CHAPTER V. Of their singular Continence and Chastity. A THIRD considerable instance of that sobriety and moderation for which the Christians were so renowned of old, was their continence, and abstaining from all manner of uncleanness, which is that virtue that we properly call chastity; a virtue for which how eminent they were (notwithstanding what their enemies heavily charged upon them to the contrary, of which afterwards) we shall take notice of in some few particulars. 1 First, the Christians of those times were so far from breaking in upon any unchaste embraces, that they frequently abstained even from lawful pleasures, and kept themselves even from the honourable and undefiled bed, never marrying all their life. "We are," says Octavius, "chaste in our speech, and chaster in our bodies, and very many of us, though we do not boast of it, do inviolably preserve a perpetual virginity." Thus Justin Martyr tells the emperors, that amongst the Christians there were a great many of either sex, who had from their childhood been educated in the Christian discipline, who for sixty or seventy years had kept themselves single and uncorrupt, and he wished the like could be shown in all other sorts of men. To the same purpose another apologist: "It is very easy," says he, "to find many amongst us, both men and women, who remain unmarried 1 Minut. Fel. p. 26. 2 Apol. 2. p. 62. U even in old age, conceiving that in this state they shall have fitter opportunities of drawing near to God." Not that they who persevered in this course of celibate did combine themselves into distinct societies, and bind themselves under an oath of perpetual virginity (as the humour was in after ages) for of this not the least shadow appears in any of the writings of those times. They applied themselves to the business of their place and station, and only lived single, that in those troublesome and hazardous times of persecution, they might be less ensnared with the entanglements of the world, and be more free for the exercises of religion. Secondly, when they did marry, they generally professed they did it only to comply with the great end of the institution, viz. the propagation of mankind; not to gratify wanton and brutish desires, but to answer the great end of nature, that human society might not fail. "Either," say they, 66 we marry not at all, but keep ourselves always continent; or if we do marry, it is for no other end but the bringing forth and the bringing up of children."2 Hence it was that they seldom married more than once. "We willingly contain ourselves," as he speaks in M. Felix, "within the bond of single marriage, and either know but one woman (and that merely out of a desire of children) or none." The first knot being loosed by death, they very rarely tied a second: which gained great honour and reputation both to them and to their religion with the Gentiles amongst whom they lived. Chrysostom tells us that a discourse hap'Athenag. leg. pro Christian. p. 37. "3 2 Justin Martyr, ibid. p. 71, Athenag. ibid. pening on a time between him and his master, who was a Gentile, concerning his mother, being told that she was a widow, and after inquiry concerning her age, being answered that she was forty years old, and that she had lived twenty years of the time a widow, the man was surprised with a strange admiration, and cried out before all the company, "Behold," saith he, "what brave women there are amongst the Christians."1 The truth is, such was the heavenly zeal and temper of the first ages of Christianity, that they would have no more to do with the world than they needs must, but industriously shunned all its burdens and encumbrances, amongst which they especially reckoned marriage, a state not rashly to be engaged in; for once it was allowable, but for a second time inexcusable. And indeed it cannot be denied but that many of the ancient Fathers, Tertullian, Cyprian, Jerome, and others did inveigh against second marriages with too much bitterness and severity, violently pressing many passages in Scripture to serve the cause, straining the string many times till it cracked again; and not sticking to censure and condemn second marriages as little better than adultery. Hear what one of the Apologists says to it: "Amongst us every man either remains as he was born, or engages himself in one only marriage; for as for second marriages, they are but a more plausible and decorous kind of adultery. Our Lord assures us, that whoever puts away his wife, and takes another, commits adultery; which place, as also another of like importance, how perversely he 1 Ad Vid. junior. tem. iv. p. 458. 2 3 Matt. xix. 9. interprets, and impertinently applies to his purpose, I am not willing to remember. Clemens Alexandrinus speaks in the case with much more modesty and moderation. "As for those to whom God has given the gift of absolute continence, we think them happy: we admire the gravity and stayedness of those that content themselves with a single marriage: but yet say withal that compassion ought to be had of others, and that' we should bear one another's burdens,'' lest he who seems to stand fair, do fall himself:"2 and as for second marriages that of the apostle is to take place, if they cannot contain, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn.' However, it is certain the Fathers of old generally did what they could to discourage second marriages. The ancient canons (as Zonaras tells us) suspended such persons from the communion for a whole year; and the council of Laodicea, though it determine not the time, yet it requires that they should spend some small time at least in penance, in fasting and prayer, before they be received to the communion. By the canons that are called apostolical, whoever after baptism has engaged in a second marriage is rendered incapable of any degree in the ministry. Accordingly Epiphanius reports of one Joseph, whom he knew, a converted Jew, and advanced to the dignity of a count by Constantine the Great, that when the Arians would have laid hands upon him to have made him bishop, he got off by this wile, by pre 1 Gal. vi. 2. 21 Cor. x. 12. 6 3 Ib. vii. 9. Stromat. lib. iii. p. 428; vid. Epiphan. Hæres. 48, p. 178; Cyrill. ad Illum. Catech. 4, p. 90. 5 In Can. 7, Concil. Neocæsar. 6 Can. 1. 7 Can. 17. tending himself to have been twice married.' But though the Fathers and ancient councils were thus severe in this case, yet the rigour of their censure will be much abated, if what some tell us be true, that many of their passages are not levelled against successive marriages, but against having two wives at the same time. For as a learned man has observed, there were three sorts of digamy: the first, a man's having two wives at once, this was condemned by the Roman laws; the second, when the former wife being dead the man married a second time; a third, when for any slight cause a man put away his wife by a bill of divorce, and married another, which, though then frequently practised, and connived at (if not allowed) by the laws of those times, was yet prohibited by the decrees of the church, and of this last sort (says he) many of the ancient canons are to be understood.2 Thirdly, they were infinitely careful to shun all occasions and appearances of lightness and immodesty; whatever might tend to inveigle their senses, and to debauch their mind and manners; nay, whatever might but give a suspicion of wantonness aud incontinence. They declined as much as might be going to all public meetings, such as feasts, plays, shows, &c. When afterwards the fervour of Christianity began to abate apace, and persons had in a great measure lost that huge reverence which former times had for continence and chastity, Theodosius, to restrain them a little within the bounds of decency, provided by a law that no woman, of what quality or rank soever, should |