The suruey of popery vvherein the reader may cleerely behold, not onely the originall and daily incrementes of papistrie, with an euident confutation of the same; but also a succinct and profitable enarration of the state of Gods Church from Adam vntill Christs ascension, contained in the first and second part thereof: and throughout the third part poperie is turned vp-side downe.

CHAP. IIII. Of certaine generall obiections against the marriages of Priests, with briefe solutions of the same.

The first obiection.

BE sanctified therefore and be holy,* 1.1 for I am holy (your lord and God:) I answer, that al the Israelits were commanded to be sanctified & to be holy, aswel as were the priests, and so▪ if this argument were of force in popish sence, al people aswel as priestes, shoulde abstaine from the vse of holy wedlocke, yea, the priests were euen then married, as is already proued.

The second obiection.

I would haue you without care: the vnmarried careth for the things of the lord, how he may please the Lord; but he that is married careth for the things of the world,* 1.2 how hee may please his wife: therefore priests ought not to be married.

The answere.

I say first, that S. Paul preferreth the state of the vnmar∣ried, [ 1] before the condition of the married. For he saith indeede, that the vnmarried doth better, if he can so continue, albeit in marrying he sinneth not:* 1.3 yet this is not in respect of any holi∣nes that resulteth out of single life, but because the vnmarried is more free from the cares of the world, and so more apt for∣studie & the seruice of God. I say secondly, that S. Paul neuer [ 2] meant to enforce any person, either to be married, or to leade a single life, & therfore did he say that he sought for the cōmodity of the Corinthians, but not to entangle thē in the snare: as if he had said, if I shuld go about to bar you of mariage, I shuld tan¦gle you in a snare. I say thirdly, y^t a man may be as holy in ma∣riage, [ 3] as if he liued vnmarried to his liues end, which S. Hie∣rome though a great patron of single life, both grauely consi∣dered, and sincerely acknowledged: for he saith, that Abraham pleased God no lesse in wedlocke, then virgins doe in their sin∣gle life: these are his expresse words, as the popish canon law reciteth them:* 1.4 Abraham placuit in coniugio sicut nunc virgi∣nes placent in castitate: seruiuit ille legi & tempori suo serui∣amus & nos legi & tempori nostro, in quos fines coelorum deue∣nerunt. Abraham pleased (God) in marriage, euen as virgins now please in chastity: hee serued the law and his time; let vs also vpon whom the ends of the world is come, serue the law & our time. Yea S. Nazianzene saith, that his father being a bishop, was greatly holpen in pietie by his wife: & the same S. Gregory saith in another place,* 1.5 that neither marriage nor single life, doth either ioyne vs to God or to the world, or withdraw vs from god, or from the world. This is confirmed by S. Chry∣sostome in these words:* 1.6 Nuptiae licet difficultatis in se plurimum habeant, ita tamen assumi possunt, vt perfectiori vitae impedi∣mento non sint.* 1.7 Although marriage haue great trouble in it self, yet may it so be vsed as it shalbe no hindrance to per••••t life. S.

Austen after that he had auouched holy life to be nothing aba∣ted,* 1.8 in holy Samuel and Zacharias by reason of their marria∣ges: by and by he addeth these words: Qua ergo ratione accu∣satur quod minime obesse probatur? & quis neget bonum debere dici, quod neminem laedit. How therefore is that thing accused, which is proued to do no hurt? & who denieth that that ought to be called good, which bringeth harme to none? S. Clemens Alexandrinus giueth a sufficient solution to this obiection,* 1.9 in these expresse words: Annon permittitur etiam ei qui vxorem duxit, vna cum cōiugio etiam esse solicitum de iis quae sunt domi∣ni? sequitur: ambae enim sunt sanctae in domino: haec quidem vt vxor, illa verò vt virgo: cannot she also that is married toge∣ther with hir marriage, seeke the things that pertaine to the Lord? for they both are holy in the lord: this as a wife, she as a virgin. Nicephorus though he were caried away with sundry er∣rors of his time,* 1.10 yet doth he make S. Gregory who was a mar∣ried bishop, equal with S. Basill his brother who led a single life: these are his words: Et quamuis is coniugē habuerit, rebus tamen aliis fratri minimè cessit: & though he were married, yet was he nothing inferior to his brother in other things. In fine, S Ambrose saith thus:* 1.11 Quid ergo dicimus si virgines de deo co∣gitant & iunctae viris demundo, qu espes relinqutur nubentibus apud deum? si enim ita est, dubium est de salute eorum: nam vide∣mus virgines de seculo cogitare, & matrimonio iunctos domini∣cis studere operibus. What therfore say we, if virgins think of god, and the married of the world, what hope haue the married with God? for if it be so, their saluation is in doubt: for we see that virgins do thinke of the world, and that married men are careful for the works of the Lord.

The third obiection.

Defraude not one another but for praier sake, saith S. Paul ergo priests that must euer pray, must euer abstaine.

The answere.* 1.12

I say first that S. Paul doth here shew the necessity of mar∣riage, in that he disswadeth not from abstinence saue onely for praier sake. I say secondly, that priests must not euer be occu∣pied in prayer no more then lay men: their nature and condi∣on, requireth conuenient recreation.

I say thirdly, that y^e apostle speaketh not here of euery kind [ 3] of praier, but of extraordinary praier, appointed for vrgent ex∣traordinary causes: which kinde of praiers, must alwaies haue fasting ioyned with them, as the apostle doth expressely say: and so if the papistes will needes haue the apostle to speake of vsuall and daily praier, then must their priestes vsually and dai∣ly fast;* 1.13 which I weene their fatted headed moonkes will neuer agree vnto, or at least neuer put in practise. Yea they must con∣tinually absteine from wine, for so the law required.

The fourth obiection.

When Dauid to satisfie his hunger being vrgent, required of Abimelech the priest,* 1.14 some cakes of bread, or what els came to hand; Abimelech answered that hee had no common bread: but if he and his companie were not polluted with women hee would giue them hallowed bread. Now it is cleere, that A∣bimelech meant of their lawfull wiues, because hee coulde not suspect holy Dauid, to haue been polluted with naughtie women. If therefore lawfull wedlocke did so pollute secular persons, that for the vse therof, they might not eate the Shew bread: how much more shall the vse of wedlocke pollute priests of the new testament, that they may not eate Christes body in the holy masse?

The answere.

[ 1] I say first, that how holy your Masse is, shal by Gods grace [ 2] appeare in conuenient place. I say secondly, that wedlocke is an honourable and vndefiled bed, and therefore cannot pol∣lute such persons, as vse the same lawfully and in the feare of God. Yea if the vse thereof had not been lawfull, euen in Bi∣shops and other ministers of the church; holy Paphnutius durst not haue defended the same publikely, in the presence of so ma∣ny learned men at Nice: who for all that did so, and was ther∣fore not onely highly commended, but the whole councell als∣agreed to his godly motion. I say thirdly, that there were ma∣ny [ 3] legall contamination, aswel in men as in women, (whereof

who list may see at large in Leniticus,) but neither was the lawfull matrimoniall act reputed any of them;* 1.15 neither do those legall ceremonies concerne vs of the newe testament, but the true puritie signified by the same; that is, Christian purificati∣on wrought in the bloud of Christ Iesus, and apprehended by a true, sincere, and liuely faith. I say fourthly, that many legal contam••nations were no other sinnes, then the manifold popish [ 4] irregularities, then nocturne pollutions done without consent of the patient: which neuerthelesse the best learned papistes will haue to be no sinne at all. I say fiftly, that Abimelech in∣quired of cleannesse from women, not in respect of the coniu∣gall [ 5] act; but for many other contaminations, which might haue happened by comming neere to any woman in her monethly course. For not only the woman her self was thereby vncleane in lawe and legall ceremonie, but also all such as touched her clothes, her bed, her seate, or whatsoeuer els. Which inquisi∣tion Abimilech made, least hee shoulde seeme to contemne the law: that so Dauid if perhaps he had been any way polluted le∣gallie, might haue had (saltem desiderio) purification accor∣dingly. I say sixtly, that the high priest in the olde lawe was married, and begate children, and that euen in those daies [ 6] when he ministred to the Lord: for he was bound to offer vp in∣cense on the altar, of sweete perfume, that was neere the arke of testimonie before the mercy seate;* 1.16 not this day or that day onely, but euery morning and euery euening throughout their generations for euer. Since therefore the high priestes marri∣age and coniugall acts, were nothing preiudiciall to his holy function; it followeth consequently, that neither can holy wed∣locke be now preiudiciall, to the ministerie of the newe Testa∣ment.

The fift obiection.

The councels of Carthage, Toledo, Agatha, and some o∣thers, haue flatly prohibited the marriage of priestes: which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done, if it had been a lawfull thing.

The answere.

I say first, that mans authoritie cannot abridge & take away [ 1]

from man, that libertie which God himselfe hath graunted vn∣to man. For the inferior cannot alter the law of his superior, as is already prooued. I say secondly, that though the pope and his late councels, doe roundly impose lawes against holy wed∣locke; [ 2] yet doth S. Paule plainly confesse, that hee hath no au∣thoritie so to doe. Praeceptum inquit, domini non habeo, consiliū autem do: I haue no commandement of the Lord, but I giue mine aduise.* 1.17 I say thirdly, that the councell of Agatha doth [ 3] euidently insinuate, that the prohibition of priestes marriages was but of late yeares.* 1.18 These are the wordes of the councell; Presbyteri, diaconi, subdiaconi, vel deinceps, quibus ducendi vxores licentia modo non est, etiam aliarum nuptiarum euitent conuiuia. Priests, deacons, subdeacons, and the rest, who this day haue not licence to marry, must not be present at the feasts of other marriages.

This councell was holden in Narbon, about 439. yeares af∣ter Christ, which was 51. yeares after Pope Syricius, who first abandoned the mariage of priestes as I haue prooued.* 1.19 To which time this councell of Agatha alludeth, when it saith; (who are now debarred from marriage:) as if it had said; Be∣fore they might haue married, but now it is forbidden them. I say fourthly, that their owne deere Gratian in his glosse vpon [ 4] pope Martins wordes, confesseth matrimonie to be of so great force, euen in deacons that marry after their orders: that nei∣ther the popes decree, nor the vow by him annexed to orders, is able to dissolue the same. These are his expresse wordes; Si vero diaconus a ministerio cessare voluerit, contracto matrimo∣nio licitè potest vti;* 1.20 nam etsi in ordinatione sua castitatis votū obtulerit, tamen tanta est vis in sacramento coniugij, quod nec ex violatione voti potest dissolui ipsum coniugium. But if a deacon will cease from the ministerie, hee may lawfully haue the vse of wedlocke contracted in time of his deaconship: for al∣though he offered the vow of chastitie when he tooke orders, yet so great is the force of matrimonie, that it cannot be dissolued by breaking the vow. Out of which words I note two things; the one, that Gratian speaketh of that matrimonie, which dea∣cons contract after they be made deacons: the other, that such matrimonie is perfect & of force, notwithstāding y^e vow annexed

by popish law. To which I adde other two thinges: first, that Gratian auoucheth S. Austen to be of his opinion,* 1.21 whose wordes he alledgeth in the next canon. Secondly, that since marriage is of force after orders in a deacon, it is so also in sub∣deacons, priestes, and the rest. The reason is euident, because the vow is of the same force in all: neither can or will any lear∣ned papist say the contrary.

I say fiftly, that it skilleth not much what many councels say; as I haue prooued at large in my booke of Motiues: yet here I adde one decree out of one of their councels, which ma∣keth [ 5] the controuersie manifest. Thus therefore appointeth the first councel holden at Toledo or Toletanum.

Si quis habens vxorem fidelis concubinam habeat, non commu∣nicet. Caeterum is qui non habet vxorem, & pro vxore concubi∣nam habet, a communione nō repellatur,* 1.22 tantum vt vnius mu∣lieris, aut vxoris, aut concubinae, vt ei placuerit, sit coniunctio∣ne contentus.

If anie of the faithfull hauing a wife haue also a Concubine, let him not receiue the holy communion: but hee that hath no wife, and keepeth a concubine in steed of his wife, let him be ad∣mitted to the communion; yet so as hee be content with one onely, either woman, wife, or concubine, as pleaseth him. Loe, this councell giueth a man free libertie, to keepe woman, wife, or concubine at his pleasure, so he be content with one at once. Neither doth it forbid such an one, to receiue the holie communion. Yet it prohibiteth euery priest from the commu∣nion, that keepeth his lawfull wife: but the famous councels of Nice and Constantinople, were of another minde as I haue prooued.

The 6. obiection.

Vow saith the prophet, and performe vnto the Lord your God, all ye that be round about.* 1.23 Therefore priestes and reli∣gious men and women which haue vowed, cannot marrie at all.

The answere.

I say first, that this obiection can at the most prooue onely [ 1] this, euen by popish doctrine; to wit that such as vow chastitie cannot marry without sinne: but not that their marriages bee not of force, or not true marriages indeed. I prooue it euident∣ly, because marriages after simple or single vowes, be of force with them, and reputed as they are, for true marriages indeed. And this obiection speaketh of such vowes, because the scrip∣ture is nothing acquainted with popish solemne vowes.

I say secondly, that they are not only true marriages and of [ 2] force, but also contracted lawfully and without sinne. I prooue it,* 1.24 because as it is sin to make ill vowes, so is it lawful to break the same, and double sinne to performe them. This is euident in Iephthe, who to accomplish his vow, became the murderer of his own only daughter. In wicked king Herode the Tetrarch, who for sake of his vow beheaded S. Iohn the baptist. In the fourtie Iewes, who to performe their bloudie vow, say in wait to destroy S. Paule. These wicked votaries, as they sinned most greeuously in making their vowes; so did they iterate their sinne in performing the same. Who neuerthelesse shoulde haue sinned but once, if after the making of their vngodly vowes, they had ceased from the performance thereof. For which cause holy Bernard aduiseth his sister grauely, not to keepe and performe any ill vow.* 1.25 Thus doth he write; Re∣scinde fidem in malis promissis: In turpi voto muta decretum. Malum quod promisisti, non facias; Quod incautè vouisti, nō impleas; Impia est promissio, quae scelere adimpletur. Breake thy faith in euill promises;* 1.26 chaunge thy purpose in vnhonest vowes: doe not that euill which thou hast promised; performe not that which thou hast rashly vowed. That promise is wicked which is performed with wickednesse. S. Isidorus hath the selfe same resolution concerning ill vowes, as hee is alledged by Gratian. S. Bede after he had largely discoursed vpon euil pro∣mises, and withall shewed that it is better euen to be periured, then to performe naughtie and wicked promises; alledged for the confirmation of his opinion,* 1.27 the fact of holy Dauid in the death of Nabal. These are his wordes: Deni{que} iurauit

Dauid per Deum, occidere Nabal virum stultum & impium, at{que} omnia quae ad eum pertinebant demoliri; sed ad primam interces∣sionem Abigail foeminae prudentis mox remisit minas, reuocauit ensemin vaginam, ne{que} aliquid culpae se pro taliperiurio contra∣xisse doluit. Finally, Dauid sware by God, that he would kill Nabal a foolish & wicked man, & that he would destroy all his both smal & great: yet so soon as Abigail (Nabals wife) a wife woman, made her petition to him, he abated his anger, put vp his sword, and nothing lamented the breach of his othe.

S. Ambrose hauing at large prooued by many golden testi∣monies, that it was sinne to breake ill vows then to performe the same, at length alleageth the ensample of Christ himselfe, for that only purpose; these are his words:* 1.28 Non semper igitur promissa soluenda omnia sunt: denique ipse dominus frequenter suam mutat sententiam, sicut scriptura indicat. Therefore all promises ought not to be kept at all times: for euen our Lord God himselfe doeth oftentimes change his purpose, as holie Writ beareth record.* 1.29 S. Austen reputeth it a great point of wisedome not to do that which a man hath rashly spoken: thus doth he write: Magnae sapientiae est reuocare hominem quod ma∣le locutus est: It is great wisedome for a man to call backe (and not performe) that which he hath spoken vnaduisedly.

Soter who himselfe was the bishop of Rome, teacheth ex∣presly, that rash promises ought not to be kept: these are his words: Si aliquid incautius aliquem iurasse contigerit,* 1.30 quod obseruatum in peiorem vergat exitum, illud salubri consilio mu∣tandum nouerimus, & magis instante necessitate periurandum nobis, quam pro facto iuramento in aliud crimen maius diuerten∣dum. If any man shall sweare vnaduisedly, which if it be per∣formed bringeth greater harme; that ought to be changed, by prudent aduise: for we must rather be periured, if neede so re∣quire, then for performance of our othe, to commit a greater sinne: so then it is euident, that vngodly and vnlawfull vowes ought not to be kept. But such is not the vow of single life, say the papists. This therefore must be examined.

The vow of single life is a godly vow, and so liked of Saint Paul, as he reputed them damned that kept not the same.* 1.31

I answer, that it is a wicked and vngodly vow,* 1.32 to tie our

selues from marriage al the daies of our life: and I wil proue the same, by the best approued popish doctours, and by the doctrine established in the Romish church, and that because the replie containeth such matters as is no lesse intricate then im∣portant. [ 1] I therefore say first, that it is a verie wicked and vn∣godly act, for a man to expose himselfe to sinne. Thus much is granted, by the vniforme consent of all learned Papists: inso∣much as all the Summists agree in this, that those arts which can seldome or neuer be vsed without sin, are altogether vnlaw∣full. Gregorie surnamed the Great, as hee was vertuous and learned, so was he the bishop of Rome, and for that respect, of great account among the Papists; though he were no papist in deede, as now a daies papists are so knowne and called: thus doth he write:

Sunt enim pleraque negotia, quae sine peccatis exhiberi aut vix aut nullatenus possunt:* 1.33 quae ergo ad peccatum implicant, ad haec necesse est vt post conuersionem animus non recurrat.

For there be sundrie arts, which can hardly or not at all bee practised without sinne: therefore after our conuersion wee may not haue recourse to such, as anie way draw vs to sinne. Nowe let vs applie this to the matter in hand, for it is most certaine that he exposeth himselfe to sinne, that bindeth him∣selfe neuer to vse the remedie against sinne: for example, if a man should vow, that hee would neuer vse the helpe of surge∣rie or phisicke, that man shoulde doubtlesse expose himselfe to the perill of death: none but senselesse bodies, will or can this denie: So in our case of single life, because God hath appoin∣ted matrimonie for a remedie against sinne, so saith the Apo∣stle, to auoide fornication, let euerie one haue his wife, and let euerie woman haue her husband. For which respect Saint Gregorie Nazianzene saith,* 1.34 that marriage is not so subiect to perill as single life.

[ 2] I say secondly, that it is a great sinne, to debarre and stop the course of naturall propension: yea this is a thing so cer∣taine,* 1.35 as their angelicall doctour Aquinas proueth thereby the murdering of ones selfe to be sinne, bicause it is against the inclination of nature. Nowe let vs make application heereof, for the propension to beget children is naturall, as which was

before sinne in the state of innocencie, and so hee that maketh a perpetuall vow of chastitie feeling in himselfe this propension, committeth a greeuous sinne.

I say thirdly, that it is a damnable sinne to tempt God, for [ 3] it is written in Gods booke,* 1.36 yee shall not tempt the Lorde your God. Vppon which words the glosse receiued of all pa∣pists; saith thus: Deum tentat, qui habens quid faciat, sine ra∣tione committit se periculo, hee tempteth God who hauing ordinarie meanes, committeth himselfe to daunger with∣out cause. This exposition is so agreeable to the text as A∣quinas willingly admitteth the same. Nowe let vs applie it to the matter in hande. He that refuseth ordinarie meanes, and so committeth himselfe to perill, tempts God grieuously, as both the popish glosse and Aquinas grant; but the ordinarie meanes to auoide fornication is marriage saith the Apostle:* 1.37 therefore he that voweth neuer to marrie, exposeth himselfe to the danger of fornication, & thereby tempteth god grieuously, and consequently his vow is wicked and damnable.

I say fourthly, that that vow which for the obediēce of mans [ 4] law is preiudicial to Gods law, is wicked and damnable:* 1.38 but such is the vowe annexed in popish priests (marke well my words) therefore the vow imposed to popish priests is wicked and damnable. I say first the vow annexed, because the priests [ 1] do not formally vow single life, but the Pope hath annexed it to their orders by his wicked decree. I say secondly, the vowe [ 2] imposed, because the priestes indeede woulde willingly re∣taine their libertie stil. I say thirdly, that gods law doth not [ 3] onely graunt libertie to marrie,* 1.39 but also chargeth euerie one that hath not the gift of continencie to take a wife, & to vse holy [ 4] wedlocke, for the auoiding of sinne. I say fourthly, that mans law onely hath prohibited the marriage of priests, which being once proued, this fourth assertion wilbe manifest. Thus ther∣fore writeth their deare Gratian in expresse words.

Copula namque sacerdotalis vel consanguineorum, nec legali,* 1.40 nec euangelica, vel apostolica auctoritate prohibetur, ecclesiasti∣ca tamen lege penitus interdicitur.

For the marriage of priests or kinsfolks, is neither forbiddē by the law of Moses, nor by the lawe of the gospell, nor by the

law of the apostles; yet is it vtterly interdicted, by the lawe of the church (of Rome.)

Marke well these wordes for Christes sake (gentle christian reader) for they are able to confound al obstinate papists in the [ 1] world. Obserue therefore first, that this Gratian who vttereth these words, was a verie famous popish Canonist, brother to Peter Lombard surnamed for his supposed deserts, the Mai∣ster of Sentences, who was sometime bishop of Paris, and of such renowme in the popish church, as his bookes are this day read publiquely in the diuinitie schooles. Obserue second∣ly, [ 2] that this great learned papist Gratian liued with his bro∣ther Lombard about 400. yeeres agoe, euen then when the pope was in his greatest pompe and tyrannie. Obserue third∣ly, that this Gratian being so learned and so renowmed among [ 3] the papists, did euen in the altitude of popedome, commit that to the publique view of the world, which vtterly ouerthroweth al papistrie. Obserue fourthly, that the pope and his vassalles [ 4] being iustly infatuated for their manifold sinnes, had not pow∣er to hinder and keepe backe from the print such bookes, as vt∣terly disclose their tyranny, falshood, and paltrie dealing. Oh sweete Iesus! great is thy mercy, wonderfull is thy iustice, in∣finite is thy wisedome, vnsearchable are thy iudgements. Tru∣ly saith the Psalmograph;* 1.41 Vnles the Lord defend the citie, in vaine do they labour that keepe the same. Thou, O God, who causest the red sea to giue place to the Israelites; thou who causest Balaams asse to speake; thou who causest the fire to suspend it force in the burning furnace; thou who causest yron to swimme vpon the water; thou who causest lockes and brasen gates to open voluntarily; thou, thou, O mightie God of Is∣rael, hast enforced Gratian that learned, famous, and zealous papist, to confesse openly for the battering downe of al popery, that the marriage of priests (which the Pope enforceth vppon them vnder paine of damnation euerlasting) is neither forbid∣den by the law of Moses, nor by the lawe of thy holy gospel, nor yet by the law of thine apostles.

* 1.42Caietanus their owne deare Cardinall and learned schoole∣man confirmeth that which Gratian hath already said. These are his wordes;

Nec ratione, nec authoritate probari potest quod absolute lo∣quendo, sacerdos peccet contrahendo matrimonium.* 1.43 Nam nec ordo in quantum ordo, nec ordo in quantum sacer, est impeditiuus matrimonij: siquidem sacer••otium non dirimit matrimonium contractum, siue ante, siue post, seclusis omnibus legibus ecclesi∣asticis, stando tantum ••is, quae habemus à Christo & apostolis.

It can neither bee proued by reason nor yet by authoritie, if we will speake absolutely, that a Priest sinneth by marrying a wife. For neither the order (of priesthood) in that it is order, neither order in that it is holy, is any hindrance vnto matrimo∣nie: for priesthood breaketh not marriage, whether it be con∣tracted before priesthood, or afterward, setting al ecclesiastical lawes aparte, and standing onely to those things, which wee haue of Christ and his Apostles.

Antoninus is consonant vnto Caietane,* 1.44 and writeth in this manner: Episcopatus ex natura sua, non habet opponi ad matri∣monium; the office of a bishoppe of his owne nature, is not op∣posite vnto marriage.

Saint Clement telleth it as a wonder, that the Apostle giuing so many rules and precepts touching matrimonie,* 1.45 should say nothing of the marriage of Priests, if it had beene a thing necessarie: these are his words.

Omnes Apostoli Epistolae, quae moderationem docent & con∣tinentiam, cum & de matrimonio, & de liberorum procreatione, & de domus administratione innumerabilia praecepta contine∣ant, nusquam honestum moderatumque matrimonium prohibu∣erunt.

All the Epistles of the Apostle, which teach sobrietie and continent life, whereas they containe innumerable precepts touching matrimonie, bringing vp of children, and gouernment of house, yet did they no where forbidde honest and sober marriage.

I say fiftly, that to take away the christian libertie from man which God hath granted to man, is a wicked and damnable [ 5] sinne: and therefore doth the holy vessell of God bid vs,* 1.46 to perseuer constantly therein. For after that hee hath exhorted euerie one to continue as God hath appointed, and withal hath shewed the freedome of marriage to bee granted to all, hee

forthwith addeth these words; Ye are bought with a price, be not the seruants of men: as if he had said, to marrie or not to marrie is in your owne election, let therefore neither Iew nor Gentile ouerrule your libertie, let none entangle your consci∣ences, let none bring you into faithlesse bondage, let none im∣pose that heauie yoke vpon your necks, which yee are no way able to beare. Nowe by due application heereof, the vow of single life, at the least the vow annexed to priesthood, which by the law of man, spoileth vs of our christian libertie, must needs be a wicked and damnable vowe.* 1.47 For as the learned papist Victoria hath wel obserued, the gospell is called the law of li∣bertie, because christians after the promulgation of the gospel, are onely bound to the law of nature. And yet our late popes haue made our case more intollerable, then euer was the hea∣uie yoke of the Iewes. For Saint Paul chargeth vs, to stand fast in the libertie wherewith Christ hath made vs free, and not to be intangled againe with the yoke of bondage.* 1.48

I say sixtly, that to abandon Gods holy ordinance is a wic∣ked [ 6] and damnable sinne: and yet is this done as the Pope bluntishly auoucheth, by his tyrannically extorted vowes: for matrimonie contracted after priesthood, is by Gods law true and perfect matrimonie, as is alreadie proued by popish grant; and yet is such matrimonie become no matrimonie by popish vow, as the Pope would enforce vs to beleeue. Therefore by due application, the monasticall vow is a wicked and damna∣ble thing.

I say seauenthly, that euerie vowe must bee de meliori bo∣no, [ 7] of a better good, or of that which is a more holy thing: so writeth their approued doctour and canonized saint Aquinas in his theological Summe:* 1.49 and therfore because the popish per∣petuall vowe of single life is not of such a better good, it must needs be a wicked & vnlawful act. To prooue the saide popish vow, is not of a better good, the reader must diligently obserue these points: first, that it is one thing to speake of virginity in it [ 1] selfe, or as it is compared with wedlocke; and another thing to speake of it as it is perpetually vowed in such & such a person: secondly, that to leade a single life is indifferent to such per∣sons [ 2] as haue the gift of continencie, but not to others: thirdly,

that such intangle themselues in snares by Saint Paules doc∣trine, [ 3] as do not know their future continuance,* 1.50 and for all that make a popish vow of single life for euer: fourthly, that it is a [ 4] great sinne to do any thing which is not of faith,* 1.51 for so saith the apostle. Hereupon it followeth first, that the vow of single life or virginitie, is vnlawfull: the reason is euident, because it is not a better good. I prooue it, by the flat testimonie of Saint Gregorie Nazianzene, a most eloquent and learned father, who was S. Hieroms master, and taught him the holy scriptures, and for his wonderfull knowledge therein was rightly surna∣med Theologus, as recordeth Simeon Metaphrastes, these are his expresse wordes;

Cum in duo haec genera vita nostra omnis diuisa sit,* 1.52 nimirum in matrimonium & caelibatū, (quorum alterum vt praestantius & diuinius, ita maioris quo{que} laboris & periculi alterum humilius quidem & abiectius, caeterum minori periculo obnoxium) vita∣tis vtriusque status incommodis, quicquid in vtroque commodi erat, delegerit, in vnumque coegerit, alterius nempe sublimita∣tem, alterius securitatem, fuerìtque citra supercilium pudica, cae∣libatus commoda matrimonio temperans, ac reipsa ostendens neu∣trum horum suapte natura tale esse, vt nos prorsus vel Deo vel mundo astringat, vel ab his penitus nos separet: Sic quidem vt alterum natura omnino fugiendum sit, alterum prorsus expeten∣dum; verum mentem esse, quae & nuptias & virginitatem re∣cte moderetur, atque vtrumque horum instar materiae cuiuspiam ab artifice ratione componi, & ad virtutem elaborari.

Whereas our whole life is diuided into these two kindes, to wit, into matrimonie and single life, (whereof the one as it is more excellent and diuine, so is it also of greater labour & dan∣ger; the other more base and vile, but subiect to lesse danger) (Gorgonia) eschewing the discommodities of either state, hath chosen and gathered into one, what commoditie soeuer was in both, that is, the sublimitie of the one and the securitie of the o∣ther. She was chaste and nothing proud, tempering the com∣modities of single life with marriage, and shewing in very deede, that neither of the twaine is such of it owne nature, as can eyther ioyne vs wholy to God, or to the worlde, or with∣draw vs wholy from God or from the world. So verily as the

one ought of it owne nature be auoided, and the other to bee required: but that it is the minde that doth rightly moderate both marriage and virginitie, and that either of them must bee by reason composed of the artificer as certaine vnwrought stuffe, & so be made a vertue. These are the words of this great clarke and holy father, in which he hath learnedly described the natures and properties, both of marriage & virginitie; which I haue alleaged at large, because they are worthy of our consi∣deration, and doe exactly explaine this intricate and important matter. Out of them therefore I note first, that as virginitie is [ 1] more excellent one way, so is it more dangerous another way, and so all things considered, there is no preeminence in either [ 2] of the twaine, at least not in virginitie. I note secondly, that as matrimonie is more secure and free from perill, so may it also include al the good that is in virginitie. For as S. Gregorie saith, Gorgonia being a married woman, ioyned the sublimitie & most excellent part of virginitie, with the securitie of hir chast wedlocke. I note thirdly, that by S. Gregories discourse, wed∣lock [ 3] is to be preferred before virginitie. For al the good parts of virginitie may be included in chast wedlocke, not so the good parts of wedlocke in virginitie, that is, virginity is euer subiect to perill, from which wedlocke abideth free. I adde hereun∣to, that the world may be cōtinued without virginity, although wedlocke be necessarie for the same. I note fourthly, that vir∣ginitie [ 4] of it owne nature, can neither ioyne vs to God, nor withdraw vs from God, but is as marriage in that respect. I note fiftly, that neither wedlock nor yet virginity is a virtue of [ 5] it selfe, but a peece of vnwrought stuffe, which then becommeth a vertue, when it is perfectly laboured by the worker: and consequently, that virginitie hath no such perfection and me∣rite as our papists doe ascribe vnto it.* 1.53 Clemens Alexandri∣nus taught this doctrine long before Saint Gregorie.

It followeth secondly vppon the foure obseruations, that if [ 2] virginitie were a better good as it is considered in it selfe, (the contrarie whereof is proued) yet woulde it not follow that it were a better good,* 1.54 as it is vowed of him or hir that hath not y^e gift: the reason is euident, because our sauiour hath appointed such persons, to vse the soueraigne medicine of chast wedlocke:

and so single life is so farre from being a better good in such persons, that it is no good at all, but a flat damnable sin.* 1.55 Be∣sides this, such persons expose themselues to great perill, that is, to commit fornication, because they know not their own fu∣ture state.

It followeth thirdly, that such a vowe cannot be of a better good, because it is not of faith. I proue it, because his act can∣not [ 3] be of faith, who knoweth not whether his act please God or not, yea he contemneth God presuming to do that, which is offensiue in Gods sight. If they answere that they know God will giue them the gift for asking; I replie, that so to say is great presumption: For Christ himselfe saith, that all cannot liue single, but they onely to whom it is giuen:* 1.56 and saint Paul after he had wished euerie man to be as himselfe, added forth∣with; but euerie one hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. Saint Ambrose saith, sola est virginitas quae suaderi potest, imperari non potest;* 1.57 onely vir∣ginitie is a thing which may be counselled, but commanded it cannot be.

I say eightly, that a lawfull and godly vowe must bee of such things as are in our owne power, & that otherwise it is of [ 8] no force at all. For this cause, the vowes that children made were of no force in the law of Moses, so long as they were vn∣der the gouernment of their parents. In like case were the vows of wiues, & of seruants,* 1.58 without the consent of their hus∣bands and masters, yea, all vowes of monks & other religious persons so called, which are made without consent of their ab∣bots, & generals, are for this cause voide, & of no force at all: so write Aquinas, Caietanus, Couarruuias, Nauarrus Syluester,* 1.59 Fumus, Antoninus, and the rest. And yet is it euident, that Chastitie is not in the power of man, for so Christ himself hath taught vs. And it is a friuolous euasion to say, that by prayer it may be obtained. For who knoweth that God will grant his prayer for single life? to whom hath God so promised? Certes, the holy Apostle praied instantly three times, that the pricke of the flesh might be taken from him,* 1.60 and yet could not attaine the same. Neuerthelesse euerie idle Monke, Frier, and Nunne, when they haue presumptuously entangled themselues in the

snare, and that without Gods appointment, nay contrary to his commaundement, will enforce God to yeeld to their de∣sire. In this their impious doctrine, our papistes doubtlesse become flat Pelagians, and either for their pride will not, or for their iust blindnesse cannot see it. For Iulianus the Pelagi∣an taught the selfe same doctrine,* 1.61 and for that was christianly confuted by S. Augustine. These are S. Austens expresse wordes; Dicis enim quod dominum continentiae gloriam liber∣tate electionis honorauerit, dicens, qui potest capere capiat; tan∣quam hoc capiatur non dei munere, sed arbitrij libertate, & ta∣ces quod supra dixerit,* 1.62 non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, sed qui∣bus datum est. Vide quae taceas, quae dicas. Puto quod te pungat conscientia: sed vincit rectum timorem, cum ingerit peruersum pudorem, quoquo modo iam defendenda praecipitata sententia.

For thou saiest, that our Lord hath honoured the glorie of continencie with the freedome of election, saying; He that can take, let him take; as if this were taken not by Gods gift, but by y^e free will of man, & thou concealest that which Christ said before, al men doe not receiue this word, but they to whom it is giuen. Consider well, what thou concealest, and what thou saiest. I verily thinke, that thine own conscience pricketh thee: but when a rash sentence must be defended, it bringeth in per∣uerse shame, which ouercommeth godly feare. Thus saith S. Austen.

Out of these wordes I gather first, that Iulianus held this [ 1] opinion, that euery one might liue a chaste single life, at his [ 2] pleasure. I gather secondly, that for this end hee wrested the [ 3] holy scripture. I gather thirdly, that Iulians owne conscience condemned him for this his foolishe opinion, as S. Austen thought: and so gentle reader, thou seest euidently, that late poperie is become flat Pelagianisme.

But our papists in great furie exclaime bitterly against vs & say, y^t God denieth vs nothing, that is necessary for our salua∣tion: which I willingly admit, telling them withall, that we may attaine eternall saluation, aswell by marriage as by sin∣gle life.* 1.63 And heereunto I adde, that matrimonie is ordained for the saluation of al such as cannot liue a continent single life: and therfore saith the Apostle; if they cannot absteine, let them

marry, for it is better to marry then to burne. Againe, albeit God should graunt their requestes for a time, yet would it not follow that they shuld so continue to the end of their liues.* 1.64 For as S. Paul aduiseth, hee that seemeth to stand, ought to take good heed least he fall.

I say ninthly, that vowes which are not voluntary and free from all coaction, are not only wicked, but of no force at all. So [ 9] write the best popish doctors, Aquinas, Lombardus,* 1.65 Antoni∣nus, Nauarrus, Syluester, Angelus, Fumus and the rest. And who knoweth not that Romish priestes, moonkes and others of that irreligious crew, doe yeeld to the perpetuall vow of single life by coaction, and reluctante conscientia? it is manifest doubt∣lesse in all such as want the supernaturall gift. For since they can neither freely be admitted to the ecclesiasticall ministerie, nor yet professed in the monasterie, and so enioy the expected commodities thereof: at length they condescend by popish re∣straint, to admit the vowe of single life. For howsoeuer God shal bestowe his gift of continent single life, it is decreed before hand, that the yonger brothers of the house of Farnesus, & Co∣lumna, Vrsinus, and such like, shalbe cardinals bound to single life. So is it commonly intended by gentle men, otherwise ver∣tuous and of good worship, that their yonger sonnes shalbe the parsons of such and such fat liuings, wherof themselues are the patrones; although they be as vnfit for the popish annexed vow, as euer was Sardanapalus that effeminate wanton.

I say tenthly, that al vowes are wicked and vnlawful which [ 10] are either of things indifferēt, or of vnlawful things, or against any commandement. So write Antoninus, Fumus, Vignerius,* 1.66 and other approoued papistes. All which neuerthelesse are tru∣ly verified, of the popish vowes of single life. For first, virgi∣nitie is a thing meere indifferent, and no vertue till it be right∣ly [ 1] laboured by the workman, as I haue prooued out of S. Gregorie Nazianzene▪ Secondly, the vowe of virginitie or [ 2] single life in such as want the gift, is against Gods holy com∣mandement expressed not onely in S. Paul,* 1.67 but also in his ho∣ly gospel. For when Christ saith, he y^t can take, let him take; he saith also consequently & virtually, he y^t cannot take, let him not take: as if he had said; whosoeuer can with a good conscience

absteine from wedlocke, let him so doe; but he that cannot, let him marry a wife, because that is expedient for his saluation. S, Paul doth so interpret Christ, in other wordes equiualent. I say vnto the vnmarried, and vnto the widowes, it is good for them if they abide euen as I doe:* 1.68 but if they cannot abstein, let them marry, for it is better to marry then to burn. Thirdly, virginitie vowed as a worke of supererogation, of merite, and perfection, is a wicked and superstitious thing, and yet is this the popishe maner of vowing the same: for thus writeth Viguerius, their learned professor of diuinitie and Dominican frier.* 1.69 Dicitur melius bonum, quia est supererogationis, & quia iuducit ad perfectionē, vt castitas, paupertas, & obedientia. It is called the better good, for that it is a worke of supererogati∣on, and because it bringeth vs to perfection; as chastitie, pouer∣tie, and obedience. Now that none of our workes be perfect, or rightly termed workes of supererogation; I haue prooued copiously, in the fift conclusion of the second chapter of my Motiues. I therfore conclude, that perpetuall vowes of single life in the Romish Church, are vaine, rash, impious, and most execrable in Gods sight.

The perioch of the chapter.

Priestes were married in the olde lawe, and in time of the new testament, in the East church, and in the West: Many popes of Rome, were the sonnes of priests: neither were they bastardes, but legitimate children. Many holy and learned bi∣shops, were married men▪ S. Gregory, S. Spiridion, S. Cheremon, S. Philogonius, S. Eupsichius. S. Paphnutius defended the mar∣riage of priestes publickly in the councell of Nice, and auou∣ched in the spirite of God, that the vse of holy wedlocke was honourable in them, euen in time of their priesthood. S. Chere∣mon and his wife fled togither from persecution, euen at that time when he was Bishop of Nicopolis. Eupsichius was the bi∣shop of Cesarea and forthwith after his marriage martyred for Christ Iesus. The apostles themselues were married, begate children, and carried their wiues about with them, while they preached the gospel abroad in the countrey. Clergie men vsed

the benefite of marriage aswell as secular persons, vntill the vntimely birth of wicked pope Syritius. Bishops, priests, and all religious persons so termed, may most lawfully marry by the lawes of God, and are onely debarred thereof by the odible lawes of man, or rather to vse the apostles wordes, by the detestable doctrine of Satan. All this I haue proued effectually in this present chapter. Yea, the marriage of priestes was vsed without restraint in Germanie, for the space of a thousand seuentie and foure yeares, after Christes sacred incarnation.* 1.70 That is, vntill the daies of the vngratious pope Hildebrand, who termed himselfe Gregorie the seuenth, who crept into the popedome by naughty meanes, in the yeare of Christ 1074. And because I wil charge the Papistes with nothing, but that which they shall neuer be able to denie; their own deare moonk Lambertus Schafnaburgensis, (a man whom their trusty friend Ar. Pontacus Burdegalensis, affirmeth to haue handled the hi∣stories of his time very exactly) shalbe my witnesse against the pope, and popishly prohibited marriages. This writer so au∣thenticall as ye heare, writeth in this maner;

Hildebrandus papa cum episcopis Italiae conueniens iam fre∣quentibus synodis decreuerat,* 1.71 vt secundum instituta antiquo∣rum canonum presbyteri vxores non habeant, habentes aut di∣mittant, aut deponantur;* 1.72 nec quispam omnino ad sacerdotium admittatur, qui non in perpetuum continentiam vitamque cae∣libemprofiteatur. Sequitur; aduersus hoc decretum protinus ve∣hementer infremuit tota factio clericorum, hominem plane haereticum & vesani dogmatis esse clamitans, qui oblitus ser∣monis domini, quo ait, non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, qui po∣test capere capiat; & Apostolus, qui se non continet, nubat; melius est enim nubere quam vri, violenta exactione homines viuere cogeret ritu angelorum, & dum consuetum cursum naturae negaret, fornicationi & immunditiei fraena laxaret.

Pope Hildebrand togither with the Bishoppes of Italie de∣creed in frequent Synodes, that after the ordinaunces of olde canons, priestes shoulde not haue wiues; and that suche as had wiues, shoulde either put them awaie, or bee depriued of their liuinges; and that none shoulde be admitted to the or∣der of priesthoode, but hee that woulde professe the per∣petual

vow of single life. Against this decree the whole faction of the clergy stormed wonderfully, exclaming that Hildebrand was mad & a flat heretike, as who had forgotten the words of the Lord, who saith that all cannot liue continent, and the A∣postle saith, hee that cannot abstaine, let him marrie; for it is better to marrie, then to be burnt; and would violently compel men to liue like angels; and while hee denied the accustomed course of nature, gaue libertie to fornication and vncleannesse. Out of which wordes I note first, that this Lambertus was a [ 1] Monke, and a great patron of poperie, which I proue by two reasons; first, for that hee tearmed it a faction, to withstand Pope Hildebrands wicked decree. Again, because he affirmeth the late prohibition of priests marriage, to bee according to the old canons, which canons for al that, were not before the daies [ 2] of the late Pope Syricius, as I haue proued. I note secondly, that since this Lambert was a great and zealous papist, all must needs be of good credit, that he saith against the papists, and popish doctrine. I note thirdly, that priests were marri∣ed [ 3] in Germanie, aboue one thousand seuentie yeeres after Christ, that is, till the time of this wicked Hildebrand. I note [ 4] fourthly, that it was so strange a thing in those dayes to speake against the mariage of priests in Germanie, that they reputed Pope Hildebrand a madde man and an heretique, for with∣standing the same. And yet such is the fondnesse and mad∣nesse of the common sorte this daye, that they deeme them mad men and heretikes, who speake in defence thereof. I note [ 5] fiftly, that all the learned in Germanie proued the Pope an heretike, by the flatte testimonie of Christ and his Apostle. I [ 6] note sixtly, that by the verdict of all the learned in Germanie, that great and goodly country, Pope Hildebrand did not only enforce them violently against their auncient custome, but withall did open the window to al filthie liuing. Priests were also married in our owne countrey of England, till the late dayes of the saide Pope Hildebrand, if wee will beleeue our owne English Chronicles.

Polidorus another deare friend of the papists, shall tell them what he thinks of the Popes proceeding, touching the marri∣age of priests: thus doth he write.

Illud tamen dixerim, tantum abfuisse, vt ista coacta castitas il∣lam coniugalem vicerit,* 1.73 vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus, plus malireligioni, plus doloris omnib bonis im∣presserit, inusserit, attulerit, quam sacerdotum libidinis labes: proinde forsitan tam è republica christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset; vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimoni•• sacerdotibus restitueretur: quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent, quam se spurcissimè eiuscemodi naturae vitio turpificarent.

Yet this I wil say, that this compelled chastitie (of priests,) was so far frō excelling chastity in wedlock, as no crime what∣soeuer hath brought greater shame to priesthood, more harme to religion, more griefe to all good men, then the vnchast life of priests. Therefore, perhaps it were no lesse necessarie for the publike weale of christendome, then for the order of priesthood, that once againe priests might marrie publikely, that so they might liue honestly & without shame, & not pollute themselues so filthily. This is the iudgemēt of their own popish Polidore, who being an Italian knewe best the Romish fashion. He con∣fesseth plainly as you see, that priests were maried in old time, wishing for great causes that it were so againe. Their great Cardinall Panormitanus giueth so worthie a testimony of this controuersie, as which being well marked, will confoūd al pa∣pists in the world: these be his words; Continentia nō est in cle∣ricis secularibus de substantia ordinis, nec de iure diuino,* 1.74 quia a∣liàs Graeci peccarent, nec excusaret eos consuetudo. Sequitur: & non solum credo potestateminesse ecclesiae hoc condendi sed credo pro bono & salute esset animarum▪ quod esset salubre statutum, vt volentes possint contrahere, quia experiētia docente, contra∣rius prorsus effectus sequitur ex illa lege continentiae, cum hodie non viuant spiritualiter, nec sint mundi, sed maculantur illici∣to coitu cum eorum grauiss▪ peccato, vbi cum propria vxore esset castitas: Continencie in secular priests, is not of the substance of their orders, nor of the law diuine, because otherwise the Greeks should sinne, and their custome could not excuse them: and I doe not onely beleeue that the church can make such a law, but also that such a law were for the good, and for the sal∣uation of soules, that such as would might marrie; because ex∣perience teacheth, that a contrarie effect followeth of that lawe

of continencie, since this day they liue not spiritually, neither are cleane, but are polluted in vnlawfull copulation with their sinne most greeuous, though they might liue chastly with their owne wiues. Out of which wordes of Panormitan, [ 1] (who was their canonist, their Abbot, their archbishop, their cardinall,) I note first, that the prohibition of marriage in se∣cular priestes, is neither of the substance of the ministerie nor by the law of God, but onely enforced by the law of man. I note secondly, that priestes marriage may be honourable and honest [ 2] chastitie. I note thirdly, that the prohibition of priestes marri∣age, [ 3] is against their soules health, as which causeth the priests to sin damnably. Out of which notes I inferre this memora∣ble corollary, that the prohibition of priests marriage is against Gods law, against the health of mens soules, and against the good of the common weale, and that by constant popish doctrin. So then, the pope is neuer able, to purge himself of his shame∣ful dealing.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Leuit. 11.44.
• * 1.2

  1. Cor. 7. vers 32.
• * 1.3

  ••••ngle life, how it is better.
• * 1.4

  C. 32. q. 4. c▪ 7.
• * 1.5

  Nazianz. in o••at. ••un••b. pro patre orat. 28. tom. 2.
• * 1.6

  In epitaph. Gor∣goniae orat. 25.
• * 1.7

  Chrys. in 1. Tim. homil. 10.
• * 1.8

  August. in quaest. mix. q. 12. in fine.
• * 1.9

  Clemens Alex. lib. 3. stromat.
• * 1.10

  Niceph. lib. 11. cap. 19.
• * 1.11

  Amber. in cor. cap. 7. prope ••••∣dem.
• * 1.12

  1. Cor. 7. vers. 5.
• * 1.13

  Leuit. 10. v. 9.
• * 1.14

  1. Kin. 21. v. 3.4.
• * 1.15

  Leu. 15. per 〈◊〉〈◊〉 See cap. 21 22.
• * 1.16

  Exod. 30. v. 7.8.
• * 1.17

  1. Cor. 7. v. 15
• * 1.18

  Conc. Agath cap. ••8.
• * 1.19

  Anno Dom 439
• * 1.20

  Dist. 27. cap. 2. diaconus.
• * 1.21

  This is a whip to all poperie.
• * 1.22

  Conc. Tolet. 1. Can. 17.
• * 1.23

  Psal. 76 v. 11. Esaia••, 19. v. ••••.
• * 1.24

  Iudg. 11. v. 31.39 Mat 14. v. 7 10. Act. ••3. v. ••1.
• * 1.25

  Bernard de modo bene viuendi, Serm 62. to. 1. p. 1699.
• * 1.26

  Isidor. ap. Grat. C. 22. q. 4. in m••lis.
• * 1.27

  Beda apud Grat. C. 22. q. 4, si aliquid.
• * 1.28

  Ambr. lib. de ••••∣fic. cap. 12.
• * 1.29

  Aug. apud Gr•••• C. 22. q. 4. c••••. magna.
• * 1.30

  Soter in epist ad episcop. Italiae to. 1. conc. C. 22. q. 4. ••i ali∣quid.
• * 1.31

  The replie.
• * 1.32

  The answer
• * 1.33

  Gregor. hom. 24. in euange.
• * 1.34

  1. Cor. 7. vers. 2. Nazianz. in lau∣dem. Gorgo. 2.
• * 1.35

  Aquin. 22. q· 64. ••r. 5.
• * 1.36

  Deut. 6. ver. 16.
• * 1.37

  1. Cor. 7. ver. 2.
• * 1.38

  Quarto principa∣liter.
• * 1.39

  1. Cor. 7. v. 25. Mat. 19, v. 11.12
• * 1.40

  C. 26, q 2, sor••▪
• * 1.41

  Psa. 127. verse 1. Hebr. 11. ve. 29. Num. 22. vers. 28 Dan. 3. verse 25 4. Reg. 6. verse 6. Act. 12. ver. 7, 10
• * 1.42

  Caiet. in quod∣libet cont. Luth▪
• * 1.43

  Vignerius is of the verie same o∣pinion, De differentii•• voti. §. 5. ver. 14.
• * 1.44

  Antonin. cap. 3. Tit. 1. cap. 21. §. ••
• * 1.45

  Clemens Alex∣and. lib. •• stromat
• * 1.46

  1. Cor. 7. v. 23▪
• * 1.47

  Victor. demur. sect. 2. relect. 7. p. 280.
• * 1.48

  Galat. 5. verse 1.
• * 1.49

  Aquin. 22. q. 11.
• * 1.50

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.51

  Rom. 14. ver. 23.
• * 1.52

  Gregor. Nazian. orat. 25. in lau∣dem Gorgonia tom. 2.
• * 1.53

  Clemens. Alex∣ander. lib. 3. stro∣mat.
• * 1.54

  The disparitie ought to be no∣ted well.
• * 1.55

  Mat. 19. vers. 11.12. 1. Cor. 7. verse 2.
• * 1.56

  Mat. 19 verse 11
• * 1.57

  1. Cor. 7 verse. 7. Ambros. exhort. ad virgines. tom 1. p. 106.
• * 1.58

  Numer. 30. per∣totum.
• * 1.59

  Mat. 19. verse. 11.
• * 1.60

  2. Cor. 12. v. 7, 8, 9,
• * 1.61

  The papistes are become Pelagi∣ans.
• * 1.62

  August. cont. Iulian: Pelagian. lib. 5. ca. 7. tom. 7.
• * 1.63

  1. Cor. 7. v. 9.
• * 1.64

  1. Cor. 7. verse 12
• * 1.65

  Aquinas 22. q. 88 ar. 2. corp. Lomb. in 4. dist. 38. Anton. p. 2. tit. 11 c. 1. §. 1. Fumus, de vo••o, §. 1. Syluest. de voto primo. §. 1.
• * 1.66

  Vigner. de virtu•• inst. c. 5. § 5. v. ••4. Ant. & Fum. v••i supr.
• * 1.67

  1. Cor. 7. v. ••. Mat. 19. v. 1••
• * 1.68

  1. Cor. 7. v. 8.9.
• * 1.69

  Viguer. vbi supr.
• * 1.70

  Anno Dom. 1074.
• * 1.71

  Lambert. Sch••••∣nab Chron.
• * 1.72

  Anno. Dom. 1074.
• * 1.73

  Polidorus. lib. 5▪ cap. 4. in fide.
• * 1.74

  Panormita••. de clerie. co••••ugati••. cap. cum Olim.