decree of the Emperor Constantius in 355 is also remarkable evidence of the feeling of the early Christians, for as soon as Christianity is established we find the Heathen practice is at once repealed. Now I freely admit to Dr. M'Caul that if I were advocating a repeal of God's law by the traditions of men, I should be open to his argument "ad invidiam," when he refers to superstitious notions entertained at the same period, and asks me if I am prepared to accept such superstitions. This is, however, but an old fallacy. The interpretation of Scripture (as distinguished from mere translation) being the question, reference to ancient and continuous acceptance of a passage, or to ancient and continuous practice, which indicate the sense attributed to the passage, is most valuable. This Dr. M'Caul allows, and indeed relies upon with regard to his translation of the 18th verse. The circumstance that the same writings, or the practice of the same age, afford evidence of superstitious usages also, does not diminish the weight of their evidence as to the fact, whether Christians did or did not hold the marriage with a deceased wife's sister to be contrary to God's law. The fact that the large majority of Christians from the time of the Apostles down to the present time have deduced the doctrine of the Trinity from Scripture will remain an important fact, whether or not the same Christians have from an early time held various superstitious notions irreconcilable with
