Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

RELATIVE TESTIMONY OF HUMAN LEGISLATION.

39

tion to be contrary to the law of God, incestuous, and excluding, ipso facto, from church privileges. As to the causes of change, both in the opinions of ministers of religion and in civil legislation on the subject, these may be noticed when we have glanced at the relative testimony of human legislation in modern times.

Meantime, we have the undoubted testimony of the whole Christian Church, of every shade and degree, whether of purity or of corruption, for 1500 years, holding the marriage of a man with the sister of a deceased wife to be unlawful and incestuous. In regard to the first 300 years of the Christian Church, if there be not positive testimony that it held the same thing as there is strong and almost unquestionable presumption that it did there is assuredly not a vestige of evidence that it held the contrary.

In regard to anything venerable in the Jewish Church, the evidence we have seen is all to the same effect. The opinions of the Talmudists undoubtedly carried the general principles that imply it; and at best, wherein it seems otherwise, they are only the parallels, under Judaism, of Popish superstition, traditions, and legends, under Christianity. Their conclusions are drawn, not from the law of God, but from their preconceived notions of the lawfulness of polygamy; and these again are drawn from their own corrupt practices, which they sought to shelter under the venerable names of Abraham and others, through the connection with whom, according to the flesh, they expected salvation. Their example is a warning rather than a sanction.

Section VIII.-Relative Testimony of Human Legislation.

The writer believes that it may be laid down in the outset as an indisputable fact on this subject, that in all human legislation professing to be based on divine revelation—that is, on the Word of God revealed in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments-the marriage of a man with the sister of a deceased wife is declared to be unlawful. If this be fact, as it is believed to be, it is very significant, and will make legislation, that overlooks or ignores the authority of divine revelation, as a basis on such questions, of very little value indeed as an authority with Christian men.

In respect to all Popish nations the fact admits of no dispute, and no time need be wasted on the subject. In regard to Protestant nations the fact is no less certain. Those of them where the law is different, not only do not proceed on such a basis, but, as we shall see, legalise marriage and sanction divorce in the teeth of the Levitical law, and on the principle that it is no longer binding on nations or individuals, but that it is merely cere-monial or judicial, in the sense of being limited to the Jewish polity, now abolished. In those Protestant countries where such marriages are sanctioned by law, the laws are comparatively of recent date, and where principles that do not admit of the application of Scripture principle and authority to legislation have become prevalent.

Meantime, let us shortly glance at the law in Protestant States after the Reformation. It has already, indeed, been stated in substance, in the passages adduced from Böehmer and Brouwer, as quoted by Mr Badeley in proof of the doctrine of the Reformers, viz., that they universally held the principle, that what was forbidden to the man was forbidden to the woman; that as a man was forbidden in Lev. xviii. 16 to marry his brother's wife,

40

GERMAN STATES-SWITZERLAND.

the woman was forbidden to marry her sister's husband. The law at, and for about two hundred years after the Reformation, remained the same in all Protestant countries.* The period when the change took place is no great guarantee for its scriptural soundness. An American writer, who styles himself "A Puritan," writing about ten years ago, says, "But the last fifty years have developed a great advance of the public mind towards the truth ;" and in proof of this development "towards the truth," he says, "In this country (the United States) all the States but one allow of the marriage of a wife's sister.† In the Protestant States of Europe the case is similar. Throughout the whole of Russia, Saxony, Hanover, Baden, Mecklenburgh, Hamburgh, Denmark, and most other States, such marriages may be contracted." The law of Russia is that of the Greek Church, and is against such marriages. "In the Protestant States of Europe."-This is rather a glaring specimen of the figure of a part for the whole. In plain British phrase it means Germany; for even Denmark can hardly be esteemed anything but a German appendage; and when the writer adds, " and most other Protestant States," it affords a tolerable specimen of the scrupulous accuracy of this class of writers. Writers on the same side are not ashamed to follow his example in this country. Dr Janeway, remarking on the "Puritan" on this point, says," Judge Storey has, in his Conflict of Laws,' the same enumeration and the same additional clause." What the law of the Lutheran Church in Germany now is, the writer has no means of ascertaining at present. But thoroughly Erastianised as it is, it is not improbable that it will have no "conflict of laws" with the state.

This "conflict of laws" suggests very serious warning and consideration to the churches of Britain, Erastian on the one hand, and Voluntary on the other. In regard to the former, if public sentiment, no matter by what means, principles, or influence, become sufficiently impregnated with loose views, so as to procure a change in the law of the land, either their discipline or their faith falls as a matter of course; or

*Since writing the above, I have obtained from the very valuable library of the Faculty of Advocates a sight of Böehmer and Brouwer. On this point, after discussing the whole subject with all the fulness and nicety of an able juris-consult, Böehmer sums up by declaring," In the ecclesiastical laws of Protestants I find no exception." The whole section will be quoted on another branch of the subject.—Böehmer's Jus Ecclesiasticum Protestantium," tom. iv. p. 174. Brouwer declares that the marriages in question were unlawful in "ALL GERMANY," that is, at a period when the Word of God was the rule of law on the subject. He will also be quoted more fully hereafter.

This is not very consistent with a statement made by another American writer, who says, that in "Kentucky and North Carolina" such marriages are visited with severe discipline;" and again-" In some few of the States the English rule was adopted."-Marshall on "Lawfulness of Marriage," pp. 35 and 60. Yet I find these very States, North Carolina and Kentucky, in a petition to the House of Lords, enumerated as holding them lawful, as also Holland and Sardinia, where the law, we have proved, is the very contrary. How many others are thus falsified in their enumeration it would be rather troublesome to ascertain. But these parties seem to have opened the map, and asserted it of almost every country they found there, if it merely had a name. They enumerate the small principalities of Germany, and cantons of Switzerland, as mighty States. It would not be half so barefaced a delusion to practise on the ignorant if we should enumerate the petty States of Italy, the counties, towns, and parishes of Great Britain and Ireland, where the law is opposed to them. Many Scotch parishes are three times as large and populous as these mighty Swiss States-such as Uri, Zug, and Unterwalden,-though the fact had been as stated, which it is not. It appears from the Report of her Majesty's Commission of 1847, that Neufchatel is the only canton where such marriages are allowed. Whatever men, who have got themselves into a difficulty by violating the law, or their hired agents, may do, it is unworthy of Lord Denman to lend his name to the support of such unworthy arts. Such rash statements as this will not tend to raise public estimation of judicial gravity or accuracy.

OPINIONS OF GERMANY AND FRANCE INFECTED AMERICA. 41

they must sustain a conflict with the state; in other words, as in Scotland, on another point, a disruption. In regard to the latter, it is very clear that, by whatever means, principles, or influences, it is brought about, after the state has legalised such marriages, the church voluntary, or disestablished, is at once placed in collision with the law of the land, if it declare incestuous the marriages which are civilly lawful. In such circumstances there is a very strong temptation to discover some way of getting out of the difficulty, and where religious principle is low, the readiest way is to lower the church's creed, and modify her discipline. This is the history of the case in the United States. No one can peruse the discussions, by their writers, on either side of this question, without discovering it. No one can peruse these discussions, and observe the spirit of levity, latitudinarianism, and German rationalism, both as to principles of belief and of morals, the loose notions as to creed and to church discipline which some of them entertain, without seeing the perfect truth of the following statement of Dr Janeway, pp. 49, 50:

666

But,' says our brother, the last fifty years have developed a great advance of the public mind towards the truth,' (p. 23.) And what was the state of the public mind fifty years ago? In the middle of the last century Voltaire and his impious associates formed their conspiracy against Christianity; and laboured diligently, in their unholy vocation, to overturn the Church of Christ, and to bless the world with the reign of infidelity and atheism. Their efforts were crowned with most alarming success. Frederick the Great of Prussia patronised Voltaire. Frinces and crowned heads were poisoned with infidelity. The French Revolution burst forth like a terrible and destructive volcano. Infidelity became ascendant. Religion was laughed to scorn. The Sabbath was abolished. The goddess of Reason was enthroned and worshipped. The baneful influence of infidelity and atheism was spread more or less over a large part of Europe. Nor did this country escape the miserable contagion. Such was the depressed state of religion and the prevalence of infidelity about fifty years ago, that a venerable theological Professor advised his pupils (the writer heard him) to prepare their minds for a season of persecution."

A consideration of the prevalence and influence of infidel and pantheistic principles in Germany would throw much light on its legislation. The author had occasion, some time ago, to consider this subject in relation to the question of the connection of Popery and Infidelity, and the proof that Infidelity prepares the way for Popery, and the result of his inquiries is embodied in the following short statement:-Every one is aware that that country has been fearfully overrun with open and avowed infidelity--that her literary men, with the King of Prussia at their head, conspired, during the course of last century, with the infidels of France, and other parts of Europe, to uproot Christianity. They united together to command the public jour nals of all sorts to make pictures and engravings means of moral corruption-to bring the entire press under their influence and control-even so to command it, as that booksellers would sell only their productions-and these alleged sole and only friends of freedom, and of free discussion, actually conspired to destroy freedom of opinion, and to prevent the publication of any views hostile to their own. They laid plans to secure the education of youth in universities and schools-nay, to put their friends into the parish churches, and on the bench, and in tutorships-they "had a seminary for

42

PANTHEISM AND IMMORALITY OF GERMANY.

Bavarian priests."* They succeeded to a great extent in debauching the principles of influential men and women, especially the young-in destroying social virtue-and were many of them monsters of every vice-fornication, adultery, murder, poisoning, and assassination. Such were Barhdt, Weishaupt, Zwack, and many others, of whom Robison says, "all were liars." t Under the name of a society of freemasons, formed and governed after the model, and by the maxims of the Jesuits, many of whom were members of their conspiracy, they designed to destroy the religion and governments of Europe. Infidelity advanced also under the name of Neology, or Rationalism, or Naturalism-varying in all degrees from Pelagianism to Atheism. This system they adopted from the English Deists; while, like them, they pretended respect for Christianity, but asserted the supremacy of their own erring reason, and the right to bring all the facts and doctrines of Scripture to its standard, and, as they agreed with, or differed from it, to receive or reject accordingly. They advanced all the objections, and many more, to Scripture, which have been produced by infidels, and by Papists to the Scripture as the sole rule of faith. This system infected the great majority of the clergy, who turned the pulpit into an engine of mere Paganism, and taught the most unchristian tenets and pernicious morals under the name of Christianity-rejected confessions of faith, and professed the right of the utmost latitude of opinion, spoke and printed the worst infidelity, and even immorality—while they professed to be ministers of the gospel and thus shocked all feelings of decency, honour, and common honesty, and wrought fearful havoc in the minds of the people. "The churches were thinly attended, the Sabbath little honoured, and the Bible neglected." §

One may form some estimate of the weight due to Germany or German legislation on any subject, either of religion or morals, by the following statement by Dr Julius Müller, Ordinary Professor of Theology in the University of Halle, Wittenberg:-" Unquestionably the strongest current of our German literature is that which has its source in Pantheistic modes of thought; and this Pantheistic predominance may be seen, not only in our philosophy, but also in the other sciences, and perhaps prevails most of all in our polite literature; indeed, the religious and political convulsions of the most recent times have made manifoldly evident how deeply these methods of representation have already become, by a great part of our people, thoroughly incorporated. After Deistic rationalism ceased to exert much influence, at least in scientific and æsthetic literature, Pantheism assumed to itself the right of inheritance, while impure, mongrel forms of rationalism have attempted in vain to disturb its possession. It has, too, succeeded in prepossessing the spirit of the age in its favour, which gives it the great advantage of not being under the necessity of criticising and controverting other modes of thought, which are no longer in connection with its own principles, but allows it to pass judgment upon them quite according to its own rule, as if the right of doing so were its own." ||

It would be a very extraordinary thing, indeed, if a nation steeped in Pantheism; in the belief, if belief it can be called, that the universe is God, and therefore " every one members one of another" in the material sense, as well as each and all component parts of God himself, or more properly,

* Robison's Proofs of a Conspiracy, pp. 191-200. Ibid. p. 252. Rose, xxxi.

§ Rose's Protestantism in Germany.

Müller's Christian Doctrine of Sin-Introduction.

GREAT NUMBER OF DIVORCES IN GERMANY.

43 according to this theory, itself, should be very strict in their notions of the marriage relation. One would as soon expect strictness among the Pantheistic Hindus, or the ancient Egyptians, or among those described in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. Every one who knows Germany, knows well enough how thoroughly corrupt it is in this respect; and the best Germans bewail it, and blush for it. The marriage of uncles and nieces is not only permitted by dispensation, but, according to a German witness before the Royal Commissioners, Mr Bach, (900) "are not in a great part of Germany" considered incestuous. In a portion of Prussia, equal to a twelfth part of the whole, about 600 requests for divorce had been, till lately, brought before the Royal Supreme Court of Judicature each year,TWO HUNDRED of them for Berlin alone. And though the number had diminished to 400 a-year during the previous three years, it was mainly in the rural districts. They had increased in Berlin. The Bishop of Exeter, in an argument against such marriages in the House of Lords, on Feb. 26, 1851, and which Lord Campbell pronounced unanswerable, after deprecating our following the example of Prussia, said, "The population of the monarchy of Prussia was, he believed, somewhat less than that of England and Wales, and it appeared from the returns that in that population there occurred no fewer than 7,800 divorces in three years, or about 2,300 in each year." The condition of things is no better in some other German states.

the

The authority, either of ecclesiastical practice or of civil legislation, in a country of which this is a just picture, may bulk in the eye of ignorance or infidelity,—may help those who have violated the laws of their country, and, as we hope to show, of their God, to hold up their heads,-may serve purposes of hired agents, and sway the minds of politicians, of little religion themselves, and whose whole rule of conduct is, what saith the multitude, but can weigh very little with those who believe in the authority of God, expressed in the Old and New Testaments. One would wonder that professed ministers of the gospel, either in Great Britain or America, should be found aiding and abetting in this species of argumentation, were it not that there is no inherent or prescriptive security, that like causes will not produce like effects in Britain or America as they have produced in Germany. Of as little authority as a rule for Christian men, who take their Bible as their guide, must be the legislation of any country, such as America, which has arrived, no matter by what process, at the condition, if not of ignoring, at least of passing by, the recognition of the Bible as any principle of its constitution, or regulator of its laws.

In regard to the civil law of England, it has been the practice of American writers to deny that it was founded on the Levitical, and to quote, in support of their denial, the opinion of Judge Vaughan in the time of Charles the Second. The writer cannot enter upon this question. Those who wish to see it fully discussed may consult the very learned pleadings of Edward Badeley, Esq., as bound up in the volume of Dr Pusey, already quoted. An extract will be given in the Appendix. *

In the meantime, let the following passage (p. 174-176) be well pondered, with the fact that he obtained the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench in his favour:-" And now, my lords, I believe I have (I fear at immoderate length) carried your lordships through, not only the reasons on which I consider myself entitled to your lordships' judgment, but also

* See Appendix A.

« AnteriorContinuar »