The American Home Missionary Society, The American Bible Union, The American Tract Society, The American Sunday School Union, The Missionary Societies of the Protestant Methodist, the Episcopal Methodist, and Moravian bodies: Respectively being in league and fellowship with the Slaveholders of the South, utterly dumb in regard to the slave system, and inflexibly hostile to the anti-slavery movement, are not only wholly undeserving of any pecuniary aid or public countenance at the North, but cannot be supported without conniving at all the wrong and outrages by which chattel slavery is characterized, and therefore, ought to be instantly abandoned by every one claiming to be a friend of liberty, and a disciple of Christ the Redeemer. Resolved, That the attempt of the New York Independent, and other religious journals, to shield the American Board of Foreign Missions from anti-slavey condemnation, and to represent it as occupying a sound position, in regard to the enslaved millions in our land, because of its action at Hartford, representing certain laws in the Choctaw nation, pertaining to the instruction of slaves and free coloured persons in Mission Schools -is marked by fraud, Jesuitism, and the supremacy of sectarian exclusiveness over the instincts of humanity." This is doing up the business strong. These men take a strange delight in pouring out execrations. It would be hard to deprive them of such entertainments. Curse on, Shimei! Independent. NEW YORK EAST CONFERENCE ON ITINERANCY. Whereas, it is the doctrine of our Church, that when changes in mere questions of economy seem to be providentially indicated, they may be made without impairing the integrity of the Church itself: And, whereas, it has been the usage of the Church from the beginning to modify its policy from time to time, to meet the varying conditions of times and places; And, whereas, the New York East Conference believe that the time has now come, when the interests of Methodism in particular and the cause of God in general, would be greatly promoted by a modification of the rule restricting the episcopacy in the appointment of pastors to the churches, so as that the pastoral relation might be continued for a longer period than two years, but not to exceed three; and so as that the invidious regulation with regard to cities should be abrogated or modified; therefore, Resolved, That the New York East Conference earnestly request the ensuing General Conference to make the requisite modification. THOMAS HOLLIS—HIS BOOK.—An interesting relic of Thomas Hollis, the great benefactor of Harvard College, and founder of the Hollis Pro fessorship of Divinity, has fallen under our eye, among the valuable collection of books, possessing an interest from their antiquarian and historical associations, in possession of J. Wingate Thornton, Esq., of this city. It is a volume printed in London, in 1679, containing the Treatise of John Owen on the Person of Christ, and which, according to the autograph and entry at the head of the title-page, came into possession of Mr. Thomas Hollis, in 1700; and during that and the twentysix succeeding years, as appears from his notes at the end of the book, was read through by its owner, no less than six times. These memoranda are as follows: The full title-page of this book, so much a favourite with Mr. Hollis, is as follows: "CHRISTIALOGIA: or, a Declaration of the Glorious Mystery of the Person of Christ, God, and Man. With the Infinite Wisdom, Love, and Power of God, in the continuance and constitution thereof. As also the Ground and Reasons of his Incarnation; the Nature of his Ministry in Heaven; the Present State of the Church above thereon; and the Use of his Person in Religion, with an Account and Vindication of the Honour, Worship, Faith, Love, and Obedience due unto Him in and from the Church. By John Owen, D.D." Here, if there was no more, is evidence enough to satisfy any one that the Hollis Professorship in Harvard University is not filled according to the intention of the founder. Unitarians are not admirers of the works of John Owen. A Professor of Divinity supported by the munificence of Thomas Hollis, is devoting himself to the inculcation and dissemination of doctrines in direct antagonism to the cherished views of the donor. He had better beg from door to door.-Puritan Recorder. EPISCOPAL STATISTICS.-Dioceses, 30. Bishops, 39. Priests and Deacons, 1,723. Whole number of Clergy, 1,762. Candidates for Orders, 217. Baptisms-Infants, 18,162; Adults, 3,271; not stated, 827; total, 22,260. Confirmations, 8,798. Communicants, 102,749. Marriages, 6,484. Burials, 11,549. Sunday School Teachers, 9,734. Scholars, 64,304. Churches consecrated, 53. Contributions, $683,841 23.-Banner. THE BIBLE IN COMMON SCHOOLS. In one of the schools at Ellsworth, Maine, all the children were required to read the Bible in the Protestant version. A Roman Catholic parent appealed to the Courts of the State for redress; and the public were informed that the Courts sustained the directors of the schools. We supposed that the decision of the Courts at least recognized the divine authority of the Bible; but, are surprised to learn, on reading Judge Appleton's document, that the directors were sustained on the lowest ground that could possibly be selected. The following are extracts: But the instruction here given is not, in fact, and is not alleged to have been, in articles of faith. No theological doctrines were taught. The creed of no sect was affirmed or denied. The truth or falsehood of the book in which the scholars were required to read, was not asserted. No interference by way of instruction, with the views of the scholars, whether derived from parental or sacerdotal authority is shown. The Bible was used merely as a book in which instruction in reading was given. But reading the Bible is no more an interference with religious belief, than would reading the mythology of Greece and Rome be regarded as interfering with religious belief or an affirmance of the pagan creeds. A chapter in the Koran might be read, yet it would not be an affirmation of the truth of Mahomedanism, or an interference with religious faith. The Bible was used merely as a reading book, and for the information contained in it, as the Koran might be, and not for religious instruction. If suitable for that, it was suitable for the purpose for which it was selected. No one was required to believe, or punished for disbelief, either in its inspiration or want of inspiration-in the fidelity of the translation or its inaccuracy or in any set of doctrines deducible or not deducible therefrom. It would be a novel doctrine that learning to read out of one book rather than another, of a book conceded to be proper, was a legislative preference of one sect to another, when all that is alleged is that the art of reading only was taught, and that without the slightest indication of, or instruction in, theological doctrines. General Readings. THE RELIGION OF PAYING DEBTS. ONE of our exchanges has the following strong remarks on this subject. They drive the nail in to the head and clinch it. "Men may sophisticate as they please; they can never make it right, and all the bankrupt laws in the universe cannot make it right, for them not to pay their debts. There is a sin in this neglect, as clear and deserving of church discipline, as in stealing or false swearing. He who violates his promise to pay, or withholds the payment of a debt when it is in his power to meet his engagement, ought to be made to feel that in the sight of all honest men he is a swindler. Religion may be a very comfortable cloak under which to hide, but if religion does not make a man 'deal justly,' it is not worth having."-Merchants' Magazine. SINGING THE PRAISES OF GOD. NOTHING is more common in our congregations than to see professing Christians, who can sing in the parlour or social circle to the admiration of every listener, sitting perfectly mum whilst the sacred songs of God's house are sung. They act as if there was no obligation resting upon them to take part in this delightful exercise. That eminently great and good Christian minister, President Edwards, said, that "as it is the command of God that all should sing, so all should make conscience of learning to sing; as it is a thing that cannot be decently performed at all without learning. Those, therefore (where there is no natural inability), who neglect to learn to sing, live in sin, as they neglect what is necessary in order to their attending one of the ordinances of God's worship." The command to sing the praises of God is as binding as the command to pray. We are not authorized anywhere in the word of God to delegate a committee to perform this service for us. We might just as well try to pray by proxy as to praise God in that way.-Presb. Herald. THE SCOURGE OF MEMORY. REUBEN remembered, and conscience remembered, and the guilty brethren well knew the statute of God. "Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. At the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man." Perhaps the declaration had often come with awful power, like sudden thunder, to their consciences. It was twenty years since the fearful crime had been committed, but we may rest assured those years were not years of happiness. And yet, except within the breast, those twenty years had gone on thus far securely, although those guilty brethren must have often looked upon each other, not so much like brethren as companions in crime, and witnesses against each other. And Reuben, especially, they must have watched with fearful jealousy. It is almost a wonder, indeed, that they had not disposed of him also; but God prevented it. We cannot think that as yet, they had been penitent; for if so, they would have confessed their guilt to Jacob, and sought his forgiveness. But God was beginning to set, as in a solemn day, his terrors round about them. Twenty years had passed away, and the remembrance of Joseph had neither faded from the father's mind, nor from theirs. The father held it in the power of love; the sons held it, or rather it held them in the strength of conscience. Twenty years! and not one of the circumstances had faded from their souls! God strikes the memory with the rod of a providential infliction, and the doors of its caves burst open, and the fixtures of the past sin of guilt come trooping out, and again they are with their joyful brother, despising his anguish, and selling him for gold. It is all fresh, as if but yesterday!-Cheever. THE SABBATH-NOT SUNDAY. WE regret that the term Sunday has come into such extensive use among the Protestant Christians. Why not give the day of sacred rest its Scripture name? True, a name is a little thing; but little things produce great effects sometimes. Sunday is the heathen name for the first day of the seven. That day was appropriated by our Saxon forefathers to the worship of the sun. We do not wish to be as particular as our Quaker friends, who, too, above the appearance of evil, reject the Saxon name of the secular days, as well as that of the sacred day; but with regard to the day of holy rest, we do feel that the contrast between its idolatrous and Scripture name is something like the difference between the worship of the sun and the worship of God. Sabbath is the Hebrew word for rest, and is used in a sacred sense. The Sabbath day is a day of holy resting. The time was, in Scotland, among Presbyterians, when, if any person said Sunday, he was considered very illy bred, if not set down as a Papist. The Church of England, not fully reformed from Popery, retained the word in her liturgies. Our brethren of New England, by some means have suffered the word to slide into general use among them; and through their example, Presbyterians have come to use the word without a twinge of conscience. We say again, it is a small matter; but little things are sometimes indicative. It may not be much to ask, if the general use of Sunday among Christians does not indicate a general decline of the sense of sacredness which we ought to cherish in regard to holy things? Whenever a community is pervaded with a deep-toned piety, such a state of heart will be indicated in the words and phrases of the people: and there will be a genuine reverence for all that belongs to the Bible. That sacred day needs all possible help to keep it from being trampled under foot by an ungodly world. How important to throw around it all the sacred associations which properly belong to it. How quiet should it be in the family; and how completely should all secular conversation be excluded from the domestic circle, that our children from earliest infancy, may be thoroughly impressed that it is not merely Sunday but the holy Sabbath-the day of sacred rest.—Presbyterian of the West. THE PRESBYTERIAN MAGAZINE. AUGUST, 1855. Miscellaneous Articles. WHY IS THE NAME JESUS CONFERRED UPON No. I. THIS we are inclined to regard as a most important questionone through which we pass at once into the very fontes solutionum of some of the gravest questions which can fix, or occupy the attention of man. It is, in fact, a test question; for upon our answer depends our theological standing, as Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Universalists, or Calvinists. That such importance must attach to this question is obvious from the import of the name Jesus. As Jesus and Saviour are synonymous, identical in signification, the question before us, is all one with the question, Why is the Messiah called Saviour? on what ground is his right to such a title based? It is our present purpose to answer this inquiry; and, in order that the solution proposed may have all the advantages of a contrast with opposing errors, we shall first consider some of those reasons which men are accustomed to assign. We know of none, who lay claim to the Christian name at all, who do not ascribe some honour to the Messiah-who do not speak of him as a Saviour-who do not look upon his mission as one of great importance to our race. Thus far, all are agreed. But when we come to ask why the Son of God is called a Saviour-to ask what those benefits which flow from his life and death really are, we soon discover, that the agreement with which we consoled ourselves, is one which does by no means extend to details. When the question is put, what has the Mediator really done for man? there are given back, in reply, answers the most conflicting and VOL. V.-No. 8. 22 |