there bee no certaine lawe, to say: Thou shalt giue so much in almes, yet notwithstanding, all men must knowe, that they are bounde by the worde of God, to releeue their neighbours, and to extende their liberalitie towardes them, as farre as they are able. Thus yee see in effect what wee haue to beare in minde vppon this place.
Nowe if this doctrine were well obserued, thinges woulde go better than they doe. But we [ 10] see nowadayes poore folke giuen to such craft and malicious wilinesse, as woulde loath a man to see it: they are become little better than theeues. A man cannot haue fieldes and vine∣yardes in the countrie abroade, but they are al∣wayes deceiued of some parte of them, and that in such wise, as if they were in the Lande of their enemies. And why? Because the poore dispence with themselues, and beleeue that they haue some vantage aboue the rich to pilfer [ 20] away and to take by stealth, whatsoeuer they can come by. And what say they? O it is of the goods of GOD which wee take. Well then seeing it is Gods, it ought to bee accounted ho∣ly. Therefore thou robbest GOD when thou pilferest away an other mans goods: thou go∣est to catch that out of Gods hande, which hee had kept in store for an other. Againe wee see what crueltie there is in riche men, howe they woulde faine swallowe vp the whole world, [ 30] howe nothing can suffice them. And therefore their wealth oftentimes is not blessed of GOD, because it is not in his safegarde, nor kept vn∣der his protection. Wee see howe GOD tel∣••eth vs, that wee must vse such gentlenesse towardes our neighbours, as that euerie man must employ himselfe to releeue those which are in neede and necessitie. If men woulde doe so, doubtlesse GOD woulde holde their goods vnder his protection, and himselfe would [ 40] keepe them: but because rich men vse rather crueltie than bountifulnesse towardes their neighbours, it occasioneth poore men to pilfer away all that they can get: because the rich ab∣use their goods in such sorte, as men see. Ne∣uerthelesse this is not here written in vayne. All ought to followe the lesson and the warning which is here vsed, to wit, that the poore bee somewhat releeued, and that they wrong not the riche, that they robbe them not of [ 50] their goods, and that when they are hyred, they so employ themselues and bestowe their labour in such wise, that it may be to the pro∣fite of the maister which payeth them their hyre.
Let vs nowe come vnto that which Moses ad∣deth touching diuorcementes. Hee saith, That if a man hath married a wife which afterwardes dis∣pleaseth him for some blemishe which shee hath, hee may cast her off, so that he giue her a bill of diuorce∣ment. [ 60] And hauing so cast her off hee may neuer take her againe, if shee marrie her selfe againe vnto an o∣ther.
Nowe let vs note that this bill which the man gaue in this case, was to the credite of the wife, and to the discredite of the husbande. For it declared thus much: I haue maried a wife and shee displeaseth mee. And why? For some blemishe which shee hath in her bodie, or for some qualitie which is in her. The husbande then declared hereby that hee was a faithlesse and forsworne man. For why? Hee tooke a wife on condition to haue her companie all the time of his life, and nowe hee casteth her off. See howe through his fault, such an holy bond as marriage is broken. Yea but there was some thing amisse in her. Oh, but thy selfe wouldest gladlie bee borne withall. And thy wife was committed vnto thee on that condition, that shee shoulde bee a part of thine owne person: and thou cuttest thy selfe as it were in the midst. If thine arme bee weake, wilt thou cause it to bee cut off at the first choppe? If there bee any contagious disease which might empoyson the whole bodie, surelie thou were better leese one member, than thy whole life. But when a fin∣ger is ill fashioned, and a man seeth something, which I knowe not howe, is not so feate as he coulde wishe, must hee therefore mangle his bodie? Verilie it were against nature. Euen so an husbande was not to bee excused, when he deliuered in this sorte such a bill vnto his wife. The thing tended nothing to her discredit, but it serued rather to shewe that shee was in∣nocent, and that men shoulde knowe that shee was not put away either for adulterie, or for a∣nie other lewde deede: but only for ye wayward∣nesse of the husbande beeing a crooked ••urlie fellowe, and such a one as desired to haue his lust satisfied. Nowe it is saide in the ende, That when the husbande hath thus diuorced hir wife, and shee bee maried vnto an other, her first husband may not take her againe. For this were an abhominati∣on before the Lorde. In this lawe wee haue first of all to note, that when GOD thus permit∣ted diuorcementes, it was not to dispence with the thing, to make it lawfull: but because hee meant not (as touching ciuill order of gouern∣ment) to exercise any rigour against the Iewes. For yet for all this, the lawe of marriage re∣mayned in his full force, and (as it hath beene aboue handled) ciuill order of gouernment is not to preiudice the tenne commaundementes or to chaunge anie thing in them. For in the two Tables GOD hath comprised a perfect rule of life, and a certaine and infallible rule whereunto wee must order our selues. Nowe may the rule of ciuill gouernment chaunge a∣nie thing in these tenne commaundementes? No. For yee see howe we ought to liue. But the rule of ciuill gouernment is an ayde hereto, not to shewe vs any perfection, but to leade vs thereto, to the intent that men might be bridled from ouerflowing their banks too farre, and that the wicked which by their good will woulde not obey, might bee forced by constraint.
Yee see then whereto the rule of ciuil go∣uernment serueth. But yet for all that, the lawe abideth in his full force. Agayne, in