A Christian Directory, Part 2: Christian EconomicsBaxter, Richard
Religion
A Christian Directory, Part 2: Christian Economics
Baxter, Richard
Casuistry; Christian sociology
_Answ._ Where the laws of the land do take care for the prevention of
injuries, and make any determination in the case, (not contrary to the
law of God,) there it is a christian's duty to obey those laws:
therefore if you live under a law which forbiddeth any putting away or
departing, without public sentence or allowance, you may not do it
privately upon your own will. For the civil governors are to provide
against the private injuries of any of the subjects. And if persons
might put away or depart at pleasure, it would introduce both injury
and much weakness into the world. But where the laws of men do leave
persons to their liberty in this case, they need then to look no
further than to the laws of God alone. But usually the sentence of the
civil power is necessary only in case of appeal, or complaint of the
party injured; and a separation may be made without such a public
divorce, so that each party may make use of the magistrate to right
themselves if wronged. As, if the adultery be not openly known, and
the injuring party desire rather to be put away privily than publicly,
(as Joseph purposed to do by Mary,) I see not but it is lawful so to
do, in case that the law, or the necessity of making the offender an
example, require not the contrary, nor scandal or other accidents
forbid it not. See Grotius's learned notes on Matt. v. 31, 32, and on
Matt. xix. and 1 Cor. vii. about these questions.
_Quest._ XI. Is not the case of sodomy or buggery a ground for
warrantable divorce as well as adultery?
_Answ._ Yes, and seemeth to be included in the very word itself
in the text, Matt. v. 31, 32, which signifieth uncleanness; or at
least is fully implied in the reason of it. See Grotius ibid. also of
this.
_Quest._ XII. What if both parties commit adultery? may either of
them put away the other, or depart; or rather must they forgive each
other?
_Answ._ If they do it both at once, they do both forfeit the
liberty of seeking any compensation for the injury; because the injury
is equal (however some would give the advantage to the man): but if
one commit adultery first, and the other after; then either the last
offender knew of the first, or not. If not, then it seemeth all one as
if it had been done at once. But if yea, then they did it either on a
supposition of the dissolution of the matrimonial obligation, as being
loosed from the first adulterer, or else upon a purpose of continuing
in the first relation: in the latter case, it is still all one as if
it had been done by them at once, and it is a forfeiture of any
satisfaction: but in the former case, though the last adulterer did
sin, yet being before set at liberty, it doth not renew the
matrimonial obligation: but yet, if the first offender desire the
continuance of it, and the return of the first injured party; shame
and conscience of their own sin, will much rebuke them, if they plead
that injury for continuance of the separation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account