have not done enough; so long as by any means whatever we might contrive to do more. Let this view of the matter but possess the mind of Christians generally; let the friends of missions bring the amount of their exertions into fair comparison with the claims that are made upon them; let one and all of them be penetrated with the conviction that they have not yet done all they might. Let them faithfully act up to these convictions, and I will be bold to predict that in the course of a very short period the missionary world will wear very different face. There will be a spirit and an activity, and a devotedness in the work in all its branches, which we have never yet witnessed.

а

Perhaps the author of the discourse modified the expression of his views as to the conversion of the heathen world, in order to make his argument tell with greater effect upon the immediate object of the society, whose cause he was advocating; for he says, "Although by good wishes and prayers alone, we can express our Christian benevolence to the infidel world at large, yet on behalf of certain corners of it we may certainly employ more active and more immediate exertions. To the remote, uncultivated, untutored districts of our own country in particular, we may; and every principle of religion and every feeling of humanity call upon us to send relief by such means as are within our power."

Now I beg you to observe here three things, 1st-It is admitted to be "a duty, enforced by every principle of religion and every feeling of humanity, to send relief to the necessitous by such means as are in our power." 2d-That we can express this benevolence to the world at large by good

wishes and prayers alone. And 3d-That therefore, it is our duty in effect to confine our exertions within certain geographical boundaries. Now I maintain that the middle term of this syllogism is a mere assumption, instead of a thing rigidly proved, and we have already seen that it is utterly false, consequently the conclusion falls to the ground. But I appeal to you whether the effect of such a representation of the nature and extent of their duty to a Christian congregation, would not be (if they admitted the correctness of the preacher's statements) to make them feel fairly delivered. from all obligation to extend their practical benevolence beyond the limited bounds he had been pleased to prescribe.

There can be no question as to the claims of our immediate neighbors, our countrymen, upon our compassion; but their claims are not exclusive of those of our "brethren" the Hindoos, or the Caffres, or the cannibals of New Zealand; and surely the man incurs an awful responsibility who takes upon him, by presenting to his hearers partial views of duty, to absolve them from the obligation to listen to the command of Christ to go into ALL THE WORLD and preach the Gospel to every creature. For such in effect is the doctrine of the sermon before us.

You know too well the present state of things in many religious circles, in various parts of our native country, to reckon this an obsolete discussion. Would that the evil had been confined to the date of the sermon, or had at least terminated with the eighteenth century! But I am afraid that many ministers, who, we may hope, know and love the truth, treat the subject of evangelizing the world (at least as to any practical purpose) as a subject which may very consistently be let alone.

When they do allude to it, they will own that they ought to give it their "good wishes and prayers;" but it is rather by their silence upon the subjectby their allowing it to be lost sight of and forgotten, that they tacitly authorize their people (so far as their authority may go) to view it as a matter they may safely leave alone-as, in short, no concern of theirs.

I cannot account, upon any principle more favorable to the parties concerned, for the state of dormancy in which many congregations and churches still remain, in regard to a cause which to all Christians ought to be so dear and important. I know that there are many noble exceptions to this evangelical apathy (shall I call it ?); and were all the churches, were all Christians to do as some of them do, that is, to the utmost stretch of their means, this censure would be without an object. But alas! it is not so. The capabilities of the Christian public are matter of numerical calculation, and, much as some do, the amount of all that is done, is but a small fraction of what, according to a very moderate computation, might be effected. I have now in my eye their pecuniary capabilities; but what shall we think or what shall we say of their ability to furnish men? How many fit men do all the churches of Great Britain and Ireland furnish annually to go out as missionaries to the heathen? Is it the fact that not one church in a hundred, actually sends out a single missionary? Is it a fact that thousands of Christian churches meet week after week, and year after year, for the observance of the ordinances of Christ, and that it never occurs to one of all these multitudes of professing Christians, and is never once suggested to them by their pastors, that there

may be some individuals among them who should go as messengers of mercy to their heathen brethren? If this is the fact, I leave you to draw the inference. Guilt lies somewhere. Is there not ground for addressing such bodies of professing Christians, in words originally spoken in reference to another subject, "Now, therefore, there is utterly a fault among you."

On this I shall not now enlarge, but I would ask, If such has been, and is the state of things in many Christian churches, ought they to remain so? It is high time for all whom it concerns to consider this question. And unless they can justify their neglect of the heathen, let them repent, pray for forgiveness, and seek grace to "walk henceforth in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

Within the period that has elapsed since the publication of the sermon now commented on, the greater number of the existing missionary societies date their commencement. Many foreign missions have been undertaken, and a degree of businesslike activity and system characterizes the operations of most of them; and their exertions God has been pleased to honor in many instances with an encouraging measure of success.

But it should be observed, that while Christian benevolence has taken a wider range of exertion, and is now travelling to the ends of the earth, it has not been absorbed by these foreign operations. Christian zeal and benevolence have opened new channels for themselves at home also, and are flowing in various directions through the length and breadth of the land. Consequently the Christian world is not now pursuing, with undivided attention, either the propagation of the Gospel among the heathen

nations, or the enlightening of the dark and long neglected corners of our own country. Both have a share of attention. And these two great classes of objects, the foreign and the domestic, are again subdivided into various minor classes, so that there is a great variety of benevolent objects now demanding the support of the Christian public.

But in this state of things, there is more need than ever to sound the alarm in the ears of professors, lest, deceived by this appearance of multiplied and diversified activity in doing good, they become deaf and callous to the cries and miseries of those to whom they have yet afforded no relief ;— lest, thinking only of what they are doing, they forget that there is something they are not doing, and which nevertheless ought to be done.

Is it not matter of notoriety, that many, when the claims of the missionary cause are pressed upon them, crave to be excused lending their aid, on the ground that they assist some other benevolent and religious institution? This, to say the least of it, is surely making the performance of one duty the reason for neglecting another. To propagate the Gospel wherever there are human beings to receive its glad tidings, is either the duty of Christians or it is not. If it be the duty of one, it is the duty of all, according to their ability. But in the case supposed, the plea in effect is inability. I grant that a poor man who may give his mite to one object, may not be able to give to two or more, and in his case the plea is valid. But I am supposing the plea of inability to be urged upon insufficient grounds, and the pittance of charity bestowed on one beggar, made a pretence to send away twenty, unpitied and unhelped.

Let me suppose for the sake of illustration, that