of kin, as it is stated in God's word: for by this rule of theirs, if the marriage of a brother and sister, where the blood is not mixed upon any fide, be not lawful, it is made more hainous than the marriage of grandfather with his grandchild, or any of his pofterity, where the blood of the family is unmixed only upon one fide; and yet the Lord declares, That their nakedness is his own, which he does not declare as to the brother and his sister, betwixt whom no such thing takes place. And further, by this one rule of trying the degrees, and knowing the nearness of kin, it is made the fame thing for a granduncle to marry his brother's or sister's grandchildren as for a grandfather to marry his own grandchildren, or their posterity, and yet the law of God makes an express distinction, Lev. xviii. 10. 12. 13. 14. But by this rule there is no manner of distinction; for in both cafes, a person that hath in him the unmixed blood of a family, does neither more or less but marry another that derives part of the blood from that family; and so the uncle and niece are nearer of kin than the brother and fifter, because they are as near of kin as the grandfather and grandchild, or any that descend from him, which the Lord makes a greater nearness than that of brother and sister; and yet the uncle and niece are made near of kin in the word of God, only by virtue of the nearness of brother and sister, which is presupposed to it, y 12. 13. 14. Is not this therefore a strange confufion of the degrees? And this is the presbytery's most just and easy rule. They also seem to confound affinity and confanguinity in such a manner, as to make J. B. who is J. M.'s granduncle by affinity, to be in the place of a parent to her by right of blood; and this is evidently beyond all law and common sense. And thus men that would be wise above what is written, are left to become vain in their imaginations.

The question is grossly mistated, when it is put upon this footing, whether the instances expressly mentioned in the 18th chapter of Leviticus do so exhaust the general prohibition, y 6. that it may be lawful for any persons to marry together that are not expressly mentioned in the Levitical law.

J. B. never made a question of this; but it is constantly affirmed on his part, that the degrees of confanguinity and affinity, clearly pointed out in these instances, and in the reasons of the prohibitions, do so exhaust the general precept, y 6. that marriage cannot be unlawful upon degrees not pointed out in the following verses; and that it is an ufurpation

3 R2

1

pation upon the divine authority, to prohibit upon any degree upon which he has not prohibited.

To this agrees the Proteftant definition of incest, and the decree of the council of Trent is pointed against this as the doctrine of Protestants; and this is according to the definition of incest in the law of Scotland, James VI. parl. 1. act 19. "Therefore our Sovereign Lord, with advice and consent " of my Lord Regent, and the three estates of this present " parliament, statutes and ordains, That whatsomever perfon " or perfons, that commits the said abominable crime of in" cest, that is to say, whatsomever person or persons they " be, that abuses their bodies with fik persons in degree as "God in his word has expressly forbidden, in any time co"ming, as contained in the xviiith chapter of Leviticus, " shall be punished to the death."

And, act 15. "Item, Our Sovereign Lord, with advice " and confent of my Lord Regent, and three estates of this " present parliament, has statute and ordained, That the " halie band of marriage, made be all eftates and forts of " men and women, to be als lawful and als free as the law " of God has permitted the samen to be done without ex"ception of person or persons; and has declared and de"clares, That secunds in degrees of confanguinity and affi"nity, and all degrees outwith the samen, contained in the " word of the eternal God, and that are not repugnant to "the faid word of God, might and may lawfully marry at "all times, sen the 8th day of March, &c. and ratifies and

"

approves all the faid marriages done, sen the faid day, &c." And this was the thing stated in the ancient discipline of the evangelical churches in the valleys of Piemont, several hundreds of years before Luther. " Articles of marriage ought to " be performed according to the rules prescribed by God, " and not within those degrees which he hath forbidden; " and there need no scruple of conscience be made con"cerning what the Pope has forbidden, although we give "him no money for a dispensation; for that which God " hath not forbidden, may very well be done without his " permiffion." Morland's history, book 1. chap. 5. p.87. It is true, that Luther at first restricted incest to the instances expressly mentioned in the Levitical law, but afterwardhe went upon the degrees upon which these instances are given, as do the Proteftant divines against the Papists. Brochmand, a Lutheran divine, thus states the Proteftant argument against the Papists, Princeps et palmarium argumentum est hoc; alla

tum

tum a Luth. de Capt. Babyl. viz. Rectius novisse Deum quæ perfonæ ad conjugium aptæ fint, et quousque se extendant cognationis gradus, quam ullus homo. Deus vero non prohibuit conjugia nifi usque ad fecundum gradum in linea inæquali, Leviticus 18. et 20. Quocirca conjugia in reliquis gradibus a Deo non probibitis inita, non poffunt nec debent cenferi conjugia incesta. Brochmand de conjugia, quæftio 53.

They that have given their judgment in this cafe againft J. B. have laboured under another remarkable mistake in confounding the unequal or oblique line, as it is commonly called, with the direct line, and in overlooking this, viz. that the line is as direct from the common parent to his pofterity, by one of his children as by the other.

The Levitical law, though it speaks nothing of these lines, makes a very clear diftinction betwixt what we call the direct line, and the unequal or oblique, and that clearly founded in the nature of the thing. The Lord forbids the grandfather to marry the grand-daughter, or the grandfon to marry the grandmother, because of their own nakedness, or because there is a communication and derivation of blood betwixt them, and one of them is a part of the other's flesh, and so makes it unlawful for all them to marry together, among whom this takes place, or where this may be faid, as where the Lord says it, "Theirs is thine own nakedness ;" and this is perhaps infinuated in the general prohibition,

6. if we look to the import of the original word: but this does not take place in the cafe of sister and brother, betwixt whom there is no such communication or derivation of blood, nor is there any such communication of blood from the sister to them that are defcended of her brother; and therefore there can be no way of reckoning the nearness of kin in that cafe, but by the generations or degrees, while all that are on the direct line are unto one another as in the fame degree, and so near of kin, that the nakedness of any one of them is the other's own nakedness, which is the highest degree of nearness of kin. This plain distinction is much overlooked, and a loose way of arguing is gone upon, making an inference from the mother to the grandmother, as from the aunt to the grandaunt; though it be most evident the nature of the relation in the cases of grandmother and grandaunt is vastly different, and the reason of the prohibition in God's law as to the grandmother, viz. "their own " nakedness," will never apply either to the aunt or grandaunt. Though the relation be the fame, as to the matter of inceft, incest, in the case of the grandchild or greatgrandchild, yet it will never follow from this, that the relation is the same in the case of niece and grandniece: and though the grandfather, and the ascendants on the direct line, be considered as one with the descendants on that line; yet this is only with respect to one another, and not with respect to any of them on another line, whose nakedness is not their own, otherwise it were most easy to demonstrate every marriage incestuous: and therefore this reason for prohibiting a man to marry his aunt, "She is thy father's near kinswoman," will never apply to the grandaunt, the grandfather's near kinf. woman, as has been with fome confidence asserted, under the influence of the foresaid mistake.

The reasonings upon the 14th verse of the 18th chapter of Leviticus against J. B. look liker the forming of the word of God according to mens judgments, than the forming of their judgment, according to that word. The reason given in that 14th verse, with respect to the uncle's wife, " she is " thine aunt," does indeed shew, that the Lord carries the prohibition as far in affinity as he does in consanguinity, but cannot extend to the grandaunt, whether we consider the fense and scope of the text, or the nature of the relation.

The text declares, as it is unlawful for a man to uncover the nakedness of his father's sister, his father's near kinswoman, or the nakedness of his mother's fifter, his mother's near kinfwoman; so it is unlawful for a man to uncover the nakedness of his father's or mother's brother, whoisin the fame nearness of kin with the father or mother's sister; and then shews how a man in this case uncovers the nakedness of his father's brother, which is by approaching unto his wife, whose nakedness is thus declared to be her husband's nakedness; and fo says the Lord, "Thy father's brother's wife is thine aunt,

"

thy father's fister." Thus it is plain, that as in the other cafes of this law, the Lord carries the affinity along with the confanguinity, so he does in this cafe. And this is the only thing we have in the 14th verse beyond what is contained in the 12th and 13th; so that if an inference cannot be drawn from the father's sister to the grandfather's sister, y 12.; neither can an inference be from the father's brother's wife unto the grandfather's brother's wife: but from the father's fifter his near kinfwoman, unto the grandfather's fister his near kinswoman, there is not an inference, because the grandnephew is at a farther distance of kin from the grandaunt than the nephew is from the aunt; and so the relation is not

the

the fame: for though the father's posterity be not set at a distance from him in this case by generations, seeing their nakedness is still his own, and thus they stand in the greatest nearness of kin to him, yet every generation sets them at a farther distance from his sister, whose nakedness theirs is not, otherwise the aunt's daughter, and daughter's daughter, &c. would be as near of kin to the nephew, and at no greater di stance from him than is his aunt, whose nakedness theirs is. And it is certain, that they who defcend from a common parent by the sister his daughter, are in a direct line from him and his daughter, as well as they that descend from him by the brother his son, are in a direct line from him, and from that son, and to thousands of generations, they stand every one of them with the common parent, and the brother or fister of whom they are defcended, upon the direct line; so that none of them can be fet at fuch a distance from the common parent, or from these by whom they are defcended from him but that still their nakedness is their own: but these that descend from the common parent upon the one line, are set at a distance from them that defcend from him upon the other line, and that by every generation; for even in the first the brother is at a greater distance from the sister than he is from his father. And now let it be determined by them that can tell whether two and three make five, let it be determined whether they that descend from a common parent upon one line be fet at a greater distance of relation from them that descend from him upon another line, by two generations upon one line, or by one upon each line; and then the great question will be determined, whether the uncle and grandniece be nearer of kin to one another than are cousin-germans. Thus, neither by the aforesaid text, nor by the nature of the relation as stated in the law of God, can any inference be drawn against the lawfulness of marrying the grandaunt, from the unlawfulness of marrying the aunt: and more must be said upon the law of God for making out this inference than lawyers or divines have yet produced, before they can fatisfy any impartial judge of the justness of it. It is owned, that the general statute upon the subject of incest is contained in y 6. "None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to " him." And if this nearness of kin be not stated to us in the following verses by the Lord himself, what is the design of these following verses? And, if we be not to stand on the utmost uncertainty, must we not rest in the Popish law, where only we find a pretence of infallibility? But if we

be