Concubinage and poligamy disprov'd, or, The divine institution of marriage betwixt one man, and one woman only, asserted in answer to a book, writ by John Butler, B.D. for which he was presented as follows : We the grand jury, sworn to enquire for the body of the city of London, on Wednesday, the first day of December, 1697, present one John Butler, for writing and publishing a wicked pamphlet : wherein he maintains concubinage to be lawful, and which may prove very destructive to divers families, if not timely suppress'd.

THE Epistle Dedicatory. TO John Butler, B. D. Asserter of the Lawfuluess of Concubinage.

IT is now become usual for Authors to set off their Performances, by dedicating them to Ex∣traordinary Patrons; and therefore I hope you will not blame me for Dedicating the following Sheets to your felf. Your Book, for any thing I know, considering the Scope of it, and the Functi∣on of the Author, is unpresidented. You have been at a great deal of Pains, to write an Apology for the Modish Practice of keeping a Miss. The pre∣valency

of the Custom had already abated much of it's Odium; so that there wanted nothing but your finishing Stroke, to commend it to us from the Pulpit as Sacred and Holy, which you have Generously done in your 34th Page, &c. But, good Sir, to which of the Saints will you turn, or whom shall we fol∣low as a Patron of your Reform'd Concubinage? Adam neither had, nor was allowed any Concu∣binc; and the first that we find upon Divine Re∣cord to have been Guilty of Poligamy, was La∣mech, one of Cain's Posterity. I am afraid that the Holiness of the first Practitioner will scarcely be able to Hallow the Practice. If we come to Abraham, the Father of the Faithful, we don't find that he made use of any Concubine till his Wife advis'd him to it; and that she did not neither, till she her self was past Childbearing, by the Ordinary Course of Nature. So that if we must be resiricted to the same Conditions, the Gal∣lants will scarcely thank you for your Kindness.

In the next place, you leave us mightily in the Da••k, not only as to the time when, but likewise as to the Number of Concubines we may Lawfully 〈◊〉〈◊〉. We don't find that Abraham had above one at a time, yet his Grandson Jacob had two or three: Now, pray, Sir, which of the two must be our Standard? Or what is to be the Rule of the Reform'd Concubinage you propose? Abra∣ham and Jacob had the Consent of their Wives, and the first of them sent away his Miss, and kept his Wife. But; for you, Sir, if we may believe Martha Perkins, you have sent away your Wife,

and kept your Miss. Pardon me, Sir, if I take Miss and Concubine to be Synommous Terms; for I am not Master of Logick enough to distinguish betwixt them, according to your Description of the latter.

But the Liberty of Poligamy, or Concubinage, is not the only thing wherein you have vindicated the Original Right of Mankind; You have put a Greater Obligation upon the Age still, by making every man a Judg in his own Cause; nay, and an Executioner too; for you have not only adjudg'd Martha Perkins to be an unjust Desertrice, but have dispos'd of her Property at your own hand, by taking Mary Tomkins into her Bed, without Ap∣plication either to Church or State, or receiving any Approbation from them. So that it's no Fault of yours, if all Mankind don't, according to your Laudable Example, shake off all Subjection to them, and re-assume their Primitive Liberty.

But at the same time, Sir, how such Practises can agree with the Laws of God, and the Laws of the Land, to which you ought to conform your self as a Christian, and a Subject, you would do well to inform us. You must not think to satisfie the Curiosity of this Age, by referring us to the disputed Practises of the Patriarchs, which were not found∣ed on any Positive Command, nor yet to some In∣stances of Concubinage found among Christians in Constantine's time, or before; nor to the ad∣vancement of the Issue of Concubines now and then to the Chief Seats of Civil Government; Nay, nor to God's making use of the Children of Con∣cubinage

sometimes to be Instruments of his Glory. None of these are sufficient to satisfie our Rea∣son, and much less our Conscience, which in mat∣ters of this Importance, expects to be assur'd by Revelation.

God allow'd but one Wife to Adam when the World was to be Peopled at first; nor any more but one Wife a peice to Noah and his Sons, when it was to be Peopled a second time. And the reason of this was as we are inform'd by Malachi, Because he would have a Holy Seed, which insinuates strongly, That Concubinage is unholy. Solo∣mon, tho Guiltiest of all Mankind yet durst not venture to teach the Lawfulness of Concubinage according to your Practice; but tho he had been polluted thereby himself, gives precepts full of pu∣rity to others, advising Them to rejoyce with the Wife of their Youth, and to let her Breasts satisfy them at all times, Prov. 5. 15. Nor is there throughout the whole Scripture more Emphatical and Passionate Exhortations to be∣ware of Strange Women, and more Lively De∣scriptions of Whoredom, and the danger of it, then is to be found in the Book of the Proverbs. The Pen-man having suffered Shipwrack on those Shelves himself, was therefore the more fit to paint out the danger of them to others, which he has accordingly done; so far was he from recommend∣ing his own Practice to others, as you do,

It is also certain that our Saviour and his Apo∣stles have commanded, that every Man should have his own Wife, and every Woman her

own Husband. Nor is there the least Vestige of Concubinage to be found allowed in the New Testament. So that it is exceeding strange that you should stretch your Commission, and wrest Texts to teach us Concubinage, especially when the Age has more need of a Curb than a Spur as to that matter.

But above all things in your Book, those Blas∣phemous Reflections upon the Conception and Birth of our blessed Saviour choak me most. Had you no other way to defend your own practice but by such profane Allusions? Don't the Scriptures teach you, That there is no such thing as Marrying and giving in Marriage in the Kingdom of Heaven? Can there be any A∣nalogy betwixt the blessed Virgins Immaculate and Wonderful Coneeption, and the Pregnancy of others before Marriage? Is there any simi∣litude betwixt that which is done by the Om∣nipotence of God, without any possible Concur∣rence of humane Corruption, and the practice of Concubinage? Really, Sir, this Notion appears to me so very foul and horrid, that I think there can be no better Advice given to you than that which the Apostle gave to Simon Magus, Acts 8. 22. Repent therefore of this thy Wicked∣ness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thy Heart may be forgiven thee. Had you taken heed unto your self, and to your Doctrine, according to the Apostle's Advice to Timothy, you would never have been guilty of such a Pra∣ctice, nor have advanced any such Principles.

In the next place, Sir, let me ask you, What was it you saw in Concubinage, or what migh∣ty Profit have you reap'd thereby your self, that you do with so much Zeal recommend it to others? Had you but look't into History, ei∣ther Sacred or Profane, you would have found that the Natural Effects of it were, the breach of the Peace of Families, Quarrels, Murders, and all manner of Ʋncleanness. It had its rise from Cains Family, and you know that he was of that wicked one; Murder and Whoredom had both of ••••em their Original from the same vile Parent, and Ʋncleanness and Hatred of true Religion, have always since gone hand in hand, as you may see abundantly proved in the Book call'd, Gods Judgment against Whoring.

As to your own Family, You own that the Chil∣dren of your first Marriage are Rebellious and Disobedient, that they have offered Violence to your own Person, and continue to oppress and slander you, that your first Wife hath deserted you, [as you say] because you disinherited her Eldest Son a Papist, and [as she says] because you had got your Maid with child before-hand, and you add that she and her Sons have unjustly possess'd themselves of your Inheritance. These, and such as these, are the Blessed effects of your own Concubinage, and yet you are so good Na∣tur'd as to recommend it to others. Let's suppose now your children by Mary Tomkins, come also to years of Maturity, will not they have the same Rancour against Martha Perkins and her

Children, as she and hers have against them? Will not both Broods be enrag'd to find their respective Mothers treated as an Harlot, and is not this the Natural Result of your Concubinage.

Then as to the Opinion that the World enter∣tains of you, It cannot be suppos'd to be very fa∣vourable. The worst of Men, abominate a Leud Clergy-man, and you own your self that you are Accounted such an one, and let me tell you that your Defence will be far from healing your Repu∣tation, there's no way left you for that, but to confess and forsake. You will not find that Men of Sense and Probity will take your Arguments as unanswerable; and tho some of your Brethren you say, have giv'n no reply to what you return'd as an Answer to their Reproof, all others will not therefore think themselves obliged to keep silent. The Cause concerns the welfare of our Souls and Bodys, Posterities and Families too much, to let you pass without a Publick Answer, tho hitherto you have escap'd any Publick Censure more than the Presentment of the Grand Jury; The Author of this Reply, has no Personal Acquaintance with you, nor pick against you, and if in some Places, you find that he hath treated you sharply, it's no more than what he thought the Cause requir'd. It seem'd indeed a sort of a Paradox to him, that a Man should pretend to so much Conscience of keeping an Oath to a Temporal Prince, from which his Abdication and the Causes of it, absolv'd him in the Opinion both of Church and State, and yet make no scruple of breaking his Marriage Vow to

God and his Wife, by taking another into he•• Bed before his Cause was heard and much less de∣termin'd. That he himself should take upon him to be Judge in his own Cause, and yet not allow the Supreme Power of the Nation to be Judge in theirs against a Prince, whom he owns to have Acted Tyrannically, by erecting an High Commission Court to supersede the Proceed∣ings of all others, and to Act in favour of Persons Popishly Inclin'd. That Mr. Butler should allow Desertion in his own Wife, to be a suffi∣cient Cause of Divorce, and of Marrying another, and yet scruple to own that Tyranny and Deser∣tion, are not sufficient to dissolve the Contract betwixt King and People, and to justify their set∣ting another upon the Throne; Says, that he is a very partial Casuist, and gives the Reader very much cause to suspect his sincerity.

In the next place let me ask you, what mighty blessings they are which the Turks reap from their Poligamy? You cannot pretend that it hath en∣creased their Off-spring, and made them Populous. For daily experience teaches us, that▪ their Num∣bers are now very much exhausted; which is the Natural consequence of Poligamy at last, tho it may prove otherwise for an Age or two at first. The reasons of this are obvious. For,

1. Too much Venery consumes a Mans Bones and Flesh, and the Issue of such Consumptive and Incontinent Parents, will in time enfeeble the whole Nation.

2. A Mans making use of more Wives than one at a time, occasions the Women to think that they ought to have the same Liberty; How many unhappy Instances does our own Nation afford of this, that the Mans going astray, hath made the Woman take that same Course, which all Men own to be destructive to Propagation, and must in time diminish the Number of People?

3. When a Man hath such a Numerous Fami∣ly as he cannot sufficiently provide for; then all of them come to be neglected, and to want the necessary conveniencies of Life, which shortens their Days, and Breeds Nasty and Contagious Di∣stempers amongst them, as is evident from the frequent Plagues amongst the Turks, whereof this is assign'd as one Principal Cause, and its ap∣parent enough amongst the children of common Beggars, and the Poorest Sort, many of whom Perish by Nasty Diseases, which renders them Loathsome to the Eyes and Noses of those that walk the Streets.

And if Poligamy were allow'd in this Na∣tion according to your Proposal, we should quickly find that our greatest Estates would be much too small to maintain the numerous Offspring of Persons of Quality, according to their Birth; so that they must quickly be reduced to Misery, and the Original Families suddenly perish. For the Children of one Wife would think they had as good right to be provided for out of their Father's Estates, as those of another; Which if they were, it would speedily dismember the largest

Patrimonies that any of our Nobility enjoy and if they were not, it would occasion endless Quarrels and Murders betwixt Brethren and Sisters. If you had but looked into our antient History, and consider'd what a Miserable, Bruitish, and Defenceless People our Ancestors were, at the time of the Roman Invasion, when Poligamy was allowed amongst them, you would quickly find what I say to be true.

You must also know, that the Imperial Laws condemn Poligamy, Lib. 9. Tit. 9. Leg. 18. Eum qui habet duas Uxores comitatur Infa∣mia, i. e. He is counted infamous that hath two Wives. Dioclesian made a Law likewise against having of two Wives: Cod. Lib. 5. Tit. 5. Leg. 2 And the Christian Emperors, Theodosius, Arcadius, and Honorius, would not suffer the Jews that lived in the Roman Empire, to have many Wives, as may be seen by their Laws, Cod. de judaei. Leg. So un∣justly have you appealed to the Practice of the Antient Christians, either Magistrates or Mini∣sters, as Patrons of Concubinage. You know likewise that St. Hierome condemns Lamech as the first, Qui unam costam distraxit in duas, who made two Ribs of one.

Nor can it be unknown to you, that Clergy∣men committing Adultery, were for ever re∣moved from their Ministery, Distinct. 81. C. 11, 12. That the Ancyran Synod imposed Seven Years Pennance upon the Adulterer; and that the Council of Neocaesarea De∣creed,

that if a Minister's Wife fell into Adultery, he should dismiss her, or else leave his Ministry, and by the Eliberine Council he was denied for ever the Communion of the Church, if he did not dismiss her, and that it was likewise Decreed, that the Adulterer should not be suf∣fer'd to Marry with the Adultress; yet you own that you had just Cause to suspect your Wife, and can prove several suspicious Tokens of h••r Ʋnfaithfulness, p. 18. and yet never offer'd to put her away: And she accuses you of committing Adultery with her Maid before she left you, and yet you took your Maid into her Bed, without any Application either to Church or State, notwithstanding the depen∣ding Controversies betwixt you and your Wife. These are suspicious Tokens of an Inordinate Love; for which, had you but made use of the first and second Remedies prescribed by the Heathens, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abstinence and Time, you had been in no danger of the third Remedy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an Halter, though it had been better you should have had a Mill∣stone hang'd about your Neck, and been thrown into the middle of the Sea, than to have gi∣ven such Offence as you have done to the Church of God.

Nor can you be ignorant neither, that many satisfying Answers have been given to your Argu∣ments, from the Polygamy of the Patriarchs and Jews: As 1. That if there had been any Relax∣ation of the Law of Monogamy, instituted by

God in Paradice, it would have been by a written Law and Express Scripture. 2. That if this had been allowed for Procreation, it had been most Necessary to be granted unto Adam in the beginning of the World, and to Noah in revi∣ving and re-peopling the World. And 3. That Polygamy, or marrying of many Wives, render∣ed Solomon unfit for Procreation, as is evi∣dent by his small Posterity. And, 4. That the Law of Monogamy being revived by Christ and his Apostles, and brought back to the first Institution, was to take place, not for the Time past, but for the Time to come, as all other posi∣tive Laws of Natione do: So that though Po∣lygamy might be then tolerated as an Infirmi∣ly, for a time, in those which were newly con∣verted; yet it cannot be so now.

I shall add that if the first institution of Mar∣riage, between one Man an•• one Woman at a time be once broken, there's no other Limitation to be found in the Scriptures; whence it follows, that if more be allowed then one, a Man may have as many as he pleases, So that it will be hard to bring it to a Medium. Some perhaps will plead for King Charles II's. Number as a Standard, and others it may be, will be satisfied with no fewer than Solomon, and so our Nobility and Gentry (if your Project take place) should have Kennels of Concubines, as now they have of Hounds. And what Inconveniences this might occasion, you may know by your own Incontinence, those Poor Wo∣men must loose their Youth, and Teeming time,

without any hopes of having Nature satisfied; For being another Mans Property, no body else must meddle with them, and so they must either burn and languish, or commit Whoredom, nay, perhaps bestiality. Their own Stallion (for Hus∣band he is not) must speedily be either enfeebled, or neglect some or all of them, as we find in A∣hasuerus, who did not call for his Beautiful and Beloved Esther in Thirty Days together. And the rest of his Concubines were never brought to him except he delighted in any of them, and call'd her by Name, yet they were shut up and kept close by the Keeper of the Women. So that here was a Great Number of Females rendred useless for Propagation, besides the Tentations they were ex∣posed to, of being base with Eunuchs and their own nearest Relations.

Now, Sir, pray consider whether these and the other Reasons that you will meet with in this Book, be not much more solid against Con∣cubinage, than any that you have advanc'd for it. And if your Conscience be convinced, be not ashamed to Retract what you have so unad∣visedly writ upon this Head. St. Augustine, who was much a Learneder Divine, and better Man than you can pretend to be, did not think it unbecoming him to Recant his Errors, and to take shame to himself for his Youthful Lusts; but Yours can scarcely pass under that denominati∣on, who went into your Maids Bed, after ha∣ving Lived Forty Years with a Wife.

Your Loose Book hath done a World of Mis∣chief in the Nation; and therefore it concerns you, as you would have the pardon of God, and his Church for the same, to make your Confessi∣on and Recantation as publick as your Crime; Which that you may do, is the worst that the Author of this Book wishes you.