Page:Tetrachordon - Milton (1645).djvu/90

 them it was easier for a Camell to go through a needles eye, then a rich man in at heav'n gate. They were amaz'd exceedingly: he explain'd himselfe to meane of those who trust in riches, Mark 10. They were amaz'd then out of measure, for so Marke relates it; as if his explaining had increas'd their amazement, in such a plaine case, and which concern'd so neerely their calling to be inform'd in. Good reason therefore, if Christ at that time did not stand amplifying, to the thick prejudice and tradition wherein they were, this question of more difficulty, and lesse concernment to any perhaps of them in particular. Yet did he not omitt to sow within them the seeds of a sufficient determining, agen the time that his promis'd spirit should bring all things to their memory. Hee had declar'd in their hearing not long before, how distant hee was from abolishing the law it selfe of divorce; hee had referr'd them to the institution; and after all this, gives them a set answer, from which they might collect what was cleer anough, that all men cannot receive all sayings, verse 11. If such regard bee had to each mans receiving of mariage or single life, what can arise, that the same christian regard should not bee had in most necessary divorce? All which instructed both them and us, that it beseem'd his Disciples to learne the deciding of this question, which hath nothing new in it, first by the institution, then by the generall grounds of religion, not by a particular saying here or there, temper'd and level'd only to an incident occasion, the riddance of a tempting assault. For what can this bee but weake and shallow apprehension, to forsake the standard principles of institution, faith, & charity; then to be blanke & various at every occurrence in Scripture, and in a cold Spasm of scruple, to reare peculiar doctrines upon the place; that shall bid the gray autority of most unchangeable and sovran rules to stand by & be contradicted. Thus to this Evangelic precept of famous difficulty, which for these many ages weakly understood, and violently put in practice, hath made a shambles rather then an ordinance of matrimony, I am firme a truer exposition cannot be given. If this or that argument heer us'd, please not every one, there is no scarcity of arguments, any halfe of them will suffice. Or should they all faile, as Truth it selfe can faile as soon, I should content me with the institution alone to wage this controversie, and not distrust to evince. If any need it not, the happier; yet Christians ought to study earnestly what may be anothers need. But if, as mortall mischances are, som hap to need it, let them be sure they abuse not, and give God his thanks, who hath reviv'd this remedy, not too late for them, and scowr'd off an inveterat misexposition from the Rh