And His mercy is on them that fear Him from generation to generation.

He hath fhewed ftrength with His arm, He hath fcattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.

He hath put down the mighty from their feats, and hath exalted them of low degree.

He hath filled the hungry with good things, and the rich He hath fent empty away.

He hath holpen His fervant Ifrael, in remembrance of his mercy, &c.

He will keep the feet of His faints.

The bows of the mighty men are broken, and they that ftumbled are girt with ftrength-the wicked shall be filent in darkness.

The adverfaries of the LORD fhall be broken to pieces-the LORD maketh poor and maketh rich, He bringeth low and lifteth. up.

They that are full have hired themselves out for bread, and they that were hungry ceafed.

He fhall give ftrength unto His king, and exalt the horn of His anointed.

The conclufion of all which appears to be, that either we do not worship the fame GOD which the Jews did, or the GoD we worship doth not difallow nor difapprove polygamy. Miraculous bleffings beftowed of GOD, in answer to the prayers of people living in open breach of His law, are totally contradictory to the whole fcripture-character of GOD. The way of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD, but the prayer of the upright is His delight. Prov. xv. 9. He that turneth away bis

To fay that He once did not difallow or difapprove it, but that He has changed His mind upon the fubjectis one of those affertions which are diametrically oppofite to the attribute of unchangeableness, fo ftrongly marked out in fcripture, and which is, and muft be, of the very effence of an ALL-PERFECT BEING.

VOL. I.

ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination. Prov. xxviii. 9. Comp. Pf. lxvi. 18, 19, 20.

In what has been faid on the fubject of this chapter on polygamy, I fhould think arguments enough have been brought to prove that it was not finful in the fight of God, under the Old Teftament, and that the bleffed GOD, by becoming man (1 Cor. xv. 47.) and condefcending to appear on earth for us men, and for our falvation, in the likeness of finful flesh, Rom. viii. 3; made of a woman made under the law, Gal. iv. 4; came not to deftroy the law, by leffening the Security which it was evidently made to afford the weaker fex against the stronger. That the treachery which was fo pofitively forbidden, and fo amply provided against, among the Jews, fhould be allowed to Chriftians (who are children of the fame Heavenly Father, fubjects of the fame Almighty King) and even commanded them in fome cafes, is a monftrous fuppofition!-repugnant to the pofitive inftitution of GoD, They shall be one flesh -contradictory to all found reafon-and abhorrent from every generous, honourable, and humane principle. Whatever the fituation of the man may be, the danger arising to the woman from the confequences of feduction and dereliction is equal, therefore equally provided against by the law of God.

How polygamy became reprobated in the Chriftian church is eafily accounted for, when we confider how early the reprobation of marriage

5

marriage itself began to appear. The Gnoftics, whom Epiphanius derives from Simon Magus, condemned marriage in the most fhocking terms, faying that it was of the "Devil;" but this was to fupport themfelves in their horrible tenet, that "all wo

men should be common amongst them.” Better people foon afterwards condemned marriage as unlawful to Chriftians, and this under a wild notion of greater purity and perfection, in keeping from all intercourfe with the other sex. This opinion divided itself into many fects, and gave great trouble to the church before it was discountenanced. Still fecond marriages were held infamous, and called no better than lawful whoredom. Nay, they were not ashamed to write, that,

a

"man's first wife being dead, it was adultery, "and not marriage, to take another." Amidst all this, polygamy muft neceffarily receive the fevereft anathema-for if it could be fuppofed unlawful for Chriftians to marry at all, and then fo deteftable to marry a fecond time, after the death of a wife, the having two at once must be, a fortiori, accounted more horrible than all the reft. All these feveral opinions had texts of fcripture preffed into their service, by the ingenious zeal of their feveral abettors: the Old Teftament was of no authority in the matter; the New Teftament was made to speak what it did not mean, concerning what it does mention; and conftrued fo as to condemn what, when rightly understood, it does not mention. The two T 2

firft

first of these conceits about marriage have been long exploded, except with respect to the Romish clergy, who, to this hour, are forbidden to marry. But polygamy throughout

the Chriftian church, the western part of it at leaft, is looked upon as a fin against the seventh commandment, though there is not a fyllable in the whole Bible which makes it fo. When I mention polygamy, I would always be understood to mean on the man's fide, for on the fide of the woman, the whole scripture fhews it to be a capital offence.

Why this diftinction should be made, Hɛ best knows who made it; but, in part, we may suppose, from the confequences attending on one fide, which cannot be on the other; these are finely touched by the strong and masterly pen of the fon of Sirach-Ecclus xxiii. 22, 23. Having fpoken of the adulterer, he faith, (agreeably to Lev. xx. 10.) This man fhall be punished in the streets of the city, (fee alfo Deut. xxii. 24.) and where he fufpecteth not be shall be taken. He then proceeds-Thus fhall it go alfo with the wife that leaveth her husband, and bringeth in an heir by another-For, first-she hath disobeyed the law of the Moft High-fecondly-fhe bath trefpaffed against her own husband-and thirdlyfhe hath played the whore in adultery, and brought children by another man. She shall be brought out into the congregation, and inquifition fhall be made of her children.-Her children shall not take root, and her branches fhall bring no fruit. She shall leave her memory to

be

be curfed, and her reproach shall not be blotted out. Though these be the words of an apocryphal writer, they deserve the highest regard, because they are exactly confonant with the law of GOD. But it is very extraordinary, that in a discourse against fornicators, whoremongers, and adulterers (which commences, ver. 16. and is continued to ver. 26. inclufive) not a word fhould be faid against polygamifts, if polygamy were a fin as much on the man's fide as on the woman's.-He moft likely would not have paffed it over in filence had there been any law against it.

His defcription of the adulteress is very fine, and the aggravations of her offence, by bringing forth a fpurious iffue, ftrongly marked; but they are fuch as cannot exist on the man's fide, and therefore hence, in part at least, arises the difference.

What he fays of the adulterer is also remarkably ftriking, and evidently taken from Fob xxiv. 15. We lofe much of its propriety, from our mis-translation of 'O 'Avpwπος παραβαίνων απο της κλίνης αυτο-A man that breaketh wedlock, we call it; but this is not a translation of the words-they literally are -the man who tranfgreffeth from out of his bed-like the murderer, Job xxiv. 14. who, rifing with the light, is in the night as a thiefSo the adulterer. Saith Job-the eye of the adulterer waiteth for the twilight, faying, No eye fhall fee me, and difguifeth his face. The fon of Sirach reprefents the adulterer as "leaving his bed, stealing out of it, as it

T3