Laws, which was tosed
Ereferve the Inheritances in their proper.*!! Cu
loufe and Line, might certainly have been-"!?, I
done either by the private choice of the-if a:
Parties without confulting , and much ka
more by the Authority of Mofes and the,4n
Elders themfelves, without confulting thak f,
voice of God; which, fince they did notify
do, this is the molt Emphatical, and thdik-
rtioft remarkable way that could have beerj::5ilt |.t
toy Marriage of Coufin Germans. 2i
contrived to Ihew us the Unlawfulnefs of
Mil the Marriage of Coufin Germans in all or-
twin dinary Cafes, but only in this which was
til M® peculiar to the JewiJh State, unlefs you will
nanyla except the Laws of Athens, which took their
j,mills: Copy from thence; and where the fame
idt ii at Laws were obfer ved,and for the fame Reafon,
J,in;;; as I have proved more largely infome o-
fevtoither Papers which are now in the Prefs.
ml tie Ik Further, the play of which I
lisCaM ^ve mention'd, I will prove to all the
diately to! World to have taken its Plot from this Story
$ oty of Zelophehad and his Daughters, and there
this is tl the Poet making only a Fi&ion of the cafe,
p. cli^:and luppofmg the Father to be alive, who
.j^jti in the Writings of Mofes, and in the truth
\\ tot alfc °fthe Story, was dead, hath contrived the
V ^jtjfiufinefsfo, that his whole Tragedy is but
one continued Declamation againft the
, ^; Marriage of Coufin Germans, ^ ™ w Sav*™*
1 • r—becaufe the Father was not
11 choice^ deceajed , as the Scholiafl upon that
ifu iEfAuthor does exprelly fay.
Laftly, when it is made lawful by the
)l j^Lawof Mofes, for the Brother to raife up'
Seed unto the Brother, nay, notonly law-
Lfajbut a Duty, in cafe the elder Brother
rfil died without IfTue, fhall we from thence in-
c0 ;jer, that it was lawful in all other cafes be-
C j fides,
♦
A Letter concerning the
fides, notwithftanding it is exprelly prohi-
bited in the Eighteenth of Leviticus<} And p "
if a particular Difpenfation tnuft not be ex-
which it was procured, why lhould it in a- ' "
nother ? when, bcfides that fuch Marriages ^
are forbidden in Leviticus, the general rea-
fon why it ought not to be extended to any . ,
- - * • ■ • 4 —^ .i t/iac w
other cafe, is this, that a particular Dif-
penfation is in its own nature diftinguilhed lct
from a general Licence, and to extend any
Grant further than the reafon for which it^S $
was obtained, is to fay, in efledt, That it
was obtained for fuch a realon, and it was
not obtained for fuch a reafon at the
time, which is a Contradiftion. And this,:ler' 8u
befides the reafon of the thing, and the 0^ it as an
pinions of the greateft Lawyers among the;%oi
Romans, which have been already produced^ in h
is ftill further confirmed by the Authority?^ 11
of St. Ambroje in his Epiftle to f aternuf^Wx
where fpeaking of Theodofius his Prohibit, fignift
tion of the Marriage of Coufin Germans jtaetpeft
who yet referved to himfelf a Power o::J
difpenfing in particular Cafes, as Theodfl Mrft
ric did afterwards, as may be feen by th<*,btiag
Form of the Imperial Difpenfation in CaftU
odorus^he hath thefe words : Sed dicis alien IoMarrv,
relax at urn, verum hoc Legi non prrtjudicat lip^pR
trap
Mtbec
Marriage of Coufin Germans.
lypti tuo^ entm tn commune flatuitur, et tantum
froficit cut relaxatum videtur.
But I foresee you will objeft, that the
rioni Prohibition of Coufin Germans is not ex-
preflyfetdown in the Eighteenth of Levi-
Mttt; tlQUS-i as that of the Brothers Marrying the
split Brothers Wife, in any but the cafe excepted,
is; to which I anfwer,
Firft, that whether this Prohibition were
pofitively fet down in Leviticus or no,
yet this hinders not, but the Lawyers Rule
iloi# concerning Difpenfations, qua propter ne*
effed 1 ceJfifafem receptafunt, non clebent in Argu-
'j, mentum trahi, may, and ought to take place
'n at the' *n as we^ as *n any otner Inftance
" 4lvi. whatfoever. But fecondly , I do humblv
lOtl r l • - i m i *
propofe it as an undeniable Truth, That
0 #mAf. the Marriage of Coufin Germans is exprefly
mm- ,r . / - r \c i t t J
■ prohibited in Leviticus it lelr; but if, when
-r. I fay exprefty, men will needs underhand it
of fome one word that does, without a Pe-
riphrafis, fignifie a Coufin German ; this is
, , / not to be expedted, becaufe there is no fuch
[0^ ' « — ' « 1 ?-< I /T\ r
0w
^ word in Hebrew, neither does fig-
-.\f nifiein its firft notion properly a Coufin
CaV', Qerman, but in general, any, whom by rea-
of too near Confanguinity , it is not
pe*11;;;; lawful to Marry, as I can, and will, in my
fi: t larger Papers,-prove j but to infill upon this
ji#r J C 4 matter
A Letter concerning the W
matter now fo fully as I ought to do, would f5 0
fpin out my Difcourfe to too great a length; JfW
therefore I pafs on in the fecond place to ob- fot
ferve, that this Rule of the Lawyers, that "1
all doubtful things are to be interpreted in A>"
the moil favourable fenfe, though it ihould ritf; ^
be applied to the Cafe pf Coufin Germans, 3,ttattl
yet it would do it no good; for where a ilnterel
private and a publick Intereft interfere with iip an(
one another, that is always to be inter- Mar
preped the moft favourable Senfe, which if k are
moil favourable to the Intereft of the Pub? ier; t
lick, it being very unreafonable, that any
private Member of a Commonwealth ihould
Jive upon the Spoils, and by the Dammage g fee
of it, as it hath been demonftrated, that it jomes
would be in this Cafe, not only in itsfelf, jjf0 ma
but likewife in its example.
Again, becaufe it may be objefted, that kg jj
the Dammage accruing to the publick, not ^ H,e
being much, difcerqable nor, from the^ij..
Marriage of Coufin Germans, it would
unreafonable to call fuch Marriages in que- ^
ftion, when the Dammage is fo little of let- . /
ting them alone; and the Inconveniency ,'f-
that would happen from difturbing them, ;j' ct'E
would be fo great; to this I anfwer : Firft, Jj
that we cannot eafily compute what Detri-1. ef
pient hath already been fuftained by the^'f '
Mar- 1'
I
fo Marriage of Coufin Germans.
^Q, ™ Marriages of Coufin Germans, unlefs we
ttikri would tell where they would have Married,
i^ceto d) had they not Married one another, nor con-
tkfequently what Friendlhips might have
ittpit heen made, nor what Quarrels prevented or
^lutloL reconciled; only of this in General, we are
<m. certain, that the odds is great as to point of
d; forwtei publick Intereft, and for the Promoting of
WaeriFriendlbip and Intereft among men, be-
be let ween the Marriage of Coufin Germans, and
We^ttthofe that are at a further diftance from
ereftoftkfeone another; and if youfhall confider with
rile, tkeyour felf what a mighty influence theDifcon-
weailttent or Animofity of one fingle man may
ytheDinnKfometimes have upon the publiek Peace;
,nftratedj tbcertainly no means ought to be negle&ed,
in itsiiby which fo many Quarrels may be pre-
yented, fo many Friendlhips made, and lo
ty^imany Piques and Enmities reconciled.
otWiiy. Secondly, we are not fo much to confir
taoi, iffl'der what real Inconveniency hath actually
0j fiilappened, as what would happen, if the
Marriage of Coufin Germans were univerfah
ly pra&ifed, by dividing Mankind into fo
{£][icop;:many petty Societies and independent Ca-
l^ujabals, as a man for robbing upon the High-
isS anfw^y is apprehended and hanged, not becaufe
ie is
^tewte^himfelf hath done fo great a Dammage
TaLjtiothe Publick, but becaufe if this were u-
I' ' niverr
t
2 6 . A Letter concerning the
niverfally pra&ifed and permitted , weztkyht1
lhould be actually in a ftate of War, and^g01"
there would be no face of a Common-:i>fft
wealth any longer; and the fame reafonrf^
holds in Proportion in Coufin Germans, if ittRttfoi
be true, as I havefaid, that the univerfaljyifld
pra&ife of it would deftroy the State; and®, neii
therefore it ought not to be allowed in a jjar-tpra me,
ticular inftance, though it had not been for«jt my Ec
bidden by the Law of God, as it is manifeflsfor tb
it is. _ _ ; againfl
But for thofe Marriages of this Naturcougkti
that are already confummated by the Copu>\yM
la Carnalis, I am fo far from difturbing them,&fiiG
that I wilh them all much joy with ally k
my heart, and I lhould never count it jjjGitia
Difparagement, but an Honour, if they^jone[l,
were other wife vertuous and good People ^ of whi,
to be defcended of fuch Parents; for tnejl^^
proceeded upon the bent grounds they could^-ry^,,.
they did not underitand the inconveniencj ^
that fuch Marriages bring to the Publick :?|Jy
and they had the Concurrence of many ^
great Lawyers and Divines for what they . ■ d
did, fo that upon all accounts they are ex,^ "iE
cmed, they ought to perfift in what the;,:... ' ,
have done foi the very fame Reafon fo JX"'',
which, if they had been further informed
they lhould have avoided it before; an JX
4r»iv
:ed
War,
Marriage of Coufin Germans;
what they have done, is fo far from having
11 any thing of heinous in it, that it is not fo
Come: much as an object of Repentance; and fo
m as I have faid already, I Willi them all with
all the Reafon and Juftice in the World,
ie imuch Joy and Comfort in their Conjugal
sta}! Embraces, neither ought it to derive any
iwfoif Envy upon me, that I have thus elaborately
flotta made it my Endeavour to hinder all fuch
\um Matches for the Future; for if they be ma-
nifeftly againft the Intereft of Mankind,
no man ought to be difpleafed at me for do-
JbytheCi ing that, which is of fo manifeft tendency
toifige.to the Publick Good, and indeed ought ra-
joy rilther to thank me, that I have thus adven-
fgi coloured at a Critical and dangerous time to
oOT^ftemm theTorrent of Prejudice and received
ilgooifeOpinion, of which there are but few men
m\ fefthat would not have been afraid,and if befides
being prohibited by the Laws of Nature,
einconve^it be likewife forbidden by the Scripture
o ihe Wit felf, certainly every man that hath not
race«'a mind to proclaim a War againft Heaven,
muft at the fame time of neceflity be at
slot
nts they^'peace with me.
lit tifl
[iff
But whatever the cafe of Private Perfons
be, I do allow, that it is a part of the
^ ^natural Prerogative of Princes and Perfons
JitW:"ighly related to the Crown, to Marry
a
«
A Letter concerning the^
a Coufin German, and this I fpeak without [jjy h
any Court Flattery or Parafitical Defign, as ^jjrJii
a thing following evidently from the Prin- jilfe
ciples I have laid down, and of the Natural-,< md
nefs and Eafinefs of the Confequence I willed
make my Adverfaries themfelves thet
Judges. _ ... fiolii
For in the firft place it is fo much for the
intereft of thePublick, that the mind of aj^Q
Prince fhouldnot be difcompofed, and his ,reoj]
Councells rendred by the difturbance of hisje an(j
mind, lefs judicious and fteady, it is fo
great a Prejudice to the Civil State, that ;^,c
the Pa/lions of a Prince Ihould be enflamed
beyond the Bounds of Difcretion, that up- ^ 1
on the fame Principle of Publick Intereft,' :.u
it is allowable to him to Marry a Coufin Ger- X
man, for which it is forbidden to others;jjj ■
and this feems to have been the cafe of Re*"" !*,'
hoboam^ who Miarried z Coufin German. X
Another Reafon which may make it not V2
only lawful, but neceflary for a Prince or X
any that have a probable Relation to the an
Crown,to be difpenfed with, is for the peace 'e'a
andfafety of Mankind, for the uniting oF^3
two great Interefts together, which might
otherwife be a mutual Nulance and De-
triment to each other; and this juftifies the
Marriage of his Highnefs the Prince of
Orange,
Marriage of Coufin Germans.
, ynjwi>u , uiiu uy jL,cppcru& in ins llalciicijl
^ Treatile of the Mofaic Laws in the Cafe of
; 5 Maximilian the, Second, Emperour of Ger-
manyj wholikewife took a Coufin German to
® Wife, at which, notwithftanding the Luthe-
?m ratts do acknowledge it to be lawful, yet
many were offended at it, as a thing of bad
Example,vand fuch as afforded matter of
S '1 Scandal to the Adverfaries of Religion, and
' to the weak Religionifts themfelves, from
^er which cafeof Maximilians y the Inference is
eafie, that if the Lutherans were offended
ickkjt^ notwithftanding they did acknowledge
aCw.! it to be barely lawful; then much lefs ought
b to cjt to be allowed in any private Perfon,where
kfittft: it can proved fo plainly to be prohibited
'Stmt and unlawful $ and fo much for this time.
jm^Idefireyou ferioufly to confider of what I
iratehave written, and to expeft what remains
slatiocttwith Patience, as well as to judge of this
sfortkpwith Ingenuity and Candor,
the*-
#| lam,
' 1 C) J WJLAV JlllUlt illUlll iuUJ 1 llllLvlui
)'"■ the Lady Mary, a Daughter of
Sir, Yours.
■ - " '!"*>•« >"'• * 1 '*"""
whi
Books Printed for
Kettilly at the
Head in StPaafs Church
Yard.
PRofecution no Perfection, or the Dif
ference between Suffering for Difobe> *
dience and Fad ion, upon Phil. 1.2 y.PreacheefowCi
a t St. Edmonds-Bury in Suffolk on the 2^;ddiis
of March i68i.^k Nath. Bisby, £>. D. 4U toajlati
A Sermon Preached before the Lorc^tkr
Mayor at Bow-Church, on the 29th of Maj'to/wi
1682.by BenjaminCalamy, D. D. qto. IHOpera
The Harmony of Natural and PofitmmVi
Divine Laws: by Walter Charleton, M. DMtf
Svo. fi'ijjrf "
Two Difcourfes Introdudory to a Difquifi
Hon, demonftrating the Vnlawfulnefs of Martha fa
riage of Coufiti Germans, from , Real
fon, Scripture and Antiquity: by John TurS^j
ner, late Fellow of ChriJh*Co!ledge in Cam ii» „ j
bridge. 8 vo< „
Gon
Conftantius the Apoftate,^i»g a Jhort *
ount of his Life9 and the Senfle of the Primi-
ive Church about his Succejfion^andtheir Be-
aviour toward him9 wherein is fhewn the
Vnlawfulnefs of excluding the next Heir up-
an the Account of Religion, and the necejflty
rf Eajfive Obedience, as well to unlawful Op-
\\ ptcffors^as legal Perfecutors, being a f ull An-
pi -fm to a late Pamphlet intituled Julian the
UllIvApoftate.
Mr. Richardfon's Sermon before the Lord
Mayor. 4 to.
—Evans his Sermon before the Lord Mayor*
1. or
v fur #ray's Sermons on the id of September,
flhe Rebellious City deflroyed. qto. .
y,WI1 M.Amyraldus his Diflcourfle of Divine
;,v jjjDrearns, translated out of French by Mt\
fl: ^ ^owde, together with his Preface concerning
ufe of Re afon in matters of Religion. $vo.
n"nlf|rH.Mori Opera Theologicay & Philofophi-
'J j j^.Fol. Three Vol.
D.More's Reply to the Anfwer to his An-
idote againfl Idolatry. With his Appendix<
—Remarks on Judge Hales, of fluid Bodies,
it5™
xc. 81/0.
flf .—Expofition on the Apocalyps. 4/0.
on Daniel. 4to.
Confutation of Aflrology, againfl Butler.
/0.
Dr. Sherlocks Difcourfe of the Knowledge
of Jefus Chrift. With his Defence. 8 vo. Ik
Anfwer to Danfon. 4to.
-Account of Fergufon's Common-plaa
Book. 4to.
Dr. Falkener's Libert as Ecclejiafiica. 8vo
Chriftian Loyalty. 8vo.
-Vindication of Liturgies. 8vo.
Fowler's Lilertas Evangelica. 8vo.
Mr. Scot's Chriftian Life. 8v§. 2d. Edit.
Dd. Worthington's great Duty of Self-Re
fignation. 8vo. n
Smith's Pourtraft of Old Age. 8vo.4
Mr. Kidder's Difcourfe of Chriftian For
titude. 8vo.
Allen's Difcourfe of Divine Affiflanct
8vo.
—— Chriftian Juftijfcation ftated. 8vo.
Againft Fergufon, of Juftification. 8vt
•Perfwafive to Peace and Vnity. With \
large Preface. 8m,
Preface to the Perfwafive. Alone. 8vo.
•Againft the Quakers. 8vo.
—Myfiery of Iniquity unfolded againft th
Papifts. 8vo. Conn
-Serious and Friendly Addrefs to th
Nonconformifls. 8vo.
- Praftical Difcourfe of Humility. 8m "
"«f for
ar
The HARDSHIP and danger of
subscriptions, reprefented,
i N A
E T T E R
TO THE
Reverend Dr.POWELL,
With REMARKS upon his SERMON,
Preached before the
University of
ON THE
Commencement , 1757.
\ «
Et refellere fine pertinacia, & refelli fine iracundia, parati fumus.
Cic. Tuf. Qu.
LONDON:
Printed for J. W a u g h, at the Turk's-Head, in
Lombard-Street', and W. Fenner, at the Angel
and Bible, in Paternojler-Row. 1758.
[Price Sixpence.]
/
THE
HARDSHIP and DANGER
0 f
Subscriptions, reprelented, &*€.
Reverend SI Ry
T is no part of my intention, to?
H I ^ deprive you, of any reputation,
which your fermon, in defence
of the fubfcriptionsy required in the church
of E?iglandy may really deferve; but only
to propofe to your coniideration, the reafons,
which have hindered my concurrence with
you, in the opinions* which you have offer-
ed to the public.
The fubfcriptions, required in the church
of England, have occafioned many warm
contelf s, among protejfants $ and it will be
readily owned, that they have not anfwered
A 2 ths
4 A Letter, t the Reverend
the beneficial purpofes, which good men
have defired; but many bad ones, which all
good men have been forry for. Some honeft
and learned men, well qualified for the
miniftry, have been obliged to refufe com-
pliance with the terms of admiflion into the
church of Eiiglcmd; others, by compliance,
have been filled with very uneafy reflexions.
Some, it is to be feared, have been tempted,
by worldly motives, to fubfcribe, without
being convinced of the truth of the articles -y
whileft others, who have fubfcribed, once
and again, have learnedly confuted many
of the do&rinal propofitions; to the truth of
which, they had given their public and fo-
lemn affent.
Thefe are inconveniences, attending fub-
fcriptions, which every fenfible, and honeft
man would be glad to fee removed. And
it may well be queftioned, if it would not
have been for the advantage of the Chriftian
Church, if the impofition of fubfcriptions
had never been thought of. However, Sir,
as your fentiments and mine, upon this fub-
jedt, are very different, I have taken the
liberty to make fome remarks upon your
fermon;
Dr. Powell, h 5
fermon; and to offer them to your confide-
ration, and to the candor of the public.
Your difcourfe is introduced with an ob-
fervation, which perhaps I do not well
underftand. For you fay, p. 5.— It is,
" ufually, of more importance to the peace and
" happinefs of a community, that if s members
" fhould fpeak, than think, alike. For they,
<c who have learned to confefs their faith, in
" the fame form, to// confder each other,
"friends; ew/z though they fhould difagree,
" not a little, /tor explanations of it -7
" while fuch, have been accuftomed to dijfe-
u rent exprefjions, Ctf/z feldom be convincedy
" that their opinions are the fame
As it is the duty of all men to fpeak truly,
or agreeably to their real thoughts, I can-
not fee how the members of any comma-
nity can alike ; unlefs they alfo think
alike. It is of no importance to the public
peace and happinefs, for men to fpeak words,
which have no meaning. For this is juft the
fame, as if they did not fpeak at all; and
fuch unmeaning words, like thofe of a par-
rot, or jackdaw, can be of no moment to
fociety.
6 A Letter, to Reverend
fociety. How then can it, ufually, be of
more importance to the community, that
it's members (hould fpeak, than think, alike?
If they fpeak with truth, they muft fpeak,
as they think. And, if they do not think
alike, neither ought they to fpeak alike.
And, therefore, I cannot fee how it is pof-
fible, for honeft and underflanding perfons,
to confefs their faith, in the fame form of
words, whileft their faith itfelf is various:
nor, that the fame words, without the fame
meaning, can have any tendency to pro-
mote concord, among people, who are
not willing to be impofed upon, by founds $
but choofe to fpeak the truths themfelves $
and to hear it from others.
4
_ 1
In the fame page, you tell us —*-ct The
u vcifejl and beji friends of oar religious eflab*
" lijhment have long wijhed, that all the pro-
*' teftants, in this kingdom, could be united,
" by a confent to the fa?ne liturgy, and the
"fame articles of faith" You add very well
-—cc Not a confent^ forced\ or feigned 5 but
<c given freely, andfncerely, notwi thfanding
" feme fmall difference of fentiments, about
" points of fpedilation) Gr ceremoniesI
muft
Dr. Powell, &*c. 7
mud own, Sir, I cannot perceive, that fuch
an univerfal confent is poffible; unlefs all
the protedants, in the kingdom, thought, and
judged, alike, of the liturgy, and articles of
faith. You difclaim a forced, or feigned,
affent. For that would be hypocritical: and
yet wifh for a confent, given freely and fin-
cerely. How can this be poffible ? The
protefants of this nation have different capa-
cities, and opportunities. Some are more,
others lefs, diligent, in acquiring religious
knowlege and fome have more and dronger
prejudices than others. And, confequently,
their fentiments will vary, not a little, but a
great deal ; not only about fmall points of
fpeculation, or ceremonies; but about the
mod important and effential dodtrines of
our holy religion. This fully appears, from
all pad hidory; and that it will ever be fo,
yvhileft protedants have different capacities,
opportunities, prejudices, &c. is extremely
probable. This confent, fo long wiffied for,
by the wifeft and bed friends of the edab-
liffiment, is quite impoffible. But there is
another kind of confent; namely, to love one
another, notwithdanding our difference of
fentiments. This, we can hardly wifh for,
with
8 ^/Letter, to the Reverend
with too much earneftnefs. Nor, indeed,
would a confent of opinion and judgement,
if poffible to be univerfally attained, produce
more virtue and happinefs, than the pre-
fent, wife conflitution of heaven; by which
every.protejfant is left to judge, and un-
derftand, for himfelf, in the beft manner
he can.
»
Your reflexion upon the diffenters, page 6.
is, I apprehend, too fevere; for you fay—.
" They have been rendered objlinate, in mat*
" ters perfectly infignificantIf thefe in-
fignificant matters are fuch, as you have
enumerated, page 8. —cc Whether Luke the
<c phyfician was, alfo, the evangelijl? Whether
the rules for finding Eajler are perfectly con-
<c fiftent ? Whether the titles, given to a faint, or
<c a king, properly belong to them ? or whether the
cc pope^or the council, is to be preferred, infixing
the time for a jeflival ? —Thefe matters
are, certainly, infignificant enough. But thefe,
Sir, are not the matters, concerning which,
the diffenters can be charged with obfiinacy;
if a word of fo harfh a meaning is to be
ufed at all. There are other matters, about
>vhich, diffenters haye difputed; and thefe,
undoubtedly,
Dr. Powell, &'c. 9
Undoubtedly, are of no fmall importance^
and well deferve the attention of all protef-
tants ; and efpecially of thofe, who impofe,
or countenance, afubfcription to human com-
portions 5 viz. " Whether Jefus Chrijl is
<c not the fole lawgiver, in his own Church ?
" Whether kings, or parliaments, or convo-
" cations, or affemblies of divines, can require
" fubfcriptions to forms of human device,
cc without ufurping upon Chrijl's authority,
u and invading the rights of that Lordfhip, or
u Dominion, to which, his God and Father
" has exalted him ? Whether it is not the
duty of all chriftiahs to ftand faft in the
ic liberty of the gofpel, and fleadily to main-
<c tain their right and privilege, to judge, for
themfelves ? Whether it is not the true
C{ proteftant principle, that the Bible is a fuf-
" ficient, and the only, flandard of our faith?
" and, if it be fufficient, and the only flandard,
" whether it is not prefumptuous to impofe
" the thirty-nine articles, or any other human
£C formularies of faith; which have been va-
il rious; and, in many particulars, inconfiftent
" with each other, and with the holy Scrip-
Cf tures themfelves ? And laftly, whether it
<c is wifely done, to invent fo many diftinc-
" tions, and refinements, to qualify a fub-
B c£ fcription $
io A Letter, to the Reverend
Ci Jcription; and to make it fit eafy upon a
<c doubting confcience; — which, perhaps,
" after all the arts of palliation, will remain
" unfatisfied, and fearful ? " Thefe appear
to be matters of real importance. And, if
diffenters are not willing to give them up, I
hope, Sir, you will not think them obffinate;
but rather approve their difinterefted firm-
nefs, in adhering to, what they think, im-
portant truths: and efpecially, as their firm-
nefs, in this refped, has been, and is, at-
tended with the lofs of many worldly
emoluments, and advantages; to which
a fubfcription would have opened them
the way.
You are alfo of opinion, page 6. that,
notwithftanding a fubfcription is required to
the thirty-nine articles, —<c Great liberty is
" left, for a difference off judgement sy in mat-
(< tersy either not plain, or not important ? "
But how can great liberty, or any liberty,
be left, when the avowed defign of in>
poling this fubfcription was to avoid a di-
verfity of opinions, in matters of faith ? Or
how can you hope, that this liberty, which
is left by the articles, is fo extenfive, as to
take in every man, " whofe principles are
"not
D Po WELL, &C. II
•
<c not deftriiEiive of the church, or nation"
The Bible contains fuch an extenfive ftan-
dard, but as for the articles, they are much
too narrow, and were injoined with a de-
fign to avoid, but not to allow, a diverfity
of opinions; much lefs to allow fuch a di-
verfity, as to take in every man, whofe
principles are not of the moft deflrudtive
malignity.
In page 7. you fay — <c I will not enter
c< here, into any debate with thofe, who, calli?ig
<c themfelves fervants of Jefus Chrifi, and
u members of the catholic church, affert their
f< freedom from all human impoftions(I wifli
*c you had not added) and will not fubmit to
Cc any terms of communion ; like him, who re-
^ fifed to be made a citizen of Athens, be-
*c caufe he was already a citizen of the world V*
There are many, who may be called the
fervants of Jefus Chrifi, with the greateft
propriety, who think it their duty to affert
their freedom from all human impofitions,
But I know of none, who refufe to fubmit
to any terms of communion. The diffenters,
if you mean them, are ready to fub-
{nit to every term of communion, in-
B 2 joined
12 A Lett er, to the Reverend
joined by the gofpel and do fubmit to the
particular times, and places, agreed upon,
by the congregations, with whom they
join, in public worfhip* How then could
you perfuade yourfelf to fay — " Should a
li man adhere to this principle, he could never
ct join in any public worjhip? What do you
mean, Sir, by this principle? If you meari
the principle of affertiqg their freedom from
all human impofitions, we have thoufands
of proteflants, who conftantly join in the
public worfhip. But, if you mean, as I
iltppofe, you mean, the principle of not
lubmitting to any terms of communion, I
know no fuch perfons. However, if you
had the dijjcnters in view, you might very
well have fpared your jeft, as they have
no likenefs to him, who refufed to be made
* t.
a citizen at Athens; (perhaps, there might
have been a little refemblance, if he had re-
fufed to be made a Jlave, at Athens) becaufe
he was already a citizen of the world. You
go on to obferve — <c Not only the times, and
*' places, and ceremonies, of public worjhip,
il but the words alfo, muji either be appoirtted,
£< by common ccnfent, or chofen by him, who
" prefides in each congregation? The times,
i
and
Dr. Powell, &c. 13
and places, and other circumftances, re-
lating to public worfhip, are appointed, a-
mong the dijfentersy by common corifent,
or cuftom ; nor would it be any objedion
to me, if the prayers alfo (provided they
were rational and agreeable to the Scrip-
tures) were appointed, in like manner; but
the words of thefe are generally chofen by
him, who prefides in the congregation.
What then ? You fay, —cc "That conscience
u muji be Jirangely per*verfe, which can fub-
" mit to the directions of a Jingle perfony and
<c not to the authority of the publicCer-
tainly the point to be confidered, is, which
of the two is beft, and mod agreeable to
the intentions of public wor/hip. If the
fingle perfon dire&s a form of devotion, pre-
ferable to that, injoined by the authority of
the public, that confcience muft be ftrange-
ly perverfe indeed, which refufes to approve
it, becaufe it is of private direction; and
even to prefer it to any injoined by public
authority, which appeared, to him, to be
lefs adapted to ferve the purpofes of wor-
/hip. Many difenters have no objection to
a liturgy, provided it be agreeable to the
Scriptures} but, as you fay,— " If it re-
J4 -^Letter, to the Reverend
" quires him [the perfon, who officiates, and
«' I add, or any other perfon] toprofefs
f( trine s, which he does not believe y or if he
u judges either the whole, or ids principal
"parts, to be vain, trifling, ;
" hisajjent will befinful." And you own, if
iincerity forbids the ufe of this fervice, this
is a fufficient reafon not to ufe it. Thefe
conceffions are extremely juft. And,
upon thefe accounts, the diffenters think
themfelves entirely juftified, in their re-
fufals of the public liturgy. You tell us,
page 8. <c The ajfent is given to the ufe, not
(C the truth, of the liturgy: "—But how can
a perfon honeftly aflent to the ufe of forms,
which he thinks are not true ? You add—
" This ajfent cannot be underftood, to extend
"farther, than to an approbation of the doc-
4< trines, which it openly prcfefjes y or with
" which, it has an evident and neceffary con-
" nexionBut how can an honeft clergy-
man, who believes the fcripture-dodtrine of
the trinity, approve the fcholadic, unfcrip-
tural, and Athanafian doctrines, which it
openly profeffes ? Or how can thofe ap~
prove the calviniftic dodirines, interwoven
with the liturgy, who are fo far from be-
lieving
Dr. Po WELL, &C. 15
heving them to be true, that they have a-
bundantly confuted them, and fhewn them
to be falfe ? The law then, which requires
an ajfent, fuppofe it would be contented
with an approbation, leaves an unfurmount-
able obftacle, in the way of thofe, who are
unable to approve, or to pretend to ap~
prove, doftrines, which they believe to be
erroneous.
It is our duty to perform all our public
adorations, with fincerity, and purity of heart,
as in the prefence of the great fearcher of
hearts. And, though we are unable to at-
tain to abfolute perfection, it certainly be-
comes us to rejeCt whatever is untrue, tri-
fling, or fuperftitious. For thefe are defeCts,
which will juftify our refufal to ufe, or ap-
prove, them. What then do you mean, page
9. where you fay, — " even in the holy fcrip-
ct ture it/elf, fome portions have been thought
c< lefs proper to be publicly readP Very true,
— <c and yet no chrijlian willfcruple to declare,
u that it is profitable for reproof] for exhort a-
Cl tion^for infraction in righteoujhefsj5 And
then you draw the following inference, —
" why then is the liturgy to be rejected\ for
<c want
i 6 A Letter, to the Reverend
€t want of that imaginary perfection, which no
<c book, not even the book of God, has ever ob~
<c tained ?—" Surely! the cafes are very dif-
ferent. For thofe portions of fcripture, not
ufually read in public, are hot rejected, nor
reckoned, by any, to be imperfections in the
book of God. But the liturgy is rejected ;
becaufe it openly profeffes doCtrines, which
are believed to be contrary to the holy fcrip-
tures 5 it is not rejected for the want of an
imaginary perfection, never to be obtained $
but for the want of an agreement with the
chriftian rule, which might be attained; if,
inftead of exculing it's defeCts, there was but
an equal zeal to reform them.
But it may be replied, as you immediately
add, —c< that the difficulties arife, not from
the want ofJome fappofed excellency, but from
real blemifes; from blemifhes, which have
been obferved long ago, and their remedies pro-
pofed— But have thefe remedies been ever
effectually applied ? Have not almoft all al-
terations been refufed, in every paft attempt
to heal our differences ? And are not the
moft material objections againft the liturgy
(till in full force ? Youthen afk, even fup-
Dr. Powell., &e. ty
pofing fome blemidiss, — " Is there in our
<c liturgy any abfurdity yfo glarings as tobevi-
"flble to every eye? Is there any impiety fo monf-
" trous, as to flock every devout worjhipper V
Admit there is not; for it is not eafy to fay
how glaring an abfurdity muft be, to have
this effedt. It is but too evident, that many,
from cuftom, prejudice, or inattention, are
reconciled to very great abfurdities, and even
to very fhocking impieties. But, furely, an
abfurdity fliould be removed, and a defedt
reformed -y though vifible only to a few, and
not to every eye: and it is certainly true, that
many things, which have efcaped the vu!~
gar obfervation, do, notwithftanding, call
aloud for reformation. You then reprefent
the complaints of your mod: fcrupulous ad-
verfaries — " as chiefly 'relating to thofe ap-
" pointments, in which there was the great-
<l eft room for a difference in mens judgement,
"or fancy:" Such as the lengthy and di-
viflons of the fervice — what p aft ages of
fcripture ought to be intermixed — hew of-
ten fome important petitions may be repeat-
ed — cc thefey and fucb as thefe, you fayy
u are the matters in controverflyP If fo,
C your
18 A Letter, to Reverend
your moft fcrupulous adverfaries might ve-
ry foon be made.eafy. But I mull tell you,
Sir, there are many other matters, of much
greater importance, which have been, and
ftill are, the fubjedts of controverfy. Do
not your public prayers inculcate the belief
of the athanafian trinity ? Are not fome of
your folemn petitions addrefled to God the
Son 5 others to God the holy Ghoft, and
others to the holy, bleffed, and glorious tri-
nity, three perfons and one God? Is not
the plan of Calvinifm intermixed with your
forms ? Will not thefe be matters of con-
troverfy, as long as they remain unaltered ?
And do not thefe deferve the attention of
every thinking man, of every devout wor-
fhipper ? In comparifon with thefe, how
infignificant are the points you have menti-
oned ? Kneeling, or ftanding; a furplice,
or black coat, — how trifling ? And yet,
even in thefe little things, if we can change,
not for the worfe, but for the better, it will
furely be a point of wifuom ; becaufe trifles
fhould not be rendered important, by mak-
ing them unalterable. And, therefore, I
fhould think, thaty in matters of this fort, no-
thing
Dr. Powell, &c. 19
thing is fo plainly wrong,, as a refufal to
change for the better.
You intimate, page 10. that matters in
difpute are to be determined, by public au-
thority, — <c and that, if one man ajjumes to
tc himfelf this determination, every man might
u claim, with equal reafon -> and which, if
" every man Jhould exercife, all united wor-
<c flrip mujl totally ceafe — But" this con-
fequence can, by no means, follow. For,
the dijfe?iters claim, and exercife, this very
power, of determining, for themfelves, points
in difpute. And yet it is well known, that
all united worfhip is fo far from totally ceaf-
ing among. them, that they affociate, for
this purpofe, oonftantly and cordially; tho'
their fentiments vary in many points.
*
Y'ou inform us, page 11. — cc it is not a
<c condition of union, in our church, that even
" our minifers Jhould acknowlege every thingy
" in the public fe?~vicey to be exaBly what is
u beft and fitteftl* But, if any parts of your
fervice contain what is wrong, and unfit,
how hard is it to oblige your ministers to
C z profefs
20 A Letter, to the Reverend
profefs —<c that in their minds they aff'ent to,
'' and will follow, in their praBice, //jr />r£-
<c fcribed forms of prayer "— when many of
thefe prefcribed forms contain particulars, to
which they cannot affent, in their minds, nor
follow, in their pradice, without occafioning
to themfelves uneafy, and perhaps uncon-
querable, fcruples. Of this, fome clergy-
men have publicly complained, in very pa-
thetic, and affeding terms; and have duti-
fully petitioned for relief; but hither-
to in vain ! Ion
Uurarti
As for the articles of religion, to the con- "km
fideration of which, you next proceed, you ' many
fay — tc they are iiot merely articles of peace. this affei
They are defigned alfo as a tefl of our cpi- ^ ^
<c nionsP Can protejlants have a better ted
than the bible ? What authority have any ^
men to invent, and impofe, another ? Were
our reformers, were the compilers of the
articles, or thofe, who impofed them, in-
fallible? Is there not great prefumption,
aud want of mcdedy, in men's aiTuming
a power to judge for others; and for all
fucceeding ages, in matters of the greateit
import-
Dr. Powell, &c. 2t
importance to every particular chriftian ?
What pity is it, that your church has fo
long countenanced this ajfumed power; and
fufFered her clergy to be at the . trouble of
contriving fo many fubtile diftindions, to
reconcile their fentiments, with that folemn
declaration of their faith, which they mult
exprefs, in words, whofe original, literal,
and obvious meaning is quite contrary to
their real, and avowed belief?
You obferve —cc that hey who ajfents to
<{ our articles, mufl have examined them, and
" be convinced of their truth? But do not
many of your clergy, notwithflanding all
this affent, examination, and convidion,
openly difbelieve, and confute, the articles ?
This is an untoward appearance, in your
church. However you attempt to qualify,
and vindicate, it, thus 5 — " There are rules
(i of interpretation, peculiar to thefe writings,
" [viz. the articles] as the defgn of interpret-
" ing them is peculiarVery peculiar are
thefe rules of interpretation indeed! If, as
you fay,—we are not concerned to dfcover
I* what was meant by the writers, but what
ci will
22 y? Letter, the Reverend
u will be under flood by the readersDid
not the writers draw up thefe articles, with
a deflgn to avoid a diverfity of opinions, a-
mong thofe, who are admitted to officiate
in your church ? And, if this was their de-
fign, as well as of the a£l, which injoins
fubfcription, this original intention will be
totally loft, if minifters fubjcribe them, in
divers fenfes; and venture to depart from
what was meant, by the writers, to that
fenfe, which may be underftood by the
readers. If this lax method of interpreta-
tion is once allowed, there may be the
greateft diverfity of opinions, notwithftand-
ing all the care of the compilers, and im-
pofers. And, if fubfcription is now be-
come ufelefs, and ineffectual, as undoubt-
edly it is, to the prevention of a diverfity
of opinions, how much is the continuance
of this practice to be lamented ; efpecially
as it is very enfharing, and grievous to ma-
ny good men ?
In page 12. you afk the following quef-
tions, — <c If our articles are to be thus ex-
plained, ivi!i they not be rendered uncer-
" tain,
Dr. Powell, 23
" tain, and ufelefs, by a variety of inconfift-
c< fenfes?" Undoubtedly, they will! —
€X Where fall we fx the fandard of public
cc opinion ?" In the bible, the true chriftian,
and proteftant ftandard. — " Will ?iot every
ct whimjical interpreter find fome followers,
&c?" To which you have anfwered-*—" with
t
" cut doubt, the method propofed admits fomc
<c variety of interpretations. what other
11 does not ?" The articlesy then, are plain-
ly incumbered with infuperable inconveni-
encies. And one would think, it would
be much better, for your church, to get
fairly rid of them, and to adhere to the bi-
bley which confeffedly contains the true re-
ligion of protefiants. The bible is of a ge-
nerous, and large compafs $ and will com-
prehend every honeft man. Which muft
be pleafing to all perfons of liberal, and
candid minds; who prefer the honour of
religion, and the virtue and happinefs of fo-
ciety, ro the narrow and mercenary views
of a worldly intereft.
You tell us, — " that, wherever an arti-
« cle is exprejjed, in fuch general terms, as
will
24 A Letter, to the Rev trend
44 will fairly contain feveral particular opi-
44 rions ; there, certainly, zV A fujjicient for
<c him, who fubfcribes, to be convinced,
" fome one of thofe opinions is trueBut I
mud afk, can the opinions, contained in
any of the articles, agree with the fenti-
ments of thofe clergymen, who difbelieve
the athanajian trinity, and embrace the
fcripture dodtrine ? Or can thofe, who re-
jedt the calviniftic interpretations, find fen-
timents, in the articles, favourable to their
notions, concerning the divine perfections,
the grace of the gofpel, and human liberty?
You take notice, 44 that it has been faid,
4C that a latitude of exprefion was chofen, on
4C purpofe to admit, within the pale of the
44 church, men of various, oppofite,
44 principles!y But certainly, they were mU
flaken, in faying thus; becaufe the com-
pilers of the articles intended to avoid a di-
verfity of opinions. And, therefore, they
would not choofe any latitude of expreffion,
which would defeat their grand intention;
nor had they any defign to admit, within
the pale of the church, men of various and
even oppofite opinions; when it was their
declared
Dr.powell, 25
declared purpofe, to avoid a diverfity of opi-
nions; and to eftablifli confent, touching
true religion.
You obferve, page 13. " Cujlom can
cc take away the force of exprejjions, or give
<c them a new meaning. And where the ori-
" ginal fetife is one, the received another, the
<c fubfcriber is at liberty to ufe them in ei-
i€ ther" This liberty then, I muft obferve
again, will intirely deftroy the very end,
for which the articles were compiled. And
therefore, your church would be better,
without them. How many good men, in
your church, are made uneafy, by their
fubfcriptions ? How many are incapable of
any farther preferment, though deferving
of the higheft -> becaufe they dare net re-
peat a practice, which has already given
them fo much difquiet ?
But to proceed, if the fubfcriber may
choofe the original fenfe, or the received;
the fenfe of the writers, or of the readers;
(all which you allow) will not this bring
down the articles to no fixed fenfe, or to no
fenfe at all 5 however, to no real ufe I In-
fignificant, then, are all fuch fubfcriptions.
D , And
26 ^Letter, to the Reverend
And I cannot but wifh, again, and again,
that they were quite taken away. Then
there would be full fcope for the honeft
and faithful, the inquifitive, and ingenious,
in this happy age of liberty and learning, to
carry on their noble improvements, in re-
ligious, and critical, knowlege; without
being any longer cramped, and difeouraged,
by the narrow and illiberal limits, fo pre-
fumptuoufiy fixed, by our miftaken ancef-
tors, who had fo little critical {kill in the
ftudy of the holy Scriptures. —Then honeft
and pious men, though of different fenti-
ments, would cordially unite, in chriftian
love, and good-will, to one another; and
found knowlege, diffufive, god-like chari-
ty, and pure and undefiled religion would
flourifh abundantly, under the aufpicious
fmiles of heaven-born liberty. Then the
church of England would be honourably di-
flinguiftied, above all the churches of the
earth, as the bulwark of the reformation;
and the glory of the chriftian church : ——
which can never be, whileft the narrow
and peevifh meafures of impofition are per-
mitted to cramp the nobleft fpirits, within
your pale; and to difguft the moft candid,
and inquifitive, without it. —— Permit me
then,
Dr. Powell, &*c. 27
then, without offending, mod devoutly to
wifli, that our numerous and learned clergy,
who have imbibed, or acquired, generous
notions of chrijlian truth and liberty, would
unite their utmod endeavours, not to glofs
over, and palliate -y but to difcountenance
and remove, all remaining defe&s and ble-
mifhes. Which, after all the foftening
arts, and mod dexterous refinements, are
grievous, and enfnaring, to many of the
mod refpe&able dignitaries, and miniders,
in the edablifliment. — Unite, Gentlemen,
in petitioning your fuperiors, who mud be
fenfible, as well as you, that a farther re-
formation is dill wanted. Unite, in every
:na[j. fair and honed, in every prudent and proba-
W111J ble meafure, to obtain this great blefling.
But, if all your efforts fhould be vain, which
^ God forbid ; how much would it contri-
bute to your honour; how much would
it promote the virtue and religion of your
country ; bravely, but peaceably, to make
a dand, and to give up your emoluments,
your temporal advantages and dignities,
rather than wound the peace of your own
ana
nation >
1)2#
00't
confciences, by fubfcriptions and profeffions,
^ which contradidl the inward perfuaiions of
can .e your minds. This would be glorious an-
I D2 deed^
28 Le tteRj to the Reverend
deed; and convince, at once, the common
.enemies of religion, that the gofpel was ftill"
the power of God, and the wifdom of God
to Salvation. Your names would be re-
corded, in the annals of liberty. And
(what is infinitely more) your fhort refig-
nations and felf-denial, here, would be re*
warded* with the glory, which cometh
from God, and which will endure for
twer !
* 1 • - * i 4; ■ > f v
You add in page 15. — " The ajfent [to
x< the articles] muji be conceived to be given,
with more folemnity, and exaBnefs, by him,
i( who projeffes to Jludy every branch of re-
hgious know lege, than by cne engaged chief-
u ly in other purfuits 5 by a man of mature
<c judgement, than by a youth jufl beginning
Xt to exercife his reafon■ ■ Whereas, the
truth is 5 The greateft proficients, in re-
ligious knowlege, will be embarafled with
the greateft and moft numerous difficulties;
and as for the young perfons, they muft
have the feweft objections $ becaufe they
know but little of the matter. However,
it may very juftly be objected, -—c< They
have neither the age, nor the learnings
tC necejjary, to make them proper judges of
"fuch
Dr. Powell, &c. 29
£t fuch abftrufe pointsand, if their weak-
nefs is not impofed upon, — cc They cer-
cc tainly ajfent, before they have thoroughly
*£ examinedHow greatly would it be for
the honour of our univerflties, and how
.much to the advantage and vktue of our
youth, if this, and all fuch dangerous cuf-
.toms were utterly abolifhed ? How can the
inftrudlors of youth expedl, from them, a
facred regard to truth when they are, thus
early, accuftomed to trifle with the affetit
required; and to promife, with folemnity,
to adhere to a faith, which they have not
examined, nor are capable of underftand-
ing r — This, Sir, is a very different thing
from that, mentioned by you, of teaching
children a creed; which, when arrived at
years of consideration, if they do not un-
derftand, or believe, they can rejeft; be-
caufe they are under no engagements to
profefs it, right or wrong. But the youth
in our univerflties promife, and fubfcribe
(and, in fome colleges, do they not alfo
fwear ?) to adhere ftedfaftly to the articles.
And, if nothing more is meant by their
fubfcriptions, than what you intimate, page
15. for God's fake, ufe your influence,
Sir, to deliver our youth from this early
and
30 ^Letter, to the Reverend
and dangerous cuftom of tampering with
their confciences!
Upon the whole, the alterations, which
fo many friends of liberty and religion,
earneflly with for, are not recommended—
<c To accommodate the liturgy and articles to the
cc prejudices of dijfenters: " — But to truth,
confidence, and our common chriflianity.
What! if there were no dijfenters in the
land ? Are not truth and righteoufnefs,
peace and liberty, the eafeing fcrupulous
and tender confciences, in the church,
things of the laft importance? Are the
clergy, no way concerned to make their
own liturgy, more perfect ? their own ar-
tides' more agreeable to reafon and fcrip-
ture ? Dijfenters are thankful for, and
happy in, their liberty ; and many of them
wifh, that the minifters in the eftablilh-
ment were equally happy and free. They
do not envy your honours and riches; but
wifli you would contrive any fair and re-
putable methods, to fecure them to your-
felves. And, when this point is gained,
they wifh, that, inftead of defending your
prefent, imperfedt eftablilhment, you would
unite your counfels'and endeavours, to fettle
it
Dr. Powell, 31
it in the neareft conformity to the holy
Scriptures. Can any obje&ions be urged
againft this reformation, which might not
have been urged, with equal force, by
the papiftsy againft the changes, made by
our firft reformers ? For God's fake, let
us all then, both churchmen and diffenters,
unite our honeft and candid endeavours,
to bring about this happy, and moll de-
firable event. For, furely, no time was
ever more favourable to fuch an attempt,
than this age of learning, free enquiry,
and rational forbearance; under the beft of
\
Kings, and the mildeft adminiftration, ever
known.
To conclude : I moft heartily wifb, that
all chriftians may pay a conftant attention
to the exhortation of our great apoftle,
in the words of your text, iCoR.i. 10;
Now, I befeech you, brethren, by the name of
our Lord Jefus Chrifly that ye all [peak the fame
thingy and that there be no divifions among you;
but that ye be perfectly joined together, in the
fame mind, and in the famejudgement. I moft
fincerely and heartily wifh well to you, and
to the reft of the clergy, to all chriftians, and
to all mankind. And am, Reverend Sir,
Jan.24, 1758. Your humble Servant. ABC
Booh publijhedby George Benfon, .
And fold by James Wa u g h, at the
Turk's-Head, in Lombard-ftreet.
I. 'THE hiftory of the firft planting of the chris-
tian religion: taken from the a£ts of the
apoftles, and their epiftles. Together with the re-
markable fa£ts of the jezvijh and roman hi (lory ; which
affected the chriftians, within this period. In three
volumes, quarto. The fecond edition, carefully corredted,
and with iarge additions. Price bound 17s.
II. A paraphrafe and notes on fix of the epiftles of St.
Paul, viz.
I Thejjalonians, ? 5 I Timothy, f Titus,
II Thejjalonians, S Z Philemon, St II Timothy,
Attempted in imitation of Mr. Locke s manner. To
which, are annexed, critical differtations on feveral fub-
je£ls, for the better underftanding of St. Paul's epiftles.
The fecond edition, carefully corrected, with large ad-
ditions, quarto. Price bound 17s.
III. A paraphrafe and notes on the feven (commonly
called) catholic epiftles; quarto, viz.
St. James, 1 C II St. Peters ?J I, II, and III.
I St. Peter, S I St. Jude,it Of St. John.
Attempted in imitation of Mr. Locke's manner ; to which
are annexed feveral critical differtations. Price bound 17s
\
IV. The reafonableneiTe of the christian re-
ligion, as delivered in the fcriptures. In four Parts.
Part I. Contains the arguments for the truth of the chrif-
tian religion. Part II. The anfwers to the difficulties
and objections, propofed by the anti-revelationi/is. Part
III. An interpretation of feveral texts, which they have
perverted. Part IV. Appendix, or a Vindication of the
praecedeing parts of the book. The fecond edition,
octavo. Price ftitched 4 s. 6d.
SOME
GENERAL THOUGHTS
ON ■
GOVERNMENT,
And particularly on the
»
Prefent State of Affairs.
*
LONDON:
Printed fox M. Cooper, in PntfrnoJler-Row-y 1757.
[ I ]
SOME
General Thoughts, &c.
"W" F Indignation could make a Poet, as
Juvenal faid, I think, with much more
& Reafon, it ought to make a Writer.
Things are come to fuch a Crifis, that;
I am fure, it requires both our Hearts and
Heads to mend them. I mean clear Heads
and honeft Hearts.
When I was both at School and the
Univerfity, I was taught, and learnt and
believed/ that none but Scholars, or at lealt
thofe who had travelled, and learnt the
Cuftoms of other Nations befides their own,
B were
[ 2 ]
were fit to make Statefmen and Politicians :
I believe Plato, and Arijlotle, and Solon, and
all the great Statefmen and Philofophers of
former Times, thought fo. But, it feems,
I was miftaken; for now-a-days, the Syf-
tern of Politicks is fo wholly changed, that
every ambitious Man who can get into a
certain Pod, and be in poffeffion of the
T~-y and E ——, (for what Ufes I won't
fay) thinks himfelf an able Statefman, and
a confummate Politician.
The Cafe was not fo in Queen Eliza-
betid s Reign. For none but very able Men
and Scholars were preferred by her : And
they, in return, made her Reign very glo-
rious.
The Queftion is not now, whether the
Nation be corrupt $ I believe that is a Point
given up : The Bufinefs is not now to rail,
but to mend.
As Reftitude of Manners, Integrity, and
Love for our Country, build up, and
form, and ftrengthen States, and King-
doms, and Empires : So, it is plainly
proved, and appears from Hiftory, that the
I contrary
[ 3 ]
contrary Qualities pull them down and de-
ftroy them.
There is nothing I dread fo much as the
Ruin, nay the Decay of my Country.
I know there is a certain Acme, or De-
gree of Perfection, in all States, as there is
in human Bodies, beyond which nothing
can pafs. You may, by proper Regimen,
continue long in that State : Are we come
to that Degree, or are we paft it ? If we
are paft it, let us let ourfelves down as
gently as we can,
I believe rather we are arrived at it ; for
I don't know when England enjoyed better
Days, or more Freedom. Let Male-
contents fay what they will, Hiftory will do
Juftice to the prefent Royal Family, to
the two laft Reigns, And for the Truth
of the Comparifon, I appeal to the paft
Hiftories of Royal Families.
If then we are arrived to this Pitch, let
us have a care of a Repletion, or Plethora,
which is generally the Cafe of all flourifh-
ing Conftitutions. I am afraid that is our
Cafe. And if I was not afraid of appear-
B z in**
C + ]
ing too religious in this Libertine Age, I
would fay that Pride and Fulnefs of Bread,
&c. were in us.
What then muft be done ? The Body
Politick is like the Body Natural. We
muft ufe Evacuations, either bleed, or
purge, or live upon a lower Diet. Can
we fubmit to live upon a lower Diet ? Can
we who have been ufed to high Soups, and
rich Broths, live upon Water Gruel ?
Can we forego our Pleafures and live at
home ? Can we give up our favourite Di-
verfions, our innocent Routs, and more
innocent Mafquerades, and take care of
our Families ? Alas, I am hideous, a Fool,
and ill-bred for thinking fo. Can we go
plainer in Cloaths, and lay by our Laces,
our rich Liveries, and Equipages ? If we
can't do this, and a great deal more,
towards a Reformation, it is plain, we can't
conform to live upon a lower Diet.
The raging Paffion of this Age, is the
Love of Pleafure, in its worft Senfe. This
Love of Pleafure, or Luxury, call it which
you will, proceeds from Plenty. Infidelity
proceeds
[ 5 ]
proceeds from Luxury ; for did we believe,
or believe fincerely, we (hould not be en-
tirely profligate. But we endeavour to do
all in our Power to difbelieve ; fo we com-
mence Infidels ; fo we come to laugh at all
Religion, and would willingly dye in that
Condition, but that Providence fometimes,
in Mercy, fends a burning Fever, or fome
other falutary Diftemper, to awaken the le-
thargick Infidel.
If we can't then fubmit to a proper Re-
gimen,we muft bleed, or purge, or ufe fome
other Evacuations. I recommend firft, vo-
miting or purging ; bleeding, and perhaps
Amputation, laft. By vomiting and purg-
ing, I mean Adls of Refumption, fqueez-
ing of Spunges, fweating an over-grown
corpulent Eftate, which has fed illegally on
the Entrails of the Government, without
1
ever giving an Account. Reverfing Rever-
fions, and going to the Bottom in Enqui-
ries. In fhort, tapping, or doing any thing
to difcharge the Humours of an over-grown,
dropfical, fickly, confumptive Body.
In
/
[ 6 ]
In a Word, if we do not fubmit to a Re-
formation, it is the Opinion of raoft (may
Providence avert the Predi&ion) that we
fhall be forced to one, or a Diflblution.
I am no Seer or Prophet j but no Man
can help forefeeing Events in the natural
courfe of Things, and conjecturing from
what has been, what may be.
I come now to bleeding, as one of the
lalt Remedies in our Power, generally fuc-
cefsful, though often unwillingly fubmitted
to. For Amputation, if ever it comes to
that, I am afraid, will be the Work of
others.
I was always forry, if fo low a Creature
may fay fo, for this War. For all Wars are
Scourges, and certain Indications of God's
Wrath. And I always thought (^with Sub-
million to my Superiors) that the manner
of entering into it was mean, below the
Heroifm of his Majefty and Family, and
Dignity of the Nation. I can never believe
it the Impulfe or Suggeftion of an Hero.
On the one hand, we are conftantly re-
proachcd by the French King, of beginning
the
[ 7 ]
the War like Pirates; and on the other,
blamed and upbraided by the neighbouring
Nations, of bringing the War into Europe.
I aik, as Politicians, had we not better have
kept the War in that Part of the World
where the Grievance began: So the French
would have been the Aggreflbrs, and we
the Defenders; fo we fhould have had Juf-
tice on our Side.
Whereas, by taking their Ships without
a Declaration of War, we are the Aggref-
fors in Europe, and they the Defenders.
Nothing has fucceeded hitherto. Provi-
dence feems to declare the Juftice on their
Side. Befides, where was the Policy of be-
ginning a Privateering War, when we
ftake, at leaft, Three to One !
I refume the Argument. Now we are
entered into the War, if we can't have rea-
fonable Terms, the Limits adjufted, and
Boundaries fettled, let us pufh on the War
vigoroufly, and not do Things by Halves.
I cannot fee how we can expedt honourable
Terms as Aggreffors, unlefs by honoura-
ble is meant, Terms which may fave our
Honour -9
C 8 ]
Honour ; therefore let us be content with
reafonable.
No War can be carried on without Mo-
ney; I fhould think it advifeable not to
ftarve the Caufe. I would not be fuppofed
to advife unneceffary and extravagant Ex-
pences. But very often a vigorous Profe-
cution puts a fpeedy End to a War.
If we won't tax our Luxuries for the
Sake of ourfelves, and the Good of the
Conftitution, let us do it for the Sake of the
War. In the End, it may do us all good.
And, if we are impoverilhed a little, I fee
no Harm in it. All plethorick Bodies are
the better for emptying.
We may eafily fpare the Money, if we
will fpare our Diverfions. Either put down
our Places of Pleafure, or tax them. Tax
our Follies, our Pleafures, our Gaming,
our Race-horfes.
Put a Tax on our Gaming-houfes, on
our Play-houfes (as I am informed the
French King does), and all Houfes of idle
Refort and Entertainment.
But
[ 9 ]
But do not tax our Neceflaries, or the
Labours of the Poor. Tax the Houfes
where they encourage Cock-fighting, which
is both a cruel Diverfion, and a Pretence
for Thieves and Gamblers to aflemble.
Then after the War, if Providence pleafes
to put an happy End to it, take off the moft
burthenfome Taxes; thofe efpecially the
Poor feel moft. Let always thofe continue
which feed our Vices, and enervate our
Minds.
The Diftillery fliould be well looked to,
and a Tax laid, or Methods found out, fo
as to amount to a total Prohibition of that
execrable Liquor Gin ; if we have a mind
to preferve the remains of our enfeebled
Poor.
How can all this be done without an
Union among ourfelves, efpecially our Mi-
niftry ? And I hope and pray, not only for
an Unity, but a Perpetuity of the fame Mi-
niftry ; that we may not be the ftanding
Jeft and perpetual Proverb of neighbouring
Nations.
C It
ffim
[«° ]
It is plain, while there are fo many
Intrigues and Contention about Places, the
Good of the Publick may be the Pretence,
but Ambition is the Root of the Quar-
rel.
In a Time of War efpecially, nothing
can be more abfurd than to be divided.
How can an Houfe ftand that is at Variance
within itfelf? Surely the Animofities of
great Men Ihould be laid afide at that Time.
The Story of Themijiocles and Ariftides is
well known. How can the Body thrive,
nay, indeed, long exift, when the Head is
out of Order !
I believe it is nothing to any impartial
or unbyaffed Perlon, a true Lover of his
Country, who are the Minifters. Only
we wifli they may be honeft -y wifh they
may be able. But it is very much the In-
tereft of thofe Minifters, to be popular,
which they may eafily be, by purfuing fuch
Meafures only, as are for the Publick
Good.
Monopolies of all Kinds, at prefent
known by the Name of Jobs, by all means
are
[ 11 ]
'
are to be avoided, upon any Emergency
whatever. By Jobs, I mean a Combina-
tion, or Contract, of a few, to cheat the
Publick.
i
Publick Offices fhould be well looked
into and regulated. For we cannot fup-
pofe in a general Corruption, that they can
efcape the Contagion ; but that there is
great Tyranny and Exadion pradifed upon
the Subjed, under the Name of Fees, or
fome Pretence or another.
The voluminous Body of Laws, or Ads
of Parliament, or Statutes, called or di-
ftinguifhed by what Name you pleafe,
wants a thorough Revifion and Abridg-
ment $ and the iniquitous and dilatory
Pradices of the Courts of Law, cry out
for an Amendment.
I have often thought the Law, as now
managed, the greatefl Burthen the Subjed
groans under, fince the Tyranny of Popery
has been removed. And, like that too, is
oppreffive, eats out our Subftance, and
calls aloud to Heaven for a Reformat
tion.
C 2 I am
[ 12 ]
I am forry that any Clouds Chould hap-
pen in fo good and juft a Reign. Did great
Men love the King as well as they do his
Places, and their Country more than their
own Advancement, they would ftudy to
make Him eafy, and Us happy.
A Difunion among ourfelves in the Be-
ginning or Entrance into a War, is down-
right Madnefs ; I hope this Infatuation is
not the Fore-runner of our Fall, ^uos
Jupiter vult perdere, prius dementat. Let
us unite, and no body can break our Bun-
* *
die of Arrows; but if we feparate them,
they are eafily broke.
I fay then, inftead of placing ourfelves at
the Meridian, or hoping that we may arrive
ft ill at a greater Degree of Perfection, may
we not juftly queftion, whether we are not
pad our Acme, and taking great Strides to-
wards our Ruin ?
My Reafons for it, are thefe. In the
firft place, our extream and great Corrup-
tion of Morals; which always preceded and
predicted a Decay and Fall of Empire. In
the next place, our exceftive Luxury; which
always
[ *3 ]
always brought on certain Ruin. Likewife
our bare-faced, open and avowed Lewdnefs;
and give me leave to add, in my Opinion,
a Decay of Stile and Learning.
This perhaps may be my particular Opi-
nion, and may perhaps ftartie fome Authors,
who are fond of their own Produ&ions; for
let the Cub be ever fo ugly, the Mother
Monkey will love it, and think it hand-
fome.
I think our Stile by fome has been fo
diftorted, that I don't know whether I am
reading Englijh or French. Others, who
perhaps look upon themfelves as elegant and
polite Writers, write meanly while they
think they write ealily. And when they
endeavour to raife their Stile, perhaps in a,
pompous Defcription, or aim at the Sub-
lime, they make ufe of Epithets to make
out their Poverty of Genius : Which puts
me in mind of Boys, who get upon Stilts to
appear taller : Or like the French, who lard
their Meat, to give the infipid Difli a
Relifh.
The Stile of another is very neat, but ra-
ther too quaint and fmart for the SubjeCt.
We
gNl ' v!W- • aw ■
' * K . - —
[ 14 ]
We have nevertheless, a few elegant
Writers, neat and plain, in the beft Latin
and Greek Manner, who would fhine in the
beft Ages of Greece and Rome.
Our Decay of Learning, I think, may be
eafily proved from this, that there are fo few
learned Books produced now among us.
Our Genius is either enfeebled and decayed
(or our Tafte, with our Morals, corrupted)
like a rich Soil whofe Heart is worn out; in-
in
ftead of producing vigorous and good Corn,
which affords ftrong Nourifhment, we pro-
duce nothing but thiftly Pamphlets and c"
weedy Books of Entertainment.
I hope my Countrymen will forgive what Cl:"
I am going to fay, as I think no Country 'ca"
or Men above Amendment or Advice. I K
would not have us think ourfelves the wifeft eir Ti
of Mankind, nay, indeed, very wife. My Wkabi
Reafons for it are thefe: Our Credulity and H
Changeablenefs, neither of which were ever fc
i
efteemed the Marks or Attributes of Wif- ^edb
dom. We are too eafy of Faith in every
thing but Religion ; which is the Reafon freft,
we are fuch Dupes to fo many Impoftures. fler of
I hope Sorter
is
\
[ 15 3
I hope I (hall be forgiven in fpeaking my
Thoughts freely on Government, I declare
I do it with Submiffion ; and, at the fame
time, declare myfelf an Admirer of the belt
of Kings, and of the beft, though moll pre-
carious, of Conftitutions.
We fhould never fend any two Com-
manders Abroad with equal Power, there
being a certain Jealoufy attending Command
in all military Men 5 efpecially thofe of a
different Element are not fond of one an-
other.
The Greek Generals would never have
conquered the Perjians in that remarkable
Sea-fight, if they had not commanded
fingly ; for tho' they were ten, they took
their Turns of Command each Day, fingly,
with abfolute Power.
It is a common Notion, and, I believe,
well founded, that England can never be
ruined but by its Parliaments. By Parlia-
ment, I fuppofe, is meant, parliamentary In-
tereft. And, if we do not change the man-
ner of their feptennial Continuance into a
Ihorter Period, I am afraid the Confiitu-
tion will be entirely broken : It fickens a!-
w
1 ready
J
C 16 ]
ready by its long Duration. An ambitious
Man, Prince, or Minifter, may bring his
Schemes to bear in feven Years, which he
could not do in three or one.
The Governments, the molt jealous of
their Liberty, have always made their Ma-
giftracies of fhort Continuance. That Aft,
which made the Parliament lit feven Years,
I am afraid, diminished the Royal Autho-
rity, and flung the Weight into the popu-
lar Scale : For if by one Aft they can fit
feven, why not by another fit longer ? And
fo, by degrees, prolonging themfelves, and
finding the Sweets of Government, Secu-
rity, and Perpetuity, become a Rump-par-
liament, and fit perpetual Dictators.
Thepaffing that Aft, which gave Liberty
to our Men of War to take Merchant Ships,
I believe has hurt the Fleet, and turned
them Privateers.
«
Wife Men do not refufe Counfel from
even an Enemy, nor abftain from follow-
ing a good Example, though praftifed by a
Foe.
The French King has led the Way, and
fhewed the Example. He has turned the
Purfuit
[ *7 ]
Purfuitofhis Men of War into their trad
Channel, and pointed out to them the true
Path to Glory and Reward; by eftablifhing
a Reward for taking the Enemy's Ships of
War.
Otherwife the Men of War are only Plun-
derers, and take an Advantage of a weak
and unequal Foe to enrich themfelves.
I wifh the Militia Bill -faH Succefs in its-
Extent, if for our real future Good. I be-
lieve, and am fure, there is not an Indivi-
dual who wifhes better to his Country than
I do. But, I am afraid, if thefe feptennial
Parliaments continue, while the Great and
Rich find it fo much their Interefl to be
chofen Members, they will bring by-and-
by an armed Force into the Field, to main-
tain their Pretenfions, and difpute their Elec-
tions, as the Romans did formerly, by dint
of Arms, and breaking of Heads.
Give me leave, before I finifh thefe Re-
«
marks, to anfwer an Objection I have heard
publickly made, that We are not more luxu-
rious than our Anceftors ; and they com-
monly alledge the Reign of King Charles II.
as an Example. I believe I can prove it
D from
[ 18 ]
from the following Confiderations: Were
there ever fo many Vehicles of all Shapes
and Denominations ? Were there ever fo
many and fuch Iplendid Equipages ? Were
there ever fo many Places of Diverfion, a
Ranelagh, Vauxhall, for the great, and
Places of lefs Denomination for the inferior
Quality ? Were there ever fo much mafque-
rading ? Such Routs ? [Names unheard of
before] Balls, Ridotto's, Mufick Clubs ?
Was there ever fuch a Rage for Card-play-
ing ? I wifh there was nothing more carried
on in thofe numerous Aflemblies, but the
innocent Diverfion of Cards! Were there
ever, and would there then be, fo many
Elopements and Separations? Was there ever
fo much Drunkennefs among the common
People, and fo much common Difhonefty
amongft all People ? Were there ever fo
many Songflers, both Men-fingers and Wo-
men-fingers, Fidlers, Muficians of all kinds?
In King Charles s Reign, at the Beginning
of it, they had no Women upon the Stage,
and Men adled the Female Parts: For the
King coming early to the Playhoufe, the
Aftors, to pacify and pleafe the King, who
loved
[ 19 ]
loved a Jeft, defired his Majefty to have a
little Patience, for the Queen was not ready,
fhe was not quite (haved.
Was there ever fo numerous a Nobility !
Laftly, there are now eredting, and have
been, within thefe few Years, eredled, more
noble Palaces, and magnificent Villas, than
ufed to be produced before in whole Cen-
turies!
I humbly beg Pardon for any thing that
may feem bold and prefumptuous, which is
advanced in this fmall Treatife, and few loofe
Thoughts. I declare upon my Word, they
are my own ; genuine and fincere, proceed-
ing from the Love of my Country, and the
difagreeable Afpedi of Affairs. I have read
no Man's Works upon this Subjedt, for I
fuppofe it would be compleater if I had. I
only read a Quotation in a News-paper^
where the Author talks of a certain neigh-
bouring Nation, and accounts for their Man-
ners. Which put me in mind of a Story I
had read in Plutarch of Annihal; who, up-
on his Flight from the Romans after his De-
feat, coming into Afa Miner, in fome City
there, was defired to attend the Harangue of
a cer-
[ 20 ]
a certain great Orator ; who, for his Ho«*
nour, had compofed a Speech upon the Sci-
ence and Art of War. The Speech was re-
ceived with univerfal Applaufe by the Audi-
ence, and loud Acclamations; when Anni-
bal was afked his Opinion} who, like an ho-
neft Man and blunt Soldier, replied, he ne-
ver heard a worfe in all his Life, for the
Man did not underftand one Word of the
Matter.
I believe there is little faid here, which is
not founded on Hiftory, and known Princi-
pies of Government, and preceding Fadts-
I am fure it proceeds from an honeft Heart,
and a fincere Defire of ferving my Country,
if I could. I offer my Mite, let abler Men
fling in their Treafures into the Publick,
FINIS.