which they had thus received from the serpent, and mutually indulged in themselves. And the same nature and the same curse, have both been continued down, in the line of natural generation, to this day. And this curse can never be taken off without a full and final cross against the indulgence of that same fleshly lust, and the final destruction of that nature which leads to it.

Many objections have been urged against this doctrine, as well as against the doctrine of celibacy and continence in general, which are well known to be among the principle articles of our faith. To enter fully into the discussion of this subject, and answer in a satisfactory manner, all the objections that may be raised against this doctrine, will require great plainness of speech.* But as this appears to be the most darling principle of the world, and as the greatest opposition against our faith is levelled at this particular principle; therefore, in conformity to the strict demands of light and truth, revealed in this day, it appears necessary that the cov ering which has so long been spread over all nations, should be taken away, and the vail removed from the face of all people.†

This vail was prefigured by the vail of the temple, which separated the entrance into the most holy place. "The vail of the temple was rent in twain" at the crucifixion of Jesus,‡ which signified the rending of the vail of the flesh by his sufferings for sin. After that, those who faithfully followed his footsteps through mortification, and lived a spiritual life, were able to look within the vail, and to discover, in some measure, what it was which separated those who lived in the works of generation from having access to the most holy place. Yet the vail remained untaken away. "Neverthless," says the apostle, "when it shall turn to the Lord, "the vail shall be taken away," And this never could be done till the second appearing of Christ, when it was taken away by that chosen female in whom the second appearing of Christ first commenced. As the vail of darkness which hid the face of God from man, was first caused by the transgression of the first woman; so it could not be removed until it was removed by that distinguished woman, in whom was revealed the Bride of the Lamb, the first Mother of the children of the Kingdom, in the new creation.

That Adam and Eve were unseasonably led into the act of sexual coition by the lust of concupiscence, through the insinuations of the serpent, and (whatever may have been done in a figure) that this lust was, in reality, the forbidden fruit of which they partook, appears evident from the following considerations. 1. The sentence denounced "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow shalt thou

66

upon

the woman.

* We would not willingly give offence to any; our only design is to show and vindicate ur faith clearly on this subject, for the information of all who desire to understand it, and we willing to be benefitted by it.

† See Isa. xxy, 7.

See Matt, xxvii. 51.

|| 2 Cor, iii. 16.

"bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband;" er, (more properly, according to the original,) "thy desire shall be "subject to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

Here it may be asked, Why was the sentence directed against her conception? Why was she to be punished with sorrow in bringing forth children? And why was her desire (or more properly, her lust†) to be subject to the will of her hushand? Why this rigorous sentence? Is not God just and righteous? Most certainly; and therefore he dispenses punishments according to the nature of the offence; or rather, he forsakes those who forsake him, and leaves them to reap the reward of their own doings. Whatever a man sows, the same he must reap; and whatever he eats, that he must digest, however painful it may feel. He who, after being faithfully warned by his friend, foolishly swallows a poisonous fruit, because of its fair appearance and peculiar flavor, must feel its effects; but he ought by no means to charge his sufferings upon his friend.

From the very nature of the curse denounced upon the woman, the discerning mind will readily perceive what the nature of the offence was. This same curse has been more or less felt by the fallen daughters of Eve to this day." This remark will apply, with peculiar force, to all those who have been decoyed by the same insinuating allurements to pleasure, who have yielded to the same desires of an animal nature, who have been ensnared by the same deceitful influences of concupiscence, and have conceived and brought forth children in obedience to the inordinate demands of lust. Thus the woman is not only subjected to the pains and sorrows of childbirth, but even in her conception, she becomes subject to the libidinous passions of her husband; and in this sense, her desire is subject to the will of her husband. This slavish subjection is often carried to such a shocking extent, that

See mar Bib Gen iii. 16.

† See Cruden's Concordence, Article Desire. Tho it is obvious that the effects of the primitive curse are seen and felt by the whole human race, as the offspring of fallen parents and heirs of that curse; and tho all womankind have inherited their portion of the curse denounced upon the first woman; yet there has always been an exception in favor of those virgin daughters who have wisely kept themselves from the contaminating corruptions of lust. They have been, thereby, not only exempted from the pains and sorrows of childbirth, and preserved from those debasing pollutions, and that servile wretchedness, so common to those who subject themselves to the inordinate passions of man; but they have often been distinguished as peculiar objects of Di. vine favor.

This may indeed be a willing subjection on the part of the woman, and her passions may be even more debased than his, but whether her subjection be willing or unwilling, still this does not alter its servile nature, as respects the man's power of enforcing it, so long as he possesses that power, as her husband, and exercises it at the instigation of his passions, instead of being governed by the law of nature, or the law of God.

many females have suffered an unnatural and premature death, in consequence of the unseasonable and excessive indulgence of this passion in the man. Thousands there are, no doubt, who are able to bear a sorrowful testimony to the truth of this remark.

The libidinous debauchee may sneer at this unseemly picture, and the squeamish prude may frown at it; but the candid and reflecting mind will readily acknowledge and deplore its painful and melancholy truth. Some, convinced of its truth by sorrowful experience, will doubtless be ready to exclaim, This is surely a heavy curse upon the woman; but is the man spared? By no means: but his curse appears more obvious in another point of view. The the ground was cursed for his sake, at the time of his first transgression; yet it is evident that he has greatly increased the curse of the land, by his own corruptions, and degraded himself far below the state in which the primitive curse left him; as will appear in the sequel.

2. The evident violation of the order of nature, in a total disregard to times and seasons, in the work of generation.

That source from which man derives his earthly existence, from which his very being springs, ought to have been preserved pure and uncorrupted. The order of his generation was never designed to be polluted by disorderly passions, nor perverted by untimely seasons. Yet what is the fact in this respect, when contrasted with the inferior part of the creation? As before stated, the various orders of the animal and vegetable creation are governed by the established laws of nature, and generate and bring forth fruit according to the regular order of times and seasons.* But man is a most marvellous exception in this respect. He who alone was created and appointed the lord of all this lower world, altho in many other respects, he displays a mind capable of a far superior degree of perfection; and altho, in the ordinary transactions of life, he often observes a good degree of order; yet in the gene-ration of his species he regards none.

*

Notwithstanding his dignified station as lord of the earth; notwithstanding his rational soul, with all its noble faculties; notwithstanding his light and knowledge, his instruction, experience and observation; notwithstanding the law of his Creator, which was given to regulate in him the times and seasons of generation (as well as all other things pertaining to his work) to a greater degree of perfection than could be expected in the brutal creation; yet in this important point, man has shamefully degraded himself below all the inferior creation. Regardless of the regular order of nature, he consults it not; blind to the times and seasons of conception, he sees them not; deaf to the law of Moses, he listens not to it; an enemy to the pure and perfect law of Christ, he banishes it

*See Established order of times and seasons," page 120.

N

from his thoughts. He is eagerly bent upon the acts of generation, but seeks none of its fruits; the desire of offspring is not his motive; his rule of action is dictated only by his inordinate passions. The insatiable nature of his lust knows no bounds, submits to no order, and cares for no times nor seasons; except it be the time and season of darkness, which is so congenial to his lawless and shameful works.

Such is the lost state of man, and such the subverted order of nature in the works of generation. To the truth of these remarks let the world itself bear witness. And herein we have a striking proof of that carnal mind in man, which the apostle says, "is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."

3. The shame which is generally found to be inseparable from the act of sexual coition.

This is not only a powerful evidence that the act itself is under a curse, but an undeniable proof of its impurity and unholiness. If this be not so, why did the shame which was the consequence of Adam's and Eve's transgression, fall upon the parts which they covered? Does not this plainly point out the very act which they had committed? Does it not evidently show what the forbidden fruit was? If by the forbidden fruit, we are to understand literally, the fruit of some natural tree, which Eve plucked with her hands, and which they both ate with their mouths, why did not the shame fall upon the hand that plucked, and the mouth that ate it? As before observed, God always dispenses his judgments according to the nature of the offence. But in this case, there does not appear to be any punishment inflicted upon the hand or the mouth; but the parts to which pertain the power of generation, are now, for the first time, condemned to feel shame; and their first object was to conceal those parts from the view of each other; accordingly "they sewed figleaves totogether and made themselves aprons. And even to this day, it is justly accounted a shame, both in the male and female, to expose the nakedness of those parts; and more especially in the female, who it seems is doomed to share the greatest portion of the curse in this respect, as being the first in the transgression.

This guilty passion of shame seems to be peculiarly connected with that libidinous act which first produced it; so that it naturally shuns the light, and seeks to cover itself in the shades of darkness, secluded even from the eyes of the most intimate friends. Is not this fact, of itself, a most striking evidence that there is something, either in the act itself, or which is inseparably connected with it, which never came from God? And yet are there not many, very many, among modern christians, who, setting aside that which Jesus Christ declared to be "the first and great command," have set up this lascivious act in its place? and do they not, instead of loving the Lord God with all their hearts and souls, verily love their lusts

with all their hearts and souls, and devote all the mind and strength to support and maintain it?

Corrupted and abused, and shamefully debased, as the work of generation is, by the lust of concupiscence, it is still supported and maintained by the professors of christianity, who profess to sanction it by a legal ceremony, under the name of a divine institution. But where is the evidence that the nature of the act is purified, or the shame taken away, by the means? For altho the most reverend and pious divines may exert all their piety, and all their divinity, to gospelize it in their sermons, legalize it in their marriage ceremonies, and sanctify it by their fervent prayers; yet they can neither take away the shame of the act, nor purify the nature of it; nor can they ever induce the pious devotees of this holy ordinance to show forth their obedient zeal, by fulfilling this great command before the eyes of their Reverend teachers, who have done so much to sanctify the deed to them.

Nor can even these pious divines themselves, with all their zeal in its favor, be induced to set them a public example of this sort of worship, however faithful they may be to perform it in private. So closely is shame attached to that action which claims for its authority the first great command of God! What! Does an action which is authorized by the command of the Almighty, and sanctioned by a divine ceremony, require to be performed in the shades of darkness? Can darkness preserve the sanctity of an action which would be profaned by the light of the sun? Is it a shame for christians to obey a divine command in the presence of their christian brethren and sisters? If so, the command must surely be a very shameful one.

Probably these remarks may feel offensive to some of our professedly good christian advocates for this great command, and perhaps they will be ready to cry out, by way of exclamation, Shameful! shameful! We freely acknowledge that the subject is a shameful one, and deeply lament the shameful cause which has excited such remarks. We can truly say, in the language of Paul, "We have no fellowship with these unfruitful works of darkness, "but reprove them." And we also acknowledge with him, that, "it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of "them in secret.”* But if it be a shame to speak of such shameful conduct among a people professing the christian religion, surely it must be a far greater shame to practice it.

It will doubtless be readily acknowledged, that he who lives in the practice of stealing, acts a far more shameful and dishonorable part, than he who takes up a full cross against every thievish propensity, and bears an open and decided testimony against it. Nor can it be disputed that such a testimony would be much more Eph. v. 11, 12.