reason. For Daniel, 11, 37, ascribes to the kingdom of Antichrist
this mark, namely, the contempt of women.

Fifthly. Although the adversaries do not defend the law because of
superstition, [not because of its sanctity, as from ignorance], since
they see that it is not generally observed, nevertheless they diffuse
superstitious opinions, while they give a pretext of religion. They
proclaim that they require celibacy because it is purity. As though
marriage were impurity and a sin, or as though celibacy merited
justification more than does marriage! And to this end they cite the
ceremonies of the Mosaic Law, because, since under the Law, the
priests, at the time of ministering, were separated from their wives,
the priest in the New Testament, inasmuch as he ought always to pray,
ought always to practise continence. This silly comparison is
presented as a proof which should compel priests to perpetual
celibacy, although, indeed, in this very comparison marriage is
allowed, only in the time of ministering its use is interdicted. And
it is one thing to pray; another, to minister. The saints prayed
even when they did not exercise the public ministry; nor did conjugal
intercourse hinder them from praying.

But we shall reply in order to these figments. In the first place,
it is necessary for the adversaries to acknowledge this, namely, that
in believers marriage is pure because it has been sanctified by the
Word of God, i.e., it is a matter that is permitted and approved by
the Word of God, as Scripture abundantly testifies. For Christ calls
marriage a divine union, when He says, Matt. 19, 6: What God hath
joined together [let not man put asunder. Here Christ says that
married people are joined together by God. Accordingly, it is a pure,
holy, noble, praiseworthy work of God]. And Paul says of marriage,