therefore abundantly manifest, that by the phrase IN THE LORD, the apostle meant, and, in effect, said, That the pious widow was at liberty to marry whom she pleased, provided the object of her choice gave credible evidence of being a genuine disciple of Jesus Christ.

It has been suggested, That, in complying with the apostolic command, it was not absolutely necessary the widow should marry a converted person; but that she was to retain her profession of Christ, and not to relinquish it for a husband. But this supposition inverts the question about which the Corinthian solicited advice for the inquiry was not whether, in order to gratify their own inclinations, they might abandon their christian profession, and marry those who were not only strangers, but enemies to the religion they had recently embraced; but whether, if married when both parties were in an unregenerate state, it were lawful for the believing wife still to cohabit with her unbelieving husband.

In reply to this inquiry, the Apostle says, If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away: which, as one remarks, must imply the unlawfulness of marrying such a woman for were it supposed lawful to marry, there could be no dispute about living with her afterwards; because it is a less matter to hinder the contracting of marriage than to dissolve it when contracted.

If therefore it were a question whether the christian brother ought not to divorce his idolatrous wife, it is certain beyond a doubt that, had they been both single, he would have thought it unlawful to marry her.

This argument will appear still more forcible, if it be remembered, that the Apostle gives a latitude for parting when the unbelieving partner is refractory: for he says, If the unbeliever depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. From whence we may fairly conclude, that what is urged to justify separation in such a mar

mother and mine-Greet Amplius, my beloved IN THE LORD-For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light IN THE LORDMany of the brethren IN THE LORD, waxing confident by my bonds-Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, especially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh and IN THE LORD.' When speaking of the visions and revelations with which the apostle had himself been indulged, he says, 'I knew a man IN CHRIST about fourteen years ago, such an one caught up to the third heaven-If any man be IN CHRIST, he is a new creature: old things are passed away, behold all things are become new-And was known by face to the churches of Judea which were IN CHRIST-For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in CHRIST JESUS-Salute Adronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were IN CHRIST before me;' or in modern language, who were converted to the faith of Christ before me.

Now in all these passages, and in many others to the same purpose, the apostle evidently refers to a state totally different from that in which all men naturally are, and different of course from that in which he himself and the churches and persons of whom he speaks were before conversion. His own character had been previously unblemished: his manner of life from his youth was after the straitest sect of the Pharisees: he was, as he expresses it, Touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless; but so far was he from asserting, in reference to that memorable period, that he was IN CHRIST, that he expressly declares he was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor that what things were gain to him, those he counted loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord: for whom he suffered the loss of all things, and counted them but dung, that he might win Christ, and be found IN HIM, not having his own righteousness, which was of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, even the righteousness which is of God by faith,' It is

therefore abundantly manifest, that by the phrase IN THE LORD, the apostle meant, and, in effect, said, That the pious widow was at liberty to marry whom she pleased, provided the object of her choice gave credible evidence of being a genuine disciple of Jesus Christ.

It has been suggested, That, in complying with the apostolic command, it was not absolutely necessary the widow should marry a converted person; but that she was to retain her profession of Christ, and not to relinquish it for a husband. But this supposition inverts the question about which the Corinthian solicited advice for the inquiry was not whether, in order to gratify their own inclinations, they might abandon their christian profession, and marry those who were not only strangers, but enemies to the religion they had recently embraced; but whether, if married when both parties were in an unregenerate state, it were lawful for the believing wife still to cohabit with her unbelieving husband.