ment, by adding, " and by the Canons of the "Church of Rome."

To all the weight of evidence which has been produced against the notion of CHRIST'S introducing a new law, either with respect to polygamy, or any thing elfe, I will add one more teftimony, and fuch a one as muft carry its own conviction with it, even into the bofom of prejudice itself. Let us hear our LORD Himfelf, Luke xvi. 18. Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, (* ¿TE pav) committeth adultery; and whosoever

marrieth

* On confidering all that has been faid, on Matt. xix. 9. Mark x. II. and here on Luke xvi. 18, I do conclude, that if the poxalar-committeth adultery-be understood with refpect to the fecond-taken wife-then the anany and pav muft fignify, that she was a married or unjustly-divorced woman; for the marriage of a maid or a widow was never made adultery by the law, under any circumftances whatsoever of precontract on the man's fide..

If μoxala be understood with reference to the first wife, whom the man had divorced in order to take another; and if in this fense we are to understand the mau/nrs Mark x. 11. i. e. with reference to the first wife;-we must then conftrue porxala by Matt. v. 32, and fuppose the man an adulterer, in the fame fenfe as an acceffary before the fact to a murder, is a murderer, by caufing

another to commit it.

The argument which has been usually drawn from Matt. xix. 9. by many learned men, is as follows:-" Ift "it be adultery for a man to marry a fecond woman after "he has put away the firft, it is not lefs adultery to marry. a fecond while he retains the firft.".

86

But there are several faults in this argument.

1, Petitio principii, or taking that for granted which is

denied.

2. Ufing the word adultery in a fenfe not warranted by the word adultery-in the Hebrew fcripture, where it only fignifies the defilement of a married woman.

3. A

marrieth her that has been put away (àñoneavuεvv) from her husband, committeth adultery. This, fay fome, is CHRIST's "new law, by "which He forbad polygamy, which was "allowed under the Old Testament."-As to the meaning of the words themselves, as they are much the fame as in Matt. xix. 9. I will not repeat what has already been obferved on that place; but as to their conftituting fome new law, we have CHRIST'S OWN authority to say they do not: for observe the preface at ver. 17. with which our LORD introduces them, wherein He Himself gives us to understand, that, what He here fays, and of course what He fays elsewhere to the fame purpose, is grounded upon the law of the Old Teftament. It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Having introduced what He fays, ver. 18. with this pofitive affertion touching the stability, unchangeableness, and perpetual obligation of the law, we muft, to be confiftent

3. A non fequitur, or conclufion which does not follow from the premises, unless, divorcing the first wife, and retaining her, fignify one and the fame thing.

4. A contradiction of the law of Mofes-an inconfiftency with the antient laws of the Jews as recorded in the Pentateuch.

5. A rendering the words He that putteth away his wife, which occur uniformly in Matt. v. 32. Matt. xix. 9. Markx. 11. Luke xvi. 18.-which are all the texts on the fubject-mere furplufage and totally infignificant.

6. The mention of the putting away, keeps the whole answer in direct agreement with the question afked-viz. Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every caufe?-which the other view of the text has nothing to do with.

ourfelves,

ourfelves, or to make Him confiftent, conftrue what He fays, as grounded upon that law, which He Himself lays down as the foundation on which He fpake. This can be no other than the law of GOD as * delivered by Mofes; what that condemned, CHRIST condemned on its authority; but had He condemned what that allowed, or had He allowed what that condemned, there was an end of that law, and more than a tittle of it must be faid to fail-TEGE-to fall-perish, and be deftroyed. It may be worth our while to take a fhort view of the context:-ver. 16. the law and the prophets were until John: fince that time, the kingdom of GOD is preached, and every man prefeth into it.

As if our LORD had faid: "Till the com"ing of John the Baptift-which was fore

*Aftrong and ftriking obfervation might here be made-viz. that at the time CHRIST held this difcourfe with the Pharisees, the whole law of Mofes was in its full force, even the CEREMONIAL LAW itself; to which CHRIST was fubject, and which He obferved, from the hour of His circumcifion to His laft fupper, when He ate the paffover with His difciples. Luke xxii. 15. Nor did this law vanish away, 'till it had its full accomplishment in the death, refurrection, and afcenfion of the great and glorious antitype; when, having made peace through the blood of His cross, Col. i. 20, He entered in once into the HOLY PLACE, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Heb. ix. 12. From whence it follows, that during CHRIST'S miniftry on earth, no part of the law of MOSES could, confiftently with the character which OUR LORD fuftained, be altered in a fingle jot or tittlefor He came not to deftroy the law, but to fulfil it-this could not be, if he revoked or altered, but more especially if he opposed, any part of it.

VOL. I.

Сс

" told

""

66

"told, If. xl. 3. Mal. iii. 1.-ye were under "the teachings of the legal and prophetical difpenfation; but fince John's coming, that gofpel, which was prefigured by the cere"monial and typical rites of the Mofaic difpenfation, and foretold for ages together by the prophets, is now openly declared. "This is not confined, as the others were, to the Jews only; but multitudes of perfons, of what nation or character foever, even publicans and finners of the Gentiles, "fenfible of their fin and mifery, fhall be "invited to partake of its bleffings, and will eagerly prefs for an intereft in them, though they be no obfervers of the rites and cere"monies of the law.

66

"And yet the law is not hereby made "void ;-the prophecies, types, and shadows "of the Old Teftament, are fully accom

66

66

plished; the moral law is honoured and "confirmed, its precepts explained, and all "its commandments established as a law of My kingdom, as an eternal and unchange"able rule of life to all My subjects. There"fore think not that I came to deftroy the law. "(naтaλvoα, Matt. v. 17.) to diffolve it, or "loofen men from any of its obligations in point of obedience-It is easier for heaven " and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law "to fail-therefore, however you may have "been taught to make it void by your tradi"tions, and especially with regard to your "treatment of your wives, by which you are daily violating the law of marriage, in "the

66

"the unjust and fcandalous divorcements, "which your rabbies have taught you to "abuse to the purposes of licentioufnefs and

cruelty, yet the law of GOD changeth not, "it is the fame now as in the days of Adam; " and therefore-whoever puts away his wife

"c

66

unjustly, breaks the law which commands "him to cleave to her, and puts afunder what "GOD bath joined together-and if this be "done in order to marry one you like better, " and under fuch circumftances of provoca"tion, as force the wife you put away to marry another man, fhe certainly fins against "the feventh commandment, as does the man who takes her; but yet the guilt of adultery is not confined to them, but lights upon you also, who, by your unlawful treatment of your wife, in putting her away unjustly, caused her to commit it (fee "Matt. v. 32.) You are therefore answerable "before GOD as an adulterer; for there is no difference, in the eye of His law, be"tween the perpetrator of a crime, and the inftigator and promoter of it.”

In the above paraphrafe on the context, I have endeavoured to take in the whole sense of the paffage, as agreeable to, and reconcileable with, the law of the Old Teftament; for it was certainly by this, that our LORD regulated all His thoughts, words, and actions, on every subject, and upon every occafion, as well as in the inftance of what He faid, Luke xvi. 18.

Cc 2

Had

66

66