\

V

< I

WHO TROUBLES ISRAEL!

DISCOURSE

DELIVERED IN CONWAY, MASS.

ON THE DAY OP THE

ANNUAL THANKSGIVING,

NOVEMBER 29, 1832.

BY DANIEL CROSBY. _ . y

iTn-(«f5 uy'

Published by request of the Conway Temperance'HSociety.

AMHERST :
J. S. & C. ADAMS,  PRINTERS.
1833.

DISCOURSE.

Art thou he that troubleth Israel ¦? And he answered I have not troubled Israel ;
but thou and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments
of the Lord. — 1 KijtGs, xvm : 17, 18.
This passage contains a short but very interesting dis
pute, between two men, each of whom was high in
office ; the one a king of Israel and the other a prophet
of God. The simple question on which they joined
issue was, who had troubled Israel. Both admitted
the fact that Israel was troubled/ It was very certain
that the whole kingdom was in commotion. While the
judgments of God rested with great severity upon the
nation, diversity of sentiment and alienation of feeling
seemed to pervade all ranks in society. At this junc
ture, the prophet threw himself unexpectedly and at
once, into the presence of the angry monarch. And
the question instantly arose, who was the responsible
author of all this mischief. Ahab said it was Elijah —
with equal confidence Elijah affirmed that it was Ahab.
And, my brethren, which do you think was right ? The
^facts in the case are these : Israel, through the wicked
influence of Ahab, had departed very far from God.
Idolatry, dark and pernicious, had filled the land. It
was a time of universal degeneracy. Ahab did more,?
says the inspired writer, to provoke the Lord God of
Israel to anger, than all the kings of Israel that went
before him. In this state of things, God biKight a
strong reforming power upon the nation. He raised

up a man, endued him with great powers of eloquence,
great fearlessness of spirit, and decision of character?
and sent him forth to quicken the national conscience*
and to kindle afresh the few sparks of piety that re
mained hidden and ready to perish. With a bold and
fearless hand, Elijah threw the leaven of righteousness
upon the corruptions of the community,, and , the conse
quence was, as it must always be in such cases, the
moral elements of society began to ferment. What of
conscience and piety remained heretofore overborne and
pressed down, began now to rise and operate ; while the
wicked party in the nation threw themselves decided^
against the progress of reform. Immediately diversity
of sentiment and alienation of feeling pervaded the
community at large, and extended to individual familieSi
Some neighbourhoods supported the groves of Baal,.
and bowed before the altars of the false God, other
neighbourhoods with equal decision returned to the long
forsaken God of Israel. In the same family perhaps,
the sympathies and the influence of one member were
with Elijah and the reformation, while the sympathies
and the influence of another member were with Ahab
and his wicked wife Jezebel. Ahab and his party
threw all the blame of this state of things upon Elijah.
It was his preaching — his measures — his plans of op-|?
eration that had troubled the nation. Elijah on the
other hand, with holy indignation, threw back the charge
upon the wicked monarch and his father's house. And
my brethren, which of these men was right ? Which
was responsible for the disturbance, the reforming
power,*or the resistance that was made to it? To state
the question so as to admit a general application, when

known evils exist in the community, which threaten the
dearest interests of man for time and eternity, and God
brings against those evils a strong reforming power, who
I ask, is responsible for the agitations which may en
sue, the power that reforms, or the resistance that is
made to it? If you bring this question before the tri
bunal of party feeling, or self interest or appetite, you
may obtain an answer that will be incorrect. But if you
bring the question directly before conscience with no
untoward influences to bias the verdict, you will obtain
from every man, in every place and in every situation
one and the same answer. I wish at the outset of this
discourse to bring this question if possible directly before
the tribunal of conscience. And for this purpose, I will
mention a few cases in which the same principle is
involved. In the course of his public ministry, Paul preached
the Gospel at Ephesus. And he preached with great
acceptance, and great effect. The "Word of God grew
mightily and prevailed there." As soon however, as
the Gospel began to take effect in the City, there arose
" no small stir, about that way." On one occasion, the
whole city was thrown into commotion. The mob col
lected filled with wrath and for " about the space of two
hours, cried out Great is Diana of the Ephesians."
And so highly were the people infuriated that the friends
of Paul held him back from going into the theatre fear
ing the consequences of a personal exposure. Who I
ask was responsible for all this confusion? The Ephe
sians threw the whole blame upon Paul — But was this
right ? The facts in the case are these, Ephesus was
a city wholly given to idolatry. There, stood a temple

to Diana, which was the most splendid thing of the kind
In Asia. To support the magnificence of this Temple,
and supply it with ornaments gave employment and much
gain to a whole company of artificers. Here was a class
of men whose gains were connected with sin. The Gos
pel came to that city, as a reforming power. These
men saw very clearly that if the Gospel prevailed, not
only would Idolatry cease, but Diana's Temple would
be forsaken and their gains cut off*. They therefore
combined together, held a secret meeting and devised
measures to check the progress of the reformation. The
reforming principle was moving on in its strength when
their plans came in contact with it. The collision of
these two things, which were so opposite produced
confusion in the community. And who was responsible
for the disturbance, the reforming principle or the
resistance that was made to it ?
Take another case, very different in its nature
but sufficiently illustrative of the same principle.
Your maker has given to your bodily constitution,
certain organic laws, which in their natural and
unresisted operation are very easy and always con
ducive to health and happiness — The blood circulates,
the lungs respire, and all the processes of the animal
economy go on without producing irritation or disease.
— By a course of treatment, however, you resist these
laws, you throw yourself against them — You violate the
laws of organic life. These organs continue to urge on
their action as aforetime, — they struggle to move on
in their accustomed course, but they are resisted and
loaded and move heavily — The consequence is, the sys
tem is excited with fever, or prostrated in debility.

Perhaps some principle ceases to operate, the organ has.
not strength sufficient to move under the resistance it
meets with, and gives way, then disease and death en
sue. What is the responsible cause of this mischief —
the organic law, so salutary in its operation, so necessary
to health — or the resistance that is made to it?
I will take but one illustration more. God has re
vealed in his word a system of truth, which is most ad
mirably adapted to produce first, peace with God — then
peace with conscience, and then peace with men. It is
a peace-inspiring system. The prophets revealed it as
a religion of peace, and called its author the Prince of
peace. The angels announced it as a peace-inspiring re
ligion — " Peace on earth and good will to men.'''' Its
precepts are all peaceful, and its doctrines all tend to
harmony and happiness. And yet this religion, which
breathes only peace, is the occasion of trouble. These
doctrines come as a reforming power to the soul.
When permitted to exert their appropriate influence,
the result is always salutary. But when resisted, they*
still press on the conscience and the heart ; and there
is war with God, war with conscience, war with men.
And when you see a convicted sinner borne down with
agony, at enmity with God, at war with his own con
science, and irritated even with his fellow men, where
do you place the blame for all this anguish, on the
peace-inspiring system of truth, or on the resistance that
is made to it in that sinner's heart ?
Now, my brethren, self interest apart, prejudice and ap
petite apart, will not every man's conscience decide in the
question between Ahab and Elijah, who troubled Israel ?
And will not every man's conscience too, decide upon the

8
general question, that when a good and salutary princi
ple is resisted, and irritation and confusion ensue, the
author of the mischief is not the principle itself, but is
found in the resistance there is made to it ? This de
cision, which accords with every enlightened conscience,
will enable us to determine who troubled Israel ; and
in the further application of the subject will help us to
ascertain who is responsible for the agitations of com
munity at the present day. The present is certainly a
period of excitement and irritability. I speak not now
of those political commotions, which like the long and
rolling swells of the ocean, shake even the firmest
foundation; I allude rather to those disturbances which
are more seen and felt, because they lie upon the sur
face of society, those commotions which divide parishes,
disturb the harmony and corrupt the purity of popular
elections, those commotions which bring discord and
envy into the church of God, and dismiss his ministers
from their post of duty. Who troubles lsmel ? What
ever answer to this question may come from the tribu
nal of interest, or prejudice, or appetite, I ask only for
the response of every well informed and enlightened
conscience. Taking shelter under the principle already advanced,
I wish to bring to the test of this principle, certain
causes which are supposed by many to be the prime
movers in all this disturbance. There, are certain things
which are regarded as doing all this mischief, whose in
fluence I wish, in this discourse, to vindicate. I wish
to prove to you, that to whatever else it may be owing
that community is disturbed, this disturbance ought not
to be attributed in the first place, to

The peculiar doctrines of the Gospel, as exhibited by
all evangelical ministers.
One of the earliest objections to Christianity was
drawn from the troubles which it was supposed to ex
cite in the community. " A religion," says the objector,
" which kindles fire on earth, which requires its votaries
to hate father and mother and children, that excites
people to quarrel with the gods themselves — a reli
gion of this kind— ^can it be of heavenly original?"
From the first ages until the present time, men have
been fond of making religion responsible for popular
commotions. In the years 1830, and 1831, religion pros
pered in a manner altogether without a parallel in this
country. And what was the consequence ? The cry
of " cfiurch and state," " priest-craft," and " ecclesiastical
combination," resounded from North to South, and from
East to West. And the echo only died away with the
subsiding of revivals. But what have the doctrines of
the Gospel done that they should be held responsible
for this disturbance ? That they have exerted a pow
erful influence upon community is certain. By examin
ing this influence we shall be able to ascertain how far
they are responsible for these commotions.
In the first place then, the Gospel has met and resist
ed error. Wherever the doctrines of the Gospel have
been received, they have introduced better views of
God, his government and his Providence, they have
made a correct statement of what man is, of the way
in which he is to be saved, of the nature of his exist
ence here, and the retributions to which he is hastening
hereafter. On all these subjects, and a thousand others
they have shed light. That light has banished error.
2

10
Heathenism has fallen before it, infidelity has fallen be
fore it, and scepticism of every grade has yielded to
the superior views and higher evidences of Christianity.
But in thus meeting error, the Gospel has given occa
sion to excitement and trouble. But who is responsible
here ? Who makes the difficulty, the Gospel, which
says " the natural mind is enmity against God," or the
man who rises up against the Gospel and denies the doc
trine of depravity ? Who makes the difficulty, the Gos
pel, which says, " Ye must be born again," or the man
who in face of the Gospel denies the doctrine of regen
eration ? Who makes the difficulty'? the Gospel, which
says, " the wicked shall go away into everlasting pun*
ishment," or the man who in opposition to the Gospel
denies the doctrine of future and endless punishment ?
The Gospel opposes error. And the disturbance arises
from those who resist its operation. To which ought you
to attribute the disturbances of society, to the clear and
shining light of the Gospel, or to those whose under
standings are enlightened to perceive the truth, but
whose hearts oppose and reject it ? If there is in the
community a class of men whose minds are enlightened
to perceive the truth, but whose hearts are opposed to
it, and if these men, in their opposition to truth,
throw their influence against the clear preaching of the
Gospel and all the institutions of religion, who is respon
sible for the troubles excited, the bright light of the
Gospel, or the resistance that is made to it ? The Gos
pel comes to man as the only system of moral truth,
every other system is error. By arguments addressed to
the understanding, and by motives addressed to the con
science and the heart, it urges this truth upon all men.
If truth is received as it ought to be, there is no com-

11
motion, but if the heart reluctates and will not receive
the truth, who is responsible for breaking up the peace
of families, introducing discord into the church, and
driving from their posts the ministers of God ?
Another influence of the Gospel is to produce convie*
tion. By the strong light which it throws upon the hu
man heart, and by the ordinary illuminations of the
spirit which attend it, the Gospel has convinced multi
tudes of men in every part of the land, that their char
acters are just what the Scriptures represent the moral
state of man to be ; it has convinced them that they
ought to do immediately just what God commands them
to do, that the course they are pursuing is a sinful course*
the influence they are exerting is a pernicious influence,
and the path in which they are walking takes hold on
death ; and yet so strong is the aversion of their hearts
to the truth perceived, and so unyielding is their disin
clination to the duty to be done, that these men remain
unconverted. The Gospel is not permitted in their case
to go on to its peaceful and happy results. The coun
try is full of such men. Now if these men are render
ed sour and irritable by the pressure of their convic
tions, who is responsible for this*, the Gospel, or their
own unyielding hearts. If the man, to whose corrupt
heart the cauteries of the Gospel are applied, and whose
conscience is put to the rack by the convictions of truth,
if that man will be irritable and rage, throwing his in
fluence against the truth and the cause of God, who is
to blame for this, the truth that convicts, or the
resisting heart ? So far then as the Gospel produces
conviction, it is not responsible for the agitations of
society.

12
But the Gospel goes still farther. Besides enlightening
the mind and producing conviction, it induces peace, and
joy, and hope. ^ This is its finishing, its more appropriate
influence. And yet on this very account the Gospel has
been objected to — " It divides families, it arrays the son
against the father, and the daughter-in-law against her
mother-in-law, then commences a course of Christian
persecution and Christian slander. Hence arise the
agitations of society." But all that can be made out
against the Gospel here is simply this ; some receive,
to their joy and hope, those blessings which the Gospel
offers to all ; some are transformed into that new, and
holy, and happy character, which others reject. And
because those who are thus transformed cannot go to
the full length of their former practices, because they
have lost their relish for former enjoyments and pursuits,
therefore their opposers feel that all the natural and
social ties are broken. For such alienations who is
responsible ? Because your companion is happy in the
new character, new affections, and new hopes of relig
ion, and you, in the rejection of these same blessings, are
unkind and irritable, is the Gospel responsible for this ?
Because your child is more affectionate and obedient
since he has " obeyed you in the Lord," and you unkindly
throw your influence against his religion, who is respon
sible for this ? Let conscience, let common sense decide.
If then we look at the entire influencs of the Gos
pel, its enlightening influence, by which error is met and
confuted, its convicting influence, by which the heart is
laid open to view, or its sanctifying influence, by which
the character is transformed and the soul made happy,
we shall find no ground for the accusation brought

13
against our Blessed Lord — " He stirreth up the people"
This charge cannot be brought 2ndly,
Jlgainst any system of benevolent effort which grows out
of a firm belief of the Gospel.
It is impossible to believe the Gospel, in the evangel
ical sense of the word, without possessing a benevolent
spirit ; and it is impossible to possess a spirit, truly benev
olent, without manifesting it in action as occasion may
offer and ability permit. No small amount of complaint,
however, is made against all such efforts, not only as ex
travagance and fanaticism, but as causes which disturb
the public peace. But all that can be made out here,
is simply this, — the same principle of voluntary associa
tion which has been so long acknowledged and acted
upon in all departments of human enterprize has of late
been carried into the cause of active christian benevo
lence. It has indeed resulted from this improved
method of effort, that the spirit of philanthropy and
christian love is now operating upon society to greater
advantage and with much greater effect than formerly.
The benevolent spirit is now spreading itself out into a
diversity of forms, in order that it may meet every kind of
wretchedness with appropriate relief. Its influence is
beginning to be felt — I had almost said in every spot
where ignorance has collected its gloom, and in all the
" dark places of the earth which are full of the habita
tions of cruelty." It enters the prison and brings to the
criminal the word of life and the means of grace — It
spreads its mantle over those that go down to the sea
in ships, and puts into the hands of the sailor, as he
guides his bark over the billows, the chart of eternal
life — It spreads itself over the ill-fated shores of Africa,

14
guarding her villages against the intrusion of the slave-
trader, and intercepting his dark ship as she hovers along
the coast. It throws itself against the open currents of
iniquity in the land, and where it cannot dry up the des
olating flood, aims at least to break its force. Need I
say that it is- sending bibles and missionaries to the
heathen, collecting the children into Christian Schools,
and bringing to the benighted parents, the light and joys
and hopes of religion. — And now who makes the diffi
culty ? The man who cheerfully contributes of his
property and his influence to fill these channels of be
nevolence, or the man, who through ignorance, or pre<-
judice, or love of money, looks upon the entire movement
with a suspicious eye, and by his conversation and his
example aims to retard it ? Who makes the difficulty ?
the man who respectfully solicits and faithfully applies,
the charities of such as are disposed to give, or the man
who misrepresents the object, vilifies the motives of its
friends and aims to bring the whole subject into disre
pute ? Will the principle of voluntary associations if
left unresisted and unobstructed, produce any more con
fusion and irritation, when applied to the cause of active
benevolence, than it does when applied in other depart
ments of enterprise where no fault is found with its op
eration ? In other cases does the confusion arise from
those who voluntarily associate upon honest principles to
increase their property, and to promote internal im
provements, — or from those who misrepresent the ob
jects of such associations, and create in the community
strong prejudices to obstruct their operations ? And in
the cause of benevolence who is responsible for the
troubles'which may ensue — the men who associate to

15
enlighten the ignorant, reform the vicious, relieve the-
wretched and send the word of life to the destitute, or
the men who unkindly throw themselves against all this,
and by their influence create an opposing public senti
ment ? Will common sense or an enlightened conscience
hesitate on the question; whether it be the spirit of be
nevolence or resistance to that spirit that causes the dif
ficulty ? There is a third cause which is regarded as
disturbing community more than any other, perhaps
more than all others combined. It is a cause every
where spoken against.
It is the Temperance Reformation.
But what has the Temperance reformation done,
that it should be held responsible for all this dis
quietude of the public mind ? It has certainly exert
ed a powerful influence upon community. There are
certain moral results which have followed from this
reformation* which are worthy of being considered-^—
A careful examination of these results will show to what
extent and in what manner the Temperance reformation
has disturbed the peace of society — Allow me here to
notice some of the more prominent results which have
followed from this source. In the first place then, The
Temperance Reformation has brought out a strong sense of
obligation to oppose the ruling passions of men on this
subject. To explain my meaning let me say, the time has been
when men could sell and drink spirit, and furnish it for
others, without any very great sense of its being wrong,
or any very strong feeling of obligation to stop ; but they
cannot do so now. Such has been the progress of light,
and the urgency of conscience on this subject; that a
strong sense of obligation has been created. All men,

16
who come within the reach of the reformation^ feel this
obligation more or less. I do not mean to say that men
dp not sell or drink the poison now. Many do all this.
But it is much more difficult to do it now than it was
formerly. And the reason is, those who do so, go di
rectly against a strong sense of obligation in their own
breasts, and a rectified public opinion without. Once,
the man who sold spirit for gain, could do so without
much trouble from his own conscience, or the opinions
of others. He could gratify his ruling passion, a love of
gain, with a tolerably quiet mind. And the man who
drank spirit, because he loved it, or because it was pop
ular to drink, could gratify his ruling passion with some
tolerable degree of quiet. But it is not so now-
Whether a man sells or drinks from a love of money or
a love of the article, no matter what is his ruling pas
sion, that passion is met by a strong sense of obligation,.
and by a rectified public sentiment. The very act is at
tended by a feeling that he is doing wrong. Hence it
is that so many when about to drink in public, while the
glass is sparkling before them, feel themselves called
upon to say something by way of derision or opposition
or anecdote respecting the advocates of entire abstin
ence and the " cold water society," and perhaps to assert
their own strong claims as friends of temperance. It
may be a short speech ; but it shows too clearly to be
misunderstood the workings of the inner man! It
shows that the man is going directly against the dictates
of his own understanding, and the urgency of an awak
ened conscience. Now this is something accomplished
by the temperance efforts. It is a noble moral result.
These efforts have fixed deep in the minds of men a

17
sense of duty and a feeling of obligation. This sense
of obligation opposes their ruling passion on this subject.
They cannot avoid it. They cannot shake it off! v The
unwelcome companion goes with them to the bar room
— to the store — to the secret place where they drink,
when they dare not drink in public. This extensive
sense of obligation has been created in the community
by the Temperance Reformation. To sell or drink
has become so troublesome a business, that many a man
is restrained, who, were it not for this sense of duty,
would indulge in both these practices. And those who
continue in the practice have many a struggle, severe and
long protracted, with an awakened conscience and a sense
of obligation. Loud and authoritative is the voice of
admonition* that comes from the inner man. Strong
must be that ruling passion, whether it be a love of
money, or a desire for popularity, or a love of strong
drink, which can break away from the voice of con
science and the voice of God. The man who sells or
drinks spirit at the present day is, and must be, at times,
an unhappy man. And could a history of his feelings
be written out, it would be a diary showing many a con
flict with conscience — many a broken resolution — many
a weak argument to hush the Conflict of the soul — many
a curse, perhaps, at the reformation itself. And who
can tell that no small amount of the disquietude, and
the irritability which appear in society, does not come
from those in whose minds there is this conflict between
some ruling passion pleading for indulgence, and a sense
of duty forbidding it. Now is this feeling of obligation
responsible for the disturbance ? Obviously not. No
3

18
irritation can result from bringihg men to feel obligation*
provided they have a disposition to comply with a sense
of duty. The disturbance arises from the opposition
that is made to conscience and to duty. When a man
has been made to feel that it is his duty to support this
cause by all his influence, and yet for the sake of popu
larity, or from any other motive, he refuses to comply
with the demands of duty, becomes sour and looks
with a jealous eye towards the Temperance Reforma
tion, and acts against it, and thus produces, so far as his
influence extends, disturbance in society — Avhich is re^
sponsible for the disturbance, that man's sense of duty,
or his resistance to duty ? There is an inward as well
as outward conflict in regard to this subject. This in
ward conflict is between a sense of duty and a disincli
nation to do it. The outward conflict, which disturbs
towns, parishes, and churches, is only the devolopment
of this inward and severe struggle. Those men who
resist a sense of duty, are responsible to God for all the
disturbance thus exerted.
Another thing which the Temperance Reformation
has done is to bring men to act on the one side or the other.
It has diminished the neutral ground on this subject.
Men are unwilling to come to a decision when their pop
ularity or appetite or property is to be affected by the
decision they make. And when brought to decide, if
under the influence of some bad passion, they decide
wrong. Such men will be irritated, and will cause
trouble. No man with an enlightened and active con
science, can rest easy in a wrong decision upon moral
subjects. He will continue unhappy and wayward un-

19
til he abandons his ground or subdues his conscience.
Now the Temperance Reformation brings men to de
cide and to act. It does not bring them all to decide
and act right, but it takes away their neutrality. And
here is the difficulty. Being compelled to decide, and
being under the influence of some bad ruling passion,
they decide wrong ; and then they feel unhappy, and
vexed, and say hard things against the cause, and take
sides with its opposers. But is the Temperance Re
formation on this account to be disesteemed and aban
doned as something that disturbs the public peace ?
There is nothing wrong certainly in bringing men to de
cide on moral questions. The Bible does this. " If the
Lord be God, follow him : but if Baal, then follow him."
If men would decide right, there would be no confusion.
It is not the fact that they are brought to decide, but
the fact that they decide wrong, which makes the diffi
culty. And the Temperance Reformation is not re
sponsible for the manner in which they decide.
Another result of the Temperance effort has been
to increase the influence upon society of other moral causes.
It has brought an additional amount of moral power to
bear upon the community. It has increased the influ
ence of popular education, it has increased the power
of the Gospel, it has added new efficiency to the means
of grace and Christian example. I need not stop to
illustrate here ; the fact is, I think, obvious to all in
telligent observation. But here is another ground of
difficulty. All who are opposed to truth and holiness dis
like to see this accumulation of moral influence. It pains
them to perceive the human heart becoming impressiblfe

20
by such influences. Hence their disquietude and un
easiness. I am not at all surprised at this. To a man
who loves error and hates the truth, who loves sin and
hates holiness, — to such a man the Temperance Refor
mation must be an exceedingly troublesome thing. This
Reformation quickens into activity and new success all
other moral means. It produces an immense accumu
lation of moral power. Every thing good seems to fol
low in its train'. Men who cordially join in this Refor
mation and act according to its principles seem to be
come new men. I do not say that they are converted
to God. But they seem to be more kind and aimable,
more impressible by truth, more willing to perform du
ty. They seem to have broken away from a class of
unpropitious influences — and to have become more im
pressible by good influences — This perhaps is one rea
son why the Temperance Reformation has been follow
ed in so many cases by revivals of religion. But if men
throw themselves against all these things, is the Tem
perance Reformation on that account to be regarded as
unworthy of confidence and support ?
I cannot pursue the subject farther. But in view of
the principles laid down in this discourse and in view of
the state of society as here developed, I ask you, my
Brethren, to decide honestly — Who troubles Israel ? Is
it Ahab, or, Elijah? Is it the reforming power so sal
utary in its operations, so happy in its results, or is it the
resistance that is made to it? — Do I hear one ask,
"would you justify all the conduct of the friends of re
ligion and benevolence and temperance ?" I answer,
that, in this disconrse, I have had to do with principles*

21
not with individuals — or with individual action. I have
spoken of the doctrines of the Gospel in their appropri
ate and salutary influence, I have spoken of that benev-
olence, which necessarily grows out of a firm belief in
the Gospel — of the principles upon which the Temper
ance Reformation is based, and of some of its more prom
inent moral results. It is believed that, when resistance
to principles shall cease — when the heart is no longer
averse to the pure doctrines of the Gospel and the pure
spirit of benevolence, and when the great principles of
moral reform are no longer opposed, opposition to meas
ures and to men will cease and the jarring elements of
society will be tranquilized.
Do I hear one ask what is the appropriateness of
such a theme, to this anniversary of Praise and Thanks
giving ? I answer, much every way. For the Chris
tian I would draw from this subject matter of gratitude,
and matter of encouragement.
First, Matter of gratitude. What friend of the Sa
viour will not bless God that the Gospel is exerting
such an amount of influence, that so many hindrances to
it are removed, and that so large a mass of mind is al
ready impressible by its truth. The, present is certain
ly a day of conviction. Conscience is on the side of
God. Notwithstanding the agitation of Society, the
Gospel is. exerting an immense influence at the present
day. You behold it disclosing to view the natural heart,
quickening into new activity the slumbering conscience,
opening new channels of influence, and gaining new con
quests over sin.
This subject also affords matter of encouragement to

22
the friends of Christ. True the world is yet a dark
place — Faint and few, comparatively are as yet the
triumphs of the cross. " The progress of missions is
slow." Dark and long is the cloud that stretches itself
over the heathen world. But much of the gloom of
other times is gone. The long night of ages is rolling
away. There is a predicted glory which has not yet
come. The spirit of prophecy inspires the Christian
with an unshaken expectation of better days. So far
and so brightly has its light stretched itself into the
future, that the universal triumphs of truth and holiness
are already seen by the eye of faith, rising in the dis
tance, and pouring on the mountain-tops their golden
light. Amid all the agitations of society — and the storms
which sweep over its surface, the finger of Prophecy
steadily points the Christian to the time when the earth
shall no longer be the receptacle of ignorance, and
crime, and misery. A period of complete redemption is
on its way. And do you not see its precursors ? see
you not that light that is breaking in all over this dark
ened world ! already it has begun to reach the recesses
of heathenism, purify the habitations of cruelty, and
spread the knowledge of the Holy One over millions of
minds long held in bondage.
Prophecy assures you that the transformation shall
not stop, until the history of a Saviour's love, wafted on
the winds of Heaven, shall be known in every nation,
and the efficacy of a Saviour's death shall be felt in all
lands, raising the fallen, enlightening the ignorant, puri
fying the vile, and pouring joy and gladness into the
hearts of the afflicted.

23
But I cannot leave this subject until I draw from it a
Caution and a Warning to the impenitent. First a caution.
My impenitent hearers, the moral elements of society
are now in commotion — a crisis is approaching in the
affairs of this world. It requires no spirit of prophecy
to predict that the period of the next fifty years will
Avitness some of the most important results in the des
tiny of man. Holiness and sin have already begun to
take the ground of open and direct hostility against each
other. Both sides are rapidly losing all appearance of
neutrality and compromise. Vice is opening its most
deadly channels of influence, and the good in every land
are waking up to catch the spirit of the Gospel which
is the spirit of Christ, the spirit of holiness. You are,
or you may be, most critically placed, where you must
take sides for or against the truth. And now my cau
tion is — beware how you array yourselves under the
banner of the god of this world. You will find no
stopping place in your career of sin. The cause to
which you will find yourselves most unfortunately attach
ed, will demand all your influence, and your energies will
be called into action, just in proportion as the combat
deepens. Ere you are aware, you will become bold as
the boldest, and frantic as the foremost in your impreca
tions against all that is Holy.
That you may be preserved from this fatal course;
suffer me to lodge in your conscience the solemn warn
ing, not to throw yourselves against the designs of God.
Where can you flee from his presence ?

24
" His Spirit rid,es upon the thunder storm,
Darkening the skies into terriffic forms ; —
Beams in the lightning, rocks upon the seas,
Roars in the blast, and whispers in the breeze."
Throw not yourselves against the designs of God.
His purposes will roll on. His Church will be led
through the desert even though another Pharaoh and his
host should be swallowed up. The indignation of the
Almighty has flashed awfully in the face of those who
have mocked his might, and thrown themselves agaipst
his designs. Where are the sinners of ancient days ?
Where are Sodom and Gomorrha ? Where is Baby
lon ? Where the noise of the viols, and the pomp of
Belshazzar's feast ! Where the Godless revelry of a
thousand Lords, drinking from the golden vessels of
Zion's Temple! Heaps of ruin now mark the spot
where " stood the throne of the world." There is
; a voiceless eloquence in the ruins of fallen cities— Jt
tells me there is a God in heaven to punish pride and
impiety. It tells me there is no counsel, or might, or
knowledge against the Lord. From every deep and
gloomy cavern, from every water-pool there echoes the
voice of the Almighty — " Who hath hardened himself
against the Lord and prospered ?"\
" Man cannot live, great God, and look on Thee ;
Around thy form eternal lightnings glow,
Thy voice appals the shuddering world below."
Acquaint now thyself and be at peace with him, and
thereby good shall come unto thee.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08561 1623