rites and customs most nearly related to the subject, and for the most part prevalent, not only among the Jews, but throughout the Roman world. It will appear, we think, in the next place, that it being the aim of the apostle, to illustrate "the virtue and efficacy," or the blessed consequences of "the redemption which is in Christ," and the whole force of his comparisons and analogies, between this and other acts or agents, being derived from the resemblance of their effects, we cannot, by any logical interpretation, infer from the nature of the known causes on the one hand, the nature of the unknown cause on the other. We differ then from Professor Stuart, not at all in regard to the necessity, the efficacy, the everlasting and ever-blessed consequences of the incarnation, the sufferings and death of Christ, as exhibited with the power of an apostle in the epistle to the Hebrews; but whether the specific mode in which they become thus efficacious, whether the specific relation, which as a cause, they have to the effect, and whether the inward and subjective nature of the cause be taught by the term atonement, sacrifice, ransom, or satisfaction, in such a sense, that it becomes its proper name, as interpreted by Dr. Owen, and with some qualifications by Professor Stuart, we hope and believe may be doubted, salva fide et

salva ecclesia.

We trust, moreover, that in the view, which we have given, we do not by any means adopt the system of accommodation in the sense, in which it is guarded against in the work before us. We think that the argument and language of the epistle throughout, is readily explained in consistency with this view of it, without overstepping the general principles of interpretation, which are taught by Ernesti, and approved by Prof. Stuart. We cannot here of course follow the argument, and show the the application in detail, but have endeavored to make our allusions and references in such a manner as to indicate it to the careful reader. We fully believe, and trust it will be apparent, that the view which we present, in so far as it differs from that of the commentary, does not represent the whole, or any part of the work which Christ wrought for our salvation, as less vast in importance, or less vitally interesting, to every son and daughter of Adam. We do not say, with the accommodators and rationalists, all this is mere metaphor, all this means only so and so. We do indeed say, that some of the names and representations, which others have taken literally, are to be interpreted metaphorically, that they do not teach, in themselves considered, the exact nature of that redemptive act, which "passeth all understanding," nor the speeific mode, in which it produces its effect in the redeemed, but

they do exhibit to the Hebrew Christians more clearly, the su perior, the spiritual, and heavenly nature, of that divine agent, of those "better promises," and of those " future blessings," which in the religion of their fathers, to which they so tenaciously adhered, were but obscurely known, and which the law exhibited, only "in prophetic murmurs, or mute out-shadowings of mystic ordinances and sacrificial types." We say, moreover, that for us-for those who have the whole of the New Testament in their hands, and read it aright, and feel its power, the language of the apostle ought to mean more, than these metaphorical representations, literally interpreted, could express, either to the Hebrews, or to ourselves. We say, that the prudent, the wise and holy apostle, from a regard to the weakness of his brethren according to the flesh, has brought down the "heavenly things," which he wished to communicate, and has exhibited them under forms, which would be most easily apprehended by them; that according to the grace, which is given to us, it is for us to understand, and appreciate, their spiritual import, and, while we thus magnify the grace and glory of "the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth," to elevate to a tone, more nearly corresponding with the songs of the redeemed and of the just made perfect, that feeling of love and gratitude in the hearts of our fellow Christians, which ascribes to him the praise of our salvation.

We know not that the remarks which have now been made with reference to the substitution of Christ, are, in the least degree, liable to misconstruction. To guard, however, against the possibility of such a result, we would briefly add, that we do not consider the sufferings of Christ, as deriving their atoning efficacy from their being actually substituted for the punishment of sinners. They would equally constitute an atonement, if all our race, to whom they are freely offered as the means of salvation, should reject the offer, and should endure in their own persons the penalty of the law. That view which represents Christ as taking upon himself the penalty of the law in the literal, and not in a figurative sense of the expres sion, (for the latter is very common,) inevitably leads either to Imited atonement on the one hand, or to universal salvation ou the other. If the penalty has been endured, for any individuals in the literal sense of this language, they must be saved.

We regard the atonement as a great provision under the moral government of God, to secure the ends of justice, and vindicate his character as a lawgiver, while pardon is freely offered to the whole human race. The declaration of God

that such was the design of the sufferings and death of Christ, is indeed necessary to the accomplishment of this object. But this object being thus accomplished, the atonement, as such, is in our view perfect and complete; whether it is actually substituted for the penalty or not. For, we ask, what but an atonement which is complete and perfect in itself, can the moral governor of the universe actually substitute, or design to substitute, for the punishment of transgressors?

The necessity of an atonement which shall thus secure the ends of justice, as fully as could be done by the infliction of the penalty, is demonstrable, we think, from the nature of a moral government; and the rejection of it is, in our view, a rejection of the great cardinal doctrine of Christianity, an abandonment of its distinctive peculiarity as a remedial system.

When the atonement is spoken of as vicarious, or as a substitute for the punishment of sinners, all that can with propriety be implied is, that God designed it to be that which can, consistently with the ends of justice, be substituted for the punishment of the whole human race; that he designed it should be substituted for the punishment of all whom he "hath chosen unto eternal life;" and that it is actually substituted for the punishment of all who believe and obey the gospel.

ART. VII.-REVIEW OF RETORTS ON SUNDAY MAILS.

Report by MR. JOHNSON, of the United States Senate, from "the Committee to whom was referred the several petitions on the subject of Mails on the Sabbath, or the first day of the week."

Report by MR. MCKEAN, of the House of Representatives, on the same subject.

THE profanation of the Sabbath, in various ways, but especially by public travelling, has for years past been regarded with deep and general concern. One great source of the evil has been perceived to exist in the transportation of the mail and the delivery of letters on that sacred day. The friends of religion and morals have therefore felt it to be their duty to petition the government that the practice be discontinued, and with one consent have forwarded to Congress, during its present session, numerous memorials on the subject. They respectfully represent to the government, that while the transportation of the mail on the Sabbath requires many individuals to devote the day to secular concerns, it encourages many others to do the same, and weakens the sense of its sacredness

in the public mind generally. They regard the Sabbath as the great promoter and preserver of a pure morality in the world, and express their conviction that this republic could not be safe without its aid in this respect, inasmuch as a general depravity of morals must result from its total loss to the community, and that therefore, on mere political considerations, it is inexpedient to injure its hallowed influence. They believe, moreover, that the Sabbath is a divine institution, and that its devotion to secular employments, whether by governments or individuals, involves the violation of a religious obligation. The memorialists humbly pray, therefore, that the national government would forbear to sanction by its example, and to encourage by the facilities it affords, a species of immorality which is extensively regarded as an alarming and growing evil.

The signers of the memorials are thousands of virtuous citizens, of various religious denominations and various secular professions. Among them are individuals of the first respectability,-men of talents, wealth, and enterprise, men distinguished for their wisdom and benevolence, men high in political life, and widely esteemed for their public and private virtues. "It is believed," says the report to the House of Representatives, "that the history of legislation in this country affords no instance in which a stronger expression has been made, if regard be had to the number, the wealth, or the intelligence of the petitioners."

In a word, the object of the memorials, the motives by which it was urged, and the respectability of the signers, alike entitled them to the most respectful consideration of the national legislature. It was a very natural surprise, therefore, which was occasioned by such a document as Mr. Johnson's report. The substance of this document we shall here introduce.

That some respite is required from the ordinary vocations of life, is an established principle, sanctioned by the usages of all nations, whether Christian or Pagan. One day in seven has also been determined upon as the proportion of time; and in conformity with the wishes of the great majority of citizens of this country, the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday, has been set apart to that object. The principle has received the sanction of the national legislature, so far as to admit a suspension of all public business on that day, except in cases of absolute necessity, or of great public utility. This principle the committee would not wish to disturb. If kept within its legitimate sphere of action, no injury can result from its ob

servance.

The amount of which is, that the Sabbath is merely a conventional institution,-that, except in its circumstantials, it is

as much a pagan as a Christian institution, being "sanctioned by the usages of all nations,"-that the observance of it is harmless enough, so far as it is convenient, and that in compliance with the popular prejudice, not by divine requirement, the national legislature has sanctioned the principle to

a certain extent.

It should, however, be kept in mind, that the proper object of government is, to protect all persons in the enjoyment of their religious, as well as civil rights: and not to determine for any, whether they shall esteem all days alike holy.

We are aware that a variety of sentiment exists among the good citizens of this nation, on the subject of the Sabbath day; and our government is designed for the protection of one as much as for another.

This is a grand difficulty with the committee. Thus the Jews and Sabbatarians "pay religious homage to the seventh day of the week, which we call Saturday." Again, among those who observe the first day there is a difference of opinion as to the source of the obligation to keep the Sabbath; some deriving it directly from the decalogue, and others, who "regard the Jewish Sabbath as abrogated," deriving it from the example of the apostles.

With these different religious views, the committee are of opinion that Congress cannot interfere. It is not the legitimate province of the legis lature to determine what religion is true or what is false...........The petitioners for its discontinuance appear to be actuated from a religious zeal, which may be commendable, if confined to its proper sphere; but they assume a position better suited to an ecclesiastical than to a civil institution. They appear, in many instances, to lay it down as an axiom, that the practice is a violation of the law of God. Should Congress in their legislative capacity, adopt the sentiment, it would establish the principle, that the legislature is a proper tribunal to determine what are the laws of God. It would involve a legislative decision in a religious controversy.

That is, to comply with the request of the petitioners would be to express the sense of Congress on the question between a few Jews and Sabbatarians, and "the great majority of our citizens."

But that question Congress does decide, so far as Mr. Johnson's difficulty goes, every week; except that now and then they set at nought alike the sentiments of Sabbatarians, Jews, and all others. For what more explicit recognition of the first day would they be guilty of towards their seventh day constituents, by the stopping of the mail, than they now are by the suspension of public business. To be consistent in their scruples, the committee ought to bring in a bill for the banishment of the Sabbath altogether from the halls of Congress; and