§. 39. Of vndiſcreet reproouing a wife. to Obiect. She may be of ſo outragious a diſpoſition, as, but by force, ſhe will not be kept in any compaſſe.

§. 39. Of vndiſcreet reproouing a wife.

Contrary is the indiſcretion of husbands who regard nor place, nor perſons, nor time, nor temper of themſelues or their wiues, nor any other circumſtance in reprouing, but like Saul (who at a table where a great feaſt was, in preſence of his Nobles

and Captaines, when he was inraged with anger, with moſt virulent and bitter ſpeeches not rebuked onely but reproached alſo his ſonne, and that with ſuch words as he ſpared not his owne wife; for in his paſſion he called his ſonne, ſonne

of the peruerſe rebellious woman:) like this fooliſh and furious Saul, I ſay, they take the moſt open place of the family before children, ſeruants, and whole houſe, to reproue their wiues; and that with ſuch bitter and diſgracefull termes, as either they prouoke their wiues to anſwer againe for maintaining (as they thinke) their owne credit and reputation, (thus Ionathan was prouoked to anſwer his father againe:) or elſe giue them of the houſe that behold her thus trampled vnder foot, occaſion to ſet their feet alſo vpon her.

Moſt husbands are forward enough to reproue, but few doe it in meekneſſe, and moderation. They cannot doe it but in company, nor without bitter words. Many in rebuking their wiues, ſticke not to vſe all the euill termes that they can thinke of, euen ſuch as tend not only to their wiues diſhonour, but alſo to their owne and their childrens infamy. The reaſon whereof is, becauſe they neuer rebuke but when they are in paſſion, and ſo ſcarſe know what they doe: whereby alſo they ſtirre vp paſſion in their wiues, and yet for all that refraine not any whit the more, but rather grow more violent: as when the heat of two fires meet together, the flame muſt needs be the greater. This being the prepoſterous practiſe of many husbands, is it any maruell that ordinarily ſo little good, and ſo much hurt is done by reprouing? Nay, would it not be a wonder, if any good, and no hurt ſhould be done thereby? This therefore though it be a duty, yet a dutie rarely and with great moderation to be vſed.

Thus farre of an husbands mildneſſe in his ſpeeches to his wife.

§. 40. Of an husbands

amiable countenance towards his wife.

An husbands cariage towards his wife muſt be anſwerable to his ſpeech, or elſe all the mildneſſe thereof will ſeeme but complementall.

A mans cariage compriſeth vnder it, his Countenance, Geſture, Actions: in all which muſt mildneſſe be ſeated.

1. His countenance in his wiues preſence, and towards his wife, muſt be compoſed to an amiable pleaſantneſſe. His authority ouer her, and eminencie aboue her, may not make him forget the neere coniunction and vnion betwixt them.

Vnder the face and countenance I compriſe head, brow, eies, lips and ſuch other parts which are, according as they are framed, ſignes of amiableneſſe, or diſcontentedneſſe. Now among, and aboue other parts of the body, the outward compoſition of the countenance doth ſooneſt and beſt declare the inward diſpoſition of the heart. By Eſaus pleaſant countenance Iaakob perceiued that he was pacified in his heart towards him, and thereupon ſaid, I haue ſeene thy face as though I had

ſeene the face of God, that is, an amiable, gracious countenance. On this ground Dauid deſired God, to lift vp the light of his

countenance vpon him, that thereby he might know the fauour and loue of God towards him. On the other ſide by a frowning and lowring face, by hanging downe the head, putting out the lips, with the like, anger, malice, griefe, with other like affections of heart, are manifeſted: by Caines caſting downe of his countenance God diſcerned anger and enuy to be in his heart: by Labans countenance Iaakob obſerued that his affection was turned from him. A wife then beholding mildneſſe and amiableneſſe in her husbands face, beholds it as the face of God, and therein as in a looking glaſſe beholds the kindneſſe and loue of his heart, and ſo hath her heart thereby the more firmely knit vnto him, and is moued the more to reſpect him.

§. 41. Of husbands too great auſteritie.

Contrary is 1. A loftie proud countenance, as of an imperious Lord ouer his vaſſals.

2. A grim ſterne countenance, as of a iudge ouer poore priſoners.

3. A lowring frowning countenance, as of a diſcontented [gap]reditor ouer a deſperate debtor.

4. A fierce fiery countenance, as of an angry King ouer a [gap]biect that hath diſpleaſed him.

Theſe and ſuch like countenances as they manifeſt a proud, ſtout, furious diſcontented diſpoſition of heart, ſo they cannot but giue great diſcontent to a wife, yea and much affright her being but a weake veſſell, and alienate her heart and affection from him.

§. 42. Of an husbands familiar geſture with his wife.

II. An husbands geſture ought to be ſo familiar, and amiable towards his wife, as others may diſcerne him to be her husband, and his wife may be prouoked to be familiar with him. They which this way are ready to ſhew themſelues kind and milde husbands, are prone to exceed and ſo to fall into an extreame on the right hand: for ſome are neuer well but when they haue their wiues in their laps, euer colling, kiſſing, and dallying with them, they care not in what company; thus they ſhew more lightneſſe, fondneſſe, and dotage, then true kindneſſe and loue, which forgetteth not an husband-like grauity, ſobriety, modeſty and decency.

Some ſticke not to alledge Iſaacks ſporting with Rebeckah, to countenance their laſciuiouſneſſe.

But they forget that what Iſaak did, was when he and his wife were alone: he was ſeene through a window. Much greater liberty is granted to man and wife when they are alone, then in company. Beſides there are many other waies to ſhew kindneſſe and familiarity, then by lightneſſe and wantonneſſe.

§. 43. Of an husbands ſtrangeneſſe to his wife.

Contrary to the familiaritie I ſpeake of, is (as we ſpeake) ſtrangeneſſe, when an husband ſo carrieth himſelfe towards his wife as if ſhe were a ſtranger to him: if he come in cōpany where his wife is, of all other women he will not turne to her, nor take notice of her. This fault is ſo much the greater if ſuch a man be of a free pleaſant cariage, and vſe to be merry and familiar with other women. Though his mirth and familiarity be ſuch as is not vnbeſeeming a Chriſtian, yet his cariage being of another temper towards his wife, it may be a meanes to breed iealouſie in her. Many thinke outward kinde geſture towards

wife to be fondneſſe, but if they knew what a meanes it is to ſtirre vp, increaſe, and preſerue loue in a wiues heart to her husband, they would be otherwiſe minded.

§. 43. Of an husbands giuing fauours to his wife.

III. Actions are of all other the moſt reall demonſtrations of true kindneſſe, wherein an husband muſt not faile, as he would haue his kinde ſpeech, countenance, and geſture to be taken in the better part. Kindneſſe and mildneſſe in action conſiſteth in giuing fauours (as we ſpeake) vnto his wife. This is expreſly noted in Elkanah, who euery yeere gaue fauours to his wiues. Thus an husband as he teſtifieth his loue to his wife, ſo he will much prouoke her to doe all duty to him. A ſmall gift, as an action of kindneſſe freely giuen, not vpon any debt, but in teſtimony of loue, doth more worke on the heart of her to whom it is giuen, then much more giuen vpon contract, or for a worke done, whereby it may ſeeme to be deſerued.

In giuing fauours to a wife, an husband ought to be more bountifull and liberall, then to others, that ſo ſhe may ſee thereby he loues her aboue all; as it is noted that Elkanah gaue Annah a worthy portion, becauſe he loued her. And in giuing fauours it is beſt to beſtow them with his owne hands, vnleſſe he be abſent from her.

§. 44. Of husbands beating their wiues.

Contrary are the furious, and ſpightfull actions of many vnkinde husbands (heads too heady) whoſe fauours are buffets, blowes, ſtrokes, & ſtripes: wherein they are worſe then the venemous viper. For the viper for his mates ſake caſteth out his poiſon: and wilt not thou, ô husband, in reſpect of that neere vnion which is betwixt thee and thy wife, lay aſide thy fierceneſſe and cruelty? Many wiues by reaſon of their huſbands furie, are in worſe caſe then ſeruants: for

1. Such as will not giue a blow to a ſeruant, care not what load they lay vpon their wiues.

2. Where ſeruants haue but a time and terme to be vnder the tyranny of ſuch furious men, poore wiues are tied to them all their life long.

3. Wiues can not haue ſo good remedy by the helpe of law againſt cruell husbands, as ſeruants may haue againſt cruell maſters.

4. Maſters haue not ſuch opportunity to exerciſe their cruelty ouer ſeruants as husbands ouer wiues, who are to be continually at boord and bed with their husbands.

5. The neerer wiues are, and the dearer they ought to be to their husbands, the more grieuous muſt ſtroakes needs be when they are giuen by an husbands hand, then by a maſters.

6. The leſſe power and authority that an husband hath to ſtrike his wife, then a maſter to ſtrike a ſeruant, the more heauie doe his ſtroakes ſeeme to be, and the worſe doth the caſe of a wife ſeeme to be in that reſpect, then of a ſeruant. Not vnfitly therefore is ſuch a man (if he may be thought a man rather then a beaſt) ſaid to be like a father-queller and mother-queller.

Queſt. May not then an husband beat his wife?

Anſw. With ſubmiſſion to better iudgements, I thinke he may not: my reaſons are theſe.

1. There is no warrant thorowout the whole Scripture by precept, or example for it: which argument though it be negatiue, yet for the point in hand is a forceable argument in two reſpects. 1. Becauſe the Scripture hath ſo plentifully and particularly declared the ſeuerall duties of husbands and wiues: and yet hath deliuered nothing concerning an huſbands ſtriking and beating his wife. 2. Becauſe it hath alſo plentifully and particularly ſpoaken of all ſuch as are to correct, and of their manner of correcting, and of their bearing correction who are to be corrected, and of the vſe they are to make thereof; and yet not any thing at all concerning an husbands puniſhing, or a wiues bearing in this kinde. The Scripture being ſo ſilent in this point, we may well inferre that God hath not ranked wiues among thoſe in the family who are to be corrected.

2. That ſmall diſparity which (as I haue before ſhewed) is betwixt man and wife, permitteth not ſo high a power in an husband, and ſo low a ſeruitude in a wife, as for him to beat her. Can it be thought reaſonable that ſhe who is the mans

perpetuall bed-fellow, who hath power ouer his body, who is a ioynt parent of the children, a ioynt gouernour of the family, ſhould be beaten by his hands? What if children or ſeruants ſhould know of it? (as they muſt needs: for how can ſuch a thing be done in the houſe and they of the houſe know it not?) can they reſpect her as a mother, or a miſtreſſe who is vnder correction as well as they?

3. The neere coniunction, and very vnion that is betwixt man and wife ſuffereth not ſuch dealing to paſſe betwixt them. The wife is as a mans ſelfe, They two are one fleſh. No man but a frantike, furious, deſperat wretch will beat himſelfe. Two ſorts of men are in Scripture noted to cut and lanch their owne fleſh, idolaters, as the Baalites, and Daemoniacks, as he that was poſſeſſed with a legion of deuils. Such are they who beat their wiues, either blinded in their vnderſtanding, or poſſeſſed with a deuill.

Obiect. He that is beſt in his wits will ſuffer his body to be pinched, pricked, lanched, and otherwiſe pained, if it be needfull and behoofull.

Anſw. 1. A mans heart will not ſuffer him to doe any of theſe himſelfe: their are Chirurgions whoſe office it is to doe ſuch things: if the Chirurgion himſelfe haue need of any ſuch remedy for his owne body, he will vſe the helpe of another Chirurgion. If the caſe ſo ſtand as a wife muſt needs be beaten, it is fitter for an husband to referre the matter to a publike Magiſtrate (who is as an approued and licenſed Chirurgion) and not to doe it with his owne hands.

2. Though ſome parts of the body may be ſo dealt withall, yet euery part may not, as the heart, which the wife is to the man.

3. The compariſon holdeth not. For the fore-named pinching, lanching, &c. is no puniſhment for any fault, as the beating of a wife in queſtion is, there is no queſtion but a man that hath skill may if need be open a veine, lanch a boile, ſplinter a broken bone, or diſioynted ioynt in his wiues body, which may be more painfull then correction: and herein the compariſon holdeth, but not in the other.

2. Obiect. There is as neere a coniunction betwixt Chriſt

and his Church, as betwixt man and wife: yet Chriſt for beareth not to correct and puniſh his Church.

Anſw. There is a double relation betwixt Chriſt and the Church: he is an husband vnto it, hauing made it of his fleſh, and of his bones: and a ſupreme Lord ouer it, hauing all power

in heauen and earth committed vnto him. In this latter reſpect he puniſheth, not in the former. An husband is not ſuch a ſupreme Lord ouer his wife: therefore Chriſts example, is no warrant to him.

4. There is no hope of any good to proceed from an huſbands beating of his wife: for where the party corrected is perſwaded that the party which correcteth hath no authority or right ſo to doe, it will not be brought patiently to take it: but will reſiſt, and ſtriue if it be poſſible to get the maſtery. Let a ſtranger ſtrike ſuch a childe of yeeres or a ſeruant as will patiently beare many ſtroakes at a parents or maſters hand, they will turne againe at that ſtranger, and indeauour to giue him as good as he brings: now a wife hauing no ground to be perſwaded that her husband hath authority to beat her, what hope is there that ſhe will patiently beare it, and be bettered by it? Or rather is it not likely that ſhe will, if ſhe can, riſe againſt him, ouer-maſter him (as many doe) and neuer doe any duty aright? A fault in a wife is not taken away but increaſed by blowes.

Obiect. Smart and paine may make her dread her husband, ſtand in awe of him, and doe her duty the better.

Anſw. Such dread and awe beſeemes neither the place of an husband to exact it, nor the place of a wife to yeeld it. Though perforce ſhe may be brought to yeeld ſome outward ſubiection, yet inward hatred of her husbands perſon may be ioyned therewith, which is as bad, if not worſe then outward diſobedience.

Obiect. She may be of ſo outragious a diſpoſition, as, but by force, ſhe will not be kept in any compaſſe.

1. Anſw. It hath beene of old time anſwered, that no fault ſhould be ſo great, as to compell an husband to beat his wife.

2. Anſw. Other forceable meanes may be vſed beſides beating by her husbands hands: ſhe may be reſtrained of libertie, denied ſuch things as ſhe moſt affecteth, be kept vp, as it were, in hold;

and, if no other meanes will ſerue the turne, be put ouer to the Magiſtrates hands, that if ſhe be of ſo ſeruile a diſpoſition, as by no other meanes ſhe will be kept vnder then by feare and force, by ſmart and paine, ſhe may feare the Magiſtrate, and feele his hand, rather then her husbands.

Obiect. If a wife waxe ſo manniſh, or rather mad, as to offer to ſtrike and beat her husband, may he not in that caſe beat her to make her ceaſe her outrage?

Anſw. I doubt not but that that good prouiſion which is made in law to preſerue a mans life, may be applied to this purpoſe. The law ſimply condemnes all murther; yet if a man be ſo aſſaulted, as there is no way to preſerue his owne life, but by taking away his life that aſſaults him, it condemneth not him as a murtherer, becauſe he did it in defence of himſelfe. So if an huſband be ſet vpon by his wife, it is lawfull and expedient that he defend himſelfe, and if he can doe it no other wayes but by ſtriking her, that is not to be reckoned an vnlawfull beating her.