These Sections teach the divine law of marriage as to incest and as to divorce.

1st. Incest consists of sexual intercourse between parties forbidden by the divine law to marry, because of their relationship. Marriage between these parties is impossible; and no matter what may be the provisions of human laws or the decisions of human courts, such pretended marriages are void ab initio — invalid in essence as well as improper and injurious. Since the degrees of relationship within which marriage is excluded differ in nearness, so the crime of incest differs, according to these varying degrees, from the highest to the least measure of criminality. The obligation to avoid intermarriage between near blood-relations is a dictate of nature as well as of the word of God.

The only law on this subject in the Scriptures is the Levitical law recorded in Lev. xx. 10-21. If this law is still binding, it carries with it the principle that it is incest for a man to cohabit with any one of his deceased wife^s relations nearer in blood than it is lawful for him to do of his own. If this law is not binding now, there is no other law of God remaining on the subject of incest except the law of nature.

The Greek and Roman Catholic churches agreed in holding that this law is still binding, since the reason of the law rests upon permanent relationships, and not

upon any special circumstances peculiar to society among the Jews. All branches of the Protestant Church — Episcopal, Lutheran and Presbyterian — have maintained the same principle in their Confessions of Faith or canons of discipline. It is asserted in these Sections of our Confession. But a great diversity of sentiment and practice prevails in different parts of our Church on this subject, and for the most part the enforcement of this rule has been left to the discretion of the majority of each local church court. Several efforts have been made, in 1826 and 1827 and 1843, 1845 and 1847,* to have this Section of this Chapter changed, but without effect.

2d. The divine law as to divorce is, that marriage is a contract for life between one man and one woman, and that it is, ipso facto , dissolved only by death (Rom. vii. 2, 3), and that the only causes upon which any civil authority can dissolve the union of those whom God has joined together are (a) adultery, (6) wilful, causeless and incurable desertion.

(1.) The only causes upon which it is lawful to grant a divorce are — (a) adultery ; this is explicitly allowed by Christ (Matt. v. 31, 32 ; xix. 9) ; and (6) wilful, causeless and incurable desertion. This is allowed by Paul to the Christian husband or wife deserted by their heathen partner. 1 Cor. vii. 15. The reason in the case is also self-evident, since such desertion, being total and incurable, makes the marriage an empty name, void of all reality, and, being causeless, leaves the deserting party without remaining rights to be defended.

(2.) Such causes, however, do not, ipso facto y dissolve * See Baird's Digest, pp. 163-168.

the marriage bond, but only give the right to the innocent party, if they so elect, to demand that it shall be dissolved by competent authority. And if they do demand the dissolution, they are not left to their own discretion in the case, but they must seek for the vindication of their rights at the hands of the public authorities and according to the law of the land.

(3.) The civil law, however, has no authority to grant divorces upon any other grounds than those above defined as allowed by the law of God. Whenever they do so, as is constantly done in fact, the civil authorities put themselves into direct conflict with the law of God in the case. Hence all Christians and church courts are bound in such cases to disregard the judgment of the civil authority, and to regard and treat such unlawful divorces as null and void. And if the parties to a marriage unrighteously dissolved marry again, they are to be regarded and treated by those who fear God as living in those new marriages in the sin of adultery. Matt. xix. 8,9; Actsiv. 19; v. 29.

Marriage is an ordinance of God, designed for the mutual help of husband and wife, for the honourable propagation of the human race, and for other important purposes connected with the comfort and improvement of the species. It jyas instituted before the entrance of sin, and must, therefore, be a holy ordinance, and no hindrance to men in the service of God. The Lord saw that "it was not good for Adam," even in Paradise, " to be alone," and that " there was no help meet for him" to be found among all the other creatures. He was therefore pleased to form the woman from his side, as " bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh," and, having brought her to Adam, he joined them together as husband and wife, and thus gave an example to be imitated by their descendants. As God made no more than one woman for Adam, he thereby plainly indicated his will that every man should have only one vvife, and every woman only one husband. In this manner Malachi explains the fact, when he says : " And did not he make one ?" — namely one woman — " yet had he the residue of the Spirit. And wherefore one ? That he might seek a godly seed." — Mai. ii. 15. Polygamy was first introduced by Lamech, an abandoned descendant of Cain (Gen. iv. 19), and, though practised, by the patriax'chs, and other pious men, it is contrary both to the divine institution and to the law of nature. As God in his providence maintains so near an equality between the males and females born into the world, it is manifestly his intention that one woman only should be assigned to one man ; and wherever polygamy has prevailed, it has been attended with numerous evils, both to the parties themselves and to the public. It promotes jealousies and contentions among the wives of the same husband; produces distracted afi"ections, or the loss of all affection in the husband himself; tends to the degradation of the female character, to the neglect of children, and manifold other evils. The words of Christ (Matt. xix. 9) plainly imply a prohibiI

I

tion of polygamy; for if " whosoever putteth away his wife [except it be for incontinence], and murrieth another, committeth adultery," he who marrieth another without putting away the first, must be no less guilty of adultery.

SectonIII. — It is lawful for all sorts of people to marry who are able with judgment to give their consent: ^ yet it is the duty of Christians to marry only in the Lord.^ And therefore such as profess the true reformed religion should not marry with infidels, Papists, or other idolaters: neither should such as are godly l3e unequally yoked, by marrying with such as are notoriously wicked in their life, or maintain damnable heresies.^

1 Tim. iv, 3. 1 Cor. Gen >xiv, 57, 58.

Heb xiil. 4. vii. 36-3 1 Cor. vii. 39. Gen. xxxiv. 14. E\od. xxxiv. IG.

Deut. vii. 3, 4. 1 Kings xl. A. Neh. xiii. 25-27. Mai. ii. 1 1, 12. 2 Cor. vi. 14.

EXPOSITION.

The Church of Rome forbids the marriage of the clergy, and of all under the celibate vow. This is one of "the doctrines of devils" which is mentioned as characteristic of the great apostasy (1 Tim. iv, 1-3): " Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of DEVILS, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry," «Scc. It is a doctrine in direct opposition to the Word of God, Avhich allows " all sorts of people to marry, who are able with judgment to give their consent." An apostle declares that "marriage is honourable in all (Heb. xiii. 4), without excepting those who are employed in the public offices of religion. Under the Old Testament, the prophets, the priests, and all those who attended more immediately upon the service of God, were permitted to marry. Under the New Testament, also, the ministers of religion have an express allowance to enter into the marriage state. That the Apostle Peter was a. married man is evident from Matt. viii. 14. Philip the evangelist " had four daughters, virgins, which did proj)hesy." Acts xxi. 9. Paul claimed a right to " lead about a sister, a wife, as well as the other apostles." — 1 Cor. ix. 5. And it is repeatedly mentioned that " a bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife." — 1 Tim. iii. 2 ; Tit. i. 6. It is thus evident that the ministers of religion have the same liberty in this martter that ether men enjoy. The constrained celibacy

25G CONFESSION OF FAITH. [[cHAP. XXIV.

of the Romisli clergy is one of the chief causes of the abandoned profligacy which has ever existed in that Church.

Under the former dispensation, the people of God were expressly prohibited entering into marriages with heathens, and especially with the Canaanites. — Exod. xxxiv. 12-16; Deut. vii. 3. Such marriages were reckoned in themselves null, and so Ezra and Nehemiah caused the Jews to put away their heathenish wives. — Ezra x. ; Neh. xiii. Upon the introduction of the gospel, it must have frequently happened that a husband or a wife embraced the Christian faith, while their partner continued attached to idolatry. In this case, the Apostle Paul determines that the believing husband or wife should continue with the unbeliever : " If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him." — 1 Cor. vii. 12, 13. The apostle thus decides, that after marriage, if either the husband or the wife embrace the Christian religion, the other party still continuing a heathen, this difference in religion is not a sufficient ground for a separation. If the idolatrous party is still willing to live with the party converted, it is the duty of the believer cheerfully and faithfully to perform his or her obligations, notwithstanding their different sentiments regarding religion. But if a Christian man or woman have their choice to make, they are required to marry " only in the Lord." The intermarrying of the professors of the true with those of a false religion, or of believers with those who are evidently strangers to true godliness, is prohibited, at least in ordinary cases (2 Cor. vi. 14) : " Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers." The disregard of this rule is productive of many evils. The Christian who unites himself to such a partner exposes himself to many powerful temptations. He must necessarily mingle in the society of those whose views and pursuits are of a character entirely opposite to his own. His opportunities of religious improvement will be greatly lessened. Family worship can scarcely be maintained. His endeavours to train up his children in the fear of God will be counteracted by the example and instructions of his unbelieving partner. Instead of an help meet for him in his Christian warfare, she will prove a snare to his soul. From this cause, many have apostatized from the faith, and others who have maintained their integrity have pierced themselves through with many sorrows.