Page 48
CHAP. XXI. Three ANSWERS of the Pastors and Professors of Geneva, and of some of the Ministers who were deputed unto the National Synod of Lions, 1563, and impowered by it▪ to make these fol∣lowing Returns unto the Questions propounded to them.
The first Question was about Marriage, viz. Whether Promise of Marri∣age might be dissolved by the mutual Consent of the engaged Parties?
- Article. I. WE cannot judge otherwise, but that the Reverence which all ought to have for Marriage, should keep the Parties, who have pledged their Troth to each other, from breaking it: For sith it is as Solomon stileth it, The Covenant of GOD, it is not of the same nature with other Bargains and Agreements, which depend upon the wills of Men: and we cannot but believe, that this was the Mind and Intendment of our Lord, when lie spake these words, Whom God hath joyned together, let not man put asunder; tho' as yet there had been no carnal knowledge of each other. Therefore the Pro∣mise is Sacred, and must be held Irrevocable: For, God having punished the Fornication of a Man with a betrothed Maid, as if it were the very Crime of Adultery, he doth thereby sufficiently demonstrate, that the Maid was obli∣ged as if she were married; for Adultery presupposeth Marriage.
- Article. II. And whereas some Inconveniencies are alledged, we answer, That they will as well hold against them that are in Age as against Minors: for it often∣times falls out that they do as badly agree as Cats and Dogs; and yet they cannot be suffered to quit one another, because neither of them are now at liberty for so doing.
- Article. III. The Opinions of Lawyers in this case is of no force; because they do allow of Divorces between Husbands and Wives: Which yet is directly con∣trary to the Ordinance of God.
- Article. IV. And that Gloss put upon those words, To be joyned together; i. e. to have accomplished Marriage, ought not to be admitted: And the Judgment of St. Paul is urged to no purpose, 1 Cor. 6. 16. for when the Apostle saith, that the Fornicator is one Body with the Harlot, he useth only a Comparison, from which there cannot be deduced any true Definition. For it is other∣wise certain, that this Sentence cannot be properly avouched of Fornication, because God hath honoured Marriage only with this Priviledge, to make two Bodies lawfully conjoyned to be but one. But as we said, St. Paul, that he might aggravate the sin of Fornication, alledgeth this Passage of Moses's to conclude, That a man is separated from Jesus Christ, whenas he defiles and po∣lutes his body in coition with an harlot.
- Article. V. And although the betrothed Maid be under the power of her Parents till such time as her Husband is intrusted with her; yet this must admit of an Exception, viz. That it do not derogate from the Rights of the espou∣sed Husband, and that the Father be not compelled against his will to re∣sign