The manner in which I would argue is this. St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, says, “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power but of God, the powers that be, are ordained of God. Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.”—Rom. xiii. 1, 2. Now this solemn injunction, under this awful sanction, was imposed by inspiration upon the Christians of Rome, at the time that the crown of that empire was worn by Nero, one of the most cruel and blood-thirsty tyrants that ever disgraced a throne. By his own direction the city was set on fire, which raged for nine successive days, spreading desolation and ruin; and then to furnish himself a pretext for persecuting the Christians, he laid the crime to their charge, and fiercely commenced the bloody work. “Some were wrapped in the skins of wild beasts, and torn in pieces by dogs; some were crucified, and others, clothed in garments covered with pitch, were set on fire; while the cruel monster calmly sat in the window of his palace and enjoyed the scene of his own barbarities.” And yet this is the man, whom the apostle commands the Christians to revere as “the minister of God;” the resistance of whom is threatened with damnation. Was not Paul then the advocate of tyranny and oppression? Just as clearly as he was the advocate of slavery. In the same manner I think it can be shown that polygamy is approved by St. Paul, at least among the Gentiles. He expressly ordained that “a bishop or deacon must be the husband of one wife.” 1 Tim. iii. 2, 12. Now the inference is fair, that all other men might have more than one. Private members of the church are not restricted in their inclinations in this respect, only the officers of the church are not indulged. I see no way to avoid this conclusion. How then shall we reconcile these apparent inconsistencies? In my view, the solution is plain and easy. Upon the first introduction of the gospel into any pagan land, there always will be many evils existing, which are so completely wrought into the customs, interests and institutions of society, that it is impossible to correct them at once. Nay, if it were possible, the sudden revolution would instantly produce unspeakable misery. Take, for instance, the last mentioned case: Suppose, in a nation where polygamy is extensively practised, every man could be induced to repudiate all his wives but one; how many thousands of helpless women and children would be turned on the wide world, without the means of support, exposed to inevitable wretchedness and want! The sudden adoption of the true Christian principle, under these circumstances, would be productive of vastly greater misery than is now experienced from this horrid pagan practice; and the Christian religion would be execrated as a system of cruelty.