PREFACE. THE author of this work has, in a few introductory remarks, expressed his views of the importance of the subject of which it treats, and his conviction of the necessity that there is, that those who are interested in the defence of the truth, and in the preservation of the authority and obligation of God's Word and Law, should awake to its earnest consideration. This conviction has strengthened with the progress of his inquiries. He does not conceal his anxiety for the issues of the controversy. This anxiety does not arise from the smallest misgiving as to the scriptural strength and soundness of the argument against the marriage of a man with the sister of his deceased wife. It arises in his mind from the difficulty, in this age, of getting the generality of men to investigate with patience the decisions and principles of the Word of God; and still more, to admit the universality and extent of their obligation, even when they are known. The strength of his own convictions of the truth of the ancient faith, and of the scriptural wisdom of our reforming forefathers in the principles they maintained, and the judgments they pronounced, on the subject, has been increased by every succeeding step in his examination of the several points which have come under his review. He has examined every thing on the opposite side of the question on which he could lay his hands. He has been more anxious to see what had been said or written against the views which he holds, than to see what had been said or written in their favour. He is not aware that he has avoided any difficulty, or that he has practised any concealment, or been guilty of any misrepresentation of the views or arguments of opponents. At the same time, he has not scrupled to deal with all plainness, and even severity, with what he has believed to be glaringly contrary to truth, inju rious to good morals, or subversive of proper reverence for the Word and Law of God. He has no sympathy with the practice of drawing a "silver veil" over what is truly odious and deformed, especially when men are thereby allured to cherish and admire it. The writer has been more anxious to produce a sound and complete argument than to obtain the praise of originality. His views and arguments, however, are his own, and arrived at by his own independent train of thought. He has occasionally noticed in the text the point at which he had first seen the works of certain authors, not for the purpose of guarding his own claim to originality of thought or argument, but to show that the same truth which had commended itself to his own mind had previously commended itself to the minds of others. In this connection he may explain a circumstance, which is of small moment in itself, but which may strike the mind of the attentive reader as an anachronism in the composition of the work, viz., that it has happened, once or twice, that an author is quoted or referred to in a certain part of the work, and then it is intimated, in a later part of it, that his work had been seen or perused for the first time. The simple reason of this is, that the first reference or quotation has been an after insertion into the manuscript, or inserted while the sheets were passing through the press. The author has only to add, in the way of prefatory remark, that his object in making extracts having been to adduce evidence in support of his argument, he has chosen rather to make extracts of considerable length, than to spend his time and labour, and to diminish their effect, in attempting either to work them up into the general composition, or to make them his own by transfusing them into his own style and language. He cannot conclude without acknowledging his obligations to the Rev. Robert Bremner, of this city, for his kindness in examining the proof sheets, and for many valuable hints and suggestions in the progress of the work; and to him, and other private friends, as well as to the Glasgow University Library, and Edinburgh Advocates' Library, for the use of some valuable works, which it was necessary to consult, and which were not in his own possession. GLASGOW, April 1854. MARRIAGE AFFINITY QUESTION. No one who has directed serious attention to this subject, and is capable of taking a comprehensive view of its bearings, can have failed to perceive that it is at once very grave in its character, and far-reaching in its extent. It raises questions of fundamental importance to the existence of the Church, of social order, and of religion itself. It reaches deep into the principles on which must rest the integrity of the Scripture Canon, the Rule of Faith, and even the obligation on Christians of the moral law itself, as revealed in the Ten Commandments, as an authoritative rule of life. The truth of this, it is believed, will appear as we proceed. The assault on long-established and universally-received truths has generally this advantage, in free countries at least, that it is allowed to proceed far before the friends of truth take the alarm. Long after the change has been descried by the more observant and penetrating, who know the bearing of principles, and have been accustomed to mark and to weigh their results, as unfolded in the history of churches and nations, and in the moral government of God; the mass of society, and of those who take their "form and pressure" from the men and the things which surround them, can with difficulty be roused to perceive the dangers that are imminent, till error and wickedness have obtained such a footing that resistance becomes almost hopeless, and even impossible. Few men live by faith. They can only see the danger of bad principles when fully developed in their pernicious effects. It seems as if the social or corporate evils induced on fallen humanity by its own depravity, could be remedied only when they come to such a height as to subvert society, excite great revolutions, or draw down the manifest judgments of God. Social evils are not developed in a day; and even long after they have taken root, and budded, and blossomed, will the world refuse to believe that they can ever ripen into their poisonous and destructive fruit. This is especially the case where the principles of God's Word have to come into collision with the passions and interests of men. Such is the case with the present question. It cannot be denied that it has made immense progress in what we deem the wrong direction, while yet little or no effort has been made to stem the torrent of unsound opinion. The enemy has been widely sowing the tares, while we have not only slept, but have disliked exceedingly to be awakened. If the Church of Christ, holding what we believe to be the A 2 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. truth on this subject, will not arouse itself in a cause where passion, wealth, and influence stimulate activity and zeal, and furnish means to its enemies to overthrow it, the result cannot be very long doubtful. We are often told that we live in an age when nothing either can or ought to stand which cannot abide the most searching investigation, and we complacently think that the Scripture adage is now reversed, "Say not that the former times are better than these, for thou dost not inquire wisely concerning this matter." There is both truth and error in the statement. I admit that in all matters of physical science or material interest, men are intent on searching them to the bottom, with a view to reach the actual truth, and so obtain the actual material benefit, which cannot be obtained in any other way. I doubt much if they are equally in earnest to reach the actual truth in things spiritual and moral, and to bow to its authority if it were attained. I believe the contrary to be the fact. They commence, not with the desire of discovering the true, and on its being attained, proceed with the simple resolution to follow it; but with the desire to discover the agreeable and the convenient; not to discover, but to evade or turn the edge of the truth. They reject the authority that is divine, under colour of denouncing the authority that is human; and they play with the foundations of truth and error with as much levity and reckless caprice as a child does with its castle-building materials, and with as much reckless glee could see the temple of truth destroyed, and scarcely even make the fool's apology, "Am not I in sport. How else is it, that in things of the most solemn importance, affecting the glory of God, the honour of His law, and the whole relations of human society, civil and ecclesiastical, public and private, they flaunt in our faces, as their standard, the loose, inconsiderate sayings of some popular divine, or selected specimens of ecclesiastics little famed for Bible orthodoxy -some Neologian critic, or Talmudical Jew-or some clever lawyer, more remarkable for political dexterity than for gravity of religion or steadiness of morals-nay, of some popular novelist, male or female-and then solace themselves with the quietus, "If we have erred, it is in good company?" This may do very well to shut the mouth of "a man as I am;" but it will not do so to deal with God, and the things of God; and let all men know, that at the great day of account it will signify very little whether the company in which men have erred has been good or bad. It will, however, signify a great deal if they have erred in misinterpreting and subverting the law of God, and overthrowing the faith of many; and good company will prove as small a shelter as it is an apology for approaching things sacred in a spirit so irreverent. This spirit of frivolous irreverence, when dealing with the Word of God, is not peculiar to the present time. It is not even characteristic of an age properly called sceptical. It is as characteristic of the reign of Popery as of infidelity, and is a perfect contrast to the noble inquiry of the genuine Reformers" What saith the Lord?" It is, at all events, not the spirit befitting a subject so delicate and grave as that which we are about to consider; and I trust it will be treated by us with all seriousness, and though with little respect to human authority, when it traverses the authority of God, yet neither with presumption nor with undue self-confidence. It is a question of great difficulty, as well as of vital moment. "The question concerning the marriages of those who are connected by blood or affinity, is sufficiently grave, and not seldom agitated with great HEADS OF ARRANGEMENT AND DISCUSSION. heats. For he who shall wish to assign the true and natural causes why such marriages are so unlawful that they are forbidden by law and morals, will learn by experience how difficult it is; nay, it cannot be estimated.”* The writer desires, therefore, to enter upon it and discuss it with caution and humility, and with earnest prayer to God that his efforts may be for His glory, and the vindication of His truth and law. It is with the desire and hope of awakening some interest on this question, especially in the church to which he belongs, and of furnishing those who have not access to the main sources of information on the subject, with a general view of the facts and arguments in support of the views he holds, that he is induced to undertake the present work. The following are the Heads of Argument and Discussion under which it is proposed to treat the subject: I. The State of the Question, with the testimony of the Church and the Relative Testimony of Human Legislation in Past Times. II. The Law of Nature-what it is, and to what extent it can be a rule on this subject. III. The Word of God, and in what way it is to be used as a rule and law on this and other social questions; and under this head,— 1. To show that the whole Word of God - Old Testament and New-is our rule: 2. The bearing of Levitical law on the question: : 3. The bearing of the 18th Chapter of Leviticus in particular :- 6. To consider the special Texts in this Chapter bearing on the point at issue. IV. The effects of the opposite opinions both on Principle and Practice. V. What weight is due to Authorities on the question. CHAPTER I. THE STATE OF THE QUESTION, WITH THE TESTIMONY OF THE CHURCH AND THE RELATIVE TESTIMONY OF HUMAN LEGISLATION IN PAST TIMES. Section I-State of the Question. HERE it may be proper to state, in the outset, that the writer is the farthest possible from holding the notion that "Catholic Consent,' whether real or pretended, is "a divine informant, either supplementary to, or interpretative of Scripture." He holds, with the learned divines of the Westminster Assembly, that "the authority of the holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God, (who is truth itself,) the author thereof; and therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God"—and so he holds of every truth revealed in the Scripture, * Grotius, "De Jure Belli ac Pacis," lib. ii. sec. xii. |