same calling wherein he was called." He will but gain unrest, he will but disquiet himself, if he says, "I am sinning by continuing in this imperfect system," if he considers it his duty to change his calling, if his opinions do not agree in every particular and special point with the system under which God has placed him.

Lastly, the apostle applies this principle civilly. And you will observe he applies it to that civil rela tionship which, of all others, was the most difficult to harmonize with Christianity-slavery. "Art thou called," he says, "being a servant? Care not for it." Now, in considering this part of the subject, we should carry along with us these two recollections. First, we should recollect that Christianity had made much way among this particular class, the class of slaves. No wonder that men cursed with slavery embraced with joy a religion which was perpetually teaching the worth and dignity of the human soul, and declaring that rich and poor, peer and peasant, master and slave, were equal in the sight of God. And yet, great as this growth was, it contained within it elements of danger. It was to be feared, lest men, hearing forever of brotherhood and Christian equality, should bo tempted and excited to throw off the yoke by force, and compel their masters and oppressors to do them right.

The other fact we are to keep in remembrance is this: that all this occurred in an age in which slavery had reached its worst and most fearful form, an ago in which the emperors were accustomed, not unfre quently, to feed their fish with living slaves; when captives were led to fight in the amphitheatre with

wild beasts or with each other, to glu appetite for blood upon a Roman holida fearful as it was, the apostle says, "Care And, fearful as war was in those days, w diers came to John to be baptized, he did mend them to join some "Peace Associa the modern term; he simply exhorted the tent with their wages. And hence we und way in which Christianity was to work. indirectly, and not directly, with existing No doubt it will, at length, abolish war a but there is not one case where we find interfering with institutions, as such. Onesimus ran away and came to Paul, the a him back to his master Philemon, not dis connection between them. And then, as a to the servant, he told him of a higher feeling that would make him free with a shackle upon his arm. And so it was poss Christian then, as it is now, to be posses highest liberty, even under tyranny. It m occurred that Christian men found themse under an unjust and tyrannical government pelled to pay unjust taxes. The Son of ma his freedom, not by refusing, but by paying glorious liberty could do so without any degradation, obeying the laws, not beca were right, but because institutions are to with cordiality.

-

One thing, in conclusion, we have to obser possible from all this to draw a most inaccu clusion. Some men have spoken of Christian it was entirely indifferent about liberty and a

questions; as if with such things as these Christianity did not concern itself at all. This indifference is not to be found in the Apostle Paul. While he asserts that inward liberty is the only true liberty, he still goes on to say, "If thou mayest be free, use it rather." For he well knew that, although it was possible for a man to be a high and lofty Christian, even though he were a slave, yet it was not probable that he would be so. Outward institutions are necessary, partly, to make a perfect Christian character; and thus Christianity works from what is internal to what is external. It gave to the slave the feeling of his dignity as a man, at the same time it gave to the Christian master a new view of his relation to his slave, and taught him to regard him "not now as a servant, but above a ser vant, a brother beloved." And so, by degrees, slav ery passed into freed servitude; and freed servitude, under God's blessing, may pass into something else. There are two mistakes which are often made upon this subject: one is, the error of supposing that out ward institutions are unnecessary for the formation of character; and the other, that of supposing that they are all that is required to form the human soul. If we understand rightly the duty of a Christian man, it is this: to make his brethren free inwardly and outwardly; first inwardly, so that they may become mas ters of themselves, rulers of their passions, having the power of self-rule and self-control; and then outwardly, so that there may be every power and oppor tunity of developing the inward life; in the language of the prophet, "To break the rod of the oppressor, and let the oppressed go free."

XIV.

[Preached January 11, 1852.]

MARRIAGE AND CELIBACY.

1 CORINTHIANS vii. 29-31. -"But this I say, brethren, the it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as the none; and they that weep, as though they wept not; rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that b they possessed not; and they that use this world, as no for the fashion of this world passeth away."

THE subject of our exposition last Sunda essential portion of this chapter. It is ou examine now the former and the latter port These portions are occupied entirely with the apostolic decision upon this one questionparative advantages and merits of celibacy riage. One preliminary question, however, discussed. How came it that such a questio be put at all to the apostle?

In the Church at Corinth there were two sections of society: first, there were those w been introduced into the Church through Juda afterwards those who had been converted from ent forms of heathenism. Now, it is well kno it was the tendency of Judaism highly to vener marriage state, and just in the same proportion

(2

parage that of celibacy, and to place those who led a single life under a stigma and disgrace. Those con verts, therefore, entered into the Church of Christ carrying with them their old Jewish prejudices. On the other hand, many who had entered into the Christian Church had been converted to Christianity from different forms of heathenism. Among these prevailed a tendency to the belief (which originated pri marily in the oriental schools of philosophy) that the highest virtue consisted in the denial of all natural inclinations, and the suppression of all natural desires: and looking upon marriage on one side only, and that the lowest, they were tempted to consider it as low, earthly, carnal, and sensual. It was at this time that Christianity entered into the world, and while it added fresh dignity and significance to the marriage relationship, it at the same time shed a splendor and a glory upon the other state. The virginity of the mother of Our Lord, the solitary life of John the Baptist, the pure and solitary youth of Christ Himself, had thrown upon celibacy a meaning and dignity which it did not possess before. No marvel, therefore, that to men so educated, and but half prepared for Christianity, practices like these should have become exaggerations; for it rarely happens that any right ideas can be given to the world without suffering exaggeration. Human nature progresses, the human mind goes on; but it is rarely in a straight line,- almost always through the medium of reäction, rebounding from extremes which produce contrary extremes. So it was in the Church of Corinto. There were two opposite parties, holding views diametrically opposed to one another: one honoring the married and depreciating the unmarried