An answer, to a little book call'd Protestancy to be embrac'd or, A new and infallible method to reduce Romanists from popery to Protestancy

SECT. III. The Proofs our Adversary brings out of Scripture for the Marry∣ing of Church-Men, are ei∣ther willfull, or Ignorant mistakes of the Word of God.

MArriage in the purest Age was not forbid∣den to Ecclesiasticks, sayes our Adversa∣ry, which he proves by this passage, 1 Tim. 3. v. 2. A Bishop must be blamless the Hus∣band of one Wife.

Answer. First, was not St. Paul a Bishop? Had he a Wife when he said, 1 Cor. 7. v. 8. I say to those who are not Married, its good for them if they remain so, even as I? The sense then of that place is, that as St. Paul would have the Church Widow to be the Wife of one Husband, or to have been only Married once, 1 Tim. 5. v. 9. So he would have a Bishop to be the Husband of one Wife, or to have been only once Married. Other∣wayes what does St. Paul say here particular to a Bishop, have other Men two Wives?

Note, in the Birth of the Church it was hard to find among new Converts, Men of Maturity, for the Government of a Bishoprick, who had not been once Married, especially at Candy, of which Church St. Paul speaks here to Timothy, because, as Stra∣bo

writes, L. 10. They had an Antient Law by which all of their Republick were forced from their very Youth to Marry.

Again, to prove that Ecclesiasticks may Marry, he brings this passage of St. Paul, Marriage is Ho∣nourable in all and the Bed undefil'd, Hebr. 13. v. 4.

Answer. First, the same St. Paul says, 1 Cor. 7. v. 38. He who gives his Virgin in Marriage does well, but he that gives her not in Marriage does better. And 1 Cor. 7. v. 1. 'Tis good for a Man not to touch a Woman.

The former passage is then to be understood, thus,

Marriage is Honourable in all who may Law∣fully Marry, but not between Father and Daughter: Brother and Sister: In Church-Men who have vow'd Chastity, in Church-Widows, who being admitted to the Service of the Church, upon their resolution of not Marrying, according to St. Paul, 1 Tim. 5. v. 11. Incur Damnation if they Marry, because they cast of their first Faith, as the Apostle speaks, to wit, to CHRIST.

Secondly, the Greek Text has Timios o gamos en pasi, that is, Honourable Marriage in all so where, Protestants without ground add is, Catholicks with ground add be in the imperative mood, and so it imports,

First, an Exhortation to those who are Married that they live Faithful to one another not Disho∣nouring by Incontinency their Marriage, but keep∣ing their Bed undefil'd. But why will the Apostle that Marriage be Honourable in all keeping their Bed undefil'd? Because as he presently adds, A∣dulterers God will Judge. Thus you see Catholicks have a ground to supply the sentence not with is, but with be, or let it be.

Secondly, To those who desire to Marry, that they do not offer to Marry, when they know they are not free to Marry, being engag'd to others, or having an Impediment, and so make their Marri∣age (when the Impediment is discover'd,) Dis∣honourable. However our Latin and English Cath. Text have neither is nor be; but Honourabile conu∣bium in omnibus, Honourable Marriage in all, con∣form to the Greek Original Text.

In the third place, to justifie the Marriage of Church-Men who have Vow'd Chastity, he brings what St. Paul sayes to Tim. 4. v. 3. That forbiding to Marry is a Doctrine of Devils, where he speaks of Manicheans, Encratists and Marcionists, and o∣thers of that Cabal, as St. Chrysostom remarks in his 12. Hom. upon that passage, it is quite another thing to forbid absolutely to Marry, then to forbid only those who have Vow'd Chastity to Marry.

The Catholick Church does not forbid to Marry, but only forbids to break a Vow made to God. I think no Body will say that it is a Doctrine of De∣vils, to fulfill what one has solemnly promised to God. The thing being Lawful in it self, Deut. 23. v. 21. When thou shalt Vow a Vow to the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slak to pay it, for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee. Now the Ca∣tholick Church shows she Honours Marriage more then Protestants, because she looks upon it as a Sa∣crament which Protestants do not.

His instance of Zacharie sayes nothing against us, for we do not deny, that the Priests of the Old Law Married, but only we say, they did not use their Wives those dayes their turn was to Sacrifice, Luke c. 1. v. 23, 24. And seeing our Priests must Sacrifice every day, they ought to abstain from that Action so remote from the Spirit, and dulling it in

order to Divine thoughts at that time that our mind ought to be (sursum corda) raised above our sen∣ses, hence Origen said, Hom. 23. in num. It seems to me that it belongs only to him to offer the conti∣nual Sacrifice, who has dedicated himself to a conti∣nual and perpetual Chastity.

In fine, his last passage is from the 1 Cor. 7. v. 2. Let every Man have his own Wife, (had those who were not defil'd with Women Rev 14. v. 3. every one their own Wife?) makes nothing to prove that a Church-Man, who has made a Vow of Chastity may Marry, first, because St. Paul sayes, 1 Cor. 7. v. 27. Art thou loosen from a Wife seek not a Wife.

Secondly, because there is no Woman who was his or the Church-Man's own Wife. To understand the meaning of this passage, you must know, the Corinthians asked St. Paul whither being converted they were not bound to leave their Wives, yet In∣fidels, as some told them they ought to do, St. Hieron. L. 1. contra Iovin. cap. 4. To this St. Paul answers, no, but bids every one have his own Wife to whom he was Married in his Infidelity. He adds, let the Husband (viz. now converted) render his Debt to his Wife (tho' an Infidel) and the Wife al∣so (Converted) mutually to the Husband (yet an Infidel.)

I would now desire Protestants to reflect, that these passages brought by our Adversaries to prove their Tenets have no force for their intent and pur∣pose, when they are read in their proper places, and in the aim of the Holy Writers in those places; and so see how they are cheated, and imposed up∣on by their Teachers, when they are perswaded by them, that the Word of God is against R. Catho∣licks.