ing those who profess to serve him, wilfully, obstinately, and perseveringly transgressing one of his righteous laws.

This crime, great and aggravated in every case, receives a further aggravation in the case of men. They are not under that restraint which custom and modesty impose upon the tender sex. They may look around the whole circle of pious females with whom they are acquainted, to select one on whom the fondest affections of their hearts may repose; but when they, slighting all those with whom they enjoy or might obtain acquaintance, go into the world to look for the companion of their days, and fix upon a person who is a stranger to the religion of the gospel, their conduct is flagrantly criminal. It admits of no palliation or excuse. It is open, hardy, undisguised rebellion against the Lord of heaven

and earth.

If the motives that lead to these unhallowed unions be examined, the guilt of those who contract them will not be lessened. In the least guilty it may be a rash and thoughtless affection. To those who are thus influenced it may be said, Shouldst thou love them that hate the Lord? Surely those professors of religion, who out of love to a fellow-mortal, trample on the authority, and wilfully violate the laws, of the Lord of heaven and earth, plainly show that God is not the first in their affections, that the Saviour does not rule supreme in their hearts. They show that they prefer the objects of their choice to God and Christ, and thus, that in reality, they are joined to idols.

But many enter into such unlawful marriages, from the influence of other merely sordid motives. These see no peculiar personal attractions in the objects of their respective choice; but they have more money than some, that in every other respect are their superiors, and who unite true piety with all their other recommendations. In such cases it is evident the law of God is broken merely for the sake of money, or other worldly advantage. What would you think of a person committing idolatry, or adultery, or swearing, or blasphemy, because he was paid to commit such crime? Would it not be thought a decisive proof, that he was destitute of the love and fear of God? But why more so in this case than the other? He would break God's law for the sake of the money he hoped to gain by breaking it. And they, who for the sake

of money marry strangers to religion, as truly break God's law, and the motive is the same, money is the motive. This is to pay them for their sin. They trample on God's authority, because they hope to be paid for doing so.

§ 13. Such being the guilt of entering into one of these unnatural marriages, it is not surprising that such conduct should be followed by effects mischievous in the extreme. No one is too cunning for God. Whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap.

The evils are numerous. In many cases the total loss of piety is the deplorable effect. In these sad cases the professor of religion gains the object of idolatrous affection, or acquires the property thus sought, but it is at the dreadful price of eternal happiness, and the ruin of an immortal soul. Many who once appeared promising fair for heaven, when united to followers of the world, have forsaken the path of peace. Some find in their unbelieving partners the decided enemies of religion; others gradually imbibe the spirit of those with whom they are united. These tempt them to join in pleasures that they once abhorred; to neglect duties that they once loved; to profane the sabbath; to neglect their religious privileges; to slight their pious friends; to mingle with associates averse to piety, and to join with them in scenes of dissipation. Gradually, but too surely, the blighting, blasting influence of the forbidden union is felt upon the soul. Religion languishes declines and dies. The day of their marriage is the day that sets the seal to their eternal ruin. According to the language of the divine word, they marry, "having damnation, because they have cast off their faith."t

of

§14. Perhaps if you, who now read these pages, are inclined to form such a forbidden union, you are deluded with the hope of bringing the object of your attachment to the ways peace. Alas, this is but delusion! It is not in your power to change another's heart, and you have no reason to hope that God will reward your sin by granting you the object of your wishes. When persons have been converted after marriage, in many cases husbands and wives have been the means of leading their respective partners to embrace religion also. Thus God has blessed them and their endeavours. But when those who knew religion have married those who knew it not,

(t) 1 Tim. v. 11.

seldom if ever do we see the unconverted party afterwards converted. In numberless instances the professor of religion is drawn away from God, and back to the world and destruction; but in few cases indeed do we behold the unbeliever drawn from the world and led to God. If this is your hope, it is delusion.

§ 15. In some few cases total apostasy is not the consequence of these unnatural marriages; but in these cases they are often the cause of much unhappiness. Much temporal distress is often their bitter fruit. It appears from various passages of Scripture, that sometimes when God forgives the sins of his own people, so far as to shield them from their punishment hereafter, he lets them feel painfully the effects of their sin and folly while here. Thus, though David's adultery was forgiven, the sword was never to depart from his house. Acting apparently upon this system, the Most High frequently punishes professors of piety, who form these forbidden unions. They expect happiness, but he bids sorrows encircle them, distress and affliction in various forms, and poverty, beset them. Their expectations are disappointed; their hopes fail; and though their hope for eternity is not lost, for time they see little before them but difficulty and sorrow. Thus he frowns upon them, and marks his displeasure of their sin.. At other times their distresses are of another nature. They are spiritual distresses. Instead of a helper in their nearest earthly friend, they find a hinderance. If a family rises up, the instructions of one parent are counteracted by the example of the other. A good writer referring to this subject observes, That the language of a child so circumstanced, to the miserable mother, who entreats him to read the Bible, may be, Why should I pore over that tedious book my father never reads? Why should I spend that day in the wearisome services of the church or the chapel, which my father spends in recreation and pleasure? Why should I be so anxious to obtain what you call A NEW HEART, which my father tells me he has got through the world well enough without, and which he calls folly and fanaticism? He says that you are too strict, and would rob your children of all the innocent enjoyments and indulgences of youth." ."* If not the actual language, yet are not such sentiments likely to be adapted to the feelings of

66

* Raffles.

ON MARRIAGE.

223 the child, one of whose parents follows the Saviour, and the other the world? How painful must it be to a father or mother who feels the value of an immortal soul, who knows the Saviour's love, and anxiously desires that a beloved family of children should know this also, to think, By marrying contrary to the will of God, I have I fear entailed eternal damnation on all my dear but thoughtless children.

§ 16. Those who cavil against a divine law, because they are unwilling to submit to its restraint, invent various objections against the preceding statements, or excuses for rebelling against the authority of the Most High. Some plead that the unbelieving party may receive spiritual benefit, and urge the apostle's words, "What knowest thou, O wife, but thou mayest save thy husband."

Ans. A reply to this objection has in fact already been given. The good done bears no proportion to the mischief. Few strangers to religion are brought to embrace it, by marrying those that professed to enjoy its power; but many that professed religion, are led to forsake and renounce it, by entering into such forbidden unions. The words, "What knowest thou, O wife, but thou mayest save thy husband," refer not to a case of this kind, but to those cases where, of those persons who are equally strangers to religion, one party after marriage is brought to embrace it. In these cases the wife or husband, when converted, often becomes the means of converting their respective partner; but it is not so in those cases where professed disciples of Jesus violate his laws, by marrying those who know him not.

Obj. 2. Still it may be said, in some cases the happy result of a friend of religion marrying an amiable person, who knew not its power, has been the conversion of the unbelieving party.

Ans. Allowing this in some instances to be true, it forms no justifiable reason for violating a plain divine law. The principle maintained in this case, is neither more nor less, than "Let us do evil that good may come." The good expected may never come, yet if it were certain that it would, the sin of breaking God's holy law is not thereby lessened. Of those who do evil that good may come, it is said, "that their damnation is just."" I recollect reading of a thief who stole a

(u) Rom. iii. 8.

Bible, or other religious book. This book proved the instru ment of his conversion; but would any one argue, It is lawful to steal Bibles because they may convert the thieves that steal them? Would they not rather acknowledge, that the dishonest action retained all its criminality, whatever might be its effect? It is the same in the present case. Whether the unbelieving party be converted to God, or remain unconverted, the believing party has incurred the guilt of wilfully despising the authority of the Majesty on high.

Obj. 3. It is further objected, that so much difference exists between a nominal Christian and a heathen, that the rule which is applicable to the latter will not be so to the former.

Ans. In reply we may inquire, Wherein does that difference exist? Not in their state in the sight of God. Both are children of wrath. Not in their enjoyment of spiritual blessings; for neither has any. Not in the state of their hearts. The nominal Christian as much needs conversion, as the profligate heathen, and is as unable to be saved without it. Not that one needs less grace than the other for salvation. The nominal Christian cannot be saved, unless born again of the Spirit of God, and with that great change the heathen may. In fact, in many respects the balance turns in favour of the heathen. The nominal Christian has heard the gospel, and slighted its message; the heathen has not. In one case neg lect of religion is plainly proved, that there would be such neglect is not plainly proved in the other case, The preponderance in guilt and ruin, evidently lies with the nominal Christian. The Lord Jesus represented the state of heathen Tyre and Sidon, of Sodom and Gomorrah, as preferable to that of Jews who heard his message of love in vain.

Where then is the difference in favour of the nominal Christian? With a heart as hard as the heathen's, and as much needing divine power to soften it, with greater sins and darker prospects, in consequence of sinning against more light and greater obligations, than the heathen ever knew, the nominal Christian more tremendous.

going apace to a ruin as sure, but still