_Quest._ II. If a gentleman, e.g. of £500, or £1000, or £2000, or £3000, per annum, could spare honestly half his yearly rents, for his children and for charitable uses, and his wife be so proud and prodigal, that she will waste it all in housekeeping and excesses, and will rage, be unquiet, or go mad, if she be hindered, what is a man's duty in such a case?
_Answ._ It is but an instance of the forementioned case, and must thence be answered. 1. It is supposed that she is uncurable by all wise and rational means of persuasion. 2. He is wisely to compare the greatness of the evil that will come by crossing her, with the good that may come by the improvement of his estate, and the forbearance of those excesses. If her rage, or distraction, or unquietness were like by any accident to do more hurt than his estate may do good, he might take himself disabled from hindering the sin; and though he give her the money which she mispendeth, it is not sinning, but only not hindering sin when he is unable. 3. Ordinarily some small or tolerable degree of sinful waste and excess may be tolerated to avoid such mischiefs as else would follow; but not too much. And though no just measure can be assigned, at what rate a man may lawfully purchase his own peace, and consequently his liberty to serve God, or at what rate he may save his wife from madness, or some mortal mischiefs of her discontent, yet the case must be resolved by such considerations; and a prudent man, that knoweth what is like to be the consequent on both sides, may and must accordingly determine it. 4. But ordinarily the life, health, or preservation of so proud, luxurious, and passionate a woman, is not worth the saving at so dear a rate, as the wasting of a considerable estate, which might be used to relieve a multitude of the poor, and perhaps to save the lives of many that are worthier to live. And, (1.) A man's duty to relieve the poor and provide for his family is so great, (2.) And the account that all men must give of the use of their talents is so strict, that it must be a great reason indeed, that must allow him to give way to very great wastefulness. And unless there be somewhat extraordinary in the case, it were better deal with such a woman as a bedlam, and if she will be mad, to use her as the mad are used, than for a steward of God to suffer the devil to be served with his Master's goods.
Lastly, I must charge the reader to remember, that both these cases are very rare; and it is but few women that are so liable to so great mischiefs, which may not be prevented at cheaper rates; and therefore that the indulgence given in these decisions, is nothing to the greater part of men, nor is to be extended to ordinary cases. But commonly men every where sin by omission of a stricter government of their families, and by Eli's sinful indulgence and remissness; and though a wife must be governed as a wife, and a child as a child, yet all must be governed as well as servants. And though it may be truly said, that a man cannot hinder that sin, which he cannot hinder but by sin, or by contributing to a greater hurt, yet it is to be concluded, that every man is bound to hinder sin whenever he is able lawfully to hinder it.
And by the same measures, tolerations, or not hindering errors and sins about religion in church and commonwealth, is to be judged of: none must commit them or approve them; nor forbear any duty of their own to cure them; but that is not a duty which is destructive, which would be a duty when it were a means of edifying.
[24] See Dr. Gouge on Family Relations, who saith the most against women's giving.
[25] 2 Sam. xxv. 18, 29, 30; Prov. xxxi. 11-13, 20; Hos. vi. 6; Matt. ix. 13; xii. 7; 2 Kings iv. 9, 22.
[26] John iii. 6; Eph. ii. 2, 3.