to deliver men from this state of sin and misery; and he shows that the Jews stood equally in need with the Gentiles of such an interposition of God's mercy. The writer to the Hebrews, as we have seen, represents the christian dispensation, with its new high priest and antitypal and mystical sacrifice, as necessary on account of the imperfection of the Levitical priesthood, and the but partial efficacy of the sacrifices of the Law. In this, according to him, appeared that deficiency which was to be supplied by the new dispensation. According to St Paul, the deficiency of the Law had been shown by the fact, that while it gave a knowledge of duty, those under it were not operated upon by this knowledge, but did continually what they themselves condemned. 'When we were without the spirit, the sinful passions which existed under the Law, were working with our members to produce the fruits of death.' * But, he says, 'what the Law could not do, because it was made weak by the flesh, God has done.' The writer to the Hebrews, regards Christ as having come to deliver the Jews from their sins; he does not represent the benefits of his ministry as extending beyond them; he does not teach that God has called those his people who were not his people.' He does not advert to that subject which so deeply affected the feelings of St Paul, the rejection of his unbelieving countrymen ; and were it not for a single passage in the Epistle, it would afford no intimation, that Christianity was not generally received by the Jews. It is unnecessary to enlarge on the contrast presented in these particulars between the Epistle to the Hebrews and that to the Romans.

But the dissimilarity in the conceptions, reasonings, and sentiments of the two writers, striking as it is, is not more remarkable, than the dissimilarity in their modes of address. The Epistle to the Romans is alive with the personal feelings of the apostle. The writer to the Hebrews keeps himself individually out of sight, discovering no personal feelings, which can be regarded as characteristic. If St Paul had actually sent an epistle to the Jewish believers at Jerusalem, just after the termination of the long series of sufferings and ill treatment which had commenced in so remarkable a manner in that city, there is, we think, no doubt that it would have been an exceedingly different composition from the Epistle to the Hebrews.

ART. VII.—1. Address of the National Society for Promoting the Observance of the Sabbath.

2. Memorials to Congress on the Subject of Sunday Mails. 3. Reports of Messrs JOHNSON and McKEAN, Chairmen of the Committees of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, to whom were referred the several Petitions on the Subject of Mails on the Sabbath, or the first day of the week.

THE papers named at the head of this article, will sufficiently explain the inducement that calls us before the public at this time, to offer our thoughts on the observance of the sabbath. There are questions abroad on this subject, that require discussion. The subject itself is not to be lightly passed by. We think, that those who desire the good of mankind, who are anxious for the cause of virtue and piety, who are laboring for the wisdom and welfare of the people, should charge themselves to speak soberly, temperately, and with deep consideration, of an observance which occupies a seventh part of the time of life, and which, considered either as leisure or devotion, must exert a strong and decided influence upon the general character and happiness.

But

It is scarcely necessary to remark, that, during the last century and a half, there has been in this country, a gradual relaxation in the rigor of sabbatical observances. We have no hesitation in saying that the change was a desirable one. how far it should proceed, is the question. The institution is evidently advancing among us, towards the state in which it exists throughout the most of Europe, in which it is a mixture of religious observances with holiday amusements. And, to our minds, the real question before us, is, which is to be preferred for its moral influences and uses, the degree of restriction that now prevails among us, or the European freedom?

If any one is startled with this view of the subject, let us ask him where he can stop, short of this alternative? Is it not obvious that a change is taking place from year to year in the feelings and habits of society with regard to the observance of Sunday? Is not the number increasing, of those who are gradually laying aside all unusual restraint on their pursuits and actions, and are making the seventh day as other days, who hesitate not to perform journies on the sabbath, who entertain company at their houses, and ride or walk abroad for amusement, and who regularly absent themselves from church on the afternoon of the

sabbath? Let not these be regarded, now, as implications of wrong, but as questions of fact. Our business at present, is not with censure, but with argument. Suppose these practices to be innocent-and they are not, in their own nature and intrinsically wrong-but suppose them to be, every way, innocent. What, we ask, is, if it is not perfectly obvious, that they are leading to the result we speak of? Suppose that it were desirable that the European mode of observing the sabbath should be introduced among us; should we not all say, that these practices were promising signs? In one word, suppose the progress of the country to be as great for two centuries to come as it has been for the two centuries past, and would not the change be nearly, if not quite consummated? But, in truth, it is proceeding with accelerated rapidity; and if we do not decide soon, events will go far towards deciding for us.

This, then, to our minds, is the naked question; and in this view we shall, for a moment, consider the subject. We think it desirable that the comparison should be presented in some broad and palpable relations. So long as the question is whether in some one point or another there should be a shade more or a shade less of restriction, it may not be easy to decide. And it is desirable, therefore, that we should carry our thoughts forward a little, and should consider that, in this matter, the laying on of successive shades, or that the taking them off, will at last present marked and defined pictures of general manners and morals; and that we then should decide which picture presents in the fairest lights the prospects of our country.

To go fully into the subject, it would be necessary for us to discuss the general utility of the sabbatical institution. We venture to think that the importance of the institution to the welfare of society, as well as the support of religion, is not sufficiently understood. And with the leave and patience of our readers, we shall undertake to say something at large on this subject, though it may seem to them a very unpromising theme. But for the present, we wish to offer some views that have a bearing upon the late measures for promoting a stricter observance of the sabbath, and upon the questions that have arisen from them.

We say plainly, then, that we dread the evident tendences in this country to a laxer observance of the sabbath. Even if we put religion out of the question, and looked only at the well being of society, we should still entertain this feeling. The

great principle in ritual observances, is, that they should be wisely adapted to the character of the people for whom they are ordained, and of the whole people. A practice, like that, for instance, of riding out, to enjoy the beauty and freshness of a summer's day, might do no harm to a single individual, of a certain degree of refinement and of certain habits of reflection; but the question is, whether the same license would not do harm to the body of the people, to the young, the frivolous, the headstrong, to men of coarser passions and appetites, and fond of more riotous pleasures; whether the termination of the ride to many would not be the tavern, or the bowling-alley? We said, also, that a ritual should be judiciously adapted to the particular character of a people; that is, to the national character. The introduction of amusements among the people of France, we think, is far safer than it would be among us. There is no intemperance, and comparatively but little rudeness and violence, in their recreations. We are obliged to say, that we dare not trust our own people so far. We are of a different temperament. We are a people of stronger appetites and passions. There is, to express the whole difference, if we understand it, and we think that the literature of the two nations bears us out, there is a more powerful infusion of our common nature in the English stock, and it needs to be more carefully guarded. It cannot as safely be given up to sports and holidays. We have an instance on a small scale in one of our cities, where we are told that fifty thousand persons at least, regularly turn the Sunday into a holiday; and we believe that we correctly state, that it is made a day of more vicious and abominable excess than any other time whatever that is given to recreation. If this is a specimen of what holiday Sundays would become among us, we presume there can be no question on the subject. It would clearly be better to have no sabbath at all.

We come now to the late measures adopted for enforcing a stricter observance of the sabbath. These measures have been pursued with much zeal, and discussed with much heat; and, as usual in such cases, means and ends, motives and principles, have been confounded together. Let us, then, attempt to discriminate. We agree with the advocates of a stricter observance, about the end; we differ with them as to the means. We do not doubt that their motives, as a body, have been good; but we question the principles on which they have proceeded. For although they have a perfect right, for instance,

to withdraw their capital from those investments that involve, in their opinion, a violation of the sabbath, and to establish opposition lines of stages and steam boats, yet we think it bad in principle-bad, not as a matter of morality, but as a measure of prudence. We regret that rival and lucrative establishments should have been set up to aid the cause of moral reform. It carries an ill sound. It provokes opposition. It is no sufficient answer to say that it is the opposition of 'the wicked.' 'The wicked' are the very persons to be reformed. And measures fitted only to exasperate them, measures of a questionable or menacing aspect, that have an air of coercion or pecuniary speculation, do not seem to us to possess the dignity, gravity, and gentleness, that are needful to the right exertion of a moral influence.

Then, as to the memorials asking the interposition of Congress to prevent the passing of mails on Sunday, we did not wish them to succeed. We did not wish that Congress should legislate on this subject. Not perhaps, that there was anything very dangerous in the principle; though we look with jealousy to such precedents. But we do not think that that observance of the sabbath which we earnestly wish to see, is to be brought about by any legislative enactments. Our hope of all that moral and religious improvement in society, which we pray for, lies, first, in Christianity and the powerful preaching of it; then, in the press, in public opinion, in the patient and pure example of good men. We entertain doubts, too, though good and wise men differ here, whether the cessation of the great mails on Sunday is to be desired. The stage and the mail might stop; but private travelling, and expresses, would probably take their places, creating equal disturbance, and only, through the latter mode of communication, throwing greater advantages into the hands of capitalists. Besides, some works are proper to be done on Sunday, where the good to be accomplished is greater than the evil implied in the occupation; as when property is to be saved from fire, or flood, or mildew; or when the beadle or the tything man is employed to keep the general peace. Now, the question is, whether the good done by the travelling of the mails on Sunday, does not overbalance the evil. And here we have to add to all the facilities given to business by this medium of communication, the convenience, comfort, and relief afforded by the transmission of private and domestic intelligence. The conveyance of not merely agreea