Page images
PDF
EPUB

6

State by God himself, in the firft Settlement of Civil Societies, long before the earliest Writings.

out of the Pe

It now remains therefore that I fhew, That S. XII. Marriages out of the Peculium, were always It was agreethought derogatory to the holiness of the Seed, able to the Noever fince the time that God has been pleased, Times, to betions of those by the fore-mentioned Covenant, to make one lieve it a polSeed holy in contradiftinction to others. This lution of the is the lefs to be thought strange in our facred Holy Seed, if Writings, because it is agreeable to the fenfe of they married the earlieft, even Heathen Antiquity, prefer- culium. ved in their firft and earliest Writings, which come nearest to the Times accounted for in our facred Writings. Marriages with other Nations were from thofe times difliked, unless fome Nation were admitted to a Jus Connubii of which we have inftances in Livy. Accordingly, we find Abraham careful that his Son Ifaac fhould match into his own Family, though not yet conftituted a Holy Seed, which began in the Defcendents from himself. The like care Rebekah had for her Son Facob, that he might alfo match into the Family of her Brother Laban. That made her other Son Efau alfo, to match into the Family of Ishmael, becaufe he found it pleafing to his Father and Mother. Yet neither Laban nor Ishmael were of the Holy Seed. In Athens, Themiftocles was reckoned as a Ni0, because his Mother was not an Athenian by Extraction, and there was a particular place allotted for those who were fo in the Cynofures, to exercise by themfelves, of lefs reputation than that was where. they were exercised, who had both Parents free-born Citizens. So the Romans allowed none for complete Cives, but thofe who were of both Parents Romans. Mark Antony's Chil

[ocr errors]

dren

Phil, iii. S.

dren of Cleopatra, though a Queen, were not capable, by the Roman Laws of inheriting any thing from him. They were not in poteftate, nor heredes fui. The fame was the cafe of Jephtha, who was excluded from inheriting with his Brethren for this very reafon, because he was the Son of aftrange Woman, that is, not of a Jewish Extraction. By this it appears, that even in the Age of Fephtha, a Woman that was not an Ifraelitefs by Extraction, could not be a Wife to an Ifraelite, but only a Concubine, as afterwards; and, that Sons by fuch Concu bines were difabled to inherit with Sons of both Parents of Ifraelitish Original. Thus it 2 Cor. xi. 22. appears, that St. Paul being an Hebrew of Hebrews, that is, an Hebrew on both fides, as well on his Mothers fide as that of his Fa ther, had really caufe of boafting, fo far as his intereft in the old Peculium was really a cause of boafting. For, by thefe Reasonings, a defect on either fide fo far diminished the Right of the Perfon fo deficient to the Privileges of the Peculium, that he wanted Privileges, allowed by the Laws to those whofe claim to the Holy Seed was not, in that regard, fo exceptionable. Confidering therefore that this Defect weakned the Title to the Privileges of the Seed, it must confequently weaken his Title to the Seed it felf, which, on account of its being the Seed, had a Right to thofe Privileges. For the Parent which was not defcended from Abraham, could derive no Title to its own: Off-fpring to the Seed with which the . Covenant was made, nor to its Holiness. So far therefore, the Children proceeding from fuch Marriages, were lofers by the Parents Fault that had been the cause of the Mar riage. The very mingling of the Seed was a

debafing

debafing it. A mingled People, Jer. xxv. 20, 24. L. 37. Ezek. xxx. 5. A mixed Multitude, Exod. xii. 38. Numb. xi. 4. Neh. xiii. 3. Πλήθο úμlov in the Greek, are Expreffions fignifying the fame thing with what the Greek Writers concerning Colonies call MJades, a mixture of feveral Nations by Marriages: And this very fame Expreflion, That the Holy Seed had mingled themselves with the People of thofe Lands, is ufed to fignifie this Sin against the Holiness of the Seed, Ezr. ix. 2. So ignoble an alloy is reckoned as a polluting of it as far as it was in the Parents Power to pollute it. By the reafoning of the Priests in the Prophet Haggai, Holy Flesh touching indifferent things did not confecrate them; but if it touched any thing unclean, it was it felf polluted by it, Hagg. ii. 12, 13. And by the like Reasoning on the fame Subject in the New Teftament, a Chriftian committing Fornication does not confecrate the Harlot, but makes the Members of Chrift Members of the Harlot, 1 Cor. vi. 15. For the Holiness whereby God confecrates the Peculium, confifts in his feparating them from all the People that were upon the face of the Earth, Exod. xxxiii. 16. So alfo the Holiness that is their Duty, confifts in feparating themselves from all unholy Converfation of what kind foever: And it is the Word par ticularly made ufe of in the Subject I am dif courfing of, when the Holy Seed preferve the honour of their Station in feparating from Gentile Marriages, Ezr. vi. 21. ix. 1, 2. X. II, 16. Nehem. ix. 2. x. 28, 30. xiii. 3. So alfo the Reasoning of Fob, Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one, xiv. 4. holds here alfo, That, as to the reafon of the thing, a Holy Seed could not be expected from an unholy D

Gentile

§. XIII.

Gentile Parent. The Reafoning on the contrary, how the Federal Holiness of one Parent came to be thought fufficient for the Federal Holinefs of the Seed, I fhall afterwards account for. At prefent it is fufficient to observe, that though the Child born of fuch a Marriage did indeed derive his Title to Federal Holiness from the Parent who by his Birth was Federally Holy, yet that would not excufe that Parent in confcience, and before God, for having done what lay in him to deprive his Off-fpring of fo great a Privilege and Bleffing. However, he could not account for his Violation of his own Holiness in not obferving the Separation now mentioned. By the Jus Gentium then received, Parents were obliged to marry according to the dignity of their Station. On this account fevere Laws were made against the Marriage of Free-born Women with Slaves ; and with this Crime this fort of Marriage is charged by the Apostle, of being unequally yoked, 2 Cor. vi. 14. This makes this fort of Marriage undecent, that it is against the dignity of the Orthodox Confort. But the Dignity being facred, is that which makes it Piacular alfo.

This Reafon of Federal Holiness was alone Particularly, in fufficient to binder pioufly difpofed Perfons, regard of the unclean Sacra who had a due regard to the great honour done used by the them in admitting them to that Federal HoliHeathen Con- nefs, from engaging in fuch Marriages. But forts, either in there was alfo another confideration that was the Office it felf of Matrimony, yet more inconfiftent. That was the Sacred or in their Fa- Rites of the Marriages themselves, and the femily-Religi- veral Holy Offices wherein the married Perfons were concerned to join, if not in the Solemniza tion it felf, yet at leaft afterwards on occafion of their Oeconomical Duties. I know very well, an Opinion has of late prevailed among defpi

ons.

Jers

fers of Antiquity, as if Marriage were an Of fice fo purely fecular, as to have no ingredient of Religion concerned in it. For my prefent purpose it is fufficient to obferve, that this was very different from the fenfe of these earlier Ages of which I am now difcourfing. Plutarch on the contrary conceives, that there is no Bond more holy than that of Matrimony: syeover, desiv, icpaléeg nalais, in Erotic. And the obfcene Symbols of all the Heathen Myfteries, plainly imply, that this was their agreed fenfe, from the very Originals of their Myfteries; and God himself has fo far countenanced it, as to represent his own Union with his Peculium under the Allegory of Marriage, as I have fhewn that the Heathen Gods had done before. Each Family then had their facred Rites. David particularly mentions his, 1 Sam. xx. 29. much more thefe Patriarchal Families. In the Roman Laws in Sacris effe, fignifies the fame as Cod. vi. 42,3t. to be in Poteftate, ftill to continue in the Fa- and 54. 3. and ther's Family: And facris remitti, or abfolvi, 55. 7. and 58. II. and 59.3. the fame with being abdicated, or given to be and 60.2. vii. adopted into another Family. Thus it was in 40. 1. the cafe of Children. And, for the fame Reafon, the taking a Wife was admitting her to the Sacra of the Family of the Husband, who, if he was a Heathen, worshipped, if not contrary, at least, rival Deities; and therefore, muft have been not only a great affront and indignity, but also a downright defecration. By the Doctrine and Reafonings of St. Paul, it must have been a nowovia with the Devil. For fo he argues: What fellowship hath Righteousness with Unrighteousness? And what Communion (xovavía is his word) bath Light with Darkness? And what concord hath Chrift with Belial? or, What bath he that believeth with an In

part

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »