Illustrating the nature of the atonement by referring to the Jewish sacrifices, he says, "If there was nothing of true and real atonement and sacrifice in those beasts that were offered, then doubtless they were an evidence, that there was to be some other greater sacrifice, which was to be a proper atonement or satisfaction, and of which they were only the presage and signs; as those symbolical actions which God sometimes commanded the prophets to perform, were signs and presages of great events which they foretold. This proves that a sacrifice of infinite value was necessary, and that God would accept of no other. For an atonement that bears no proportion to the offence, is no atonement. An atonement carries in it a PAYMENT or SATISFACTION in the very nature of it. And if satisfaction was so little necessary, that the divine Majesty easily admitted one that bears no proportion at all to the offence, i. e. was wholly equivalent to nothing, when compared with the offence, and so was no payment or satisfaction at all; then he might have forgiven sin without any atonement."*

Again: "It cannot here be reasonably objected, that God is not capable of properly receiving any satisfaction for an injury;. because he is not capable of receiving any benefit; that a price offered to men satisfies for an injury, because it may truly be a price to them, or a thing beneficial; but that God is not capable of receiving a benefit. For God is as capable of receiving satisfaction as injury. It is true, he cannot properly be profited; so neither can he properly be hurt. But as rebelling against him may be properly looked upon as of the nature of an injury or wrong done to God, and so God is capable of being the object of injuriousness; so he is capable of being the object of that which is the opposite of injuriousness, or the repairing of an injury.-. If you say, what need is there that God have any care for repairing the honour of his majesty when it can do him no good, and no addition can be made to his happiness by it? You might as well say, what need is there that God care when he is despised and dishonoured, and his authority and glory trampled on; since it does him no hurt?" The President then goes on to prove, from the natural dictates of conscience, and from the light of reason, that Jehovah demands a reparation of the evil of sin, not merely because it is injurious to the happiness of his creatures, but chiefly from regard due to his own insulted Majesty.

Vol. viii. p. 530, 531.

Sincerely and affectionately,
Yours, &c.

Vol. viii. p. 532,

ON EVIL SPEAKING:

There is scarcely a practice which is at once more wicked and debasing, than that of evil speaking. Its criminality appears not only from its own native malignity, but also from its frequent condemnation in scripture. In very many instances does the holy Psalmist intimate his abhorrence of it, in prizing so highly the. privilege of being delivered "from the strife of tongues;" in complaining that the wicked "tore him, and would not be silent," and in issuing the mandate, "Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy tips from speaking guile." Under the influence of the same Spirit, the apostle James displays his sense of the wickedness of this. practice, by commanding in direct terms, "Speak not evil one of‹ another;" by declaring that it was destructive of true religion; "if any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his. tongue, that man's religion is vain;”—and by avowing, that the suppression of it was a proof of ability to govern the whole man; "if any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body."

But while this practice is one of the most wicked, it is also of the most debasing nature. Can it be for once supposed, that ever a sentence of evil speaking proceeded from the lips of the bless-. ed Jesus? Can the thought be indulged for a moment, that an example of it was set by his holy apostles? Can it even be imagined, that a saint will ever be found allowing himself in it ?— No, never was one of these exemplified, and while God is a God of holiness, never will. Who then is the grand origin and pattern of this practice? It is just the devil himself. The very name devil signifies a calumniator; and we know that it is his employment to accuse the brethren; that it is his delight to speak evil of the saints, and even of their God; and that all evil speakers among men, are his followers, imitators of his conduct, and enHisted in his service. If any thing is debasing which proceeds from the devil, and which makes persons resemble him, this, which is the practice from which he receives his name, certainly is so.

Since this is the case, that the practice in question is one so wicked and so mean, it may be of use to consider it a little farther in the sequel of this paper. In doing this, I shall endeavour. to show, First, In what ways this evil may be committed; and, Second, What are some of the detestable qualities and bad consequences which attend it.

With the design of giving a view of the several ways in which this evil may be committed, I observe,

1. This takes place when persons speak evil falsely of those who ere innocent. I do not mean by innocent in this case, that the per

sons have no evil chargeable upon them. In this sense there nev er was an innocent mere man in this world, since the fall of Adam; and were none but such as these to be spared, all mankind wouldbe involved in one aggregate subject of slander. By the inno cent, I at present mean, those who are comparatively upright or inoffensive, and those who are not chargeable with the evil for which they are reproached. Now, I say, that to reproach these is an example of evil-speaking. Let it not be asserted, that this is a case which never, or even seldom occurs. For those who "give their tongues to evil, and their lips to speaking guile," must have a subject to vent their malignity upon. It is not likely that their fellow slanderers, who are their "brethren in iniquity," are to be most commonly selected for this purpose; but it is more probable, that they will fasten upon those who do not run with them ìn the same course, and who do not feed upon the same husks; and will calumniate them, that they may diminish their reputation, and lessen the weight of the reproof which their character casts upon their own wicked conduct. When this takes place, it is incontrovertibly an instance of the evil in question-the practice of evil speaking.

2. This evil is committed when persons talk over, and retail the real faults of one another in their common conversation. I doubt not, but it will be readily admitted by every one, that to bring false accusations against the innocent, is culpable evil-speaking: but it may not be so commonly thought, that the same character belongs to the retailing over of positive faults. Yet it cannot be doubted, when the case is fairly considered, that this is really true. What is the conduct which the perception of errors or faults will produce in a man of a good heart and righteous character? It will produce grief for them; it will produce prayer for their removal; it may produce reproof to the guilty person; and it may produce some serious conversation with other good people, that they may be mutually excited to prayer for their fallen brother, and prepared to shun the corruption which he has displayed. Such are the effects which positive faults, seen by gracious persons, will produce upon them. But is it possible for reason to suppose, that it will ever open their mouth to make them talk much about these to men indiscriminately? to make them speak in the way of displaying the atrocity of their brother's conduct? or to make them repeat it with a sneer of reproach, or a sarcastic grin of ridicule? Most assuredly not. Every good man will conceal the faults of his neighbour from all, except those who he knows will make a sanctified use of them: and when he does speak of them even to these, it will be with such indulgent tenderness of

heart, as will dispose him to put the most favourable construction possible upon them.

Now, since this is the solemn and feeling manner, in which even positive faults will be repeated by good men, and since such are the select and godly characters to whom they will communiçate these; I may safely affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that all the retailing of real and positive faults, which commonly takes place, are direct examples of evil speaking. For what other reason can people talk over these? Do they make the faulty person any better by it? Do they intend to edify their own soul by it? Do they feel the enmity and corruption of their hearts destroyed by it? Or can they aver, that they ever knew themselves, or any of their partners in defamation, made better by it? No; the man does not exist, who can shew that one of these good consequences, or any other similar advantage, has resulted from. it; and since this is the case, it necessarily follows, that the indulgence of the practice of talking over, and commenting upon, the positive faults of men, is just the fruit of malice, of envy, of hatred, or of cruelty against the person censured, or of naughtiness in the defamator himself. The practice, besides, nourishes all these odious and malignant principles, and is certainly an instance of evil-speaking.

3. This evil is committed, when persons employ themselves in talking over the personal or domestic affairs of their neighbours.. Though there are many who hesitate not to speak evil falsely of the innocent, from envious or interested motives; yet these are few, compared with the numbers who collect and retail the faults of their neighbours. And there are, no doubt, many who would not choose to join in this low traffic, and yet willingly employ themselves in inspecting and discussing the private affairs of those around them. Now I affirm, that these persons are as really chargeable with the guilt of evil-speaking, as any of the former. What is the reason that they are so prone to observe, and so fond to canvass, the domestic affairs of others? Is it that they intend to do a benefit to their neighbours by it? Is it that they feel. their piety and brotherly love increased by it? Or is it that they do real advantage to society by it? No; not even the most diligent and malignant whisperer and tattler will aver, that one of these good effects result from it. What is the reason, then, that many are so fond of erecting themselves into inspectors and critics upon the common affairs of their neighbours? And love it for their employ, to retail these, with their observations upon them, for the entertainment of others? The reason just is, that they are self-conceited; that they wish, by this, to get themselves con

vinced that their own way is best; or they are so petulant, that they wish to be always busying themselves about other men's matters; or they are so truly envious, that they wish to keep a general look-out upon their neighbours, that they may have always at hand abundant matter for traducing the character of these, and prevent them from rising in the public estimation. It is from the secret or sensible influence of these evil principles-selfishness, petulance, or envy, that all anxiety to know, and propensity to retail, the personal or domestic affairs of other people, proceeds. And though, in these gossipings, nothing positively injurious should be said of any person, yet they never can do good; and as they always proceed from wicked motives, and are designed to promote no good end, they certainly must, in justice, be reckoned among the instances of evil speaking.

4. This evil is committed, when persons give names of reproach and derision to one another. This may be done either in a more serious or more trifling manner. Sometimes persons give names of reproach to one another, in relation to the most weighty and important things; sometimes from the mere impulse of passion, and at other times as a kind of permanent and odious distinction. A diversity of sentiments, upon important or religious subjects, has drawn down upon some the first of these kinds of reproachful appellations. In the early days of Christianity, believers in Jesus were in this manner styled Nazarenes; in following ages they came to be named Christians; and in later times, the more zealous of them were called Puritans. All these names, at the periods referred to, were devised and imposed as terms of reproach; and it is to be lamented, that this species of abuse is still to be found in the world called Christian, for it must be admitted, that, both in former and present times, they are direct instances of evil-speaking.

But while persons have deliberately framed names of reproach, and applied them to others, whose sentiments upon the most important subjects were different from their own; there are others who, having got their feelings ruffled, do, from the instantaneous impulse of passion, give vent to the most opprobrious language against those who have offended them. The words of these, being upon such an occasion "like the troubled sea which cannot rest, whose waves constantly cast up mire and dirt," proceed without restraint to vent their impure ebullition in the most scornful and filthy language. And this also is an obvious instance of the evil of which I am now treating.

But, besides these two classes, there is a third, who, upon the slightest offence, or even without any, sieze upon some peculiar