vidence to this Equality, and that it would be thence forward prefumption in them to infift on their former Privileges, till God would be pleafed to restore them: And what they did in this profpect, might oblige them afterwards the fame way as Profelytes were obliged to their Marriages contracted before their Profe lytifm. This might take in great numbers of Men otherwise well-meaning, but who had not Faith enough to hope for a reftitution under fo great improbabilities of it on a Human Profpect. But there was another confideration that might affect the Faithful themselves. That was, that whilft they continued under thofe punishments which were inflicted on them by God, as an attonement for their former piacular Offences, their very Sufferings were à temporary Defe cration. All Funeftations were fo understood in the Heathen, as well as the Jewish Religion. Perfons under that condition could not dedicate, as Livy fhews, L. ii. c. 8. And it was a legal Pollution in the Jewish Priesthood, which was therefore allowed them in the cafe of very few, and very near Relations, Lev. xxi. 1, &c. The Behaviour of Xenophon on the news of the death of his Son Gryllus, and of M. Horatius Pulvillus on the like news to him, is very famous. They went through the Holy Offices, in which the news found them employed with fuch command of their Paffions, that they were not indifpofed for them, as was expected, that they might fo avoid the defigned Defecration. Thus the Bread of Mourners is reprefented as moft contrary to the Holiness of Sacrificers Their Sacrifices fhall be unto them as the Bread of Mourners: All that eat thereof shall be pol luted, Hof. ix. 4. Thus Festivals were often put by upon the receipt of bad News. And pia

5134

cular

cular Perfons, whilft they were under the Piaculum, were avoided by thofe who would referve themselves pure for Holy Offices. Their Captivity therefore being a flate of Mourning, muft confequently have been a ftate of Pollution. This therefore muft make these unholy Marriages equal to them, which otherwife would have made them polluted if they had not found them fo: At leaft for that time which might, and must have been for their whole Lives in the beginning of the Seventy Years, and of the four Generations. For fo long it might feem fuitable to their condition, to comply with that punishing Pollution to which God had condemned them for the piacular Pollution of their former Holy Dignity. I fee nothing that hinders, why this might not have been the fenfe of the faithfulleft and holiest among them. This is the time wherein Efther was married to King Abafbuerus. Yet that Match had a farther confideration, beyond these now mentioned, to recommend it. That was the fecuring fo great an intereft in the favour of the Prince, for the protection of the whole Peculium. This did more than make amends for the legal Pollution of Efther's Perfon. For, even the incurring of thefe legal Pollutions was not always finful. So far from that, that they were Duties, and very commendable ones, when they were infeparable from Duties of higher importance. The burial of the Dead was thought fo glorious, that Tobit is faid to have ventured his Life for it, though he thereby knowingly contracted a legal Pollution. And it would certainly have been very much blamed in a Son, who should have neglected that laft Office to his Parent, on pretence of a pious fear of the legal Pollution of it. This would as little

have

§. XLVIII. Against the Contracts for dividing the Children ac

Communions

The whole

in the Hufband,

have excufed him in the judgment of truly pi ous Men, as the like pretence of defigning for is, the Corban, that which was neceflary for Fa Parent's maintenance, did in the judgment our Bleffed Saviour. These things I take to be th an eafie account of the Irregularities in pra th &ice, even of good Perfons, under both Peculia Yet it will hence appear, that no fuch failures in practice ought to prejudge against the Rule, how great foever, or how numerous fuch Examples were.

Having therefore thus cleared the main Point, it will not be amifs to make fome application of its Confequences to the prefent Stipulations, which are, as you have obferved, too ufual in cording to the thefe promifcuous Marriages, as they are now of the Parents. managed. They usually agree to divide the Children between the Communions of the Pa right of Fami- rents, that each of them may have fome of ly Religions them educated in their own Communion. But i was originally thefe Contracts are perfect Nullities, by the na ture of the Matrimonial Bond fuppofed in the forementioned Reasonings, as fettled by God in the Patriarchal Families, and as received by the confent of civilized Nations. The Wife is here supposed to contract with the Husband, as if he were on equal terms with him. She may do fo for Conditions antecedent. But from the time the confents to be his Wife, the must no longer pretend Equality, nor any capa city of entring into fuch Contracts as Suppose Equality. Some things there are indeed which are confiftent with her Subordination. And for thefe things the may lay an obligation Husband before he is fo, which may engage him to performance afterwards, in Confcience. Their common Right is very confiftent with fe parate Difpofals, where the things themselves

on her

are

are feparable. But all infeparable Rights, that is, all of which there can be but one in a whole Family, muft, for that reafon, be incommunicable to the fubordinate Confort. For these things are capable of only one Difpofal, and therefore cannot agree to more than one who may conclude the whole Body, which can be no other than the Head. And of this fort is the Family Religion. All the Patriarchal Covenants fuppofed but one Religion in a whole Family; and that the Family Religion was wholly in the power of the Head of the Family. That Head was he who chose the Tutelar Patron of the whole Family, and who undertook for his whole Family for the duty to be performed on their parts, not only in the Age wherein the Stipulation was made, but for all future Generations. How could he undertake for all, if any one Member of his Body had power to controul him? How could the Deity be fatisfied with his Undertaking alone, if at the fame time it had owned a Right in confcience for any elfe to change or repeal his Obligations? He had alone the right of the common Sacra, and the Priesthood of thofe Sacra was taken for the inSeparable right of the First born, till God was pleafed to difpofe of it otherwife, not with a defign of putting it in the power of Single Families to admit of feveral Religions, but of put-ting it out of the power of Jingle Families of the whole Ifraelitish Nation, to differ from the publick Religion of the whole Nation. Whilft none but the Firft-born had a right to officiate in the Family Sacra, none but he could have the right of admitting to, or excluding from thofe Sacra, or of making any Innovations concerning them. Nor did that Tranflation of the Priesthood to the Levites alter the right of the

Family Sacra within the Families themfek Still Fofbua engaged for his own Family. Sit the Elders of the Tribes for their own Tria in matters of Religion. The Wife thereff by the Roman Laws, (which are the belt h faithfullest Preservatives of the Foot-fteps the eldest Antiquity,) was to pafs into the cra of the Husband, and her confent to be s Wife was therefore to be interpreted a cont to live under the protection of his Tutelar tron, and to keep up the performance of the Family Worship ftipulated by bim for the whe Family. If the renounced his Sacra, that wa the fame thing in the interpretation of the fare Laws, as to renounce his Family, his Conditi and confequently her being his Wife. This muft ftill be the right of Mafters of Familie derived from the fame Patriarchal Rights from whence we derive our claim of being of the Holy Seed. And by this it appears, that th Wife can pretend to no right of bringing an Sacra into the Family diftinct from thofe of the Husband. She cannot therefore treat with hi for fecuring a Right to which fhe has no legal Claim, nay, which is an Invasion of his right by the Law of God, and of civilized Nations. But may not he alienate his own Right, (though unreasonably,) fo as to leave himfel Right, whilft no liberty of refuming it? He may, no doubt, be defigns to his Personal Rights which are properly his o be a Husband, and which are not effential to his being a Has band. But his Matrimonial Contract plainly thews, that it was his defign to be a Husband, and that therefore he could not intend to alie nate thofe Rights which are really effential to his being fo, however infidious the Form may be in which he has exprefs'd his Contra and how unhappily foever he may have worded

§. XLIX. He cannot

alienate this

for himself.

it