Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

JOSEPH S. BAKER— Bmiiit. VOL. XIL i V- TE*.MS PER aNNVM. C@* “The Christian fxDE.x, publisTied on Friday in-each week, (except two in the year), will be fu misled to each subscriber at $2 aft cents, in advance ; or $3 if not paid within tlie year. jCr” Post-Masters, where the Index is taken, are requested to Forward renuttanccs for subscribers at ‘their respective offices, according to.a .decision of the Pos't-Master General as to their right to do so. All pa trons and.agents are requested to notice this. Every Agent (and all Baptist Ministers are particularly’solicited.le become agents) who procure and pay for live copies of the Lire itu.BilfidAo.a4 istfc naabcani '■pensatton for his ‘(rouble. , a Letters an business, or communications. • Hpy 1 be addressed to the Editor, post paid. JHBbitvertisemctfts may be inserted on usual terms, at the discretion of the Editor. / UggjjjL—■■ ft “ U-” wHBB * •’ ‘lnterpretation of'John iii: 5. Except (i man be born of wafer and of the Spirit, he cannot enter lhc..KLig-'‘ dom of God t •‘III. WHAT SIGNIFICATION. , Having'decided that gennad, hudor, and flneuma, arc all ip !>e hiterprctcd'figurative {t>ws are, now ‘.o delgtrmj.ne the ojVeach, anoufe meaning of the whole passage. r ’ For tjtis purpose we wilt look back to the'reshft of anr inquiries respecting the mistis ‘loquendi, and collect the significations, whfchlSff?dVal ferriw.fljHiatiy have, when uftilied to suclL&ubjccls.*’ If we find that Mt may he combined without unfitness, I to make a sense'consistent .with common’ rrri , the scope of the and tlte renin-’ ioctrine of wripw’tyf shall con clude that we have ascertained the true | meaning of the text.- . * j Except a man sic ,j<a!'/t''t.fibip!c>ricit!ly ; j i, p. undergo a great moral change of which God and which is character * ized. By’ producing faith, love, tighteo'us tforfeis. victory juyer tb§ uM|d, and niesgr vaiibn from4tifepd unfir of one. Os water rhcfaphoricMi i. e. a divine influence necessary “to spiritual lflVoud well being, f *- i” .'htd of spirit metaphorical ; 1. e. a di -vine inltiiehce which is invisible or imma terial. and active. He cannot entcr\fhc kingdom of Goelg ije. lie cannot partake of.jlie fpiicyy r<?4¥lk. ‘fftg front God's exercising kingly atilhori ~ty through (he Messiah, These several ports may be fitly com bined into a sense wniclt may be briefly ex pressed tints :• Except a man undergo a great moral change Ir<itn a divine influence, which is in various respects comparable to water and to air in motion, lie isitiuot be ;t subject of Messiah’s Spititnal reign. This sense, unless good reasons appear, to the contrary, the.buys of interpretation compel us to lake for the true one. Tltis interpretation takes die phrase iboru of water ami spi.it’ to be a double metaphor, representing the same object that the single metaphor ‘born of the spirit isrtised for, in the following verse. *1 he double metaphor may he supposed to have been used in verse 5, because a more full ■description of the object was needed, whereas, in verse (>, nothing more was re quisite than that the object pointed out as to be distinguished from that with which it is contrasted ;—the Spiritual birth from the natural. AVe. may be unable to mark out with ■confidence the precise limits to which the signification of each metaphorical term ex tends, \Y r e may howevei conclude that, as water is a visible element, it more fitly de notes the influence excited through the ex ternal means of spiritual instruction. Ihe Scriptures countenance this conclusion. 1 Cor. iii, 0. I have planted, Apollos watered. lfeut. xxxii. 2. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and Ss the showers upon the grass. Eph. v,20. With die washing of water bv the word. ’ On the other hand, air, being an in visi ble element, more fitly represents the im mediate influence of the Holy Ghost, mys ‘ tcriqus'iii.its operation, and giving efficacy prille external means. . John xx. 22. He breathed on them, and saith unto them, receive ye the Holy Ghost. John iii. 8. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hcarest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it corneth, and whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit. I Thess. i. 5. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power tnd (en pncumCtti hugio, in holy spirit,) j. e. a Sanctifying divine influence. IV. -THE INTERPRETATIONS WHICH OTHERS HAVE GIVEN. Having applied the rules of interpretation for oi.rselves, and having drawn our own continuous respecting the meaning of the text, wv may now inquire what opinions others lave formed, and on what grounds, that we hay see if there is any just cause to suspect.he accuracy of our investigation. 1. The- fvrsoiis who, on some questions, are entitled t highest respect,- are the ancient eccleVtical writers. This testi mony concen\<r a historical fact or the ineaning-of a sb r( ] with which they were well dcquaintedXs jnost worthy of our re gard. We haviy accordingly, consulted i their writings to after tain the iisus loquendi THE CHRIST N INDEX, of their times- But in a question, whether ■n word, the niennirtg of which is perfectly understood, is to be taken literally or meta phorically, we ought not to make them our judges. It would be as absurd as to refer with implicit confidence to the decision of some ancient mathematician respecitng a problem which we may solve for ourselves just.as well as he. It is nevertheless desi rable to know how they interpreted the text, and what doctrinal and practical infer ences they from it, 1 lie inquiry, 011 these points, we have reserved for this .place. Wall has a chapter on of the ancients concerning tiro him Jo state of uiTaTffs orT.ftS'wFTtiie uoTiaptizedTirom which vc make die following quotation : “AH the ancient Christians (without the exception qf one man) do understand that rule of our Saviour (John iii. 5.) Verily, verily, 1 say unto thee, Except u man [jit is in tlie -original can me tie, exempt a per son, or except one] be. born of water and of Vie Spirit, he cannot enter into ihe king dom of (Jod,. of baptism. . “1 had occasion, in ill# First. Part, to bring a great many instances of their wr ings; where all that mr*^iu. that text-front Justin Martyr down to Jie\usttn ibi so ap-. ply it; and Wkj- u !f ‘•* V.C- fought. Neither did I ettjT in arty ancient was the first that pkrecMe mean baptism. i'lny c. 1(3.1 li* gives another iulerprlV thF? wjifcirfie edit fesscs to'bc new. This Tnim did indeed write many things, in defence ol ‘infant bap tism but he has doneifti times niore/piej ndiceto that cause, by jjrithdrawiug (as far as in-Mm lay*) the elrenttth of-this ■ text of Scripture -(which the ancient Christians used asachiei grown tof it) by that forced iuu.rpiets.Hqtt nUiis.in'-ii hadias dunegood to:-!*; :-;Uija i#w m*po;hv-es and Ilrgtl-'; qiCnfv. Vv hat pjSjfiof Scripture more (fit to proufive.-V the gatuifitctlojg- C £ some q-laiii find orcTnary man pt-t imps, is , ■Hglcaji.ihlc oi tin- hccc <;f l tlie rousi-ijifciicCs By-WTtiidi if is proven from other places) that f,e ought to have Iris - child baptized, tiiau tltis (esjiecially il’-it were transnted. tuto English as it should he; our Savknir say s, ‘t hat no-jpt-c ----son .nljall cbine to Heaven without it?— nicanlifg, at least in tvtd’s ordinary way. It is true,’ that Calvin at. other places ,determine tliis to be so*, as l shall show pre '-sfMtyT'tnirhis ‘dtfrtPWW'HM'fffßr WFfi®# for the loss of. a text of Scripture. Since his time, those parties of the Protestants that havu been the greatest adtnircrsof him, have followed him in leaving out this place fronramong tlieii proof of infant baptism, and diverting the sense of it another way, which the Anti-pauiobaptist observing, have taken tlitpi advantage, and do aim to sjjiufojr all the Protestant l’aldobaplists from it. Tftey are apt now to lacy out any of ill cm that make any pretence to this text, as going against the grneral sense ol Piotestants.” The quotation already made from Justin Martyr, (p. 14.) shows his interpretation of the text. Wall, in commenting on it says : “We see by it, that they understood that rule of our Saviour, Except one be re genctatcd for born again] of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom ol God, —of water baptism ; and concluded from it, that without such baptism, no per son could come to Heaven ; and so did all the wtiters ol these 400 years, not one man excepted.” The following from Turtullian, shows not only how the text was interpreted in his time ; hut that the doctrine of the ne cessity of Baptism to Salvation was under stood to he t,light by it. “Whereas it is ail acknowledged rule, that none can he saved without baptism ; grounded especial ly on that sentence of our Lord, Unless one be born of water he cannot be saved.” We add another from Gregory Nazian zen, (A. D. 31i0.) to show the connexion between the doctrinal inference just men tioned, and the practice of infant baptism. “Some mav say’, Suppose this to hold in the case of those that can desire baptism, —what say you to those that are as yet in fants, and are not in capacity to bo either sensible of the grace or the miss of it ? Shall we baptize them too ! \ es, by all means, if any danger make it requisite, for it is better that they he sanctified without iheir own sense of it, than that they should .die unsealed and uninitiated. And a ground of this to us is circumcision, which was given on the eighth day, and was a typical seal and was practised on those that had no use of reason ; as also the anointing of the door-posts, which preserved the first-horn by things that have no sense. As for oth ers, I give my opinion that they should stay three years or thereabouts, when they are capable to bear and answer some of the holy words; and though they do not per fectly understand them, yet they form them; and that you sanctify them in soul and bo dy with the great sacrament of initiation; for though they are not liable to give ac count of their life before their reason be come to maturity, (they having this advan tage by their age, that they are not forced to account for lire faults they have commit ted in ignorance) yet, by reason of those sudden and unexpected assaults of dangers that arc by no endeavor to be prevented, it is bv all means advisable that they be se cured by the laver. So far for the interpretation of Wall and the Fathers. 2. VY’e come now to the interpretation of Galvin. The passage of his Institutes to FOR TIIE BAPTjIST fONVKN’fffON ( THE STATE OF GEORGIA. PENFtELD, GA., JIIGUST 2, 1844. which Wall refers reads as follows. “Moreover They [the opponents of in fant baptism] adduce tlie languageof Christ, which is recorded by John, and which they suppose to’ represent a present regeneration as reqtiisite.io baptism: “Except a man. be born of water and the Spirit, he catpiof en ter into the tiie kingdom of Gcd-’* See, they say, how baptism is called regenera tion by tlie mouth of the Lord. When it is evident, then, that infants are utterly in capable of regeneration, on what pretence do we admit them to baptism, to which re generation is indispensably necessary ? In the first place they are deceived in suppos ing -that refill* to baptism, bw ei.use ir-Tiieiuiuna wotm for, alter Christ hud declared to Nicodemus tlie corruption of nature,.and shewn him the necessity of being born again*; because Nicodenms was dreaming of a secound corporeal birth, he here indicates the manner in which God regenerates us, namely, by water and by the Spirit, as if he had said, By the Spirit who, in the ablution and purification ol the souls of the faithful, performs tlie office of water. Nor is this a novel mode of ex pression : for it perfectly corresponds with that declaration of Jjoiu) the Baptist: “He that corneth after me, shallA<nptize ujth the ‘Holy Ghost ami with fir?.”- • / ?s to bicptnc iuithJhe Uoty Spirit tire,- Urero-’ •fore, is to comer tjie Holy “'li'‘. it; ‘legeneration, lias the and nalufo of fi re; .so, to he born of water-and of the Spirit, is up other than to receive tlwt'infUi enee/of the Spirit, which does in-the soul what water dbes on thohotjy. I know that! othersgivtqa different interpretation, hut 1 have .110 doubt that*this is tlie genuine sense; bdbati.se the intention of Christ is pimply to teach iv*- nil must be divestn! of then own nlmircnvlio aspire to the kingdom “of. hea ven.” - .) ’ ■ ‘ 3. Tl,<iUr remains a liiiul mtt'rprciat-iprtV which was given on p. 28, in the win'd*iif : ’ •••’ •/• i; - ..ili lirelinn f - pqfiing haplisiiHo jpe 'iitteud*4<Jmf. -it iffip > find dlit-lit tint the thrwe ii> of baptism to salvation. . qONCLU‘MON. 1. The chief argument iii support of the first interpretation, and the only one which Wall advances, is its antiquity) It may be noticed that, in die very firet .instance- in which the term regeneration's applied ip baptism, (see the quotation from Justin M at yTi-fr t* Tsmumtir ifTfnts’ text. The interpretation therefore, may lie supposed to have given rise to that, use of the term’ If so, this ttsus loquendi ought not to he urged as an argument for the interpretation, having no higher author ity than the interpretation ilsolf. How far the Ancients may he relied on as authority in the interpretation of Scrip ture, may be inferred from an example given by Wall, vol. l, p. 40. “The pas sage itself, [Hernias, Faslor, lib. 3, fiiriiJi trtd. 0, cap. Hi.] which rrpres-. nis the pa triarchs and prophets of the Old ‘!’<.•■ am-.-nt to stand in need of baptism, and of tin | apostles preaching the name oi Cluisi to them aflet; they were dead, before they could be capable of entering tlie kingdom of God, does indeed seem strange to us, and is the oddest passage in all the hook ; but we must consider it is represented by way of vision, where every tiling is not to he taken in a proper sense ; yet (Jletnens Alexandrinus, who lived about 100 years alter this book was written, cites this pas sage, and lakes it for real matter of fact; and those texts, 1 Pet. 3. 10; and 4, fi, which speak of the gospel being preached to than that were dead, though they be now by most Protestants understood in a notlier sense, were, by most of the ancients, understood in a sense like to this.” Again, p. 00. “Many of the eldest Christians (be sides Hernias, whose words I gave befote) conceived that the gospel of life was preach ed, and baptism, in the name of Christ, given to the patriarchs in their separate statu.” The truth is, that the Fathers, as intepreters of scripture, and theologians, were but children, when compared with the Reformers and other divines of modern times. Every age in the progress of time easts new light on the Ifildc ; and in tin; last age, when ‘knowledge shall la-increas ed,’ much of that knowledge will be deriv ed from clearer and more correct interpre tations of the sacred volume. It is there fore manifestly wrong to fetter the mind in its investigations of divine truth liy the au thority of the Fathers. How much mis. chief has resulted from their misinterpreta tion of this one text, it is not the business of an interpreter to decide. 2. Tlie last interpretation, which agrees with the first only in supposing baptism to be intended, but differs widely as to tire general sense of the text, has not the author ity on its side. It is moreover contrary to the principles of interpretation, and involves an impropriety ; see p. 20. 3. Tlie interpretation of Calvin, the scc ond in the above enumeration agrees sub stantially with that to which our investiga tions have led us. It differs in taking jmeuma to signify the person of the lloly- Ohost : ours understands it to denote his influence. As to the general sense of the text, the two interpretations harmonize. Wall objects though Galvin‘did indeed writs many things in defence of infant bap tism, lie lias done ten limes more prejudice to that cause, by withdrawing (as far as in* him lay,) the strength of this text of .Scrip ture (which the ancient Christians used as a chief ground of it) by that foiccd inter pretation of his, than he has done good to ituxLl bis new hypotheses and argu mejr This objection lies with nearly , or if!.: equal force against the inlerpreta tioiv-’ Dwight, and any other that does i baptism necessary to salvation.— - validity cannot be admitted. If it slioi i appear that tlie great Reformer, by mec eiilg this text from the misinterpreta tion the Fathers, has undermined the very, undation on winch infant baptism was|irigiaa!ly built, still the rules of cor rect interpretation should bo followed. No textlboiild be made to spo; k a sense not : ls owDuierely to furnish a convenient defence QC-raD I *.particular doctrine o! practice. duty to respect m>t thy .m ----lut the reasons of uninspired men,} ‘vhqqave preceded us in the interpretation of SijHpture ; and as in the present instance we lirve found no sufficient reason 11 set asidathe result of our own investigations; we must decide, with Calvin, that “the in tent ill i of Christ is simply to teach that ail mustl.e divested of itreirown nature, who aspic to the kingdom of heaven,” For the Christian Index. -I- Slavery.—So. 5. * J ve endeavored, in the foregoing nuni -1 a express the argument in the brief- Csfefjl inner possible. It is susceptible of alnijd- ’indefinite addition and expansion; b-d, re I do not desire to fatigue the reader, I \viE% ct what has been written suffice for *!> ict argument on this part of the sub ject. 1 will notice, however, before passing jgQoml position under the first gener al hen , two offsets which have been pre- Sterttelftgainsi the direct scripture sanction of slijpry. JsksMfa said, that the same course ofrea* l# n i jjv'ould prove, as well, that God sane- | gCZZ-Sj I havo not seen aiiy ac 'o sustain such an allegation, and o-Hi*;t4jß | |,e advanced. It eanribt escape the uml’e oi ( tbe most careless reader, that the tw are mentioned in a very yli.fl'crcy manfiei in the script-ties, ami we have,aa;sidcs, iji the New Testament w-lurt js (qiti%dcnt to a prohibition ol polygamy’. No spmfic law against’ it Was necessary ; have no existence in Judea in the tini(7 (‘iTT 7] ffts*f trtAtmihrrntrrevA words of Christ, however, (Jlatt. 19: 0.) may hi constnied by an .easy iwinjicalion to pndiiht it. If whoever •putlelii away his wile aid marrieth nnother cominittcih adul tery ; jo who marrieth another without put ting ae.ay the first, is no 1.-.-s ruilly ul'atlul teiy. Ami ; , ! p: in the Epiaib/.j !’:e ; ri’fci.. -v . ia; ri. \ - alwava i;op:./,|k-li; i !’ uuio -oi on man to urn- v, i. ; . i , : , 1 i .7 : 1 I I, I. .. e staurn, ibv God net only j--HTiir :i but (lit t!y s::;i:'tio:icd it under both Ihe Old and Ntw T -slanu-nt di.“|ieiisati<ms 2.j'J'he second refuge is, that the word serumt in the Bible docs not mean slave, but lifers to one occupying a more volun tary situation than a bondman. In antici pation! of this objection, we gave an ac count, jn the second number, of the nature of Roman slavery, which account is sus tained by the concurrent testimony of all the claGienl writers on tlie subject. But little additional is needed here. If the Ro man ssihy extended over all those places to which the Apostles directed epistles, when ever mention is made of .servants it must re fer to spelt as were servants under Roman law. This is proof enough, of usrlf, that the sacred writers when tfii-v mi\ - rva.iu* mean slaves. But. the G-ici-r Wi- m, and to express waster nod servant would settle the poilit, were all oilier evident: ■ lacking. For master we have: i. /Curios from kurosauthority and applied to any one pos sessing yto.lh-.i.'l;- v”; -1 ‘ J Ih uni, • r i J 1 ileus fear ami pioiewfl o ’fiiake, or, perhaps, ilesmoi a bond anil poito to make, and ap plied, primarily, to a master of slaves ; as every Greek scholar knows, and any one can learn by’ application to the Lexicon.— For servant we have: 1. Oi/cetes, from oi/cos, a house, that is, one belonging to the house; and 2. dou/os, from i/eo to bind, that is, a bondman. But it is needless to wastc.tiie readers time in pro\ mg that which every tyro knows. Slavurv is not an immorality itself: Secondly. Because it is not indirectly forbidden by the spirit of the scriptures. The opponents of slavery’ claim tlie en tire spirit of the Bible to he oil their side.— They say, that die moral precepts —such as thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself, and all things whatsoever ye would that m n should do to you, do vc even so to them—ire diametrically opposed to slave ry. That the fact, that, under the circum stances, the Gospel does not forbid slavery affords no reason to believe that it does not mean to prohibit it: for if its principles ’ wore fully adopted slavery could not exist. That God has two ways to reveal his will, the direct and the indirect. Ho may for bid a thing directly, or lie mav command certain duties, or impose certain obligations, with which a certain course of conduct is manifestly inconsistent, and thus forbid it indirectly. That God lias manifestly im posed such obligations as are inconsistent with slaveiy. To.the .question : . why this manner of forbidding it was chosen in preference to any other ? it is answered: The reason may be that slavery’ is a social evil; and to its eradication a change must be effected in the society’ in which it exists, li the Gos pel had forbidden the evil instead of sub verting the principle ; il it hud .proclaimed the ii nla win Incss of slavery and taught slaves lo resist tiie oppression of their masters ; ii would instantly have arrayed the two par ties in deadly hostility throughout the civ ilized world, &c. (Wayland’s Mor. .Sei. p. 214.) We have endeavored to present tlieii views in the clearest way possible and in regard to them we make the following re marks : 1. Suppose wo grant, which we do un hesitatingly, that God does reveal llis will indirectly as ivell as directly : would it be doing justice lo Hrs character, would it be reverential to charge Him (as the Abolition ists do, if language means any thing) with saying one thing and meaning another!— He may reveal a thing indirectly but it can not be opposed to that which He has al ready in a direct manner revealed ; and we leave it to the unprejudiced reader to decide, whether it has been satisfactorily proved, that the lettoi of tiie Bible does sanction slavery. Should one of our fellow crea tures approach us wil.li a certain language upon his lips, and feelings tlie revcise of that, in his heart, we would consider him a hypocrite and deceiver; and yet God is charged—l shudder while I write it—with permitting and sanctioning slavery’ by tit<* letter of the scriptures, while bv its spirit lie is seeking its subversion I 2. If Christ am! liis Apostles viewed it - as a social evil, and chose to subvert the | principle rather than forbid tlie evil, from a desire to avoid the anarchy and blaodshed which wouldbe dn: - 1 ■f, : ■ *-r.iwfr-Cim-rW":ud oi ri ew 1 r,ng(ali<l Abolitionists. They feel no hesitation to proclaim the “ unlawfulness of slavery,” j and “to teach slaves to resist the oppression j of their mastersand tints recklessly do j that, which, according to their own show i mg, Almighty God tiiinscll, from a regard ! jto consequences, refused to do. “ Fools ! li.-adl- ng rush \\ hero angels Icar to tread.”] ] 3. \V’- have no evidence from tlte /crij> j ! ‘-tires that God withholds a revelation oi’ His ! i .ill ft • m a . nawicdge that its promulgation . wuiiid cause the shedding of human blood, j i Our Saviour Himself that He came not to bring peace on earth, but a sword, and that the principles which He inculcates would set at variance even mem bers of the same family. We do not find Him endeavoring to destroy idolatry by the use of language so framed as by its spirit to subvert it. at the same time that its letter would not fall unpleasantly upon a pagan ear ; and yet there was no subject on which the large majority of mankind were more sensitive than on this. Every reader of ec clesiastical history knows, that more Chris tian blood has been made to (low by the persecutions excited by paganism than by all oilier causes combined. 4. The idea that God omits to forbid gross sin for fear of exciting men’s angry pa.--sious. and producing anarchy in society, springs from an unworthy view ol 11 is cliar j aetcr. God cannot look upon sin ; and, surely, 1! in whose bauds are the hearts of the children ol men, and who can turn them ji.s llie. i-i.in.-i-* iii” u.:Ot-r uric lui’uud, would never be willing, even in appearance, to connive at sin from a fear ol consequences. 5. The Apostle Raul did not seem lo he as well instiucted in regard to the spiiit of Christianity as some of our modern divines, or he surely would not have used such lan guage as he did to Corinthian masters and servants : Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he unis called. Art l/iov called being it servant ? cure not for it : but if thoumayest be made free, use it ra ther. For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman: likewise also he/lint is culled, being free, is Christ's servant. Or did the Apostle thus endeavor to blind their eyes to the op pression ol the system, that they might not lie “arrayed against each other” and that the invisible spirit so dissimilar to th cboihj of the .scripture-, might insidiously, ami without their knowledge, dissolve their con nection ! 0. Our Saviour declared that lo love God with all our hearts and mu neighbors as our selves constitute■; tlie sum of the law of dit to n commandments. Now is it not remark able, that the very precepts, which, it is as serted, do so unequivocally condemn slavi - n', have inseparably inwrought into their Publisher— BENJ. BRANTLY very plirasoleogy a recoguitionland sanction of it? We havealready shown, that in the 4th and 10th commandments, —one in each of the two tables—-men servants and maid servants are mentioned, as those who are rightfully held in bondage. Here then we have the letter and the spirit of the moral precepts themselves arrayed against each other? Such impious liberties can inen lake with God’s word, -.viien they desire to gratify their own prejudices, or fear to of- Icnd the prejudices of those among whom they live I In the next number I shall take up the moral precepts themselves, and see wheth er they do condemn or undermine slavery. Circumstances may prevent me from wri ting for the next paper. A -Baptist Ministep. For ’he Christian Index'. lltllcr la Confess tlitiu cover Sin, Designed for the particular benefit of those whom it may concern. It is tho declaration of a wise man “ lie that covcreth his sins shall not prosper but whoso eonfesseth and forsnkeih them shall find mercy.” Do you believe this ? Did Sol omon speak the truth when lie uttered these words ? Every one, we think, of common understanding must subscribe to the cor rectness of this sentiment. It is not requi site to enter into an elaborate argument lo convince any mind, that a man in covering up his sins, averts none of their destructive consequences ; and that the wisest course which lie can possibly adopt, is to confess and to forsake them. But whilst this truth secures universal assent, how inconsidera ble the practical influence which should re suit from such an admission. Under what a sti’hnge infatuation do men live in refer ence lo religious realities I Only let a child of tins world be persuaded that a particular course of action winch lie had been pursu ing is disas’trnus, bow instantly a course be relinquished. Only let him be convinced that any policy will abridge his jiV ir it With us when onr spiritual instead of our ; temporal interests are jeoparded. Here, : then, may be persuasion, and even convic ’ lion, and still no corresponding effort.— Though the ini penitent man acknowledges that u iiboirtn hope in the Redeemerqf-sfn-. ! ners in- must lie wholly undone and mis<*i- I able, yet lie puts forth not one excitation lo I obtain ifrat hope and lives unconce*rned, whil t this is-, tins: cured. Though aware that in covering up his sins there is no prosperity and that mercy can he had only upon confession- and abandonment, he per sists in practising the former and neglecting the latter. How prevalent die disposition of th*s hu man heart to cover up sin—hoping thus to hide from observation its ugliness and de formity. How comparatively few the in stances in which men come forward, and with a noble magnanimity anil Christian candor, acknowledge their transgressions, declaring at the same time, their determina tion to forsake them. Were we to judge from tiie practice of the world we should suppose that prosperity was the reward of those who succeed in covering tip their sins, and that shame and ignominy were univer sally visited upon those who owned them selves guilty. We have heard of ancient people in whose judgment it was no dis grace to steal, if the thief could escape dc lection, but if discovered, he was in the pub lic view, deserving ol punishment and dis grace. In like manner, many now act a* if the conciiialiiumt nfsin was a virtue, and its acknowledgment a crime. With multi-* tudes, (ho first thought, after the commis sion of some wicked deed, is, How can it be hidden ? By what artifice can it be cov ered up ? If they can succeed in conceal ing their conduct they (latter themselves that their guilt is extenuated. The wise man’s language to all such is, Cover Vour sins and you shall have no prospeiity ; you di minish none of tlieii -1 turpitude, you ward off none of tho punishment which He who’ is acquainted with the most secret iniquit ies will inflict upon you. Own and forsake your sins and voushall have merry; though justice condemns you,’ yet you will be spared ; though you merit suffering, yet, for Christ’s sake, you will lie pardoned.” There are several methods by which per sons attempt to cover sin. The number, too, of those who are engaged in this unhal lowed practice is lar greater than is ordina rily supposed. Every man who declines’ confessing mav be said to cover his giiift. From tire self-iigh'i re . mail who boasts ill his exemption from all iniquity, down to life man wlin.-e character is stained vvitU vile ud a'ii i. then- is a consul# effort to bide guilt. Now it is to be bilnp in mind that men nun / c over their sin mi NO. 31