Vows
traditions: yea man's nature is inclined more to be pleased with them, than with the Word of God. The feast of the nativity of our
Saviour Christ, is only a custom and tradition of the Church, and yet men are commonly more careful to keep it than the Lord's Day, the keeping whereof stands by the moral law. Positive laws are not sufficient to restrain us from buying and selling on the Sabbath: yet within the twelve days no man keeps market. Again see the truth of this in our affection to the ministry of the Word: let the preacher allege Peter and Paul, the people count it but common stuff, such as any man can bring: but let men come and allege Ambrose,
Augustine, and the rest of the fathers: oh, he is the man, he is alone for them. Again, let any man be in danger any way, and straight he sends to the wise man or wizard: God's word is not sufficient to comfort and direct him. All this argues that popery denied with the mouth, abides still in the heart: and therefore we must learn to reverence the written word by ascribing unto it all manner of perfection.
Of Vows I. Our Consent Touching vows, this must be known, that we do not condemn them altogether, but only labor to restore the purity of doctrine touching this point, which by the Church of Rome from time to time has been corrupted and defaced. We hold, therefore, that a vow is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed unto Him and it is twofold: general or special.
The general vow is that which concerns all believers, and it is made in the covenant both of the law and of the gospel. I will here only speak of the vow which is made in the covenant of the gospel, in which there be two actions: one of God, the other of man. God in
mercy, on His part, promises to men the remission of sins and life everlasting; and man again, for his part, promises to believe in Christ and to obey God in all His commandments. All men ever made this vow unto God, as the Jews in circumcision, which also they renewed so often as they received the Passover. And in the New Testament, all that are baptized do the like. And in baptism this vow is called the stipulation of a good conscience, whereby we purpose to renounce ourselves, to believe in Christ, and to bring forth the fruits of true repentance. And it ought to be renewed so oft as we are partakers of the Supper of the Lord. This vow is necessary—and must be kept as a part of the true worship of God—because it is a promise wherein we vow to perform all duties commanded of God either in the law or in the gospel. It may be demanded, considering we are bound to obedience, how we bind ourselves in baptism thereto. Answer.
Though we be already bound, partly by nature, and partly by the written Word, yet may we renew the same bond in a vow. And he that is bound may further bind himself so it be for this end, to help his dullness for want of zeal and to make himself more forward in duties of love to men and the worship of God. To this end, David swore to keep the law of God [Ps. 119:116] though he were bound unto it by nature and by the written law itself.
The special vow is that which does not reach to the person of all believers, but only concerns some special men upon some special occasions. And this kind of vow is twofold:
The first is the vow of a ceremonial duty in the way of service to God, and it was in practice in the church of the Jews under the Old
Testament. Examples hereof are two especially. The first was the vow of the Nazarites, whereto no kind of men were bound by God's commandment, but they bound themselves, God only prescribing the manner and order of keeping the same with rites pertaining thereto
—as abstinence from wine, the not cutting of their hair, and such like. The second example is of the Jews, when of their own accords they vowed to give God house or land, sheep, or oxen, or any like things, for the maintenance of the legal worship; and of this also God
prescribes certain rules [Leviticus 27]. Now these vows were part of the Jewish pedagogue or ceremonial law, wherein God trained up the Jews in the Old Testament. And being observed of them, they were parts of God's worship. But now under the gospel they are not, being all abolished with the ceremonial law to which Christ put an end at His death upon the cross. It is true, Paul made a vow and since kept the same in the time of the New Testament [Acts 18]—yet not as a part of God's worship, but as a thing indifferent for the time, wherein he only condescended to the weakness of the Jews—that by this means he might bring them the better unto Christ. And whereas
Christ is called a Nazarite [Matt. 2:23], we may not think He was of that very order, because He did not abstain from wine. But He was so termed because He was the verity and accomplishment of this order.
For by it was signified that God's church was a peculiar people, severed or chosen out of the world, and that Christ—in respect of holiness—was also separated from all sinners. And the words in Saint
Matthew, "He shall be called a Nazarite," are borrowed from the book of Judges, chapter 13, where they are properly spoken of Samson, and in type or figure of Christ. For as Samson saved Israel by his death, so did Christ save His church. And as Samson killed his enemies more by death than by life, so did Christ. It is plain therefore, that this kind of vow binds us not. For there are no more ceremonies to be kept under the gospel for parts of God's worship, but the outward rites of baptism and the Lord's Supper. Vows concerning meats, drinks, attire, touching, tasting, times, places,
[and] days, were proper to the Jews.
The second kind of special vow is that whereby a man promises freely to perform some outward and bodily exercise for some good end. And this vow also (if it be made accordingly) is lawful and belongs both to the church of the Old and New Testaments. In the Old we have the example of the Rechabites [Jer. 35:6], who by the appointment of Jonadab their father, abstained from strong drink and wine, from planting vineyards and orchards—whereby Jonadab intended only to break them beforehand and to acquaint them with their future condition and state, that they should be strangers in a
foreign land; that so they might prepare themselves to endure hardness in the time to come. And now in the New Testament we have warrant in like manner to vow—as if a man, by drinking of wine or strong drink find himself prone to drunkenness, he may vow with himself to drink no more wine nor strong drink for so long time as he feels the drinking thereof will stir up his infirmity and minister occasion of sinning. Of this kind also are the vows in which we purpose and promise to God to keep set times of fasting, to task ourselves in prayer and reading of Holy Scriptures, and to give set alms for special causes known to ourselves, and to do sundry like duties. And that we be not deceived in making such vows, certain rules must be remembered: 1. That the vow be agreeable to God's will and Word, for if it be otherwise, the making—as also the keeping thereof—is sin. Vows must not be the bonds of iniquity. 2. It must so be made that it may stand with Christian liberty. For we may not make such things necessary in conscience which God has made free.
Now Christian liberty allows unto us the free use of all things indifferent, so it be out of the case of offence. Hence it follows that vows must be made and kept, or not kept, so far forth as in conscience they may stand, or not stand, with our liberty purchased by Christ. 3. The vow must be made with consent of superiors, if we be under government. Thus, among the Jews, the vow of a daughter might not stand, unless the consent of parents came thereunto. 4. It must be in the power and ability of the maker thereof to do or not to do. A vow made of a thing impossible is no vow. 5. It must be agreeable to the calling of him that makes it, that is, both to his general calling as he is a Christian and to that particular calling wherein he lives. If it be against either one or both, it is unlawful. 6.
It must be made with deliberation. Rash vows be not lawful, though the things vowed may be done lawfully. 7. The end must be good, which is, to preserve and exercise the gifts of faith, prayer, repentance, obedience, and other virtues of the mind; also to testify our thankfulness unto God for blessings received. These are the principal rules which must be observed in making of vows; and herewithal must be remembered that vows made on this manner are by themselves no part of God's worship, but only helps and
furtherances thereunto—and thus we are to esteem of all the vows of the New Testament. And thus much of special vows and of our consent herein.
II. The Dissent or Difference The points of difference between us touching vows are especially three:
Point of difference 1. The Church of Rome teaches that in the New Testament we are as much bound to make vows as was the church of the Jews and that even in external exercises. We say no, considering the ceremonial law is now abolished, and we have only two ceremonies by commandment to be observed: baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.
Again, we are not so much bound to make or keep vows as the Jews were, because they had a commandment so to do and we have none at all. But they allege to the contrary the prophet Isaiah, who speaking of the time of the gospel says, "The Egyptians shall know the Lord, and shall vow unto Him and keep it" (Isa. 19:21). I answer two ways: first, that the prophet in this place expresses and signifies the spiritual worship of the New Testament by ceremonial worship then used, as he does also in the last chapter where he calls the ministers of the New Testament priests and Levites. Second, we grant, the church of the New Testament makes vows unto God, but they are of moral and evangelical duties which must not be left undone—and if vowing will indeed further them, it is not to be neglected. And therefore, so often as we come to the Lord's Table, we in heart renew the vow and promise of obedience. And though vows be made of things and actions indifferent, yet are they not any parts of God's worship, which is the point to be proved.
Again, they allege, "Vow unto God and perform it" (Ps. 76:11). And they say that this commandment binds all men. Answer. That commandment first binds the Jews to the making of ceremonial
vows. Again, David here speaks of the vowing of praise and thanksgiving unto God, and so he expounds himself, "My vows are upon me, I will offer praises unto God" (Ps. 56:12). And this vow indeed concerns all men because it respects a moral duty, which is to set forth the praise of God.
Point of difference 2.
They also hold that vows made even of things not commanded—as meats, drinks, attire, etc.—are parts of God's worship, yes, that they tend to a state of perfection in that the keeping of them brings man to a higher estate than the keeping of the law can do. We flatly say no, holding that lawful vows be certain stays and props of God's worship and not the worship itself. For Paul says plainly, "Bodily exercise profiteth little, but godliness is profitable for much" (1 Tim.
4:8). Again, as God's kingdom is, so must His worship be—and God's kingdom stands not in outward things, as in eating, drinking, and such like actions—and therefore His worship stands not in outward things.
Point of difference 3.
They maintain such vows to be made as are not agreeable to the rules before named. And herein also we are to dissent from them. The first and principal is the vow of continence, whereby a man promises to God to keep chastity always in single life, that is, out of the estate of wedlock. This kind of vow is flat against the Word of God, and therefore unlawful. For Paul says, "If they cannot contain, let them marry" (1 Cor. 7:9). It is "a doctrine of devils" (1 Tim. 4:1) to forbid to marry. "Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled"
(Heb. 13:4). Again, this vow is not in the power of himself that vows, for continence is the gift of God, who gives it not unto all, but to whom He will, and when He will, and as long as He will. They allege that in the want of continence, fasting and prayer obtain it. Answer.
It is not so. God's gifts be of two sorts: some are common to all believers, as the gift of faith, repentance, and the fear of God, etc.
Others are peculiar to some only, as the gift of continence. "I would that all men were as I myself am, but every man has his proper gift of God, one this way, another that way" (1 Cor. 7:7). Now if we fast and pray for the increase of the common gifts of God, as faith, repentance, and all such as are needful to salvation, we may obtain them in some measure, but the like cannot be said of particular gifts.
The child of God may pray for health or wealth and not obtain either of them in this world; because it is not the will of God to vouchsafe these blessings to all men. And Paul prayed three times to be delivered from a temptation, and yet obtained not his suit. And so may we likewise pray for chastity in single estate, and yet never obtain it; because, it may be, it is the will of God to save us without it.
This vow therefore we abhor as a thing that has heretofore—and does still—bring forth innumerable abominations in[to] the world. Yet here mark in what manner we do it. First of all, though we dislike the vow, yet we like and commend single life. Marriage indeed is better in two respects: first, because God has ordained it to be a remedy of continence to all such persons as cannot contain; second, because it is the seminary both of church and commonwealth; and it brings forth a seed of God for the enlarging of His kingdom [Mal. 2:15]. Yet single life in them that have the gift of continence is in some respects to be preferred. First, because it brings liberty in persecution. Thus,
Paul says, "I suppose it to be good for the present necessity for a man so to be" (1 Cor. 7:26). Second, because it frees men from the common cares, molestations, and distractions that be in the family.
"Such shall have trouble in the flesh, but I spare you" (v. 28). Third, because single parties do commonly with more bodily ease and liberty worship God, it being still presupposed that they have the gift of continence. "The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit" (v. 34).
Again, though we dislike the vow, yet we hold and teach that men or women being assured that they have the gift of continence, may constantly resolve and purpose with themselves to live and lead a single life. "He that standeth firm in his own heart, that hath no need, but hath power of his own will, and hath so decreed in his
heart that he will keep his virgin, he doth well" (1 Cor. 7:37). And we embrace the saying of Theodoret on 1 Timothy 4: "For he does not," says he, "blame single life or continence, but he accuses them that by law enacted compel men to follow these." And men made themselves chaste for the kingdom of heaven [Matt. 19:12], not by vow, but by a purpose of heart, which is far less than a vow, and may be changed upon occasion, whereas a vow cannot, unless it evidently appears to be unlawful.
Third, for such persons as are able to contain—to live single for the ends before named—indeed we hold it to be no counsel of perfection, yet do we not deny it to be a counsel of expedience or outward ease according to that which Paul says, "I give mine advice…" (v. 25), and,
"I speak this for your commodity, not to entangle you in a snare" (v.
35).
Lastly, we think, that if any having the gift of continence do make a vow to live single and yet afterward marry (the said gift remaining), they have sinned. Yet not because they are married, but because their vow is broken. And thus said Augustine of widows that married after their vow: lib. de bono viduit. cap. 9.
The second is the vow of poverty and monastic life in which men bestow all they have on the poor and give themselves wholly and only to prayer and fasting. This vow is against the will of God. "It is a more blessed thing to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35). "Give me neither riches nor poverty" (Prov. 30:8). Poverty is numbered among the curses of the law [Deut. 28:22], none whereof are to be vowed.
And it is the rule of the Holy Ghost, "He that will not labor," namely in some special and warrantable calling, "must not eat" (2 Thess.
3:10). And, "I exhort that they work with quietness, and eat their own bread" (v. 12). Now when as men live apart from others, giving themselves only to prayer and fasting, they live in no calling. And it is against the general vow made in baptism, because it frees men from sundry duties of the moral law and changes the proper end of man's life. For every man must have two callings. The first is the general
calling of a Christian by virtue of which he performs worship unto God and duties of love to men. The second is a particular calling, wherein according to his gift, he must do service to men in some function, pertaining either to the church or commonwealth whereof he is a member. And the first of these two must be performed in the second, and the second in and with the first. The end of man's life is not only to serve God by the duties of the first table, but by serving of man in the duties of the second table, to serve God. And therefore, the love of our neighbor is called the "fulfilling of the whole law"
(Rom. 13:10), because the law of God is practiced not apart, but in and with the love of our neighbor. This being so, it is manifest that vowed poverty in monkish life makes many unprofitable members both of church and commonwealth.
And though we dislike this vow also, yet we do it holding these conclusions:
Conclusion 1.
That a man may forsake all his goods upon special calling, as the apostles did when they were sent to preach the gospel through the whole world. Second, goods may be forsaken, yes wife, children, parents, brethren, and all, in the case of confession, that is, when a man for the religion of Christ is persecuted and constrained to forsake all he has. For then the second table gives place to the duties of the first [Mark 10:29].
Conclusion 2.
That for the time of persecution men may withdraw themselves (just occasion offered) and go apart to wildernesses or like places [Heb.
11:38], yet for the time of peace, I see no cause of solitary life. If it be alleged that men go apart for contemplation and spiritual exercises, I say again, that God's graces may as well be exercised in the family as in the cloister. The family is indeed as it were a school of God, in which they that have but a spark of grace may learn and exercise
many virtues: the acknowledgment of God, invocation, the fear of God, love, bountifulness, patience, meekness, faithfulness, etc. No, here be more occasions of doing or taking good than be or can be in a cloister.
Conclusion 3.
That we condemn not the old and ancient monks, though we like not everything in them. For they lived not like idle-bellies, but in the sweat of their own brows, as they ought to do. And many of them were married, and in their meat, drink, apparel, rule, vow, and whole course of life differed from the monks of this time; even as far as heaven [is] from earth.
The third vow is a regular obedience, whereby men give themselves to keep some devised rule or order, standing most commonly in the observation of exercises in outward things, as meats, and drinks, and apparel, etc. This vow is against Christian liberty, whereby is granted a free use of all things indifferent, so it be without the case of offence.
"Stand fast in the liberty wherein Christ hath made you free" (Gal.
5:1). "Let no man judge you in meat and drink" (Col. 2:16).
To conclude, whereas the papists magnify these their vows, and yet make no such account of the vow in baptism, we for our parts must be contrary to them, not only in judgment, but also in practice. And we ought to have special care to make good the vows we have plight11 to God according to His commandment. In our creation we made a vow of obedience. And being received into the covenant of grace, we vowed to believe in Christ, and to bring forth fruits of new obedience, and this vow is renewed as oft as we come to the Lord's Table. Our duty therefore is to perform them also to God, as David says, "Vow unto God and keep it" (Ps. 76:11). And if we keep them not, all turns to our shame and confusion. Men stand much on the keeping of that word which they have passed to men, and it is taken for a point of much honesty, as it is indeed. Now then, if there be such care to keep