Mofes, as touching ceremonies and rites, "do not bind Chriftian men, nor the civil

precepts thereof ought of neceffity to be "received in any commonwealth: yet notwithstanding no Chriftian man whatso"ever is free from the obedience of the "commandments which are called Moral."

I SUPPOSE it is agreed on both fides, that marriage is a divine institution, founded on the nature and reason of things, and an object of the moral law;-as it is an object of this law, it is argued on the other fide, that "the laws concerning marriage cannot be "reckoned a mere object of those rites and "ceremonies which were to vanish * away." But feveral of the Jewish laws relative to the matrimonial connexion of the fexes, are in

part, or wholly, of " thofe civil precepts,"

which ought not of neceffity to be received in any Christian commonwealth. Therefore, upon the teftimony of our Church, which is declaratory of the word of God, all the laws relative to marriage among the Jews ought not to be received by Christians: Vol. I. Page 283.

The

The reafon is obvious; they had ingredients which were objects only of the Mosaic civil polity, and in that form were calculated only for a particular people, under particular circumftances; and laws of this defcription do not bind "Chriftian men," notwithstanding they might be very well digefted to fuit the fituation of perfons and things in the days of Mofes.

To infer that Polygamy had a finful idea annexed to it (fee vol. I. ch. iv. page 285.) by the lies invented through the ignorant zeal of the first profeffors of Christianity, and fathers of the Church,-to involve them all in the accufation of lying, upon many occafions, are fuggeftions that proceed either from confummate ignorance, or fomething worse. That the fathers in general do not deferve any fuch imputation, is evident from their writings that are admitted to be genuine :-in particular, the apoftolical fathers (I mean thofe of the first century) writ nothing upon marriage, but what is strictly confonant to the New Teftament. Madan does not seem to have attended to their writ

ings at all, but to fome ignorant fecondband teftimony; in confequence of which they are very much misrepresented. That Polygamy had no existence among the profeffors of Christianity in the first century, is evident from the apoftolical fathers never cenfuring it in Chriftian focieties. In the fecond century a fect arose that contended for the lawfulness of Polygamy, led on by Bafilides and Carpocrates; and another fect foon fprung up, in the direct contrary extreme,* condemning marriage itself, with the apoftate Tatian at their head; but the Catholic fathers condemned both;-they pursued a middle path, all condemning Polygamy, but recommending Monogamy upon principles of piety.

I ATTRIBUTE to misguided zeal, and the malevolence of prejudice, the pofition that it is horrible blafphemy against the holiness and perfection of God's law" to reprefent Chrift" as a new law-giver," and the

*It is probable both these fects had fome followers. To the latter we owe Monaftic feverities ;---to the formerMadan's new light.

+ Vol. I. Page 287.

introducer of a more pure and perfect fyftem of morality, than of the law which was given by Moses; as also the oblique hints that thefe new Species of blafphemers are much in the fame predicament with, and in many refpects followers of, the heretic Socinus, and that their liberal fentiments are old darknefs, not new light. I may fay here very justly, light comes from Heaven, but furious zeal from hell.

I WILL just remark, at the end of these obfervations and animadverfions on the chapter of Polygamy, which have extended themselves to a greater length than I at firft intended, or was aware of, that Madan's introduction of so many Hebrew words has been the cause why numbers have been led away with an idea, that he has incontrovertibly proved his hypothefis of the lawfulnefs of Polygamy-by quotations from the Hebrew Bible;-I wish to undeceive the public in this refpect, and do affure my readers that Polygamy is only supported by the ingenuity of Madan's reasoning, and the artful and prejudiced interpretation of certain

fcripture paffages;-all highly finished in point of compofition and elegance of lan→ guage:-error courts thofe gaudy appearances, to hide its native deformity; but truth dreads not to make its appearance plain and unornamented. To quote Hebrew to people that do not understand it, reminds me of a pompous pulpit orator, (who fhall be nameless) quoting Greek to those who never learned it :-As the learned St. Jerome fays, in recommendation of charity, Min side bed Inλniàdew Axano, Homer's Il. b. 1. 1. 1. And the eloquent St. Bafil in favour of neighbourhood, Κεραμεύς κέραμος καλέει,

Καὶ τέκτονι τεκλων

Και πλωχός πλωχω φθονίει, και κοιδὸς κοιδω. Hefiod.*. Rifum teneatis amici?

*Opera et Dies, 1. 25, 26.

CHAP.