ing of children by parents, or of subjects by rulers, not from enmity but from misapprehension respecting the nature of acceptable services? How much more shocking to suppose that God can be pleased with human sacrifices offered under the influence of murderous ambition, insatiable avarice, or implacable malignity and revenge! I can hardly conceive of a more detestable character, than that of a man who can delight to see armies of his brethren wantonly and maliciously butchering one another! How horrible then to suppose the Father of all is of such a character, that he can witness with complacency and approbation such scenes of carnage and murder among his children! Yet such a detestable character is imputed to God by warring Christians; for each of the parties at war supplicates his aid, and expects his approbation. It is probably a truth that the people of every country are blind in regard to the immorality of the vicious customs in which they have been severally educated. Christians in general, for many ages, have been as blind to the immorality of war, as the Hindoos are to the evils of their peculiar and sanguinary customs. This blindness of Christians, however, is far more wonderful than that of the Hindoos; for the Books, regarded as sacred by the Hindoos, approve and require human sacrifices; but our Gos pel of Salvation enjoins peace on earth and good will to all men-it requires of each that love which worketh no ill to its neighbour. Besides, if we consider the dreadful amount of human sacrifices which are offered in the wars of Christians-the hatred, revenge and inhumanity with which these sacrifices are made, and the shocking extent of vice and misery produced by the custom-we shall see still greater reason to wonder at the blindness of Christians. Probably within the last 20 years a number of human beings has/ been sacrificed by the wars of Christendom equal to the present population of the U. States. To this we may add millions and millions more who have been wounded or bereaved, or reduced to wretchedness and despair, by these inhuman wars. Nor is this all; for there is scarcely a vice or a crime that can be named, which is not authorized, encouraged, excited or nourish. ed by this detestable custom. If, therefore, the Christian's God is pleased with the custom of offering human sacrifices by war, he must be pleased with every vice and crime which is forbidden by the gospel. The Christian is shocked when he reads Dr. Buchannan's account of the scenes which he witnessed at Juggernaut-the vast concourse of people, the blindness of the worshippers, the human sacrifices which were offered, and the piles of skulls and bones occasioned by the mu!titude of former sacrifices. On reading these accounts the 7 Christian feels as though he ought to feel. Now let this same Christian take the most authentic accounts of the modern wars of Christendom-let him read the descriptions of the renowned battles of Smolensko, Borodino, Leipzig and fifty others; let him compare these scenes of havoc and horror, and the conduct of Christians on these occasions, with the anost revolting accounts of the Hindoos as given by Dr. Buchanan ;-then let him say, in the fear of God, which country affords the more horrible scenes, and which people have the greater need of being converted to the Christian religion. Military Ambition, Avarice and Revenge are the Juggernauts of Christendom. Το these idols human sacrifices are offered in numbers almost surpassing belief, and in a manner the most inhuman. Dr. Buchanan speaks of Juggernaut as the Moloch of the Hindoos; but Christians also have their Moloche, more insatiable in their thirst for blood or their demands for human sacrifices than the Juggernaut of India; and the custom of war which has been semi-deified throughout Christendom is, in my opinion, more fatal as well as more repugnant to christian principles, than any one of the Hindoo customs described by the worthy wri ter of the "Christian Resear ches." While therefore we applaud the benevolence which would convert the Hindoos to the Christian faith, and abolish their human sacrifices-we should not overlook the inconsistency of Christians, nor imagine that it is overlooked by God. All who are convinced of this inconsistency should feel no less concern for warring Christians than for superstitious pagans; they should be no less willing to exert themselves and to contribute of their property for the abolition of human sacrifices in Christendom, than in India. Indeed, it is important that Christians should first cast the beam out of their own eyes, that they may see more clearly to pluck the mote out of the eyes of theis Hindoo brethren. So long as the nations of Christendom shall continue in the practice of public war, their missionaries to the heathen, for the abolition of human sacrifices, must be sub. ject to great embarrassments. For the heathen may with perfect propriety affirm, that, bad as their customs are, they have not one among them more inhuman, more impious or more horrible than the custom of war, to which Christians themselves have attached the highest renown; and that it cannot possibly be worse to offer human sacrifices after the manner of Hindoos, than after the manner of Christians. While Christians shall gen erally believe that public wars are consistent with that spirit of meekness, love and forbearance which the gospel requires, the influence of Christianity on the character of nations must be very inconsiderable, compared with what it would be if the opposite opinion were generally adopted. As the popular opinion now is, the worst passions and the worst crimes which have any place in the history of man, are sanctioned by public authority, and practised as consistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ. But if the conduct of rulers and nations in their public wars is not morally evil, but consistent with the precepts of the gospel, it is just, reasoning from the greater to the less, to infer, that private murder, robbery, and all the atrocious conduct of the most abandoned individuals in private life, are consistent with the christian religion; and on the whole, that there is no such thing as moral evil among men. Hence we may safely conclude, either that Christians' have been under the influence of "strong delusions," and have "believed a lie," in supposing that, public wars arc consistent with the precepts of the Messiah, or that the Gospel, like the Kalikapurana, is an "abominable Book." OBJECTIONS TO THE ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS. Objection 8. "We cannot conceive it to be reconcilable with the wisdom and goodness of God, to have enjoined any positive precepts upon any nation, in opposition to his moral precepts. He never sus pends, nor counteracts, nor commands his creatures to counteract his moral rules." Answer. The ways of God are past finding out! I will mention some facts. God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his innocent son Isaac! This appears to be a command to counteract the moral rule, Thou shalt not kill. I will grant that the command given to Abraham was binding on him; but I contend that no other father is bound by the command, given to Abraham, to perform a similar act. In like manner I grant that the penal laws given to the Israelites, were binding on them; but I contend that none of those laws are binding on us. Obj. 9. "But the matter is put beyond all doubt by a sol-emn precep which God gave to Noah soon after the deluge, and consequently to all his pusterity. Gen. ix. 6. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. That this is a moral precept which was to stand 'in full force in all ages of time, is evident, because a moral reason is given to enforce it. If it remains true in all ages, that God made man in his own image, then the command to destroy the life of the mur derer, founded on this reason, continues in full force and vir the." Answ. In order to discover the true meaning of this text, I think it is necessary to attend to some of the next preceding verses. Verse 3. "Evcry moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I give en you all things." When man was first created, God gave him the herbs of the field, and the fruit of trees, for food. And in this verse, for the first time, he grants him permission to eat the flesh of animals. "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you." The expression is unlimited and universal. It includes the whole genus of animals, or living creatures, of which mankind forms one species. But we find two important exceptions to this general rule in the two next ver ses. Verse 4. "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." Here the eating of the blood of all animals is forbid den. Verse 5. "And surely your blood of your lives will I require at the hand of every beast will I require it and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother, will I require the life of man." I would ask what other language could have been used, that would have impressed on the mind of man a higher sense of the sacred importance and inviolability of his life! This verse is a solemn denunciation against the shedding of any human blood and is in perfect concord with the sixth commandment, which absolutely forbids it, without any : proviso, or exception. In the 5th verse men are warned not to shed any human blood; because God will require it at their hands. And lest that awful denunciation should prove insufficient to deter blood-thirsty man from committing the atrocious crime, in the sixth verse they are warned of the consequences, which in this life generally follow the bloody deed; as effects will follow their causes ; namely, that by so doing they put their own lives in jeopardy. It rouses in the survivors, all the vindictive passions, jealousies and fears for their own safety, that are implanted in our nature. And these have generally been sufficient to cause the blood of the murderer to be shed; and thus the fore-warning in the text hath generally been verified. I consider this text, in connection with the context, not as a command to shed the blood of the murderer, but as a most solemn warning to every man not to take away the life of any human being, for food, or on any pretence what but only as declarations of what would come to pass, Our three words shall be shed, are expressed by one word in several ancient languages, and the same word stands for will be shed. I consider the reason assigned, "For in the image of God made he man," that is, all mankind, as being good a gainst all shedding of human blood; because all men, even murderers, are made in the image of God. This reason assigned in the text, instead of supporting the construc tion given to it by the objector, appears to me to be in direct contrast and opposition to it, and is, in my opinion, an irrefutable argument against the effusion of any human blood! Obj. 10. This command to punish the murderer with death, hath been viewed as binding on all mankind in every period of the world, by such as have been favoured with divine revelation; and they have acted accordingly, from age to age, down to the present time." Answ. It seems that the objector does not pretend to have discovered in this chapter a divine command to inflict cap. ital punishments for any crime, except murder. Now if mankind had restricted capital punishments to the crime of murder, there would have been some plausible grounds for his assertion. But it appears from all history, sacred and profane, that vast numbers of the human race have been put to death by judicial tribuVol. VI. No. 8. 31 nals for other crimes and pretences, or when perfectly in nocent. The best estimate that I can make on my ac quaintance with the history of man from the days of Noah to the present time, is, that of the many thousands who have been subjected to death by civil tribunals, not one out of twenty (perhaps I might say, not one out of an hundred) hath suffered for the crime of murder. Hence we may safe, ly conclude that all those who have been favoured with divine revelation have not inflicted capital punishments in obedience to any supposed command in this chapter. It is further evident from the practice of all nations who have been favoured with di vine revelation, that they havề not viewed this text as a divine command to put all murderers to death, because the chief magistracy, in all nations that we are acquainted with, have constantly claimed and exercised a right of repriev ing or pardoning all convicts for murder, as well as for all other crimes. Now if they had considered this text as containing a "positive command from God binding on all mankind to punish the mur derer with death," they would not have claimed and exercised a prerogative of pardoning, or rescuing from that penalty, those whom God had sentenced to it. Obj. 11. "The shedding of innocent blood is a crime of such a horrid nature, that, in numerous instances, such as have perpetrated it, on a coo! |