clearly evident moral principles; or, which amounts to the same thing, by the divine Author of nature."

But whether the friends or advocates of the Sabbath touch this point or not, they "are most shamefully insulted and most vilely aspersed, by persons apparently determined to convince the world, that the tale of the frog and the ox is not fabulous." If public and outward acts of Sabbath desecration are not prohibited by government in State laws, such a day and such a government, especially if republican, cannot be sustained.

See also remarks already made in the PETITIONS to the twenty-fifth Congress, third session, 1837 and 1838, page 76–133.

OBJECTION VIII.-" WORKS OF PUBLIC UTILITY MAY BE DONE ON SUNDAY."

The objector often excuses his violation of the Sabbath by saying that the example of Christ justifies works of public utility on Sunday.

In all the examples Christ has given, relative to works, which are appropriate to the Sabbath, not one of them, we believe, relates to works, other than merciful. "Works of necessity and mercy," on which so much stress is often laid, is not Bible language. However high its authority, many are led astray by it. Christ taught by example and precept, that the sick might be healed, a horse might be watered, an animal in the ditch might be helped out on the Sabbath. He does not adduce instances of wasting grain, mouldering and bleaching hay, carrying the mail in "cases of emergency," traveling on journeys, running of boats, rail-cars and stages, &c. &c. None of these. The language of the law of the Sabbath is sufficiently explicit to convince the plainest man, that to do such works is a breach of that law. Christ's words in relation to this subject, were doubtless called forth by the over-righteous Scribes and Pharisees. They were even opposed to his healing a man whose right hand was withered. The disease was doubtless considered incurable by man; and Jesus might never again pass that way. Jesus loved mercy, not sacrifice. No works which men consider as necessary, aside from mercy, were specified; for by the law man was forbidden to

do any work on the Sabbath. "Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work." Here is the general rule. Of all kinds of work, works of mercy, mentioned by our Savior, are the exceptions. Any one's regular business, can usually be done before the Sabbath, or after it: emergencies can generally be foreseen and provided for, so that the loss shall be less, by neglecting it on the Sabbath, than by doing it, and breaking a known command of God. But the call for works of mercy cannot always be foreseen and guarded against; hence the necessity of relieving suffering nature, wherever and whenever it may be found.

A SUPPOSED CASE.

But, suppose there are Christian brethren who wish to cross the Rocky Mountains to preach the Gospel to the poor Indians; and they need the protection and assistance of the caravans which traverse those dangerous and pathless wilds, but which do not keep the Sabbath. "The command is, 'Go, preach my Gospel to every creature;' and these men are called to go; but if they go, they must either travel on that day, or expose themselves to be robbed of all their goods, and perish by the hands of savages. What shall be done? Shall they travel on Sunday, or stop and die by the hands of the wicked, as in such circumstances they undoubtedly would?" Things are assumed here which are not granted. That the Gospel should be preached to all nations, and that it is the duty of some persons to go and preach it to the Indians, no true friend of man or of God will deny. But who the persons are that should go, and how they shall go, is quite another thing. The command, to "go, preach," is admitted to be imperative, as is also "in it thou shalt not do any work." But what is to be done? Why, the Gospel must be preached. and men must go to the field; and, if there be no other way reach it, but by doing some work on Sunday, such as managing a vessel at sea, that comes within the rule which Christ laid down, and mercy cries, go, teach the heathen the way to eternal life. Were we not at liberty to do this, those who dwell in the islands of the sea, would live and die in ignorance of the way to heaven, and sink to hell. Yet God has said, "The isles shall wait for his law." But the case before us is quite different.

No one pretends that it is indispensably necessary that the caravans should travel on the day of rest. They might safely and profitably rest if they would. Admitting then that these brethren should go, that they must cross the mountains and have the protection of a caravan, we still do not make out a justification for their traveling on Sunday, for there is a way of safely reaching that distant land, without violating the fourth commandment. So long as this is the case, it is sin to break the one, in order to fulfill the other. It is this: let there be a caravan composed wholly of missionaries. Their services are greatly needed, and there can be no doubt that so large a number should, immediately be on their way thither. But if this be impracticable in the present state of feeling in the church, let a sufficient number of men, who would obey God, be hired, to proceed with the brethren. Should it be objected, that this would be a great waste of money; let it be remembered that the money is the Lord's, and the law of the Sabbath is his; and which is of the most value in his sight? If the money cannot be obtained for this object, and it is not safe for the missionaries to go unprotected, then, is it not clearly their duty to stay and convert the heathen among whom they now live, and who are in danger of an infinitely deeper perdition than the savages of the Oregon Territory?

When determining what things are appropriate to be done on the Lord's day, and what are not, the following, among other things, are to be taken into the account, viz: Does God require the thing to be done? Am I under obligation to do it? Is this the time when it should be done? Is there no way possible by which it can be done, without performing some work on Sunday? If not, then mercy cries, do it. This brings it within the case excepted from the general law. But the want of a caravan of missionaries, or money enough to hire one, that would not desecrate holy time, would not bring it within the rule. For the thing might be done without labor on Sunday; and, on those who withheld the means, and not on the brethren ready to go, will fall the responsibility. Many questions relating to this subject naturally arise, which, at first view, seem to present insurmountable difficulties, but these all vanish on a full investigation.

The question is not, whether a thing can be better and cheaper done on Sunday than to delay it, or whether, in our judgment, greater good would result from such labor; but does God require the thing to be done, &c. as above? Works of "necessity," so called, when tried by this standard, (and is it not the true one?) would be reduced to a very small number.

God is not absurd and unreasonable, requiring his creatures to violate one of his commands that they may obey another. Man, in his ignorance, may sometimes think the cause of Christ would be most advanced, and the greatest good accomplished, by his traveling on Sunday. As, for instance, a minister, twenty miles from home, who can, Sunday morning, step into a rail-car, boat, or stage, and reach home in season to preach to his destitute people or leave home, and travel that distance, less or more, and preach to those who otherwise would have no gospel sermon, may think this is doing the will of God. But God has required no such thing; for should his law be obeyed, by those directing these public conveyances, no boats, cars, or stages, would run on Sunday, and of course the minister could not then thus travel. OBJECTION IX.-" CHRISTIAN ROME AND GREECE WERE NOT MORE

PROSPEROUS THAN HEATHEN ROME AND GREECE."

Opposers to Christianity would fain make us believe that our religion is not adapted to make men prosperous and happy; as proof, they refer to Rome and Greece, which, till some time after the death of the apostles, scarcely deserved the name of Christian.

Would God that every infidel, deist, atheist, and Christian too, might this moment see and know all the benefits which heathen Greece and Rome derived from the religion of the Bible; and in how many, and what respects, Christian Greece and Rome were better than the same countries when heathen. But " none are so blind as those that will not see.' ." Heathen Greece and Rome, for want of the religion and morality of the Bible, failed to perpetuate their intelligence and prosperity; as all other nations, in like circumstances, must likewise fail. Besides, who can tell how much, of what advancement they did make, these nations owed to the influences of revelation? How much of God and

the religion of the patriarchs had tradition taught them and their ancestors? For there were some, even in those days, who knew and acknowledged the true God. The Greeks, from whom the Romans received all their learning, were a colony led from Egypt by Cecrops, 1556 years before Christ, and 15 years after the birth of Moses. This colony founded the kingdom of Athens, in Greece. They must have carried, at least, many traditionary notions of the true God with them. The Egyptians knew something of him in the days of Abram, as the history of Pharaoh and Sarah shows. Egypt was learned. Abram, Isaac, and Jacob had, each in their turn, visited, and Joseph had long lived in Egypt; and it appears that there had often been pious men in that country. No man can tell how much influence the religion from heaven had on the progress of Egypt in knowledge, nor how much the reflected light of revelation had, in the beginning, in raising heathen Greece and Rome to their subsequent elevation. They must have heard of God's power, of his judgments in famine and his blessings in plenty. Egypt seems early to have risen to great perfection in the arts and sciences; and was a large and flourishing kingdom 430 years after the flood. "Moses lived more than 1000 years before the age of Herodotus, who is the reputed father of Grecian history." The Greek writers confess that they received the letters of their alphabet from the Phonicians, (the Canaanites of Scripture,) very soon after the founding of Athens; and it is believed that the Phoenicians derived the art of writing from the Jews. Porphyry, an equal enemy to Jews and Christians, admits that Moses and the prophets, who immediately succeeded him, lived “nearly a thousand years before any of the Greek philosophers ;" and he was a friend to Grecian literature. The Jews were placed by God in the very midst of the then known and civilized world; they grew to be a great nation; God's wonderful works were wrought that the heathen might know Him; and history informs us that the name of Jehovah was thereby spread abroad. Can it be that Greece and Rome did not feel this silent influence, that emanated from the temple of Jehovah at Jerusalem, and from his works in the land of Israel? Who first instructed Egypt in the arts and sciences, and yet kept from her all knowledge of the Supreme Being?