the destinies of the Empire-exchange Zion for Montmartre, and Jerusalem for Paris. The few liberal believers whom he attracted to his views ruined his projects with the people by their impious flattery; and averted the whole body of the nation by blending, on the 15th of August, the cipher of Napoleon and Josephine with the unutterable name of Jehovah, and elevating the imperial eagle above the representation of the Ark of the Covenant. A misconception, in fact, of the character of the people, has vitiated all the attempts of various sovereigns to better their condition; they have sought to amalgamate them with the body of their subjects, not knowing, or not regarding the temper of the Hebrews, and the plain language of the scripture, that "the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations."

It is a matter for very serious reflection that the Christians themselves have cast innumerable stumbling blocks in the way of Hebrew conversion. To pass over the weak and ignorant methods that men have adopted to persuade the Jews, let us ask whether the Christians have ever afforded to this people an opportunity of testing the divine counsel, "By their fruits ye shall know them"? What is the record of the Christian periods of the second dispersion?-A history of insolence, plunder, and blood, that fills even now the heart of every thinking man with indignation and shame! Was this the religion of the true Messiah? Could this be in their eyes the fulfilment of those glorious prophecies that promised security and joy in his happy days, when his "officers should be peace and his exactors righteousness"? What, too, have they witnessed in the worship and doctrine of Christian states? The idolatry of the Greek and Latin churches, under which the Hebrews have almost universally lived, the mummeries of their ritual, and the hypocrisy of their precepts, have shocked and averted the Jewish mind. We oftentimes express our surprise at the stubborn resistance they oppose to the reception of Christianity; but Christianity in their view is synonymous with image-worship, and its doctrines with persecution; they believe that in embracing the dominant faith they must violate the two first commandments of the Decalogue, and abandon that witness, which they have nobly maintained for 1800 years, to the unity of the God of Israel.

It well imports us to have a care that we no longer persecute or mislead this once-loved nation; they are a people chastened, but not utterly cast off; "In all their affliction He was afflicted." For the oppression of this people there is no warrantee in scripture; nay, the reverse; their oppressors are menaced with stern judgments; "I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy, and I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease; for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction." This is the language of the Prophet Zachariah; and we trace in the pages of history the vestiges of this never-slumbering Providence. No sooner had England given shelter to the Jews, under Cromwell and Charles, than she started forward in a commercial career of unrivalled and uninterrupted prosperity; Holland, embracing the principles of the Reformation, threw off the yoke of Philip, opened her cities to the Hebrew people, and obtained an importance far beyond her natural advantages; while Spain, in her furious and bloody expulsion of the race, sealed her own

condemnation. "How deep a wound," says Mr. Milman, "was inflicted on the national prosperity by this act of the Most Christian Sovereign,' cannot easily be calculated, but it may be reckoned among the most effective causes of the decline of Spanish greatness."

SCEPTICISM.

LETTERS TO B

9

A SCEPTIC-No. V.

My dear Friend,

I AGAIN resume the pen.

BETHANY, Va., May 11th, 1839.

The subject of the mediation of Christ is to me a blissful theme: but it is obscured by many difficulties. As stated in a former letter, "it is set forth on one hand as a commercial transaction." With this view, the Saviour is represented as covenanting to purchase a definite number of the human family by giving his own life as an equivalent for their lives; as taking upon him their sins, by imputation, so as to become himself the greatest sinner that ever lived! This is to contradict all that the scriptures teach on this subject; for they affirm that he was "holy, harmless, and undefiled-separate from sinners;" that he was the "delight" of the Father-who says of him, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased."

In the same absurd way the righteousness of Christ is said to be imputed to believers, so that they are as really holy and just in the sight of the great Creator as if they had never sinned. This view of the subject destroys forever the idea of pardon. If I am thrown into prison for debt, and a friend interposes and pays the full amount, can there be any room for the display of grace on the part of the creditor? What would be my feelings should the creditor meet me at the door of my prison, and say, 'I now freely forgive you all the debt'? Might I not indignantly reply, 'I am, indeed, released; but I thank you not for it.'

The view also set forth in the Episcopalian Church Book, and transferred to the Methodist Discipline, that "Christ died to reconcile the Father to us," is equally absurd and unscriptural. This would put it out of our power to love the Father at all: we could in no sense feel indebted to him for salvation. But if there is a truth, written as with a sun-beam, in the whole volume of revelation, it is-that "God so loved the world as to send his only begotten Son into the world, that whosoever believeth on him might not perish, but have an everlasting life." Yes, he loved us, and desired our happiness and salvation; but how to forgive rebels, and yet maintain the honor and dignity of of his government, was the question. The death of Christ is a governmental, and not a commercial transaction. In case of treason, or rebellion, or any kind of transgression against a government, two things must be considered by the Governor with reference to pardon-1st. Is it desirable? 2d. Is it safe. With regard to the first, pardon is always desirable when there is manifestly a sincere repentance on the part of the offender; and this repentance will always prompt to atone, as far as

possible, for the past, and to a thorough reformation in time to come. To grant pardon without this evidence of repentance, would be to prostrate all dignity and authority in the dust, and at once to publish a universal license to sin. It would shake the deep foundations of the strongest government in the universe. But when this point is gainedwhen every thing conspires to make pardon desirable-the next consideration is, is it safe? I have now before me a brief sketch of the trial and execution of Dr. Dodd, for forgery, in a work entitled "The Corner Stone," by J. Abbot, the leading incidents of which are familiar to you. When he was in prison, Dr. Johnson, the great English philogist, penned a letter for him, addressed to the King, of which the following is an extract:-"I confess the crime, and own the enormity of its consequences, and the danger of its example! Nor have I the the confidence to petition for impunity; but humbly hope that public security may be established, without the spectacle of a Clergyman dragged through the streets to a death of infamy, amidst the derision of the profligate and the profane; and that justice may be satisfied with irrevocable exile, perpetual disgrace, and hopeless penury." In this case every thing combined to make pardon desirable. If a pecuniary consideration could have saved the man, hundreds of thousands could have been raised in an hour. Public sympathy was strong in his favor. But England was a commercial nation: her safety and prosperity depended upon the confidence reposed in written bonds. It would not do to make light of forgery. The King and the Judges decided that neither pardon nor commutation of the sentence would be safe. To apply this subject, in the words of Mr. Abbot: "What this poor sufferer's learned and eloquent advocate failed to find for him, Jesus Christ our Saviour has succeeded in finding for us-a way by which to satisfy justice and sustain law, and make a moral impression, which should arrest the sad consequences of guilt, and render it safe that we should be forgiven.” Or, in the words of the Apostle, "For all having sinned and come short of the glory of God, are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is by Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth a propitiatory (or mercy seat) through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his own justice in passing by the sins which were before committed through the forbearance of God: for a demonstration, also, of justice in the present time, in order that he may be just when justifying him who is of the faith of Jesus." It is thus that the Creator displays his love, and at the same time maintains the inflexibility of his justice and the dignity of his government.

It is related of one of the ancient kings that he once passed an edict that for a certain offence the transgressor should suffer the loss of both his eyes. But his own son was the first offender. What was to be done? His character and government must not be rendered contemptible by favoritism. But love and justice harmonize. He inflicts half the punishment on himself, and half on his son; and thus shows his unyielding adherence to principle. While on this subject, the mediation of Christ, I cannot omit to speak of the person of the Mediator. All the circumstances of the case require that an illustrious personage should interpose; it is necessary for the dignity of the divine government-it is necessary in order to show the heinous nature of sin: and last, but not least, it is necessary to show the greatness of the divine

love for us. And here I beg leave to introduce an illustration from the writings of Andrew Fuller, quoted by Asa Shinn, in an admirable and excellent work of his, entitled "An Essay on the Plan of Salvation." Page 178 he says, "The sense of mankind, with regard to the necessity of a Mediator, may be illustrated by the following similitude:-Let us suppose a division in the army of one of the wisest and best of kings, through the evil counsel of a foreign enemy, to have been disaffected to his government; and that without any provocation on his part, they traitorously conspired against his crown and life. The attempt failed; and the offenders were seized, disarmed, tried by the laws of their country, and condemned to die. A respite, however, was granted them during his Majesty's pleasure. At this solemn period, while every part of the army and of the empire was expecting the fatal order for execution, the king was employed in meditating mercy. But how could mercy be shown? "To make light of a conspiracy," said he to his friends, "would loosen the bands of government: other divisions of the army might be tempted to follow their example; and the nation at large might be in danger of imputing it to tameness, fear, or some unworthy motive."

“Every one felt in this case the necessity of a mediator, and agreed as to the general line of conduct proper for him to pursue. He must not attempt,' said they, 'to compromise the differences by dividing the blame: that would make things worse. He must justify the king, and condemn the outrage committed against him; he must offer, if possible, some honorable expedient, by means of which the bestowment of pardon shall not relax, but strengthen just authority; he must convince the conspirators of their crime, and introduce them in the character of supplicants; and mercy must be shown them out of respect to him or for his sake.

"But who could be found to mediate in such a cause? This was an important question. A work of this kind, it was allowed on all hands, required singular qualifications.

"He must be perfectly clear of any participation in the offence,' said one, or inclination to favorit."

"He must,' said another, 'be one who, on account of his character and services, stands high in the esteem of the king and the public: a mediator in effect pledges his honor that no evil will result to the state from the granting of his request.'

"I conceive it is necessary,' said a third, that the weight of the mediation should bear a proportion to the magnitude of the crime, and to the value of the favor requested; and that for this end it is proper he should be a person of great dignity.'

"A fourth remarked that he must possess a tender compassion towards the unhappy offenders, or he would not cordially interest himself in their behalf.

"Finally, it was suggested by a fifth, that 'for the greater fitness of the proceeding, it would be proper that some relation or connexion should subsist between the parties.

"Meanwhile the king and his son, whom he greatly loved, and whom he had appointed generalissimo of all his forces, had retired from the company, and were conversing about the matter, which attracted the general attention.

"My son, said the benevolent sovereign, what can be done in behalf of these unhappy men? To order them for execution, violates every feeling of my heart; yet to pardon them is dangerous. If mercy be exercised, it must be through a mediator; and who is qualified to mediate in such a cause? and what expedient can be devised by means of which pardon shall not relax, but strengthen just authority: speak, my son, and say what measures can be pursued.'

"My father,' said the prince, I feel the insult offered to your person and government, and the injury thereby aimed at the empire at large. They deserve to die without mercy. Yet I feel for them. I cannot endure to witness their execution. What shall I say? On me be this wrong! Let me suffer in their stead. Inflict on me as much as is necessary to impress the army and the nation with a just sense of the evil, and of the importance of good order and faithful allegiance. Let it be in their presence, and in the presence of all assembled. When this is done, let them be permitted to implore and receive your Majesty's pardon in my name. If any man refuse so to implore, and so to receive it, let him die the death.'

"My son!' replied the King, you have expressed my heart! The same things have occupied my mind; but it was my desire that you should be voluntary in the undertaking. It shall be as you have said. The dignity of your person and character will render the sufferings of an hour of greater account as to the impression of the public mind, than if all the rebellious had been executed; and by how much I am known to have loved you, by so much will my compassion to them, and my displeasure against their wicked conduct be made manifest.'

The gracious design being communicated at court, all were struck with it. The only difficulty that was started was amongst the judges of the realm. They at first questioned whether the proceeding was admissible. The law,' said they, 'makes provision for the transfer of debts, but not of crimes. Its language is, The soul that sinneth it shall die.' But when they came to view things on a more enlarged scale, considering it as an expedient on an extraordinary occasion, and perceiving that the spirit of the law would be preserved, and all the ends of good government answered, they were satisfied. It is not a measure,' said they, for which the law provides, yet it is not contrary to the law, but above it. [Goodness is more than justice.]

"The day appointed arrived. The prince appeared, and suffered as a criminal. Returning to the palace, amidst the tears and shouts of the loyal spectators, the suffering hero was embraced by his royal father, who, in addition to the natural affection which he bore to him as a son, loved him for his singular interposition at such a crisis. Sit thou,' said he, at my right hand! though the threatenings of the law be not literally accomplished, yet the spirit of them is preserved, the honor of good government is secured, and the end of punishment is more effectually answered, than if all the rebels had been sacrificed. Ask of me, my son, what I shall give thee!'

"He asked for the offenders to be introduced as supplicants at the feet of his father, for the forgiveness of their crimes, and for the direc tion of affairs till order and happiness should be perfectly restored."

But on the last point-the love of God-how do those persons degrade the love of God, who regard our Mediator and Saviour as a