dience, upt mind; so that their gods might fitly be called, there and a lie; yet they found a belief of such gods as these with an appropriate worship of them, absolutely necessary for the support of government. They were taught by experience, and every nation which makes the experiment will learn the same. I do not know that it is either irreverent or false, to suppose that the true God is more propitious to the heathen, who believe in false gods, and their control of men's affairs; than he is to such as reject the notion of Deity, and of a universal providence. We have an instructive instance on this point, in the rise, maturity and decay of the Roman empire. That people, from very small beginnings, became the greatest power that ever existed in the world. Their government filled the earth. They were heathen who worshipped many gods, believed in their providence, propitiated them by a multitude of religious services, and implored from them success in all their great undertakings. Although a Christian is shocked by the folly, and in many instances by the cruelties of their idolatry; they still believed in Deity and a providence. So long as these were believed, the moral virtues, according to their conceptions, were practised.Justice was administered, civil liberty was preserved, and the state rose to its summit of power. But as soon as the Epicurean Infidelity was disseminated, which denied the being and providence of the gods, and the fitness of worshipping them; the empire shook on its base. Every horrible crime became common, both in private and public life; justice was no longer known; liberty fled; and even the introduction of despotism was a blessing, compared with the uncontroled reign of vice, by which it was preceded.—No nation can be long safe without believing in a God, and rendering him suitable worship.

4. It may be asked, why is this subject introduced, when, if the evil mentioned does actually exist, it is not in the power of those who read to apply the remedy? I answer, there are reasons enough to justify the introduction of the subject, although a remedy may be impossible to us. It is a testimony due to truth. It is a confession and a testimony due to the glory of God, who reigneth in the midst of the nations. It is one step towards vindicating that awful justice of his providence which hath now involved us in judgments, more threatening to our existence than many conceive. It shews there is reason for us to expect a portion in those plagues by which the nations are tormented.

There are some benefits to be expected from attending to this subject. Although individual influence is small, it is

something, and we are all taught the duty of using it in our several places, to impress a reverent belief that the Lord is God of the nations; and that those who neglect to confess him, after they have evidence of the truth, have no right to expect any great interposition in their favor. To determine how long our calamities will probably endure, we must first know how long the causes will remain, which they were designed to chastise.

This subject, also, warns us carefully to maintain the institutions of religion, within our own local jurisdiction.— Here we have an influence that will be felt, if exerted with prudence and firmness. There is no such difference of religious sentiment or practice between the several Christian denominations in this State, as ought to excite the least distrust of each other, on the subject we have considered. They all believe in the word, providence and worship of God; and it is only against disbelievers of the most sacred and eternal truths we are called to unite. VERITAS.

1

From the Massachusetts Missionary Magazine.

The Religious Conference of CLERUS and his Young Friends. Clerus. LET us now attend to the nature of Providence. Theophilus. We hope, Sir, you will define Providence ; for the acceptations of the word are so various, that we shall grope in the dark, without a seasonable explanation.

Clerus. I am sensible the word Providence is capable of various acceptations. Authors and teachers have made. it correspond with their peculiar theories of sentiment. In one author it imports the divine agency, in another the blind influence of fate, and in a third nothing but sound to complete a period.

Theophilus. Pray, then, give us the proper theological definition.

Clerus. Providence, I apprehend, according to the religious import of the word, is the universal agency of God, which constantly causes the existence of all creatures and objects both in the natural and moral worlds.

Theodore. Though I am not authorised to discard the definition, yet at first glance it appears to confound creation and conservation. Is there no difference between the creation of the universe and its preservation?

Clerus. Yes, my young friends, there is a difference between the creative and supporting agency of God, for the

:

scripture says, "Thou Lord hast made the heavens, the earth and seas: and thou preservest them all." But the difference, on examination, is merely specific and circumstantial for the constancy of God's preserving agency is the only criterion which discriminates it from his creative agency. Preservation is but the continuance of creation; for no man independently of the constant agency of Deity, has power to protract his existence, move a limb, or originate a thought.

Theophilus. Your opinion, Sir, is different from the common one, that men at their creation are invested with selfmoving influence, and no more dependent on God than a timepiece is on the author. Some theorists suppose that as a machine will move regularly several days and months successively, without the agency of the author, so men and other agents are the subjects of delegated power to act in general independently of their Maker.

Clerus. You have exhibited the vulgar theory, and also the theory of some learned men who warmly advocate the self-motion of the human will; but not the theory of inspiration. Both scripture and sound philosophy inform us, that creatures in every possible stage and attitude of their existence are entirely dependent. Freedom and dependence are compatible, for while all our springs are in God, while in him we live, and move, and have our being, and in all our ways, we are voluntary; choose and refuse without compulsion. There is no interference between human agency and divine.

Philander. I am loath to differ from my teacher, but it is hard work to believe that I am absolutely dependent, and yet entirely free or voluntary in all my actions. Is it true that we are as dependent on divine agency for our voluntary exertions as for our existence? Will not the doctrine of providence afford some relief?

Theophilus. Are you not a creature?

Philander. Yes, and choose to remain one.

Theophilus. Then you are willing to be entirely dependent on your Creator.

Philander. I am but while this doctrine brings God so near, by considering me as dependent on his agency for what I now am, as for my first existence, it makes me tremble. I am afraid to live for agreeably to this theory I live in God, and am nothing at any moment without his direct efficiency.

Clerus. You ought to say, Philander, that according to seripture your present existence is the effect of God's present

agency for what philosophers style the law of nature or the law of preservation, is but the unremitting agency of God. Between our agency and God's agency there is no interven- ' ing medium or influence. The will of God makes the universe what it is at every successive moment of its existene. Providence now effects what now exists: and if God were to withdraw his present agency, the whole creation would vanish. On God's will the universe now depends.

Philander. According to your theory the universe, which comprises the natural and moral worlds, is but the unremitting effect of God's constant agency.

Clerus. Nothing else, Philander; hence we say, that, preservation is but creation protracted or continued. God impresses us with these surrounding objects and we are impresed. The seal is his, and the stamp is ours. In one word, Providence is a constant cause, and the universe is a constant effect.

Theophilus. How great is God! How small are men! Surely the work of the Lord is honorable and glorious.' The works of providence are but the successive works of ereation. God is constantly effecting what was effected at the beginning, when he said "Let there be light.”

Philander. You have my hearty concurrence. Providence is either active or inactive. If inactive, it ensures no end; but if active, it is the unremitting repetition of creation: for creation aside from divine agency is not only destitute of any preserving influence or principle, but is a mere nullity.

Theophilus. We have perhaps ascertained the general nature of Providence and I now wish to attend to the particular acceptations of the word.

:

Clerus. I will attempt to enumerate the different senses of the word Providence.

I. There are common providences, such as the alternate course of day and night and the regular succession of the

seasons.

II. There are remarkable providences; such as the salvation of a child ten days by a single plank upon the open sea; the sinking of mountains and eities by an earthquake, and other occurrences of similar description.

III. There are also miraculous providences, recorded by inspiration; such as the division of the sea, the pause of the sun, and the resurrection of the dead.

IV. We have also liberty to add the gracious providences, or operations of the Spirit which change and sanctify the hearts of men and qualify them for heaven.

To subjoin distinctly the redeeming providences of God is needless. They are comprised in the preceding articles. In the work of redemption, common, remarkable, miraculous and gracious providences are all concerned.

Theophilus. We thank you, Sir, for these discriminations: for the various acceptations of the word have frequently been confounded. But please to mark the difference between common providences and remarkable providences.

Clerus. The difference is this, common providences are frequent and constant ; but remarkable providences or what some theorists improperly style special, are seldom. It is common for a woman to bear one child at a birth; it is less common to bear two; it is less common still to bear three; when, therefore, a woman exceeds and bears five or seven it is really remarkable; for such instances are seldom. No other discrimination between common and remarkable providences is necessary for they are of the same nature. There is no difference but what is cireumstantial. There are many common providences and but few remarkable ones.

Theodore. We understand the distinction. Please now to point out the difference between miraculous and gracious providences.

Clerus. Both differ from common and remarkable providences; for neither miracles nor new hearts are effected by the common operations of providence.

Theodore. We comprehend you, Sir, but please to inform us in what respects miraculous and gracious influences agree and differ between themselves.

Clerus. The miraculous agency of God is displayed on matter and mind; but his gracious agency, only in the hearts of men. It is God's miraculous influence which stops the sun, and instantly restores reason to the subject of distraction, and effects other events of this description; but his miraculous influence never produces new hearts; visibility is attached to miracles for the important purpose of instantaneously impressing and convincing the minds of spectators.Miracles are for a sign not to believers but to unbelievers; and are therefore visible; but regeneration, which is effected by the gracious agency of the Spirit, is in its nature invisible, and manifested by subsequent fruits.

Theodore. But is not renovation a miracle of grace? and is not the duration of the church styled by some learned authors a standing, permanent miracle?

Clerus. If a pupil were to make no difference between ♣ and 6 in casting figures, he would stand corrected by the common rules of arithmetic: and does not the author who con