the charity, the humility, the diligence, and the zeal, which the Scriptures prescribe."

It should be laid down as an incontrovertible truth, that the same zeal which was manifested by St. Paul, for the glory of GoD, and the same charity that he displayed, as an apostle, in the very extensive scene of his labours, a minister is called to exercise, as a pastor, in his parish, and a private person, as father of a family, in his own house. Nay, even every woman, in proportion to her capacity, and as the other duties of her station permit, should feel the same ardour to promote the salvation of her children and domestics, as St. Paul once discovered to promote that of the ancient Jews and Gentiles. Observe in the harvest field, how it fares with the labourers, when they are threatened with an impetuous shower. All do not bind and bear the weighty sheaves. Every one is occupied according to their rank, their strength, their age, and their sex; and all are in action, even to the little gleaners. The true church resembles this field. The faithful of every rank, age, and sex, have but one heart and one mind. According to their state, and the degree of their faith, all are animated to labour in the cause of GOD, and all are endeavouring to save either communities, families, or individuals, from the wrath to come, as the reapers and gleaners endeavour to secure the rich sheaves, and even the single ears of grain, from the gathering

storm.'

We had marked other passages for quotation, but find that our limits exclude them. We regret this the less, however, from a knowledge that our readers generally can at so small a cost procure the book itself. A former very inferior edition was sold off, some years since, at one dollar per copy. This, on better paper, better printed, and well bound and lettered, is sold at the low price of seventy-five cents.

THE ITINERANT, OR WESLEYAN METHODIST VISITER.

THIS is a weekly paper, published in Baltimore, (Md.,) by friends of the Methodist Episcopal Church; and specially designed for the defence of the Church against its assailants. The former editor, the Rev. M. B. Cox, having relinquished the labours of that unenviable post, the paper is now conducted by a committee, consisting of Messrs. George Earnest, Dr. Thomas E. Bond, Christian Keener, and Robert G. Armstrong. The names alone of these gentlemen, to all who have any knowledge of them, will be an ample. guarantee for the highly respectable character of the paper. The reasons for its continuance by its present conductors, are clearly and fully stated in a calm and well written address, contained in the first number for the current year, being the third year from its commencement. The substance of that address inay be found also in No. 227 of the Christian Advocate and Journal, (for Jan. 7, 1831,) to which we beg leave to refer our readers.

We have seen it some where suggested that the necessity for continuing the Itinerant, was superseded by the publication of the present series of this Magazine and Quarterly Review. This idea has resulted, we apprehend, from entire inadvertence to the plan of this work. It has already, perhaps, (though necessarily so in self-defence,) borne rather more of a controversial aspect than was desirable; and it is our wish and aim to diminish rather than to increase this feature in its general contour. It would be wholly out of the question, therefore, to expect a place in this journal for articles of the description which the continued assaults upon our institutions, and even upon most worthy individuals among us, render necessary in such a paper as the Itinerant. The only alternative left seems to be, either to support such a paper, or to resort to the expensive and troublesome plan of issuing pamphlets on every fresh occasion ;unless indeed we are prepared to submit ourselves, and all most dear to us, to every species of vituperation and misrepresentation, without any reply whatever.

Those who may consult the columns of the Itinerant will find in it, not only detailed information respecting the proceedings of such as busy themselves in labouring to excite disaffection and disturbance in an evangelical Christian Church, but also faithful and just rebukes of such iniquity; together with occasional articles of a miscellaneous nature, not on controversial topics, and of an interesting and valuable character.

Any further information that may be desired respecting this paper, may be obtained from Mr. Robert G. Armstrong, Baltimore, Md.; who will also attend to any communications,—if post paid.

ON MARRIAGE WITH UNBELIEVERS.

(From the Wesleyan Methodist Magazine.)

THAT 'marriage is honorable,' no believer in Divine revelation will deny; and under the present circumstances of Christianity, it is equally expedient. The great difficulty appears to be, (as indeed it was from the beginning,) to induce those who profess true religion, to marry with those who are truly religious. But why should this be a difficulty among Christians in general? Is the Bible silent on the subject? Surely not. Why should it be a difficulty among the Methodists? Have the rules and the writings of the founders of Methodism given an uncertain sound on a subject of such vital importance? Indeed they have not.

First, then, what say the Scriptures? How readest thou? We will commence with the Old Testament; for it is not quite so obsolete as some of our youthful commentators suppose. It contains

the history of piety and of impiety; of the church and of the world; and it has erected those land-marks, by which the church and the world are distinguished. The sixth and two following chapters of the book of Genesis contain the awful history of the flood. It commences thus: And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.' 'Having more respect,' says the note in the Genevan Bible of 1599, to their beauty, and to worldly considerations, than to their manners and godliness.' From these irreligious associations proceeded that state of degeneracy in piety and morals which drew from the Judge of the whole earth the following declaration: My Spirit shall not always strive with men.' The result was, 'the flood came and destroyed them all.' This history of the antediluvians was written aforetime for our learning.'

6

of

The history of the church under the Mosaic dispensation is equally instructive. God as expressly forbade his people to marry with those who did not profess true religion, as he forbade them to commit murder; and the reason assigned was, 'For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods,' Deut. vii, 4. But notwithstanding the express nature of the prohibition, and the awful consequences which were foretold, many the Jews could see no harm in it.' Indeed, like many modern transgressors, they might hope to convert the unbelievers whom they admired; and, while they were disobeying God's word, might pray for the success of their endeavours, and for his blessing on their intended union! But, as God had foretold, it was surely' otherwise; and, according to the lamentation of Ezra, disobedience in this respect appears to have been at the root of all their apostasies, and the occasion of all their captivities. (Ezra ix. See also Joshua xxiii, 11–13.

We shall probably be informed, that the marriages here prohibited were those of the people of God with idolaters; and that they find no parallel in the marriages to which we now refer. But the question is, Why were they forbidden? The reasons were, 'For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you.' It was not, therefore, owing to some apparent impropriety in the inequality of these marriages; but owing to their placing the souls of God's people, and the interests of the true religion, in such imminent jeopardy. Such was the influence of these unions on the people of God, that they not only turned away their hearts' from him, but so blinded their minds, that they could see no harm' even in idolatry. Nor is this unaccountable. Those who disobey the word of God grieve his Spirit; and after he has withdrawn his influence, what is to secure to them the spirit of wisdom and of might, of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord? Here is the

reason why it so generally happens, that those who are unequally yoked with unbelievers' become cold and indifferent, and then gay and worldly, sinful and secure. So 'surely' was this the case of old, that even Solomon, with all his wisdom, could not avert the consequence; for 'even him did outlandish women cause to sin.' Now, here was a case in which, if it were ever lawful to make an exception to the laws of God, reasons might surely be admitted. Solomon was a king; and the dignity of his family and nation might seem to forbid that he should marry a subject. He was so great, that among many nations there was no king like him;' and, as greatness excites envy and opposition, policy might seem to require, that he should make affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt; and strengthen the alliance, by taking Pharaoh's daughter to be his wife. He was so pious, that he was beloved of his God;' and God gave him wisdom, so that there was none like him before him, neither after him did any arise like unto him.' But what reasons can justify a breach of the commands of God? or what piety or wisdom can secure those against final apostasy, who sacrifice the laws of God to worldly considerations? Little children, keep yourselves from idols.' Know ye not, that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? But we address those who are wiser than Solomon; and who are persuaded that they shall stand where he fell!

We proceed to the New Testament. First, then, St. Paul says, Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers.' It has been disputed whether this passage refer exclusively to marriage; and as there are great names on both sides of the question, we shall not 'decide where doctors disagree.' There is one thing, however, in which they are all agreed, namely, that though this is not the only acceptation of the passage, it is a legitimate one. For who can deny, that a passage which forbids union of every kind with unbelievers, forbids marriage with unbelievers? Of all the kinds of union, this is the most intimate; and if a union with unbelievers is dangerous, and as preposterous as a union of righteousness with unrighteousness,' of light with darkness,' of Christ with Belial;' surely no union can be so dangerous and inconsistent as the marriage union between a Christian and an unbeliever; for in proportion to the intimacy of the union are its danger and its inconsistency.

But here the judgment of charity' interposes its kind offices to screen the offender; and we are required to prove that this passage has not an exclusive reference to infidels and idolaters. The ori ginal term must prove this. This is amoros, which means, literally, persons without faith; and though it is sometimes translated infidels, because an infidel is without faith, it is properly rendered unbelievers, in the strict gospel sense of the word: because, in the estimation of the Apostles, whatever faith a man had, if he had not faith in Christ, he was an unbeliever.' In this sense the Jews were such; for though they believed in God,' they did not believe also in Christ,' to 'the saving of their souls.' 'The judgment of chari

ty,' which would restrict this word to infidels, in the modern limited acceptation of the term, would lead to strange results in the interpretation of Scripture. On the hypothesis suggested, it would appear that there are few unbelievers in England; [or in America ;] and, indeed, few Englishmen [or Americans] in the bottomless pit.* The boundary between the church and the world is completely destroyed; for in a Christian country, almost all are believers. On this principle, it is not necessary with the heart to believe unto righteousness;' there can be no such thing as 'faith unfeigned;' for all are believers, if they be not infidels or idolaters! Is this a Wesleyan definition of a believer?

But in many instances, where this ground is abandoned, we are put to the proof, that the party concerned is an unbeliever. We are informed, that it is a delicate matter; a hard point to prove this for how can we see the man's heart? In other cases, it would not be considered a delicate or a difficult point, to prove a man an unbeliever, who lives according to the course of this world; notwithstanding he may be regular in his attendance at a Methodist chapel. In ordinary cases we expect to see a man truly penitent on account of his sins; seeking mercy with weeping and supplication; separating himself from the world, and uniting himself in church fellowship with the people of God. And even this is supposed to afford evidence of nothing more than the faith of a penitent. In order to establish his claim to the character of a believer, we are anxious for evidence, that with the heart he has believed unto righteousness.' We wish to hear him with the mouth make confession unto salvation;' and to see in his life the fruits of righteousness, which are by Christ Jesus, unto the glory and praise of God.' Now what reasons can be assigned, why we should not, in every case, require similar evidences of faith? The faith of a penitent is the lowest degree of faith that can entitle a person to church fellowship; and this, at least, together with church fellowship, ought every Methodist to require, before a thought be entertained, of so solemn, sointimate, so permanent a union, as marriage is allowed to be. This is the lowest degree of faith that could be in the contemplation of the Apostle in the passage just quoted, as well as in 1 Cor. vii, 39, respecting the application of which there can be no dispute. Speaking of 'the wife,' the Apostle says, 'If her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.' To be in the Lord,' is a phrase which is always applied to true believers, and cannot admit of any other application. Hence the exhortation, 'Stand fast in the Lord;' which is analogous to our Lord's injunction, Abide in me.' Hence, also, Onesimus is spoken of as being a brother beloved, both in the flesh, and in the Lord;' and the Apostle speaks of those who were in Christ before' him. Now, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature.' In the passage on which we are now remark

* See Luke xii, 46, where amisrav is applied to those who are finally lost.