Does not the moral law referred to by St. Mark (Lev. 18:16; 20:21) apply to-day to all Christians just as it applied then to all Jews? We do not know where Mark refers to the above passages in Leviticus. Mark, as also Matthew and Luke, make reference to Deut. 25:5, but not to this passage in Leviticus. The prohibitions in Leviticus seem to be against gross and unlawful indulgence of lust or illegal marriages while the husband was yet living. If it were unlawful to marry the wife of a deceased brother, why was such an injunction given as in Deut. 25:5? While the illustration which Paul uses in Rom. 7:2,3 is designed to teach a spiritual lesson, it must also have been a recognized fact in the marriage laws of the Jews. That being the case, a brother's widow is free from her deceased husband, so that she is free to "be married to another man." Compare the terms used in Lev. 18:16 with verse 7 of the same chapter. The other text, Lev. 20:21, evidently refers to adultery, the brother, the woman's husband, being yet alive. See 1 Cor. 7:39. We do not believe that marriage to the wife of a deceased brother is contrary to Scripture. The indulgence of unlawful lusts, forbidden in the texts to which our querist refers, are always wrong. Some have had an idea that John the Baptist reproved Herod for marrying his deceased brother's wife, but Herod took the wife of his brother while his brother was yet living—quite a different thing. Deut. 25:5, before referred to, made it a duty to take a deceased brother's wife, providing he died childless. If his brother did not die childless, it would naturally be the privilege of the widow and her former husband's brother to marry if they felt so disposed.