Do those who call themselves the sons of the pilgrims, preach the same gospel which their fathers did? This is a serious question. "I determined," said Paul to the Corinthians, "not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified." "We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greek foolishness." Is Christ crucified, the theme of Socinian preaching, or is the subject rarely mentioned? Let those who hear them answer, if they please. On the whole, the claim of modern Unitarians, to be considered as the descendants of the pilgrims, will avail them, we should suppose, about as much, as that of the Jews in the days of Christ of being the seed of Abraham. They valued themselves as having descended from that venerable patriarch. When their impiety was reproved and their religion challenged, this was their defence, "We be Abraham's seed." I know, replied the Saviour, that "ye are Abraham's seed, but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you."-" If ye were the children of Abraham, ye would do the works of Abraham." Sons of the pilgrims-If your ancestors, whose religion you profess to venerate were neither fanatics, idolators, nor hypocrites, but true men, they were worthy' of the praises you bestow upon them. But remember, that in eulogizing their religion, you condemn yourselves, for having renounced the very doctrines for which they were principally distinguished. You will do well, also, to remember, that in condemning those christians of the present day, who follow their faith, and imitate their stern Puritau virtues, you virtually condemn them. To be accounted rational christians, you certainly ought to be consistent, and not condemn in others what you applaud in your ancestors. If you wish to be thought liberal christians, be careful to manifest a liberal spirit towards others. Verbum sapienti Φιλαίαθος. sat est. EXTRACT FROM WITHERSPOON ON THE ATONEMENT. Ir is lamentable to think, that there should be any that call themselves Christians, and yet refuse to acknowledge this truth, (that Christ's death is a proper atonement for sin,) which is woven, if I may so speak, through the whole contexture both of the law and the gospel. It brings to my mind the story of an ancient artist, who, being employed to build a magnificent and elegant temple, had the ingenuity to inscribe upon it his own name, and so to incorporate it both with the ornaments and body of the structure, that it was impossible to ef face the name, without, at the • John v. 18. REMARKS ON DR. CHANNING'S SERMON. Religion a Social Principle. A Sermon delivered in the church in Federal Street, Boston, Dec 10, 1820. By William Ellery Channing, minister of the Congregational Church in Federal Street. Published at the request of the hearers. Boston, printed by Russel and Gardner. OUR readers, we are persuaded, will bear us testimony, that in conducting this work we have generally avoided religious controversy. In pursuing this course, we hope, we have not been influenced by an indifference to the truth, or a pusillanimous fear of avowing our sentiments; but by a conviction that theological disputes, as they are too often managed, are not only unprofitable, but engender the worst of passions. Hence, we have preferred to leave the field of warfare to others, and devote our labours to an illustration of subjects which were bkely to have a practical effect on the tempers and lives of christians. We are satisfied, however, that the time has arrived, when it would be improper for those who are set for the defence of the gospel, to remain silent. It is a duty they owe to the cause of truth, to gird on their armour, and, at least, to stand on the defensive. We are led to this conclusion from the systematic and persevering attempts which are employed in support of Unitarianism;" and, we regret to add, the ungenerous attacks which are made on the sentiments and principles of orthodox christians. We must confess we arose from the perusal of Dr. Channing's sermon with feelings of surprise and grief. We naturally supposed, that he would urge the importance of supporting religion by law; but we did not expect to find so many illiberal remarks on other christians, by a person who makes such distinguished claims to liberality of sentiment. But His professed object is to shew, that "religion is a social principle;" from which he infers, that "a community, once convinced of this great truth, is bound to incorporate it into its public institutions." Had he confined his remarks to these two points, however we might have disagreed with him in the inferences which he makes, we should probably have offered no animadversions on his discourse. because there are some christians who believe, "that religion is a private affair between man and his Maker, with which his neighbour has no concern," Dr. C. is pleased to represent them as discarding the idea, that religion is a social principle. He remarks; "this is a revival of the old doctrine, which drove men from society to worship God in deserts, and we cannot but wonder that this error of the most thorough fanaticks should be espoused by some, who claim superiority to vulgar prejudice." In our humble apprehension, this mode of reasoning is very far from correct. Does it necessarily follow that they who believe religion to be "a private, personal thing, a concern between the individual and God," must view it as an anti-social system? We think not. If we understand Dr. C. we as firmly believe as he does, that "religion is a social principle, intimately united with social duty, operating upon us as social beings; and that it is not a secret to be locked up in our hearts, but a sentiment to be com own municated, shared, and strengthened," by all the means which reason and revelation dictate. the altar of benevolence, but themselves; that they might be the instruments of making their fellow creatures happy in time and in eternity. And we assert, without fear of contradiction, that no class of christians have manifested this social principle in all its length and breadth to such an extent, as those who believe, that sinners must be regenerated by the spirit of God, and pardoned through the blood of Jesus Christ. But while we believe, that religion is a social principle, we also believe," that it is a personal thing, concern between the individual and God; a private affair between man and his Maker, with which his neighbour has no right to interfere." It is so in two respects; as it relates to the personal experience of the christian, and his accountability to his Maker. As far as our acquaintance extends, this is a view of religion which is universally current. We know none who are called orthodox that deny this sentiment. If they did, they would deny some of the plainest truths of revelation. They would call in question, facts which are daily occur ring before their eyes; and would be faithless to the operations of religion in their own hearts. They who deny that christianity is designed to regulate the social feelings, and prescribe duties for the government of social life, must have very defective views of its nature, and would rob it of its beauty and excellence, as a religion adapted to the social nature of man.. We have the most convincing evidence, that the religion of Christ is designed to regulate the social affections from As it relates to the personal the effects which it produces in experience of the christian, rethose that believe. It teaches us ligion is a concern between the to weep with those that weep; individual and God. Is there no and to rejoice with those that re- private intercourse kept up bejoice. It induces us to visit the tween a christian and his Maker? dwellings of the poor and needy; What then are we to understand and opens our hearts and hands by the language of our Saviour? to relieve their wants. It not Matt. vi. 6. "But thou, when only commands us to do justice, thou prayest, enter into thy closbut to love mercy, and to walk et, and, when thou hast shut thy humbly with God. As a social door, pray to thy Father which is principle, religion not only binds in secret; and thy Father, which man to his family and country, seeth in secret shall reward thee but to the whole human race. It openly." What is meant by havawakens sympathies for the ing fellowship with the Father, wants and the sorrows of man- and with his Son Jesus Christ? kind. It is to religion, operating Is there nothing personal or prion the social affections, that we vate in these exercises between are indebted for the exertions the individual and God? which have been made for the conversion of the heathen. Bible societies, missionary societies, and many other benevolent institutions, are all the fruits of religion, operating as a social principle, on the hearts of men. It is this, which has led men not only to offer their property on Religion is also a private matter between man and his Maker, with which his neighbour has no right to interfere, as it respects his accountability to God. It is the peculiar province of Jehovah to try the reins and judge the hearts of men. To him alone we are amenable for our views and motives, and exercises on the subject of religion. "Who art thou, O man, that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he must stand or fall!" If this be not the case, to whom are we amenable? Who shall intermeddle with our religious views? Shall the civil magistrate? If the magistrate commands one thing, and the Lord another, "It is better to obey God than man." Shall a number of pious ministers be constituted into an ecclesiastical court? We cannot suppose that the author of this sermon would be willing to submit to such a tribunal. We hear much said against councils, creeds, and confessions of faith; many congratulate themselves, that they have burst these fetters, and have risen superior to the dark and gloomy dogmas of an ignorant and superstitions age. If then, magistrates and priests have no right to usurp authority over the consciences of men, is it not evident, that, as it respects our accountability, religion is that which belongs to the individual and his Maker, with which his neighbour, or the community, have no right to interfere? But notwithstanding these are the fixed, deliberate views of orthodox christians, they as deliberately believe that christianity is a social principle, designed by its wise and beneficent Author, to lead all its possessors to a faithful and amiable discharge of all the social and relative duties which adorn and bless human life. We should be gratified if the author of this discourse would inform us what individuals, or body of christians, maintain "that a man's religion is a subject in which society has no interest." We acknowledge we are not acquainted with any protestants in this country, whose sentiments justify such a charge. Neither do we know any sect of chris tians among those who are styled orthodox, whose principles of conduct would lead us to suppose, that they had lost sight of the peculiar characteristic of religion as a system designed to regulate the social character of man. There are several passages in this sermon which we cordially approve. But we are sorry to say there are many others which in our opinion exhibit very defective views of the religion of Christ.— We dare not affirm, with the author, "We are religious, because we are social beings." Men may be very social beings, and yet be enemies to religion, without hope, and without God in the world. We have been accustomed to trace the commencement of religion in the heart, not to the social nature of man, but the influences of the Spirit of God, by which we are renewed in the spirit of our minds. In relation to these influences the apostle speaks, when he says, "Ye are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works." We are also satisfied that holy, pious and benevolent principles are sustained and invigorated, not in proportion to the high degree of social feeling we may possess, but in proportion to the ascendancy of the truths of christianity over our understandings and affections,~~~ When our Saviour prayed for his disciples, he offered this petition, "Sanctify them through thy truth, thy word is truth." Neither dare we say, that we form our "ideas of the attributes of God, particularly of his goodness and equity, those chief foundations of religion, by seeing them manifested in our fellow creatures, and in social life." Heathens have social natures as well as christians, and mingle together in social life; but we have yet to learn, that the scenes of social life with which they are, conversant, have given them any correct, or elevated views of the "goodness and equity of God, those chief foundations of religion." We admit that after his moral character is revealed to us, and we are informed that he is good, and just, and merciful, these attributes may be illustrated by referring to the operation of the same moral qualities as existing in an imperfect degree among the children of men. But we consider ourselves entire ly indebted to a higher source than social life; even to the word of God, for all the just and clear views which we have of his moral character. We close these strictures, by expressing our sincere desire that our numerous readers may have that "religion which is a personal thing, a concern between the individual and God," and which also manifests itself in a conscientious performance of all the social and relative duties of life. Missionary Intelligen ce. EXTRACTS FROM MR. JUDSON'S JOURNAL. FEB. 26, 1820--Moung Shwa-boo, satisfied." Moung Nau took a very active part in the conversation. The three new ones said nothing, except that they were desirous of considering the religion of Christ. None of them, however, were willing to admit, that, as yet, he believed any thing. We felt that it was impossible for us all to leave these people, in these interesting circumstances; and, at the same time, we felt it very important that Chittagong should not be neglected. Under these circumstances, we came to the conclusion, that brother Colman should proceed immediately to Chittagong, collect the Arrakanese converts, and form a station, to which new missionaries from the Board may at first repair, and to which I may ultimately flee, with those of the disciples that can leave the country, when we find that persecution is so violent, as to suppress all further inquiry, and render it useless and rash to remain; that I should remain in Kangoon, until the state of things becomes thus |