THE DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER.

Clutha Leader, Volume IV, Issue 173, 2 November 1877, Page 6

THE DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER.

We were prevented, by press of matter, noticing in last week's issue the letter of " Enquirer," commenting on our •strictures on marriage with a deceased wife's sister. Our correspondent seems _iot to be aware of the wide difference between the law of marriage contained in the 18th chapter of Leviticus, and that relating to the marriage of a widow with the brother of her deceased ihusband, who has left no child behind him. He has evidently not read what may be called the preamble of the tformer law, nor the words tbat follow ■when the details uf that law have been given. Had be done so he could not. 'have failed to see that the law there set forth could not have been designed for the Jews only, for there it. is expressly declared to have been binding* on other ■nations, 2nd binding on them before the Jews existed as a nation. Tlie Egpytians and the Canaanites are condemned for doing the things that are O "T* thus forbidden, and the judgments which God made the Israelites the instrument of bringing upon the latter are expressly declared to be the consequence of the incestuous marriages that in that chapter are prohibited. This could only have arisen from the fact that " the law of nature" — the law which they had who had not the written •law, and which made them according to "the words of the apostle Paul, " a law themselves" — was of the same divine origin, to the same effect, and of equal obligation as that contained in the 18th chapter of Leviticus. The law in Leviticus is thus bnt a repetition and ; revival of the original law of marriage, and prohibits just what this had pro•hibited from the beginning. It is, 'therefore, not local in its hearing but -universal — not more binding on the -Jews than on the Canaanites, and as bindingonusas itwas on them, being the daw of common humanity. This is conby the important fact, of which 'our correspondent -seems not aware, •that when the apostle Paul is marking •out in Galations iii. and Romans x. the -distinctive character of " the law" in with the gospel as bringing the promise of -life by faith in Christ — the -law as from the beginning* having a -promise of life in it to perfect obedience — he takes his proof in both epistles from the very words of this 18th chapter of Leviticus, " The man that doeth those things shall live by them." Nowhere ra the Pentateuch, which contained " the law" as understood by those to whom the apostle wrote, are those words to be found except in this chapter, of which the sth and 6th verses are as follows, "Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, ivhich if a vnan do he shall live in them. I am the Lord- None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him," etc. The apostle thus manifestly regards this law of Leviticus xviii. as entering into the great moral law which was given at man's creation, to regulate the conduct of the race, both towards God and towards one another, and obedience to which the Saviour in his Sermon on the Mount makes the determining principle as to whether we shall be the greatest or the least in the kingdom of heaven. Our correspondent asks for New Testament authority for the prohibition of marriage with a deceased wife's sister. This is supplied in the very reference we have just made to tbe apostle quoting from the law of Leviticus xviii. lis of universal obligation, as containing and setting forth the economy under which man was created, the perfect observance of which wonld have secured life — life eternal. The law of Leviticus lays down the great principle, that " nearness of kin," whether of consanguinity or affinity, bars marriage. As an illustration of this it forbids a man to marry his brother's wife, a nearness of kin which belongs equally to a sister's husband- -these being a corresponding relation. The barrier has its root and ground in the primeval enactment confirmed by our Lord, " They twain shall be one flesh" — this conjugal oneness carrying tbe result with it, viz., nearness of kin, and causing that the kindred of either spouse become by the marriage the kindred ot the other, and more specifically tbat the immediate blood relations of either standing within the forbidden degrees become related to tbe other in such a manner as to forbid subsequent marriage. When our Lord ratified this oneness of the conjugal relation as hearing this necessary consequence, He anew ratified and confirmed the great law of nature, the violation of which defiled the Canaanites, and because of which " the land vomited them out :" in other words he confirmed the prohibition of these marriages, which, as shewn by Leviticus xviii., were forbidden by the law of nature, and among these that of two sisters to one husband. The apost'e Paul in dealing with the case of incest inthe Corinthian church — the case of s man marrying his step-mother : a case of relationship hy affinity — manifestly acts on the ground of such a marriage being prohibited by divine law — a law well-known to the members of that church, and the knowledge of which it is that gives import and force to the contrast which he draws between them and tbe Gentiles. And what law could that be, but the law in Leviticus, the one written law regulating marriage, a law which the apostle recogni.es as binding on the Oorin-

thian Christians, and, therefore, binding on us also. We have thus New Testament authority for the universality of the law of Leviticus xviii. as to time, place, and persons. No such character belongs to the law which required a brother to marry his brother's widow, she being left childless. This law helongs to what may be termed the municipal law of Israel, was local and temporary in its application, and arose solely from circumstances incidental to the ecnnomv of Israel. It no more contradicted or loosened the obligation to observe the great law that, forbade a man tn many his brother's widow, than the fulfilment of the sabbath work necessary for the fulfilling of the duties of the priest's office contradicted or loosened the great Sabbatic law — which also was a law of nature — that forbade all work on the sabbath. Only when the brother died childless, was it required of the brother to marry the : widow, Had a man married his de--1 ceased brother's widow who was not. left childless, he became defiled and subject to the special curse of God. And this limited sanction of a marriage with a deceased brother's wife, is made by our correspondent the rule to sanction, in all circumstances, marriage with a deceased wife's sister. This is verily stretching* an argument, and this is done by our correspondent because of the word " lifetime" — ignorant of the necessary deductions of such a conclusion. A reference to similar expressions would have given him to understand , that *• when a thing* is stated wich reference to a particular time, it by no means necessarily follows that the opposite holds good after that time." For example; "Remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth." Surely this does not imply that we may forget our Creator in old age. It is said of Samuel that he " visited Saul no more till the day of his death." Does this imply that he visited him either on or after the day of his death? It is said of the raven sent forth from the ark that it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth. Does this imply that it then returned lo Noah, like the dove ? Of course it does, if our correspondent is right thai because a man is forbidden to marry two sisters in the lifetime of each other, he may marry a second on tbe decease of a first. The law relates to polygamy, nnd if it refers to sisters, it just meaus if a man will have more wives than one they must not be sisters. A reference to the close of our former article (14th SfiptGrnber), will show that we consider it does not refer to sisters at . all. " Enquirer" would do well to examine his reference Bible.