Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

meaning, but when we are afraid to find it." She, therefore, who, to gratify a passion impatient of restraint, marries an unconverted man, forgets her allegiance to the best of sovereigns, violates a divine precept, and joins affinity with one who is an enemy to both his people and his government.

To avoid the force of the apostolic injunction, it has been objected, That marriage is a civil institution intended for civil purposes; that religion is a matter totally distinct, and should therefore have nothing to do in forming such connexions. Now suppose, for a moment, that the descendants of Abraham had argued thus when Jehovah said concerning the Canaanitish nations, and urged the worship of himself as the ground of the prohibition, "Thou shalt make no marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son: for they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly." What answer might the captious objector have reasonably expected? Surely no other than that which was afterwards given by a zealous reformer-" Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives? Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves."

It is cheerfully granted, however, that marriage, simply considered, is an appointment purely civil: nor does this concession in the least affect the argument in question; because whatever civil ends were to be answered by the institution, are surely as

[ocr errors]

fully accomplished by the union of two believers, as by the union of two persons of an opposite description.

Every man is induced by some motive to marry this woman in preference to that. Some men are influenced by the love of gain; some by other motives equally detestable; and some, it is hoped, though perhaps but comparatively few, by the dictates of affection. In a man of true piety, religion becomes a motive that urges him to seek for a woman whose views and experience are congenial with his own. He remembers that it is said, "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance:" and the object of his choice being in other respects conformable to his wishes, he sees it his duty and thinks it a privilege to marry her. Both parties aim, or ought to aim, at promoting their own happiness; and in order to this, means are used that are judged most likely to effect it; but does the motive in either case alter the nature of the institution itself? Surely not; nor can I believe that any person who has deliberately thought on the subject will seriously assert it.

If promiscuous marriages with unbelievers had been allowed by the head of the Christian church, the apostle needed not have taken so much pains to persuade the Corinthian querists still to cohabit with their unbelieving partners; because this might have been done in a more summary manner, by informing them that marriage was a civil appointment of God; that religion was entirely out of the question; that if they were but married, it was of no importance when, or to whom; and that, as to the case of

the widow, he had, for the same reason, no restrictions to impose. This answer would at once have quieted their minds, and have remained on record as a standard by which to decide similar inquiries in every period of the Christian church.

But all the objections to which I advert, place the apostle as a logician, not to say as a divine, in the most inconsistent light imaginable. The new con

verts were, on account of their faith and steady attachment to Christ, persecuted from city to city. Of many it might be truly said, as the apostle did concerning himself, that they had no certain dwelling place: and for this very reason he dissuades them for the moment, or, as he expresses it, Because of the present distress, from marrying even with believers themselves: while at the same time he was saying, on the principle of the objections, or must have said, had the question been asked, It is neither inconsistent with your Christian profession, nor with the will of Christ, for you to marry those very enemies who now thirst for your blood, but from whose malice it is nevertheless at all times your happiness to escape! He that can believe such contradiction, let him believe it-yet this is a consequence fairly drawn from the objections which I have endeavoured to invalidate.

I have briefly mentioned, Melissa, all, or at least the most weighty objections brought against the law of marriage, as it respects the real Christian; and she that feels a daily obligation to divine goodness and divine mercy, will neither want persuasion nor argument to regard it.

I am, &c.

LETTER II.

Congenial passions souls together bind,
And every calling mingles with its kind;
Soldier unites with soldier, swain with swain,
The mariner with him that roves the main.

IN the preceding letter, Melissa, I have stated the divine law graciously given to regulate the Christian Church respecting marriage. The injunction you see is explicit: subjection is therefore an indispensable duty, and ought to be considered as a privilege eminently valuable.

But supposing the believer in Jesus had no rule in this case by which to regulate his conduct, one might reasonably conclude that a regard to his own happi-* ness would prompt him to solicit the hand of her who, all things considered, is most likely to promote it. But is it probable, is it possible, that felicity can be secured by a connexion with one whose views of herself, of the world, and of God, are so different from those which experience has made to him both useful and familiar? It may be said, in reference to those that think so, as was said on another occasion: "The children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light." They act more in character: their principles and their practice are consistent. For among these, few, if any, instances are seen of strong attachment to Christians who are eminent for spirituality of heart and of conduct and perhaps not an individual could be found, that would not see at once the incongruity,

and be even shocked at the bare proposal of marriage with a disciple of Mahomet, or a votary of Diana. But the believer in JESUS, who deliberately gives her hand to a merely nominal Christian, is less cautious; because she must know that the object of her choice, however different and splendid his profession, is nevertheless as great a stranger to the life of grace and true godliness, as the deluded follower of that arch impostor, or the idolatrous worshipper of the Ephesian divinity!

It will be readily admitted that an unconverted man may be a good husband, a worthy master, a kind father: but amiable and endearing as these qualities are, and that they are endearing and amiable wherever found, is cheerfully acknowledged; yet surely they make not the aggregate of a Christian's happiness in the marriage life! These are ingredients indispensably necessary to the domestic felicity of professor and profane: but the follower of Jesus, who thinks and acts in this case consistently with his profession, has, besides these, other highly important considerations that demand notice, and which are indeed essential to the completion of his happiness. He remembers that the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal; nor can he forget that it is said concerning these, "Be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment-Stand fast in one spirit, with one mind, striving together for the faith of the Gospel." But how can two walk together except they be agreed? How can there be joint effort where there is opposition of sentiment? How could such persons consistently attend to the apostolic exhortation, "Dwell with each other

« VorigeDoorgaan »