MARRIAGE ASSERTED: In Answer to a Book Entituled Conjugium Conjurgium: OR, Some Serious Considerations on MARRIAGE, Wherein (by way of caution and ad­vice to a Friend) its Nature, Ends, Events, Concomitant Accidents, &c. are examined.

By WILLIAM SEYMAR, Esq;

Written by a Country Gentleman.

Ebr. Chap. 13. Ver 4.

[...].

LONDON, Printed for Henry Herringman, at the Blue Anchor in the Lower walk of the New Exchange. 1674.

TO THE READER.

READER,

I Am something jealous that this Treatise a­gainst Marriage which I have here examin'd, has been in publick some time be­fore I had the sight of it: and I am the apter to think so, because it came to my hands b [...] by an accident; for [Page]I have some time since made my self as much a stranger to the Town as my occasions will permit; If my Igno­rance has made me guilty of an errour by not publishing the Answer within the usu­al time, if I may receive your pardon you will endear me to be upon any other occasion

Your real Servant.

THE PREFACE.

SO soon as I was inform'd that there was one in print that did dis­suade this Age from Marriage, I was extreamly impatient till I had sent to London for the Book; because a­mongst all Discourses which the most licentious of men, whose tongues, as the most divine Poet rallies, are their own, for who is Lord over them; I say, among the discourses of these loose tongu'd persons I could never observe any one solid Argument that could possibly dissuade any rational Man, (I mean a Christian) from the appro­bation of a married life, as not most befitting and necessary for the genera­lity of Mankind. I was therefore de­sirous to see the utmost could be said to invalidate a constitution of unity [Page]which God Almighty himself in Para­dise ordain'd for a complement of man's felicity even in that state, and our Sa­viour his blessed Son honour'd with his first convincing miracle that he was the Messias: And since, upon these con­siderations, the Romish Church has given it the glorious title of a Sacra­ment, and all Ages that have kept the faith, nay all civiliz'd Nations have constantly recommended Marriage; and our own best reform'd Church of England, though she denies it a Sacra­ment, does effectually honour it more, by allowing the Sacred Priests who serve at the Alt [...] to accept of this life. And now I have perus'd this Book throughly I must confess I am still of the same mind I was before, for there is not one Argument throughout the whole Trea [...]e which is able to give the least sho [...] to this Truth, That it is better for a man to marry the worst wife in the world, than by avoiding the inconvenience, to be guilty but once ei­ther [Page]of Incontinency, or any sort of pollu­tion whatsoever.

That a Coelibate or single life is the more perfect of the two must be grant­ed on all sides, provided the ends an­swer the good of those men who de­vote themselves to it beyond that which Marriage pretends to: and what they are let us examine.

The ends of Marriage are two; The continuation of the species of Mankind, (which received God Al­mighty's blessing at the first instituti­on,) and to avoid Fornication. 'Tis an immediate gift and favour from God to live continently, afforded but to few: and I doubt not but this Age believes it as great a miracle as any of those recorded in Scripture. A single life ought not to be undertaken by any but those who are so gifted, and then it is a noble resolution, worthy of all praise, for a man to sequester him­self from the affairs and delights of this busie world to a solitary devotion, that [Page]leaves the splendid trouble which ac­companies the riches and honours of it, for the lasting and satisfactory pleasure of contemplation. This in­deed is a blessed change to forsake a humane, to lead an Angelick life. But our Conjugium Conjurgium through­out his Book, though he here and there be sprinkle some commendations of Virginity as a Seraphick life and leading more immediatly to the great and onely end of our being, Eternal happiness; yet is the whole tenour of his discourse so managed, that any the least discerning Judgment may perceive, as well by observing the per­son the Letter was designed to, a man of free conversation, as by his Argu­ments, which from the inconveniences which are in a married state, the falsest of Topicks, he would infer it ought wholly to be abolished, at least not ac­cepted of by any that are not content­ed to be esteemed Fools and Ideots: And how few there be that will accept [Page]of Marriage upon this condition, espe­cially when the generality are so ea­sily inclin'd without the assistance of printed Arguments that may startle their faith and debauch their manners, to obey the brutal dictates of sense be­fore the more Christian ones of Rea­son, I am content that he himself shall Judge.

It is a common observation, That weak and passionate minds cannot ap­prove or dislike any thing but in hy­perbolical expressions: and as some In­amorettos are highly guilty of this va­nity in their addresses to the female Sex, so I think Mr. Seymar is not al­together blameless in his censures of them; not so much in the sharpness of his reproof, as in the universality of the application: For it must not be denied, that as there are too too many that are Monsters of Na­ture, guilty of all crimes which by the Laws of God and man are so account­ed; So there are numbers that dignifie [Page]their sex, leading lives worthy of the vocation wherewith they are called, out­doing men in actions of piety, humi­lity and charity, whose fame both Solomon, and Jesus the son of Syrach sufficiently celebrate. And since Chri­stianity has taken root, the Church-hi­story will afford numerous Examples of their true magnanimity and cou­rage for the Faith. And to descend to this our Age; any man not prein­gaged, will find it not altogether void of gallant and virtuous Women, though they have discouragements e­nough from the debauchery of men, which practice cannot have any Basis upon Reason, and scarce upon the senceless opinion of Atheism.

So that if our Authour had advis'd his Friend only to some rules of cau­tion, that he might have made a right choice, and then have honoured the rest of mankind with his knowledge by printing it, it would have been a real and charitable obligation: but to [Page]decry Marriage without any limitati­ons as a real ill, and yet not to recom­mend any other sort of life which may continue the race of Mankind regular­ly, and answer those advantages (be they never so slender) which a married state affords, is the most irrational and disingenuous proposal imaginable.

The Inconveniences that he reckons up in a married state are good store of them conditional to the acceptance of life: and let him either marry, or live single, they will bear him compa­ny. Some others are purely in imagi­nation, and by a Deceptio visûs there they look like faults on the Wives side, when 'tis nothing but passion and folly on the Mans: and, seeing our Judge­ment is the ultimate of our Know­ledge, 'tis therefore impossible for any man to find out this mistake in himself, which a superiour being, whose know­ledge is above him, easily discerns. Therefore I would only ask any man who frets most, whether 'tis not both the [Page]easier and speedier way to question his own Judgement, and that way re­gulate his Passion, than to endeavour to reform cross accidents to them, e­specially when the price is so dear, as to be wicked?

These things being granted I would not be understood here to recommend a married life (though I know it affords solid felicity) as really happy in it self, but comparatively so in opposition to those whimsies some of the Ancients dreamt of, and we have put in executi­on, by breaking through the most sacred of obligations to all uncleanness imagi­nable; as if our Saviour were a great­er Impostor than Mahomet, and his Laws no more to be regarded than the Alcoran? But waving this, I cannot but smile at the policy of our new Re­formados, who rather than be trou­bled with the sullen humours of a le­gal Church bedfellow, called a Wife, have upon the result of their most se­rious thoughts, made choice of a new­er [Page]fashioned Creature called a Miss, which they Joynture with as much assurance as a Wife, and whose pre­sent maintenance is full as charge­able: never thinking, that whilest they enjoy only the pleasure of a peevish contradiction to the Laws and cu­stoms of their Ancestors, she is still as free as she was before to leave their bed for another Joynture, or to abuse it as she pleases without the least con­trol (but exact submission to her Ladi­ships divine will) at the price of into­lerable diseases, and utter ruine of her ridiculous Fop.

The reason I take notice of this book is, because by the frequent quo­tations of Scripture, it looks as if the Author did think both Reason and Re­ligion back't him. As for those thick-scull'd men whose souls are so steept in matter that they think they have none, what they speak, or what they write signifies nothing to me; Impu­dence I know is the top of their Ver­tues, [Page]and railing at things sacred the height of their wit; so that what is here writ is not designed to do them any kindness or discourtesie. Qui vult decipi, decipiatur. He that will be deceived, must be deceived. Truth is so glorious a thing that it is commendable in any man to look for it; and as I think 'twas Mr. Sey­mar's design, so where I vary, he has no reason to be angry, my de­sign being the same. So I proceed to the examination of his Treatise, whether his Arguments have either wholly or in part rendred this old-fashioned custom of Marriage, wick­ed, or ridiculous.

TO THE READER.

THE Authour of this Book takes spe­cial care by addressing himself to the ingenuity and good manners of his Readers, that they should not be inqui­sitive after his name, quality or rea­sons that mov'd him to write this Dis­course; yet he himself publishes all three, the two first in the Title page, and the third in his very first address to his Reader after his Apologie, by telling him it is to save his friend from the ruine of marriage: not much un­like a secret every body is acquainted withal under the strictest laws of secre­cy by the politique Relator: which rea­son if he had not declared, and I could have been satisfied that the publishing of his Book would have had no farther [Page]an influence upon this unthinking Age than to have purchast him the reputa­tion of a Wit, I should have been so far from giving him the least oppositi­on, that if it would have done him any service, he should have had my hand to his Certificat.

For his Apologie where he reckons up several Authours that wrote Books counter (as he thinks) to truth as well as himself, I shall only say thus much; That the end or design is the only thing that denotes any action good or bad. So the holy Fathers of the Church who enumerated the troubles that attend Wed­lock in an innocent Age, in order to persuade some of them to a more refi­ned and Angelick life, were highly to be commended as Persons that design'd the solid welfare of Mankind: but who­ever shall use their very arguments, that they may the more easily persuade men to lead lives in all uncleanness contrary to the express commands of God Al­mighty, do no less than imitate the [Page]Devils trade, who like a roaring Li­on goes about seeking whom he may devour, and by all who are not fools or madmen, ought to be esteemed no more their friend.

The latter part of his Apologie says that he may talk of Love-matters as well as those persons who were inspi­red to pen the holy Scriptures: and why not? with the caution before mention­ed, that his end in so doing be as innocent as theirs.

That Hypocrites are Whore-masters I believe; and could heartily wish none else were so; then would not this vice daily encrease in reputation amongst us as it does.

For the holy Scripture which con­sists of so much variety, that I know no book of so small a volume in the whole world does the like, cannot be supposed to be understood by every Per­son that can read, in the tenth part of it: and truly I believe no one man liv­ing understands it in every particular. [Page]But to our Authours purpose; Is it decent or commendable in any man so to mistime his advice to youth, as to be laught at for his labour? And if the Wise man says, a word spoke in due season is like apples of gold in pictures of sil­ver, there is no doubt but those places which he quotes in Deuter. ought to have their times when, as well as persons to whom, they ought to be published.

And now the conceal'd reason of writ­ing this Tract is declar'd, namely, I­ctus Piscator sapit, The burnt Child dreads the fire: what then? why there­fore the burnt Child's friend must not warm his fingers. But we shall have better reasons anon I hope, otherwise Marriage will be found very necessary for Mankind still, for all the thinkling concord of Conjugium Conjurgium.

But before our Authour falls to his business in good earnest, he treats his Readers with a complement, by tell­ing them that notwithstanding this following discourse he may be in an [Page]errour, because the greatest Philoso­phers, Mathematicians and Divines have been mistaken; which is a fair encouragement to the most modest of his Readers to believe he thinks he is mistaken, and if he thinks himself in an Error, in Justice they ought not to question it.

However this in his own method will make nothing to his purpose, un­less he will inferr, that because each of these Artists do not know every thing which belongs to their particular Science, that therefore they know no­thing. To reduce which to a Syllogism, a new Mode and Figure must be invented: for what inference can be deducted from the logomachal specula­tion of Scoolmen, from the imperfect genealogies of the Jewes, as we so think them, being not acquainted with their customs in Pedegrees, from the bold inquisitions of some persons into the Arcana Dei, things which God (as not belonging to us) has not reveal'd? does [Page]it therefore follow that we must needs be ignorant of the will of God Al­mity relating to our own duty which he has reveal'd by his blessed Son whilst he stayed here, and afterwards repeated by his Apostles in their several Epistles here and there, as the subject matter of which they treat requires? And particularly this duty of Marriage, the subject of our discourse, is plainly allowed of and commended by our Sa­viour for the ends before mentioned, and with some stricter limitations than Moses confin'd the Jewes to: though this present Age in defiance of him turn off their wives at their plea­sure. And all along St. Paul in his Epistles by charging the duties of Hus­bands and Wives so home, sufficiently commends this state: and as he does (I know) speak more honourably of Virginity in his epistle to the Corinths, so in that to the Ephesians (that he may be rightly understood) he bitterly condemns all uncleanness whatsoever [Page]in these words, Ephes. Chap. 5. ver. 5. For this you know, that no whore­mongers, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an Idolater, hath any inheritance in the Kingdom of God: a dreadful sentence! So that whoever dissuades against Marriage, St. Paul positively tells Timothy, preaches the Devils doctrine; which opinion I hope Mr. Seymar will think in due time no disparagement to sub­scribe to.

And in the Discourse where he reck­ons contradictions in the Scripture it self, one of which (as he thinks) must therefore needs be false, though grant­ed, they make nothing to his purpose: yet knowing how slightly that sacred book is by some censured, I was will­ing to take notice with how much sound­ness of Judgment, as well as modesty the learned and pious Dr. Hammond de­livers his opinion concerning some of those places quoted by our Authour; as where St. Stephen saies in the Acts, [Page]seventy five souls went down with Ja­cob into Egypt, and Moses reckons but seventy, the Dr. tells us it as an ordinary manner of speaking among the Hebrews to reckon those that were in the Loins of their Parents not born, as if they were really so, and five being born afterwards makes the number: with which agrees the Septuagint, which saies, seventy five souls came down. And in the next verse the diffi­culty that seems to arise from his say­ing that Jacob was carried into Si­chem and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a summ of mo­ny of the sons of Emmor of Sichem, is easilie reconciled with those two passages quoted by our Authour out of Genesis, by observing there were two burying places, one bought by Abra­ham of Ephron the Hittite in Mach­pelah before Mamre that is in He­bron in the land of Canaan, for four hundred Shekels; the other bought by [Page] Jacob of Emmor in Salem a City of Shechem in Canaan also, for one hun­dred Lambs, or pieces of money with that signature. And it is a frequent Hebraism as well to call the Father by the Son's name, as the Son by the Fathers. For further satisfaction who will be pleased to read the Drs. Anno­tations on that Chapter, may receive it. And when he saies that St. Mat­thew in his 27. Chap. quotes Zacha­ry for Jeremy; and St. Mark in his first Chapter cites a passage out of Isaiah which is in Malachi, he is mistaken in both places; for St. Matthew in that Chap. and the 9. verse quotes Jeremy for Zachary indeed, which Dr. Ham­mond saies was because though we find it in his prophecie, he had it from a book of Jeremias which is since lost: which made the Jewes say, the spirit of Jeremy rested on Zachary. And for St. Mark in his first Chapter he mentions neither Isaiah nor Malachi: his words are (verse the second) [...], [Page] as it is written in the prophets; and then he repeats the prophecie which indeed is spoke by Isaiah Chap. 40. v. 3. and also by Malachi Chap. 3. v. 1. but neither of them are quoted by St. Mark. So Mr. Seymar need not give himself the trouble by run­ing counter to the custome of all Christian Ages and commands of our Saviour and his Apostles, to be guilty of a mistake, for he sees the Proverb of Humanum est errare will easily be verified without that pains.

Well, but he is for Marriage still if it can be suitable, otherwise not: but no marriage can be suitable, therefore he is not for it. This is excellent Hocus Pocus: however (quoth he) it is a good way to palliate lust in both Sexes. Now St. James, Chap. 1. v. 15 saies, That when lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sin, and sin when it is finish'd, bringeth forth Death: so that marriage by this his rule is the high­way to Hell, which whoever walks in [Page]cannot possibly miss on, having palliat­ing Hypocrisie to bear him company. But how this doctrine must be proved, whe­ther by miracles, or the unerring spirit within, or by some new fashioned way not yet found out, I cannot imagine; however poor Momus has his defiance, the Authour saies he owes him nothing, and in my judgment it's pitty he should owe the Authour any thing.

I have not had the fortune so much as to know the taste of Hebrew roots; and the soil where I live being indiffe­rent fruitful, I dare not plant any for fear of being laught at for my labour, for I am told

That Hebrew roots are never found
To flourish, but in barren ground.

However I wonder Mr. Seymar won't allow of his own etymologie of Cherub from the Chaldee, rather than quote those other from the Hebrew which are harsher and more improbable: and see­ing [Page]that part of Mesopotamia where Abram lived before he went to Charran was reputed part of Chaldaea, why might not there many words be in use among the Hebrews that had their derivation from the Chaldee, as among us hundreds that are pure High Dutch?

And where he speaks of the Calf which Aaron made at the importunity of the people, it is plain by the very words of the Text, that seeing their Lawgiver Mo­ses had (as they thought) deserted them, they were desirous to change their Reli­gion (in the ceremonial part of which they were but lately instructed) for the Idolatry of their late Masters the Egyp­tians, whose chief God Isis, was alwaies worshipt in the likeness of an Oxe or Calf; and Jeroboam's Idolatry no doubt was in imitation of this first transgressi­on, where they had the authority of their high Priest Aaron, and the example of their Forefathers to justifie them. This supposition cannot be thought strange or unreasonable if we do but remember that [Page]such was the inclination of the Israelites in those dayes to Idolatry, that they wor­shipt ever and anon the Gods of those ve­ry Nations they had conquered. And as it is but agreeable to the rules of civility to put the fairest construction upon any man's writings they will bear; so is it the highest duty to the holy Scriptures; the omission of which is not only a crime committed against good manners, but Religion it self.

I heartily embrace his advice where (after he saies nothing can be written but what will bear some objection) he would have none esteem themselves infallible, but to be modest, and willing to learn: but I hope it is no fault to know what a man has learnt; for example, I have learnt that Purity of life, and Probity of manners are the duties of Christian Re­ligion, and that a married state invites us to both; and though the Modus the man­ner of Worship has been by Interest and Passion too violently contended for, yet Religion it self was never disputed of by [Page]any that could fairly pretend to the name of a Christian: And against this I am sure there ought not to be any objection.

For his A-Dieu which he gives his Readers, I being one of them cordially accept it; and take this opportunity to express my thanks.

MARRIAGE ASSERTED: In Answer to a Book Entituled Conjugium Conjurgium.
Of Marriage.
CHAP. I. Its Definition, Nature, Events.

WEll, now we are come to this dreadful Precipice of Marriage that Philog ynus was tumbling down, which made our Authour give this fearful skream of [Page 2] Conjugium Conjurgium, as if he had been stark out of his wits: it shews good nature indeed to be concerned for the mischances which happen to our Friends; but is not our Authour apt to be scar'd? for surely the Precipice is not so dangerous, I have known many go down without breaking their necks: but however Philog ynus by his consent shall not venture. But seeing words are but wind, which spee­dily convert (as our Hobbists Souls when they die) into the soft air; he is resolved to reiterate his advice with his pen, by refusing which Philog ynus will be the sole cause of his own destru­ction. And this discourse shall remain as a Monument of his kindness to him Aere perennius,

Which shall be such whit-leather meat,
Times Iron fangs shall never eat.

But though Philogynus may not ven­ture down, I poor Devil must, and [Page 3]the first Monster I meet withal is Nubo himself, whose Pedigree being from [...] a Cloud in English (from the cu­stom used among the Ancients to vail their Brides when they were led to their Husbands, in token of the com­mand their Husbands were to have over them) Therefore a man is over­whelm'd in darkness and lost in a fog that marries. And because Jugo is ex Jugum, Therefore wedlock is a yoak stuft with many cares, miseries, vexati­ons, discontents, and all that rabblement. And because there is an Hebrew word of his acquaintance that signifies trou­ble, therefore a married life has no o­ther company but troubles, adversities, afflictions, and so forth; but how he will teach Etymologies to make Syl­logisms I cannot imagine, no more than I can how Marriage which is in it self honourable, can be an impedi­ment to honourable actions, unless he ac­counts those Actions honourable which Faux in England would and Ravillac in [Page 4] France did commit: for Osbern ano­ther of the same tribe, a hater of mar­riage like himself, saies that married folk give greater security to the com­monwealth where they live than suits with prudence: but neither this way can it possibly be (as our Authour would have it) a hinderance to prefer­ment: No Prince surely would refuse to employ as his Ministers of State those persons only whose chiefest in­terest consists in the constitution of his government, and accept those who are least capable of giving him sufficient security for their Loyalty. But whe­ther the Country where married men are denied preferments meerly because they are so, be on this side the line or not, we must be content to be igno­rant of till he writes next.

Our Authour does rightly observe, That when the Devil had power given him to bereave Job of all but his life, yet he would not take his wife from him, but left her to torment him. And Solomon [Page 5]in those texts he quotes out of the Pro­verbs, and Jesus the Son of Sirach, do both bear witness in apt and significant expressions that a contentious and wicked wife is a very sore affliction. And after his quotations he enume­rates several sad examples of men, some ruin'd, and others made perpetually miserable in this life by their Wives: as Solomon, Sampson, our Edward the second, and others. I answer, that though the misery which befel Solomon and Sampson was caused by the breach of God Almighty's law by Moses which forbad them to marry out of their own nation; yet however the consequence of these Examples and the texts before mentioned is no more but this, that there are such things as wicked women which ought to be avoided: but when Solomon and the same Jesus do both celebrate in other texts the happiness that the man enjoys which marries a vertuous woman, they are so far from decrying a married life as evil, that [Page 6]by this their exceeding care in disco­vering the Rocks and Quick-sands which a man that is not wary may split on, they do not only suppose that there are numbers of women that are veirtuous, but also that Marriage is absolutely necessary for humane life.

In another place where he saies al­most every house can shew the Wife it's Master, what he means by mak­ing a woman a man (which no Act of Parliament ever yet tryed to do) I do not know. I have known many houses where by the folly, sloth or other more tolerable divertisements of the hus­band, the whole weight of family bu­siness has devolved upon the Wives shoulders; whom I shall rather stile a Slave than a Mistress. As for those W [...]men who out of the Pride of their heart will usurp Authority over the Man, let them go to St. Paul's Epistles for their penance.

But St. Paul himself in 1 Cor. 7.2. saies, That those which marry shall [Page 7]have trouble in the flesh; therefore our Authour would inferr, none ought to marry. But who will read the whole Chapter will find that St. Paul com­pares only the Virgin-with the marri­ed state, and prefers the former before the latter as freer from troubles and worldly business; but how this Text can any wayes dissuade Philogynus who leads (as his friend our Authour saies) a voluptuous lise, from Marriage, the only way to make that life not a wicked one, he would do well to explain.

But his quotation out of St. Luke, Chap. 14. v. 20. is too disingenuous; where that he may justifie his ridicu­lous passion against Marriage, he wil­fully perverts the words of our bles­sed Saviour himself, who because in a similitude of a great Supper which a certain man made, and inviting his friends they refused to come (but sent him their several excuses, among which one's was that he was newly [Page 8]married, and therefore desired to be excused) reflecting upon the stubborn Jewes who would not be persuaded though by convincing miracles to be­lieve him the true Messias, but some trivial excuse or other they constant­ly made not to be happy guests of this his heavenly supper; which made him in the next verse send his servant into the high wayes to gather the Gentiles, that the Kingdome of his Father might be replenished with Believers: our Au­thor therefore concludes that Christs meaning was that the married state (or­dained by God his Father in Paradise, and seconded and explain'd by himself at Jerusalem) is a hinderance to the attainment of everlasting life. Good God what pitiful shifts Men are forced to make use of to disguise the Truth!

Now he comes to the true state of the Question, which is, Whether Marriage is not in it self far more hap­py than a single life, (I mean such a one as he commends:) which compa­rison [Page 9]because he waves at present, I must do so too, till I come to the Chap­ter where he discourses of it. But be­fore I leave this I must take notice of an inconvenience which he hints, and is a very great one, and many times brings ill consequences to the married couple; And that is, when each party take wrong measures of their succeed­ing happiness, and dream of an exact felicity from a state of life (though the happiest) upon earth, God never trusted out of heaven, and for which alone he has bestowed upon mankind such Seraphick hopes. These false measures frustrating the expectation of foolish mindes, who are not prepared against the unavoidable troubles of hu­mane life, without sense or reason load their own state of life (as I have known some old Bachelours also do) with these and such like calumnies, as if the contrary condition of life to theirs were free; never recollecting how slender a penance they are condemn'd to in [Page 10]parison of the fault of Adam (which every Sinner by being so, approves on) who after he was made exquisitely wise and happy, gave his Maker the lie in the compass of four and twenty hours by a sedate action; Wherefore it is not the condition of this or that sort of life, but life it self that is the cause of nu­merous troubles, and shameful death at the last.

In answer to what is objected that Eve by being married to Adam was the cause of his and his Posterities de­struction, I'le only return a few rhymes; for the honour God has since done the B. Virgin, reinstates the sex and makes them not at all in our debt: and let him talk what he will,

—The Married State
In honour far outvies the Coelibate:
In the Creation's order 'twas made last,
And so the former in perfection past:
The lowest rank of Creatures first began,
Then what had life, and then their Master, Man;
[Page 11]
Just so his first state was in honour less,
Till the first-moving Good gave him this happiness;
This perfect friend by Gods own hand design'd,
Fitted, and suited to his manly mind,
With soft and pliant Passions made to yield
To th' more robust, with which the man was fill'd;
Which easie temper too well the Serpent knew.
So her best Virtues her, and her Adam out of Eden threw;
Adam was curst, not that he lov'd his wife, but that he thought His God not true.

But our Authour will have it still that they who design a married life long till they have lost their freedom, and are undone; and the reason why they are undone are the reason why they are undone are three clinches he has pickt up somewhere, which being only to shew his sagacity are nothing to my [Page 12]porpose; I expect reason not clinches. The next thing I meet with is an Acro­stick as he calls it, which standing full in my way with the wrong side out­wards, I have made bold to set to rights, but he may know it again.

W Wealth is which the Wife doth bring:
I Ioys without repentance loud can sing:
F Friendships sacred league does signifie:
E Entertains you with eternity.
If in the name such happiness there be,
Misses to Fops, an honest Wife for me.

He concludes this Chapter with his subsequent divisions which are two, for Society, and the continuation of our kind, which he reckons the chief ends of Marriage, and proceeds to (whi­ther I must wait on him) Member the first.

MEMBER I. Of the first end of Marriage, Society no Society.

WHere he confesses Marriage were an Heaven upon earth, if it did but answer that end, Society; and truly I am of the mind where it does not, it is no Hyperbole to call it a Hell: but here is the differ­ence, Solomon in the old Testament and S. Paul in the new sufficiently know­ing that there can no other expedient be found to answer that felicity which Marriage affords mankind, have very wisely, as well as charitably, laid down such unerring rules which, if observ'd, will render it a heaven upon earth. But on the other side, our Authour gives his Pupil no such rules to proceed by: but in a heat will not allow him to marry at all, under the penalty of forfeiting [Page 14]his wits, freedom, and happiness, all three together, and yet is not able to recommend to him any other sort of life to secure them. And where he saies Marriage is a yoak, he honours it more than he thinks for, if he doth but remember who it was that stiled the duties of Christianity it self a yoak; and upon due enquiry it will be found a part of it, so no heavier. But if the Man drawes counter in the yoak, to the rules of justice and honesty (which is often enough seen) must the Wife be condemned? or is Marriage any whit disparaged? Is their any thing more ri­diculous than to affirm a whole Society ought to be abolished because some of them are vicious? These arguments im­proved and applyed to those societies of Men, which are absolutely necessary for the cementing of the Government where they live, have been the cause of too too dreadful consequences in this Kingdome, by me not now to be re­membred.

SECT. I. What Society in Marriage is.

HEre he repeats the duties of marri­ed folk each to other, first the Husbands, and then the Wives: and concludes, That seeing there is none that performs this their duty exactly, he would advise his friend by no means to enter into that state: which very ar­gument without the least violence of­fered to it (upon my former supposition of continency) may as well dissuade an Infidel from turning Christian because that Religion does enjoyn such purity of life, such exalted charity to mankind, and such unfeigned devotion to God­ward, that no man ever yet (the Mes­sias alone excepted) exactly obeyed. Neither can any friendship be contract­ed amongst Equals, or dependencies between Inferiours and their Masters, or indeed any society last, unless each [Page 16]party, or at least one side, resolve not only to be content to wave some pun­ctillioes of their due, but many times so­lid and real duties. This was the rea­son that our B. Saviour who styles him­self the Prince of peace, did so earnestly recommend to all his followers that ne­cessary duty of forgiving each other, and requiting good for evil: the omission of this one duty (without which no man can be a Christian) how slender a reputation so ever it has in the world, has been the cause of disuniting small and great Societies, and perpetually the ruine of those who despise it most. The pleasure and satisfaction as well as the Policy in so doing, I dare not re­commend to any but who have tryed it.

And these most mighty rocks which Mr. Seymar sees in a married life, are most of them but bubbles raised by the storms of passion, and have no duration but in weak minds: and though I com­mend folly in none, yet is the female [Page 17]Sex to be pardoned if their Passions of love, anger, fear, and the rest are more predominant than Men's: for S. Paul by declaring they are the weaker vessel, does confirm common experience that their judgements are not so fixed, nor their Reason so elated as that Sex which is the glory of God; though their other accomplishments sufficient­ly answer the end of their Creation to be the glory of man. What he therefore condemns as a fault in that Sex, is so far from being one, and gives them so good a lustre, that I question (though a vice in a man) whether it is not a perfecti­on in them.

Nay in actions of prudence it self (where Men ought to excel) there are Women that outdoe the generality; not that They are improved in wis­dom, but Men by debauchery most cursedly degenerated.

He concludes, that seeing a hundred thousand are shipwrackt, for one that ar­rives to his sweet haven of contentment [Page 18]in Marriage, he would advise Philogynus not to venture at all. I have said be­fore that those who take wrong mea­sures of their succeeding happiness ei­ther in this or any other sort of life, are beholding to themselves alone for hav­ing their expectation frustrated. There is no happiness here without its allay, but those minds who are most Masters of the affections, approach it nearest. Marriage does both promise and afford a natural, and well grounded friendship (the best we can have on this side heaven) and comprehends in it all those petit satisfactions we re­ceive in inferiour societies; and is the best barr to keep out sin, vanity and shame: it's decency and order suffi­ciently speak it's Authour; And if the wickedness of men in this state have so far disparaged it as to give it a false gloss to others, it is but time the cheat were discovered, that it is alone the weak passion of fools that complain of their cure when the pain is caused by [Page 19]the disease. And it is notorious that most men who ruine their estates do so either before they marry, or else by continuing some silly vanities they con­tracted before they entred into this re­gular condition of life.

That many married men come to ruine is certain, but is Marriage the natural genuine cause of their unhap­piness? What mischief does necessa­rily follow that Vow which is to live continently with a wife in all the mu­tual acts of friendship? Is it not the breach of this vow, that is alone the cause of calamity? And whether the more understanding is not most guil­ty, I appeal, who by their Atheistical notions of the state after Death, and by their lewd examples of life whilest they stay here, invert the order of the fall in Adam, and persuade the Wo­men to be wicked.

For this is notorious, that what vice soever the Men bring in fashion, the Women second: it is not an Age [Page 20]High-treason was as much in vogue, and drest in as good cloaths as whor­ing can be now; and texts of scripture were produced to discourage Loyalty, as now they be to dishearten us from Marriage.

But as the Women did not then run into the same extravagancies of vice with the men, though they followed them, so now they alone do keep and retain that glorious ornament of Mo­desty, which the Men have cashiered themselves, and endeavour ro rally out of them. To conclude, it is a most disingenuous slander to load the weak­er sex with those faults which we our selves commend to them for none, and they must be content to bear the ac­cusation, because Custom and their own innate bashfulness forbid them a Repartee; for

No Arms of Steel they use for their de­fence,
Their Guards are only Love, and In­nocence:
[Page 21]
If Men, the wiser Sex, lead them a­stray,
'Tis these that err, Duty bids them o­bey.

SECT. 2. Of the events and concomitants of a married life.

WHere he continues his anger a­gainst Marriage, and quotes Solomon's Ecclesiastes, Chap. 7. to prove there is no such thing as a good wife, the words are, One man among a thou­sand have I found, but a woman among all those have I not found: but who will observe the discourse from the 23 verse to the end of the Chapter, will find that Solomon after he had reckon­ed up his own observations concern­ing true wisdome, and the reason of things, and what is real folly, inge­nuously declares (a true sign he had a [Page 22]prospect of them all) the disquisition was too hard for him, and adds in the close of his complaint, that among the sons of men one in a thousand he had found that had acquired wisdome and knowledge, but of the female sex not one, no disparagement to them if rightly understood, far less a barr to this blessed societie of Marriage, all equality being the natural enemy to Societies. But Solomon in this very Chapter, and else-where as he does bitterly exclaim against wicked wo­men, so he does in apt expressions set down the happiness of those who have virtuous, and industrious Wives: which sufficiently demonstrates Solo­mon did think a good Wife might be found; which me thinks Mr. Seymar is half of the mind himself, when he com­pares Marriage to an East India voy­age, by which a man is either made or marr'd; the difference in the compari­son is only that the poor Merchant can­not sometimes shun his ill fortune by a­ny [Page 23]forecast; he that enters into a mar­ried life may by timely prudence in his choice before-hand, and discreet man­aging of his affairs afterwards, very much contribure to his own happiness.

But no handsome can be honest; and his reason is, because a Ballad saies Can she be fair and honest too? and if you wo'nt believe that, he produces some Latin clinches, English ones we have had before. Surely Arguments are very hard to come by when he is forced to supply their stead, with re­peating of Ballads, and pittiful pedan­tick clinches in a subject of this weight and consequence, wherein he endea­vours no less than to unravel the ori­ginal of all Societies and Governments upon the Earth.

The next course he takes to dissuade Philogynus from marriage is to reckon up the several inconveniences of hu­mour, one of which he must of neces­sity light on, therefore he had better never marry. I have been told by [Page 24]good Logicians, that a Dilemma is no such dangerous argument as it seems to be, it cuts both wayes indeed, but a skilful Opponent may make it serve his turn as well as his Adversarys; So may any Man find as great advantages in most of Mr. Seymar's qualifications of Women, as he does inconveniences; for example, if she be not over-wise, why may not that coolness of temper make her owner of humility? which will render her full as commendable. And if she is a wise-woman in good earnest, her husband will be happy enough in her, for all Mr Seymar does not like her. And surely a young La­dy that has not had threescore years experience of folly and vanity, may be as good company as if she had. But he himself (he saies) was vext with a cross, unloving, undutiful wife, therefore no man ever had or shall have any that is otherwise.

Next is some more hedge-rhymes against Women, and then Philogynns [Page 25]is askt whether he is so mad to marry, and after he will allow no man that marries to be in his wits, he raves and talks of frenzie, Bedlam and madness, to which all married men are by him (as he thinks) justly condemned; and so concludes this Section with a seem­ing allowance to his friend that he may marry if he can find a good wife, but no qualification (that he knows of) can make her so.

Just so the Madmen do in Bedlam rave,
Something they'd have but know not what to crave:
One lacks his love, t'other wants this fine thing;
A third a riband, and the fourth that ring:
Well take 'em all, they no contentment find,
Their want alas lies only in the mind:
And yet they think themselves the on­ly wise,
And us their juster censurers despise:
[Page 26]
So our Conjugium recommends a wife,
So that Conjurgium will not gender strife.
But neither young nor handsom she must be,
Such alwaies give Actaeons livery;
A fool he saies he should himself despise,
And should be laught at by a wife that's wise:
Nor will he have a slut he can't abide her,
A Neat Dame will spend as if she were beside her.
Widow nor young nor old will do, nor Whore,
Nor one that's rich, well born, nor one that's poor.
What shall-we do to give this Patient ease,
And these excentrique raving fits ap­pease?
My Advice is, that his scull be streight trepan'd,
And th' empty shell with better brains be man'd.

SECT. III. The grounds and reasons of Love reasonless and groundless.

IN this Section the first thing is the definition of Love, which he saies is a desire bred of liking, yet for all that it is the product, he saies, of folly, and the passion of the Devil; and his reason is because Plato calls it magnus daemon, which he is resolved to English great devil; and because Plotinus another Heathen no better skil'd in Christiani­ty than Plato, does not know whether it be a good daemon, or a bad daemon, or a passion, or all three, our Conjugi­um having the casting voice, resolves it into a bad daemon, and calls it a vice.

That I may not be thought guilty of any fallacy, not so much as begging the Question, I do declare that through­out these few sheets, where I find any quotations of heathen Philosophers, [Page 28]whose opinions can be but conjectures any wayes repugnant to the Laws of Christianity, which is true reason cleared and refin'd, without further dispute I reject them, and in most pla­ces take no notice of them. The most improved wits could soar no higher than the fallacious guesses of depraved Reason, when Christianity has openly delivered us all knowledge that con­duces to the least Jota of our happi­ness. So if the Scripture allows Mar­riage, the Precedent of which is, or ought alwaies to be Love, I matter not the brainsick fictions of the Poets, or the more grave mistakes of the an­tient Philosophers concerning it. But to return.

After he has acknowledged that Love was the original cause both of the worlds creation, and redemption, and that e­very thing that is beautiful ought to be loved; I wonder that the female sex, whose chiefest ornament and perfecti­on is beauty, should be the only ex­cepted. [Page 29]Through the senses indeed is convey'd all knowledge to the Soul, but her informations of beauty she re­ceives wholly from the eye, a sense that conveys more knowledge and de­light to the understanding than all the rest put together: which makes me ignorant of the true cause why some modern Reformists, by cashiering all painting, as well as sculpture out of their Churches, compell their Pro­selytes to acquire their knowledge in divine matters, through the dull and tedious Maeanders of the Ear. God indeed, as he is the source, and foun­tain of all beauty, is properly alone the object of love; and when ever we pay any of those rayes, which we see faint and scatter'd in this his world, any such devotion and love, of which he ought to be the sole object, it is no less than Idolatry: but not to like or approve the beauty of the Universe, so as to admire its exact symmetry and proportions, is not Religion put stu­pidity.

Where our Authour makes a tri­partite division of Love for the ends of Pleasure, honesty or profit, he mistakes this passion (if the name is not too slen­der for this noble motion of the soul) which has no prospect of other ends, but only the desire of union, and be­ing the same as the object loved: for the immoderate desire of wealth, co­vetousness, arises from the Passion Fear, which never governs but in weak and impotent minds: and to this passi­on the lowest rank of beasts have their refuge both for their food and safety.

That Seraphick love wherewith the Saints and Angels incessantly do a­dore the great Jehovah, by a peculiar priviledge in broken and weak sha­dowes is permitted to descend upon the souls of the highest of mankind, while the rest have no sense of it at all; this indeed when misapplyed in the adoring a Woman, is a fault of a dark dye: but either positively to af­firm, [Page 31]or to imply by inferences that beauty in a woman is neither to be liked, not loved, though the design be to contract the exalted friendship of Marriage, is an opinion as irratio­nal as unjust.

Beauty
The onely ray of uncreated light
God e're did trust to humane sight:
To Man his best belov'd, by Man's best friend he sends
The Royal Present, and withal com­mends
The Bearer to his kindness: it would be
Strange beyond wonder, if but by this worlds Epitome
So great a Gift, so great a Giver should at once neglected be.

I am come now to his mechanick motion of the Animal Spirits in this Passion, which being a translation word for word from the great Des Cartes and not at all to the purpose, I take no far­ther [Page 32]notice of; only thus, That though Love is it self a pure action of the Soul, yet is there such a harmony betwixt her and the body by reason of those imperceptible ligaments, the vital spi­rits, which are meerly corporeal, and are the sole life of Brutes, that many times, nay most frequently, it so hap­pens that some other Passion accompa­nies this most noble one of Love, and too too often excludes her by the con­sent of a deprav'd will. Thus indeed Lust frequently possesses the whole Man, and by borrowing the splendid name of Love, scandalizes her, but on­ly in the opinion of short-sighted Men. Wherefore I must deny what Mr. Sey­mar so confidently affirms, That the Love of women's beauty, is lust, especial­ly when Marriage is the design, the laws of which run counter to Lust, and when observed (which is easy e­nough) a certain remedy against it.

As there is a Lust of the flesh, so St. Paul witnesses there is a Lust of the [Page 33]eye also, because the desires of it are boundless, it is never satisfied with seeing: but Marriage regulates and confines these boundless desires of the flesh; therefore the love of the wo­man we intend to marry, ought not, nor cannot have any other name than Love, without violating the lawes of speech and reason. It neither is, or ought to be in the same degree of pu­rity with that before mentioned, but however it carries enough of it, if the design be virtuous, to deserve the ti­tle of Love; for it naturally affords such mutual, and reciprocal kindnes­ses, as will easily invite each party to the performance of that command, to love each other as themselves: for the interests of married people are so ex­actly the same in all things whatsoever, that whoever will but obey the easy directions of nature, to be kind to themselves, cannot possibly be other­wise to their companion. So though contrary interests may disjoyn Father [Page 34]from Son, and Brothers of the same womb from each other; yet here alone in this state nothing but Folly, or Pas­sion the daughter of her, can be the cause of a disunion in affections, which made Ecclesiasticus in his 36. Chap. and 24. verse proclaim, He that gets a wise gets a possession, a help like to himself and a pillar of rest.

I do grant Mr. Seymar that there is a beauty which is conveyed to us by the internal senses, but withall we have larger and more refined conceptions of it than any that is convey'd to us by the eye; for the Imagination, a pure act of the soul, soars far above these earthly things which the external sens­es convey to the Understanding: but he would inferr that those which af­firm Women have beauty are mistak­en, because what is convey'd to the soul by the senses, presents things gene­rally more false than what is commu­nicated to it by Reason. The Answer is obvious, Reason and the senses can [Page 35]never be opponents where the subject matter ought primarily to be judged by the senses: a man in a Fever that saies sugar is bitter, does really taste it so, and his reason seconds it: the Musick I hear though never so gra­ting to anothers ear, if my sense of hearing likes it, my Reason will ap­prove of it. Where he saies, some are santastical in their loves; I repeat a­gain, all passions as well as this mis­applyed either for time or person may be evil, but regularly and discreetly used, are good; as this particular one of Love to a disingaged person in or­der to marry her, and live vertuous­ly with her, does not onely deserve the honourable name, and title of Love, but withall is an action (far from a vice, as our Authour would have it, but) commendable and well pleas­ing in the sight of God and all wise men: which I think is sufficiently proved.

Now comes his proof that Love is [Page 36]the passion of the Devil, because the Heathen which were really worship­pers of the Devil, under the names of Jupiter, Mars, &c. talk extravagantly of what they understand not: Then Lucian and his raillery is produced, to render this noble flame of Love ri­diculous: and after some more hea­thenish dreams and fictions, he quotes Gen. Chap. 1. v. 27. in order to abuse it, for he will allow Moses writings no more credit than the Heathens fictions, by first mistaking, and then calling it but a fancy: for he would have his Readers believe that Adam was first an Hermaphrodite, a conceit as wild as it is wicked; for whoever reads the history of the Creation, will find that Moses does first set it down in general terms, and then descends to particu­lars, a sort of speaking very usual at this day, and of which no Man that ever converst with Men or Books, can possibly be ignorant. From the holy writ to heathenism he goes a­gain, [Page 37]and tells the storys of Mars his Amours, and Vulcan's breaking his leg with a fall from heaven, and Ma­dam Junos jealousie, with the ficti­on of Jove and Danaë, and with such school-boyes discourse he runs over three leaves, for no other reason as I can guess, but to amuse his Reader; for not the least colour of an Argu­ment can be deduced from them to convince a Christian who believes none of them, that either Marriage or his concomitant Love is a vice.

But though Christians don't think them Gods, Conjugium does, for he saies that not onely over the Gods, but the Devils also Love tyrannizes; and his Authors (he saies) are worthy of cre­dit, where he has stories, which are about Incubi, Succubi, Fauns and Sa­tyres: but amidst these dreams the Holy Writ must not scape unpervert­ed, for Gen. 6. v. 4. where it is said, The sons of God went in to the daugh­ters of men, and of them begat Gyants; [Page 38]he will have it that the blessed Angels of God sent for the tuition and safe­guard of Men, betrayed their trust and enticed the Women to be wicked, of whom they begat Gyants. Besides the absurdity in reason that an incor­poreal Being can be the Parent of a corporeal, the assertion does not one­ly oppose the honour and providence of God Almighty in his government of the Earth, but contradict the opi­nions of the Ancient Fathers, as well as the modern belief of the Catholick, and all Reformed Churches: who do unanimously agree, that by the Sons of God were meant the Sons of Seth, who were so called because they profest the true Faith; and those of Cain's issue which followed erroneous and wick­ed opinions, were therefore called the Children of Men; Terms as distinctive and intelligible in the Age before the Flood, as that of Jewes and Gentiles was afterwards.

His last evidence that this same Love [Page 39]is the passion of the Devil, is the repeti­tion of sundry relations concerning Succubi, and Incubi; the storyes I know are numerous, but the truth of them as uncertain. It is a very dif­ficult thing to distinguish between a reality and a delusion in such cases: for if the Grand Impostor can put a cheat upon our senses (which is grant­ed by most that by the divine per­mission he can) it will be very difficult for the Understanding which receives her information from them, to judge of the delusion: Much harder would it be, if it should be found to be only the effect of the disease of Melancho­ly, which we have reason enough to suspect, because we receive all those relations from persons which are af­flicted with that distemper, which does not only hinder the regular motion of some one particular sense, but offers violence to the Understanding it self, and will not permit her to receive any information (no not by Reason) of [Page 40]the true state of things, but through the false perspective of a mistaken fan­cy. However giving, but not grant­ing, that these Diabolical violences to humane nature are real, the conse­quence can be but this, that seeing his malice is so transcendent that he will counterfeit his own nature rather than not destroy mankind, it behoves man without delay to furnish himself with the whole armour of God, that he may be able to stand against the wiles of the Devil, Ephes. 6.11. But neither thus can Mr. Seymar prove that either Love or Lust are the Devils passions. And because he is a grand Lyar and our eternal enemy that continually goes about seeking which of us he can de­vour, that therefore we should neg­lect either carelesly through mistake, or designedly, our obedience to the Laws of God; of which Marriage is one, to those that cannot live continently; is such an inference that I know not to which I ought rather to condemn it, [Page 41]whether to malicious impiety, or su­perlative frenzy.

The next dissuasive is because the Bruits are commanded by love to con­tinue their kinds; in which he is mistak­en; as it is not lust in them because it is no fault, so neither can it be Love which is peculiar only to rational creatures. So I leave our Authour to find a name for it. But if Nature persuades them, Reason me-thinks should us to continue our kind with­out being afraid to be laught at, be­cause our kind is more noble, and de­signed to greater ends.

Then the sympathy between inani­mate creatures are recounted to dis­suade Philogynus from a Wife, as the Iron and Loadstone, Vine and Elmne, and so forth; that is, because the whole Universe is cemented together by Love or sympathy, therefore Man­kind, of which the Woman is a species, must be the onely creatures exempt.

Next he will allow that rational [Page 42]creatures do Love, but he saies 'tis nothing but lust when all's done, and they that have it lack rationality: and then he tells us that Plotinus is in the right, that this Devil Love, is partly Devil, partly a God, and partly a pas­sion: yet for all Plotinus has parted the stakes, he saies it is all three, the God of Gods; such prophane contra­dictory Bombast his Readers must be content with, and if they will marry he has no other Arguments to hinder them. He concludes this Chapter by repeating what he has babled before that Love is Lust, and an old Wives fable how it was thrown out of heaven with his wings clipt, and so may go to hell, but can never come there again, with such stuffe which one would think should be below the Pen of any Gentleman to converse with, in or­der to scandalize this noble Act of the soul, of which the Treasures in Hea­ven are an object, and which the wisest and greatest of Men have allowed; for [Page 43]

Adam's wise heart was with this Passi­on fill'd,
Paradise an object worthy could not yield,
Till that a mighty miracle was show'n
Angelick beauty; but the flesh his own
Made by the hands of the great God, but how unknown.
So now those present Monarchs that command
By just Inheritance his seas, and Land
Cut into small, and petty signeuries,
Objects however of our wandring eyes,
To whom as Gods their Subjects ho­nour pay,
And all their Laws unquestion'd do obey,
When they'l be happy, from their Thrones must come
And in their Royal breasts give Love a room:
Love more contentment to the mind affords,
Than Kingdomes conquer'd by the just­est swords.

SUB-SECT. I. What the grounds and reasons of Love are.

HEre he saies, That let the Stoicks talk what they will, they are stocks and not men that do not love a woman, that are not enclined to their embraces; but those charms which allure them, he wonders should persuade Philogynus to marry them. And now he thinks he has made Philogynus an amends; it would have been too hard to have denied his friend a Woman upon all accounts; a Wise he may not have, that's like a fool or a madman, but a Wench he will allow him: and yet me­thinks the obligation is no great one, because he does not tell his friend how he should treat her. The wisest and richest of men have never failed of be­ing ruin'd by them; and in my Judge­ment, Poverty and the Pox are more [Page 45]intolerable grievances than any Mr. Seymar, now he's angry, can pick out of a married life: and at a cheaper rate than one of them I am sure no Man could ever procure Misses.

And now he puts on a disguise, he would have his friend not marry barely for beauty without some other excellent endowments of the soul, and yet from this very section to the end of his book he endeavours to prove, that no Womans soul is endowed with a­ny excellency whatsoever; but railes against the whole sex in ill language, and does not only compare them, but place them in wickedness beneath the Devil himself; as I shall more parti­cularly observe as I go on.

Then he makes six divisions on which love of men to women are grounded, and laughs at them, by sti­ling them goodly groundsall, although Virtue, Piety and Honesty be his three first.

He saies further it is an infirmity [Page 46]for a man to love a woman, because she is not really amiable, but in his fancy onely, which he can give no rea­son for, and the sensitive (that is the natural) faculty overrules. But he for­gets that the highest of Laws are those which Nature gives, all writ­ten precepts are beneath them; and as it is a sin to be guilty of the breach of the latter, it is monstrous to be guil­ty of the breach of any of the former. The ingenious Sir Thomas Overbury in the choice of a wife comes home to this case in these words.

So fair at least let me imagine her,
That thought to me is Truth, opinion
Cannot in matter of opinion erre;
With no eyes shall I see her but my own.
And as my fancy her conceives to be,
Even such my senses do both feel and see.

And as I said before, what the eye thinks beautiful, the Reason will ap­prove to be so too.

DIVISION I. Virtue, Piety and Honesty.

THis Division begins with a great deal of Truth, and Ingenuity, that in the choice of a Wife we ought to found our love to her, on the right basis of virtue, piety and honesty, from whence we may certainly promise our selves a future life full of content, and happiness. To attest which truth Mr. Seymar brings numerous quotations from Jesus the son of Syrach, and So­lomon himself: and ends by telling us that such women as these do fear the Lord, and they shall be praised.

His next assertion is as true, that where love to a woman is grounded on any other foundation than virtue and piety, there can be no real, no lasting content; and his reason is a sound one, that the wisdome of the mind is far more beautiful than the lineaments of the face. [Page 48]This discourse is both befitting a Christian and a Gentleman, and if he would have been pleased to pro­ceed to inform his friend of the means to find such a beautiful soul (as no doubt there are millions) under the ill pleasing Vizors of loose customes, childish humours and our modern way of breeding, he would have laid such an obligation on him, as would have deserved the honourable title of a Friend. But he on the contrary, de­horts him from all inquisitions of this nature by telling him such a woman is rara avis, a Latin proverb appliable to a thing that in Nature has no be­ing, as a black swan; and declares that they are creatures stuft with hypocrisy, subtlety, flattery and all sort of mischief, having no truth nor the fear of God in them: And Solomon is quoted to prove the universal wickedness of the sex, who but just now by his own con­fession did (by earnestly commending to his son a good Wife, then by ex­plaining [Page 49]and delineating what sort of women he esteemed so) not only sup­pose that there be many such, but also that his son by observing his rules and directions might easily find one. And this very description Prov. 7.5. (and elsewhere throughout his books) of a wicked woman, are onely signs and observations that he had gained by his experience what sort of woman would prove a bad Wife, that his Son might avoid her; as this particular verse of a wheedling smooth tongue, a sign of a false heart: though this verse be more properly the chara­cter of one that will prove an Adulte­ress. So in other places he commends industry, humility and piety, as good qualifications in a Wife, that will make her Husband undoubtedly hap­py.

Then our Authour repeats several examples, of Solomon, Sampson and o­thers, that were ruin'd by their Wives: and runs over two leaves [Page 50]in quotations from Jesus the Son of Syrach of his dislike of bad Wives, till he comes to a copy of criminal rhymes against the whole sex, which end—

She is worse and may in time forestal
The Devil, and be the damning of us all.

Though our Conjugium might hap­pily in his youth receive such signal inconveniences from women, that may have heat him into this rage against them all; yet me-thinks the honour due to the B. Virgin, who was born a woman, might give some allay if not to his anger, yet how-ever to the foulness of the language.

He proceeds, They are full of self­ends, rebellion, pride, envy, &c. never good but when they are pleased, and that is impossible; like the Devil, nay ex­ceed his infernal Majestie in mischief. These are his own words. Then all the Planets are Produced for wit­nesses [Page 51]how wicked women be, which after his own method I have turn'd a little nearer truth, that he may see the Planets make more against him than for him, as thus:

Saturn gives fear lest she her Man dis­please:
Jove wisdome gives to rule her house with ease:
Mars well tim'd Anger does on the Wife bestow:
Sol affords riches to her painfull brow:
Venus gives beauty which is judg'd by light,
And softer pleasures in the silent night:
Mercury her tongue with balsom-wit does fill:
Luna t' obey gives her a moving Will.

These Rhymes are searce worth read­ing, but the fancy is our Authors, I on­ly chang'd the Verse.

But now let us seriously examine these high & mighty accusations which Mr. Seymar has loaded the half of man­kind [Page 52]kind withal, and confined them to the female Sex.

It is well observed by the learned Camden, and by Seneca before him, how improper the expression is when we say, manners are more corrupt, and things are worse than they were in the Ages before us. Each Age has its proper disease of vice; things stand at a stay, only moving to and fro as the billowes of the sea in a calm: one Age pro­duces strange anomalous garments, happily covering as deformed minds; another, excess of riot and banquett­ing; Sometimes Rebellion, Treason, Murther and Sacrilege is the mode; the next Age find no fault with Adul­terers, Whoremongers nor Sodomites. So of Nations may be observed, a Vice that is capital in one Countrey, is scarce taken notice of in another: And all Customes which are the strongest of Laws, because voluntarily assent­ed to by the generality of a Countrey, cannot be introduced by other than those who have most credit and re­putation [Page 53]among the Vulgar. That this is true the Authours of the last Hurricane in this our native Coun­trey can attest. Now if it can be proved that the female sex are not in a capacity to bring into vogue any of these epidemick vices, this must at least be the consequence, that in this particular of giving reputation to wickedness, the other sex must be guilty alone. But I must go farther and affirm, that there are vices and those no small ones continually pra­ctised and allowed by our own sex, which their inclinations do naturally divert them from; and Custom though to us, has not been so injurious to them yet, as to give them the pas­port of decency amongst them; which is so good a barr as puts them almost out of a capacity of being guilty. In this rank I account Treasons, Murthers by Duels and otherwise, Drunkenness, Cheats, Perjury, Prophaneness and Bla­sphemy, with others which I omit: and though some have endeavoured to de­bauch [Page 54]the Women so far as to make them guilty of some of them; yet is their number but very few in compari­son of men, whose daily practice is most of them. But there is no vice the Wo­men are guilty of, but is as frequent­ly practised by men, and most of their faults have received not onely their advice, and approbation, but their importunity for the committing. Which is enough for the first thing I design to prove, that the Female sex is less wicked than the Male.

The dignity of the Woman in the Creation was to be the Man's com­panion and Partner in the delights of Paradise, to which end she was en­dued with a rational soul: and though in one Ray of Divinity, Wisdome, the Man excelled; yet in that other of Beauty, she was his Superiour. So wisely ordered by the great Creatour, that whilst she admired and obey'd him for the greater perfection; he did no less admire, and love her for the less. So by the rules of the Creation [Page 55]the distance was not so great nor she so vile, as to be despised.

She fell indeed, and was first in the transgression: but Man whose privi­ledge was to be the wiser, followed her; and God Almighty's pardon was equally extensive to the one sex, as the other: and as she had one curse more than Man, so she had an honour beyond him, The seed of the woman shall break the Serpents head, which promise when compleated, we find our Saviour equally conversing with women as men: from a Woman alone he received his flesh, and to a Woman he did first reveal the hard truth of his Resurrection. This sex had the honour to bear him company to the Cross, and the only secular concern he minded in his Agony, was to bid his beloved Disciple take care of the B. Virgin his mother. Which certainly is enough to convince any Christian, that of the female sex there are, and of those not a few, far be­neath the Devils in Iniquity.

The Historical Part in both Testa­ments have recorded the names of se­veral that were eminent for piety, virtue and honesty. Amongst whom Sarah the wife of Abraham the patri­arch will stand so long as the world lasts for an exemplary pattern of hu­mility, and obedience.

In all other Histories ancient and modern, Civil and Ecclesiastical, and more particularly in our English Chro­nicles occurr several Examples of gal­lant and virtuous Women: and though I must grant there are those that are otherwise, yet that makes against Mr. Seymar; for Solomon, Da­vid in the business of Bathsheba, So­lyman the Magnificent, Holofernes, our Ed. 4. and the rest which he quotes, received their several da­mages not by entring into the state of Matrimony, but flying from it, as he persuades his friend here to do: and though there are many Wives that may truly be said to be sore afflicti­ons, yet common observation and [Page 57]experience proves it, that where one man is ruin'd by entring into the re­gular estate of Wedlock, there are hundreds, I might say thousands, that are lost by shunning the solid con­tent, and true friendship of a Wife, for the giggling, and hypocritical caresses of a Miss. These were the women Solomon points at, and cau­tions his Son of under the scandalous name of wicked and fools. The son of Syrach's observations second his, and are all to the very same purpose: but to affirm that either of them de­signed to dehort Mankind from Marri­age, is maliciously to pervert the ho­ly Scriptures to a contrary sence; for by these their cautions they supposed Marriage not only lawful, but neces­sary; and the doom attending the man that perverts holy writt (how practical soever the Custom has been both by Press and Pulpit) take from St. John in his Revelations, Chap. 22. vers. 18, 19. If any man shall add to these things, God shall add to him the [Page 58]plagues that are written in this book; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecie, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy City, and from the things which are written in this book. And that it may appear that this terrible threatning is not con­fined to St. John's Revelations, who will give himself the trouble will find, though in other words, Moses de­nouncing it in Deuteronomie, Chap. 4. ver. 2. and Solomon to the same purpose in the Proverbs, Chap. 30. v. 6.

To conclude with these malicious and false accusations against women; If Michael an Archangel durst not give a condemned Spirit ill language, though opposed by him in the prose­cution of his Masters command: how far has this Gentleman's tongue ex­ceeded the bounds of modesty, to ca­lumniate the whole female sex in such foul expressions, as are not fit to be given the greatest of Criminals, when­as Millions of these will one day be [Page 59]accepted of to be bright Inhabitants of Heaven?

DIVISION II. Beauty.

THis division is to persuade his friend that no Women are hand­som, and his reason is, because all Mankind never was agreed upon the same complexion, shape, stature and proportion that ought to occurr for the perfecting a compleat beauty; and yet he grants that evey individual man can find a woman which he esteems so: then if men (as no doubt they are) be the sole Judges of beau­ty in women, for whom alone they were made, and they by this their divided choice of love allow beauty to be found in every complexion, shape and stature, Mr. Seymar who will not allow Beauty to belong to [Page 60]any of them, cannot by this his own rule take it ill to be thought none of the number of Mankind.

The Barbarians he allows were so far civilized by Nature as to pay re­spect to a beautiful woman, and de­fines beauty to be an exact symmetry of parts; which by his own Proverb of Quot homines tot sententiae, So ma­ny men so many minds, must come under the judgement of the fancy a­lone; which being the immediate product of the soul, does by her ap­probation of a beauty declare the se­cret sympathy between the Lover and the Woman loved; and the appro­bation of anothers judgement in the case is ridiculous and needless.

It is too true, those glorious beau­ties which adorn the female sex, have besides Time that never fails, hun­dreds of Accidents that are its mor­tal enemys, and before the gayety of youth is ended, many times puff it into nothing; Sin has made Mankind [Page 61]too Wicked to have these favours continue long; but Life it self, and all its other inferiour satisfactions are as short-lived as this; and there is none sure that would part with a hap­py life because he must not enjoy it a whole Century of years. Who re­mains not satisfied, must adjourn his expectations to eternity, where nei­ther Life or Beauty ever will have end.

Next his Ballad of Can she be fair and honest too, is the second time pro­duced, to prove that all beautiful women (though just now he would not allow there was any such in the world) are fools or whores; a beau­tiful body is commonly the Index of as fair a mind: and that all handsom women must be fools is no more ne­cessary than that all Poets with old Homer must be blind.

He quotes Prov. 31.30. to what pur­pose I know not; for Solomon there tells his son, that women that fear [Page 62]God will make the best wives; and therefore advises him to make that the chief ground of his love, because beauty is vain and transitory.

But our Authour would have us when we like a handsom woman, to think her dust and ashes: that she may in time be dust and ashes I be­lieve, but for my life I cannot think her so when all my five senses tell me to the contrary: She is my Equal, and like will to like. I know my doom is to be one of our Authour's Dizzards, which I am contented with: for truly seeing he will allow the Women no Beauty, Men ought not to take it unkindly that he will allow them no Wit.

DIVISION III. Riches, Greatness.

THat our Authour does not like Beauty he told us in his last Di­vision, and now he would persuade us he can't abide Money if his Wife brings it: but surely Money is no Chimaera of the fancy though Beau­ty be: all the world have agreed long since that Gold is better than Brass: and there is never a Hobbist in Christendome that is so stupid, but believes it a real substance; the fault of it I cannot imagine, let's hear our Authours accusations.

  • Imprimis. Money is a Goddess and the world worships it.
  • Item. They that marry for money, marry a whore.
  • Item. They that marry for money will have children that shall be non­sencical, [Page 64]Gooscapical, coxcomical Ideots.
  • Item. (which is the most dreadful thing of all, especially for those that have no land) They that mar­ry for money must make their Wife a Joynture.

For the Imprimis, I have heard that there are some Countries that think the Sun a God and worship him; yet for all that I can be content with his company in my garden, without any danger of Idolatry. And I am of the mind there may some other use be found for Money besides praying to it. For the two first Items, they are both new, that Money will beget goos­capical Children; and that all rich wo­men are whores; if our Authour could but make all Whores rich, he would go nigh to be searcht for the Philo­sophers stone. But for the last accu­sation I cannot deny but that it is a most wicked, odious and abominable [Page 65]fact, worse than Witch-craft it self, to do what a man can't do, that is to say, to make a wise a Joynture when a man has not one foot of land.

But when Philogynus has found a woman that is owner of Piety and Virtue; and Solomon witnesses that such there are; the additions of Rich­es and Beautie will scarce divert him (if he is in his right senses) from mak­ing her his Wife.

DIVISION IV. Apparel, Deportment.

HEre he saies first that fine cloaths take fools; and I am of his mind, that whoever values either himself or any body else for their Cloaths, is and ought to be content to be account­ed a fool: but there is a contrary opinion that will give him that repu­tation, which is, to think that there [Page 66]is any habit of cloaths so exotique, as to declare a wicked mind.

The Country a man lives in, his Quality, Time and station must cloath him; and when the women are to blame in this particular, it is no errour of Will but of Judgement onely, the lowest of faults and par­ponable enough in that Sex. As it is a sign of folly in any to esteem themselves the better for rich and modish garments; so is it the disease of old and grave minds to censure those that wear them therefore fool­lish, or not pious.

But he saies a woman stark naked is an Antidote against liking her, she's beholding onely to her cloaths for her Beauty; and the Travailers he saies tell him so. Among all the Travails that I have seen I can find no such place, but the Cape of good hope in Africk that he means; from whence I fancy our Authour has tak­en this new model of an Unmarried [Page 67]Common-wealth: there they never marry, but couple promiscuously (with the Baboons sometimes when the Spirit moves them) without be­ing scared with the damned Bulbeg­gars of Adultery, Incest and other yet more horrid crimes; and for relation of Wife, Brother, Son, Uncle and so forth, they have no occasion for the names. This Model he recommends to old England, as Harrington did in the last Age his Rota of a Common­wealth: and in my opinion that Country that accepts of the one, will find it necessary to take the other too. But for all his gravity, I am of the mind that if he should be so unfor­tunate, as once in his life-time to be lockt into a room, with one of our English or French Ladies, that we Gooscapical Lovers call young and handsom; if she should be naked, the sight would not be so terrible as to make him break his neck out at win­dow to be rid of her.

His example of the Gentleman of Florence that married an ugly wife by candle-light, and was fain to be behold­ing to the Sun next morning to know what shape she was on, by my con­sent should have kept her in a room that always needed a candle; but what is this to England? have not our Laws sufficientlie provided against such mistakes by confining the cere­mony of Marriage to be performed within the compass of those hours, that who is not alwayes drunk, must of necessity then be sober? But what if some Men commit mistakes in their most serious actions of life, as pur­chasing of land, making of Wills and settlements, marrying and the like? must therefore no body buy land? nor make a Will? nor provide for his Children, because there is a pos­sibility that a Law suit may be the consequence of it?

Well, to gratifie our Conjugium, if he will but allow that his friend [Page 69]may find a Wife that has Piety, Vir­tue, Beauty and Riches; for her Cloaths rather than they should trouble him, if he will but promise to make them in the fashion, it is more than I know that he himself may not be admitted to be the Taylor.

DIVISION V. Familiarity, Discourse, Singing, Musick, Dancing, &c.

OUr Authour has almost forgot what he designed to prove, which was, That all who marry are Fools and Madmen, under the names of Asses, Dizzards, Gooscaps and the like: for if there are such women who are owners of the two essential qualifications of piety and virtue, and have those substantial and necessa­ry additions of Riches and Beauty, neither singing, Musick or Dancing [Page 70]will be any impediment from discourse and familiarity with the woman a man designs to marry. And hither­to his dissuasions have been so frivo­lous, that such solid qualifications will easily over-balance them.

How slightly his Gravity may think of those cheerful and innocent di­vertisements which are usual betwixt the young couple that are resolved to enter into this most sacred and obligatory league of true Virtue, it matters not: The custome of parti­cular Countries, some of which al­low more, and some less freedom of converse between the two Lovers before the consummation of the mar­riage by the Priest, is not my task at present to censure: but as those diseases in the body which arise from Melancholy, are far more dangerous and difficult to cure, than those which the more sanguine complexions are inclined to; so do those diseases of mind which Gravity and sedateness [Page 71]of temper accompany, more properly deserve the scandalous imputation of folly, than the most impertinent and laughing humour in the World. And Solomon that has pronounc'd all our inferiour actions and designes of life which do not immediately tend to that felicity that must for ever last, Vanity; has allowed Wisdom to be equally a Concomitant of the gay and brisk humour, as of that which is more grave and reserved.

His stories of the Ephesian Lady and the like, do perfectly contradict his first Position, which was, that The married state was fit for none but either wicked or fools; for those examples and all the dreadful consequences which he afterwards deduces from singing, Musick and Dancing, he neither has or can apply to any but Whores: a name to which this estate of life is a natural enemy.

For Dancing, if there is any other use of it than to gain a comely de­portment [Page 72]of body, I am content that my judgement shall accord with Mr. Seymar's to condemn it.

But Musick being the highest of Pleasures, scarce submitting to the gross name of sensual, the Soul has so great an interest in the delight, I must allow as a very great ornament to those of the female sex that are skil'd in it, especially the vocal: which being a beauty as pleasing to the ear, as motion and harmony of parts are to the eye, aloud proclaim that those which are so endowed are of the favourites of Heaven, where alone Musick and Beauty are in Per­fection. And that such Excellencies may be abused, is no more a scan­dal, than it is to Wisdom that Achi­tophel was a Villain.

DIVISION VI. Lust.

THis of all his allegations against marriage is least to the pur­pose, because marriage is its eternal enemy.

The Virgin vow does Lust the Monster flie,
And dreads to stay th' assaulting enemy;
His mighty conquest in the World she hears,
His Policy, and Rage in fight she fears,
So to a Cloister Garrison does flie,
Whose walls are proof 'gainst all's Ar­tillery;
But Marriage boldly does assault the Foe,
His fierceness, and his stratagems she all does know:
Her innocence alone her weapons be,
His sword assures her of the Victory;
[Page 74]
So David's courage from his Virtue grew,
When he the Gathite Monster fought, and slew.
And thus does Marriage over Lust prevail,
With the same weapons she does her assail.

And to grant that Love and Lust are both one Passion, is to invert the nature of words, for the notions that the Mind receives upon the naming of these two words are as different, and as opposite, as East from West.

The Poets which he quotes against Marriage, those few that I am ac­quainted with, have in no sort of writing neither Heroick, Drama­tique, Burlesque, Pindarique or any other, so much as endeavoured to prove that Love and Lust are the same Passion, or that Marriage is not essential to Societies. Those two which I have perused most are Mr. [Page 75] Cowley, and Mr. Dreydon; two of Na­ture Miracles, and who in their se­veral capacities have celebrated Love and Marriage. The writings of the former, no not his Mistress (where it is palpable (not onely by the circum­stances of his writing, but also by his own acknowledgement that he is not onely not ashamed for his being in Love with a woman, but also, that he has no good opinion of any man that is not capable of being so too) that he was really in love) must not be condemned by any without the merited imputation of weakness of Judgement. The latter, as I have not the honour of his acquaintance, having but once (to my knowledge) ever seen him, so I dare in spight of customary injustice, commend him, albeit he is alive, and though I know my Pen is far beneath his praise, yet I do as well know so vast a wit must be owner of the same quantity of good nature as will excuse it. What is [Page 76]either wicked or silly in modish colours he has so well painted, as would divert any person that is own­er of the least ingenuity, from both: more particularly this of shunning Marriage, and being entred perfidi­ously to break a vow so easy to be kept, in his Play of Marriage a-la-Mode: a more gentile Satyre against this sort of folly, no Pen can write, where he brings the very assignations that are commonly used about Town upon the stage; and to see both Box­es and Pitt so damnably crouded, in order to see themselves abused, and yet neither to be angry or ashamed, argues such excess of stupidity, that this great Pen it self (if 'twere possi­ble) would be put to a nonplus to express it.

For Chaucer and the rest that he quotes, he knowes (if he knowes any thing) that observations of Vices, are not directions to commit them; Nay farther, the Poets by rallying them, dis­suade [Page 77]men from committing them: and where an ingenuous piece of raillery will not dissuade a Man from being a Fop, I am sure the more grave directions in a Sermon can­not.

The Sultan's wife in Arabia that had a mind to leave her Husband for the handsom Travailer, makes against him (if the story be true, for I don't know it) for she had a mind to be a whore, which is against the Lawes of Marriage which forbids her: and if some Ladies in Christendome will be so, she shall have my excuse for be­ing so too. But what is this to the business?

Lust is more outragious (he saies) in women than men; he helps me with an answer for he saies when it takes, and when is that? when they wave the dull conversation of a Husband, for the brisker one of a Gallant.

Therefore let them all alone (quoth he) as to marriage; no otherwise (he [Page 78]means) whatever he payes for them: this has been answered before, and I don't love repetitions.

To conclude, It is notorious that in both capacities single and married, there are Virtuous women: and would be thousands more if Men would accept them for Wives, and not make it their daily business to de­bauch them: and when they have done, abuse them for their labour. Divines tell us, as it is the Devil's business to invite us to be wicked here, it will be his endeavour at the day of Judgement that we may be condemned for those very faults he persuaded us to commit. The De­vil's punishment all men know that believe there is a Devil, (among those that don't let this pass as an impertinence) and they who are guil­ty of the Devil's faults, cannot take it ill to share with him in his punish­ment.

MEMBER II. Of the second end of Marriage, the continuation of our kind.

WHich is indeed the chiefest de­sign, that the World may continue peopled regularly, without confusion of alliances, protected by the Lawes, and made capable of the Priviledges of Freemen, of which be­ing in a capacity to inherit is not the least. That Children are primarily Evils, is contrary to the Psalmists o­pinion, who saies, The man is blest that hath his Quiver full of them: Who­ever has observed the rules of Provi­dence will find, that numerous Fa­milies are best provided for: And as poor a way as it is of immortaliz­ing our names, however it is the best: and those actions which he stiles no­bler, will not appear so when Opi­nion is gone, and Reason seated in [Page 80]her place. The world is contented to be cheated by false glosses and de­ceits, she would not else stile the de­struction of Mankind noble, and re­ward the Executioners with all the glo­rious epithets of good and virtuous. A gallant and wise commander in War no doubt destroyes his enemies with the same reluctancy that he would cut off an arm to save his life: and takes no more pleasure of that his necessitous Act of killing men to be repeated in praise of him, than he would of this other.

That a Peasant may the same way e­ternize his name as a Monarch, is a ve­ry slender argument: for not onely the Essentials but all the pleasures of life God has equally distributed a­mongst mankind: the advantages of the superfluity of wealth (though right­ly used) is so slender an addition to the Proprietour, that none but those whom Fortune has placed at a very great distance, can possibly envy them.

The hazard that Children may mis­carry either by Sin or folly cannot divert Philogynus from desiring legiti­mate issue, no sort of action in secular affairs of life but has its possibility of miscarriage; but in this particular of Children, care and diligence in their Education does contribute so much to their advantage, that it is most commonly the Parents fault if a Child runs either into mistakes of judge­ment or debauchery of manners; But when a Parent has done his du­ty, as it cannot but be a great com­fort to see his Child make him a pro­portionable return in being Wise, so has he no reason to repine if he should not.

The Italians (he saies) make little or no difference, between their Children and kindred: I do not know what he means; for I am told that Chil­dren do inherit in Italy as in Eng­land; and for want of Issue, the next of Kin: he would therefore persuade [Page 82]his friend to adopt an Heir, rather than get one, because by so doing he leaves his estate to one that his judge­ment approves of, and does not trans­mit so great a concern to the blind chance of fortune. The Italian I grant to be a very wise man, his bu­siness, and pleasures are both directed and improved by much thinking; but withall he has the diseases which at­tend great Wits, that is, to be guilty sometimes of greater follies than the rest of mankind; for this business of A­doption we find our judgements are so short-sighted, that amongst our own Children whom we daily converse with, and observe, we frequently mi­stake the good for bad; and whom we think the likeliest to miscarry, many times outstrips his Brothers in Wisdom and Virtue: much harder is the dis­quisition in a stranger, who may by suiting with our humours (happily the worst of them) steal a secret ap­probation in our judgement of being [Page 83]virtuous, and gain anothers birth­right by nothing but a seven-years well-manag'd Wheedle. The verity of this argument we may see in e­lective Kingdomes which are gene­rally worse managed than those whose Laws by leaving it to Providence have directed the succession of the Crown to come by inheritance.

MEMBER III. Description of a single or unmar­ried life.

BY this title I expected either an ingenious Harangue in commen­dation of a singe life, or elses ome so­lid Arguments deduced from the To­picks of Virtue and Honesty, the onely Basis of true content, to have persuaded his friend to live a single Man; but I see I am deceived, for his commendation of a Bathelour's [Page 84]life is a very short one; which is, E­very body courts him that he would marry a daughter or some other re­lation, but being once married, each of them by degrees leave off such ad­dresses to him; Therefore, saies our Authour, never marry. So, so, be­cause a Man may have his choice a­mong a thousand Jewels of rich va­Iue to chuse one, and but one, there­fore by this his rule he must chuse none at all.

Now again he commends the Vir­gin state, which is nothing to his purpose; his friend is not persuaded any where to go into a Cloyster, nei­ther has he given him any directions about Chastity; well, but he saies Marriage fills the earth, but Virginity Paradise, which is very true.

Full well, by holy writ I know,
Virgin's chast Souls to Paradise do go,
But no souls there would be,
Did not their Parents lose Virginitie:
[Page 85]
Who gives a gift is greater far than he
That does accept, though with humilitie;
And what more great can e're be given,
Than to be thought the second cause to bring a soul to Heaven?
Creation ceases, and to stock Heav'n now
With purest Souls accept the Marriage vow.

I do not nor would be thought to make any comparison between the Virgin and married state; I know the former by St. Paul's testimonie is more refined and Angelick; and ap­proaches nearer, by being free from worldly concerns, to the state of the blessed after Death: I do onely com­mend the legal and regular estate of Matrimony, in opposition to all other sort of addresses to women, as com­prehending in it self more security, and content, as well as defending men from all the inconveniences of diseas­es, [Page 86]poverty and shame: which are certain, though many times late sequels of this vanity. That Marriage brings along with it cares and troubles, is by no means to be allowed of as a literal Truth: those necessary trou­bles which are congenial to life, by so interested a friend as a Wife, are not onely diverted but alleviated. Fear is a disease of mind which brings Care to her succour when we possess things of the greatest value, which we are least willing to part with, and love best: amongst which Wife and Children are the chiefest. A Crown it self, which is the height of Riches and Honour, cannot be possest with­out cares and fears, because a thing of that inestimable value: no other­wise do they belong to a married state, but that such enjoy so great blessings, and yet are not out of a posibility of losing them.

The Married do indeed set upon greater Undertakings, especially in Oe­conomiques, [Page 87]than is prudence for a single Man to adventure on, because he is assured of so good an interested second: which being not understood, makes many condemn Marriage as the authour of trouble, when as it natu­rally encounters it.

But Lust through all its ranges of Uncleanness, in its several specious dresses of satisfaction can entitle his followers to no solid content; It is beholding to a debauch of Wine vent­ed in modish nonsence, and continu­ed without a Fever, to have the cheat not discovered by its greatest Admi­rers at the first onset; before Custome calls in despair and impudence to se­cond her. And then the pedantique contradicting of an immaterial sub­stance persuade their unwilling souls to believe there is no punishment, but what is the immediate product of the Fact; a conceit so wild and silly as has not secured the Authour of it in his life, from any whose Wit will so [Page 88]far conspire with his Malice, that when he has pistoll'd him, to take care to escape unpunished by a halter.

Other commendations of a single life our Authour has not set down, and my observations inform me of no more; so I proceed to the examina­tion of his next.

MEMBER IV. Of second Marriages.

THose that marry once we have heard before are Bedlams, and now our Authour tells us so again: but those that marry twice are Daemo­niacks, and without doubt are possest: to prove it he tells of some twice mar­ried folk who came to Heaven gate, and St Peter therefore would not let them in: and St. Hierom he quotes a­gainst it, and then he brings St. Paul to confirm it, where he saies to be [Page 89]carnally minded is death. His stories such as these every where about his book, I presume are onely to please himself, and I don't envy him the di­version: but that St. Paul's meaning in those words to be carnally minded is death, was to dehort Men from marry­ing a second Wife after the decease of the first, nothing but stupidity it self can believe. For this passage has re­lation to the first chapter of this E­pistle, which St. Paul writ to the Chri­stians at Rome wherein he condemns the Gnosticks, who though acknow­ledging the Faith, did notwithstand­ing eagerly assert the necessity of ob­serving certain Mosaical Rites and Ceremonies, as pretending to a more strict life than the other Christians, and yet lived in all uncleanness, and practised unnatural lusts according to the custome of the Heathen, the con­sequence of which St Paul saies is death. For the quotation of the Fa­thers both here and elsewhere, I have [Page 90]not leisure to examine: but whoever does thus wilfully wrest and pervert the Texts of Holy writ, it is more than probable that the Holy Fathers of the Church shall not be more in­genuously used by him in their Writings.

That Love is lust, and that Marri­age is stuft with dangers and miseries has been answered in his general ac­cusation of Marriage before: but for another proof that all Marriages both first and second are unlawful, he quotes 1 Cor. 7.1, 7, 8, 26, 27, 38. and repeats the words and so concludes; Which very Chapter without farther arguments confutes his whole book, and the very design of it: for in those Primitive times the Gnosticks pretend­ing more knowledge than was allotted to their share, were of Mr. Seymar's mind, and thought marriage not at all convenient for mankind: commend­ing in words the virgin state, but pra­ctising all sorts of lusts and uncleanness. [Page 91]This cursed Heresie had taken root as well at Corinth as at Rome: and in answer to an Epistle which is lost, that the Christians at Corinth had sent to St. Paul concerning some questions, whereof this of Marriage was one, he returns this Epistle in answer; and in this part of it does punctually set down the laws of Christ concerning wedlock: which in short is this, That those who have the gift of continen­cy, he would have devote themselves wholly to prayer and contemplation, by sequestring themselves from the business of the world; and those who have not, to marry and live chast­ly with a Wife. It is these hypocriti­cal Gnosticks that St Paul speaks of, when he saies, whoever forbids marri­age teaches the doctrine of devils; and in my opinion this Treatise of Conjugi­um Conjurgium comprehends in it ex­actly that heresy of the Gnosticks in their despising of Marriage which St. Paul in this chapter does both piouslly [Page 92]and elegantlie refute; for they too (as our Authour here) pretended it was to advance the Virgin state: for

Truth is so glorious, that its enemies trie
To masquerade in't by hypocrisie:
For humane Reason is not so deprest
Tembrace the Monster Vice not gaily drest:
This by the Fiend of Hell is understood,
To gild his Poisons with some specious good;
So here Conjugium does his friend per­suade
Not to be slackled to the Amorous trade,
But where his fancy or his profit guide him
Thither to go, no ill can so betide him;
And when the Mart is done put up his ware
And carry't to the next best selling Fair.
Yet for all this our Anti wedlock Imp
Would fain be thought for Chastity to pimp,
For where St. Paul commends the Virgin state,
'Tis for that Reason onely he does Marri­age hate:
[Page 93]
But where the Saint does Chastity com­mand,
He minds it not nor cannot understand:
Like Rebell crop't who has a trick to fight
For his King's Person, but against his Right:
So here Conjugium Marriage does assail,
That th' harmless life of Virgins may pre­vail:
But th' Vizor when pull'd off will soon betray
Phanatique hypocrisie, in the whoring way.

The Conclusion.

IT was not the weight of the Argu­ments but the frequent misapplying Texts of scripture, which might hap­pily upon some well meaning Persons, have had a bad influence to fright them from Marriage, that made me take a­ny notice of this book. It was well understood by the Contrivers of our late Wars, that till they could engage [Page 94]the Pulpit to produce Texts of Scrip­ture for their Villany, they laboured but in vain: And the consummation of all the horrid murther of our King, was endeavoured to be proved lawful by perverting of Texts in Holy writ. For this of Marriage, so long as Raillery and down-right Prophane­ness were its onely Adversaries, there was no great danger that the Enemies of it should gain many Proselytes: Religion is so fixed in Man's under­standing, that he must use more than ordinary violence to this to expunge that. But when it is laboured to be proved by some by Philosophie, that there is no Being but what is corporeal, nor no punishment after our dissolution, in order to persuade Men to be wicked without fear; and because all cannot compel themselves to be so stupid but must believe there is both Rewards and Punishments af­ter death, it is endeavoured by o­thers to produce Texts of scripture [Page 95]that shall authorize Debauchery; It is more than time that seeing so many of the Nobility and Gentry who by their free and licentious living have given encouragement to the Pens of sy­cophants to flatter them, though to their ruine; those of them whose Judge­ments run counter to the epidemick Vice of the Age (for Ages have their particular Vices as well as the several Complexions of Men) would so far own their dislike of these poysonous assertions, as to discourage the Au­thours: whose onely design in these bold Undertakings is nothing, but a little praise from the Many.

No Systeme of Philosophy that has been delivered to the world, has so grosly and frequently forfeited its own Principles, as that which by pro­nouncing an Immaterial Substance to be a contradictio in terminis, has en­deavoured to prove the nullity of all Beings but what are cloathed with flesh. The Authour decries dogma­tizing, [Page 96]and is himself the greatest Dogmatist imaginable, by imposing upon his Readers (without either Rea­sons or Demonstrations to prove them) such groundless Chimaeras, for Truths, that he is forc't to break through the laws of speech it self to deliver them. And the Authour of this Treatise which I have now examined, how pat soever his design may suit with the present inclination of humour, yet is he not able to back his assertion which is, That to marry is both foolish and wicked, with the least Reason, or so much as the countenance of Authori­ty. Railing against the whole female sex in the basest of language; condemn­ing all that marry for fools and mad­men in strange exotique phrases; re­peating of clinches and Ballads, and misapplying Texts of sacred Writ to a contrary sence, is his whole Ma­gazine of wit and Reason that he is able to produce against Marriage. So that by these false accusations a­gainst [Page 97]her, she may happily appear more magnificent and honourable; especiallie when Men have not onely considered, but tryed all other sort of addresses to women: and if Mr. Seymar by this accident should be so happy as to reduce marriage into vogue, I doubt not (for all his Raillery) but it would be a far greater satisfacti­on to him, than to be esteemed a Wit by those ignorant Persons that shall admire his Treatise of Conjugium Con­jurgium.

POSTSCRIPT.

SInce the finishing of my Reply upon Conjugium Conjurgium. I find the Authour of it to be one Ramsye, that has disguised himself in the Anagramm of Seymar. He calls himself Do­ctour, and because he finds Conjugium to be Conjurgium in his own family, he fancyes Marriage to be a kind of Caterwawle all the world over. I must ask his pardon for treating him with more Complement than belongs to him.

AN END.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal licence. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.