Page images
PDF
EPUB

Capital Punishment.

inculcate the virtues of forbearance
and forgiveness.

It will be perceived that all these denials of the moral right of capital punishment, as well as the absurd notion that the design of punishment is the reformation of the criminal, involve a denial of the lawfulness of civil government. They all result in this, that man ought to be left to the restraints of conscience and religion alone; that to restrain him from crimes, or to punish his crimes, is a usurpation of the authority of his Maker. This conclusion is sufficiently startling, we would hope, to supersede the necessity of any further notice of them. We therefore turn the attention of the reader to the Scriptural evidence of the right or lawfulness of inflicting the punishment of death for the crime of murder.

The Mosaic code recognizes and establishes the propriety of capital punishment. The very man whom the sixth commandment was to given, written by the finger of God on a table of stone, thought it unquestionably proper to inflict the punishment of death for various crimes. And what is still more decisive, God himself expressly instructed Moses, Ex. xxi: 12-17, that murder, smiting one's father or mother, man-stealing, and several other crimes, Ex. xxii: 18, 19, should be capitally punished. The Mosaic code, it is true, was made for the Hebrews, and as such is not binding on other nations. Still it establishes the essential morality of capital punishment; it shows that the sixth commandment is not prohibitory of it, and that human life is not in its nature inviolable; that, in short, God may require the infliction of the punishment of death for the good of society. And what was then a desirable provision of the penal code, may, for aught that appears, be equally conducive to the public good in every age and country. It is remarkable that the ob

[Jan.

jections now urged against capital with equal or greater force during punishment might have been urged the Mosaic dispensation. The punishment of death then as well as now, deprived the criminal of any further opportunity of repentance; and as it was the practice of the Hebrews to inflict the punishment immediately after conviction, he had even less opportunity to prepare for death. Capital punishment was then as well as admitting of no redress in case of now irrevocable, its unjust infliction. Then imprisonment offered itself as a substitute for the punishment of death, and ly efficient protection to the comwas as likely as now to be an equalmunity. Then, if ever, capital punishment was inconsistent with the law of benevolence to the injurious, Lev. xix: 18.

sought to weaken the force of this The supposition by which it is code, the only code of civil law argument, namely, that the Mosaic which God himself has given to a people, is founded on a defective morality, is at least sufficiently astounding to merit a reluctant assent. Old Testament is inferior to that of It is said that the morality of the the New, and that capital punishrality. But the truth is, the system ment is a part of this defective moof morality contained in the ancient Scriptures, is the same which is taught only with more explicitness in the New Testament. grand standing error of fanatics, that It is a Christ in his sermon on the mount inculcates a more elevated morality than that of the decalogue. We need not enter at length into the proof of the identity of the moral codes of the two dispensations; it is enough that Christ has expressly declared that love to man, the sum of all human supreme love to God and impartial obligations, are required by Moses and the prophets. The argument the place it held in the penal code of in favor of capital punishment from

:

Moses, cannot therefore be set aside by the assumption that that code was framed on the basis of a lax morality. Another argument, however, on which writers on this side of the question place far more reliance than on that which we have drawn from the Mosaic code, remains to be noticed. It is founded on Genesis ix: 5, 6, where the infliction of capital punishment for murder seems to be sanctioned by our Maker. The passage is this: "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. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed for in the image of God made he man." This is addressed to Noah and his whole posterity-to men of all nations to the end of time. It is not, as some have dreamed, a mere prediction of the violent death of murderers, but a requirement of God, a demand which He makes on society to deliver up the murderer to death, for the crime of shedding the blood of man. This passage is decisive in favor of capital punishment, unless in a subsequent age the authority thus given was withdrawn. But in no part of the Bible is capital punishment prohibited. The only pretense is, that the spirit of the New Testament is opposed to it. But the spirit of divine legislation is invariably the same; and were it not, it is a correct rule that a law remains in force until it is repealed.

We turn, however, to the New Testament. It may be a source of satisfaction to those who look with peculiar reverence on the Christian Scriptures to know that even there the propriety of capital punishment is recognized. The declaration in Rom. xiii: 4, that the magistrate beareth not the SWORD in vain, and other parallel passages, are conclusive intimations of this right. An instrument of death is used as an Vol. I.

5

appropriate badge of the civil ruler. He bears the sword not in vain but for good. Can this imply any thing less than that he is justly invested with the power of life and death, and in the exercise of that power inflicts the punishment of death on malefactors for the good of society? Other intimations to the same effect might be referred to, were it not more likely to weary than inform the reader.

We are not prepared however to say that we regard capital punishment for murder as of absolute and invariable obligation: so that it can never be right to exercise the pardoning power in the case of a murderer. The fact that the magistrate bears the sword by divine appointment only makes it plain that he may rightfully inflict the punishment of death in defense of society, and not that he must inflict it upon all murderers. And if we turn to the argument from the Old Testament, it is manifest that the existence of this penalty in the Mosaic code, proves only that the punishment of death may properly be inflicted if the good of society can be promoted or secured by it. In any subsequent age if it can be shown that circumstances have so far changed that this mode of punishment can safely be superseded by a milder penalty, there is nothing in that ancient example to forbid a departure from it. The only question is, whether the instructions given to Noah are to be considered as a rule of civil government of absolute, permanent, and invariable obligation. If the passage admits of exceptions in particular cases; that is, if society may for reasons exercise the pardoning power towards individual murderers, then the rule is not of invariable obligation, but only a general rule. This it appears to us is the fact. For that exceptions to the execution of known murderers may lawfully be made hardly admits of a doubt. The

Winter.

good of society seems to require it for the better conviction of gangs of murderers, by holding out the promise of safety to any one who will turn state's evidence against his accomplices; and it certainly allows it where murder has been committed by a large body of men: the execution of a part of them answering every purpose of the law. Other cases may be supposed in

[Jan.

which the exercise of clemency may be compatible with public safety, and serviceable to the state. We freely admit that the evil of too dons is the tendency of the age; frequent and undiscriminating paryet the other extreme of making the execution of every murderer science and moral obligation, seems without exception a matter of conto us to have no support.

WINTER.

STERN winter cometh, with his freezing breath,
And brow all lowering, and black with storm;
He shaketh from his locks the blights of death,
And darkness mantleth round his awful form.
He walks in terror on the deep, dark sea,

And with him go his ministers of wrath,
Which, sweeping onward, uncontrolled and free,
Fling fearful ruin round their rapid path.
He sitteth snow-robed on an icy throne,

That rises beetling o'er the northern pole;
He looketh-lo! the world is all his own,
And joy shoots wildly through his horrid soul.

But the spring will come

In the glad young year,
And the soft green fields
Fresh flowers shall wear;
And the blue skies laugh,

And the earth be gay,

And the sun go forth
On his joyous way;
And the red-breast chirp,
And the sky-lark sing,

And the soul of the world

Shall be glad in the spring.

Then weep not naiads, o'er your gentle streams,
That lie all cold, and stiffened 'neath his breath ;
For soon the sun will fling abroad his beams,
And melt away the influence of Death.
But sing the death-song o'er the perished year,
Ye lovely daughters of the untrodden plain;
Bear, slowly bear along his darkening bier,

And deck it with the lily, cold and pale:
Chant, slowly chant the low, funereal dirge,
Sad, solemn, deep, like ocean's lumbering surge.

The dead year sleepeth in his new-made grave,
And o'er him rolleth darkly the eternal wave.

UNIVERSALISM EXAMINED, RENOUNCED, AND EXPOSED.*

"THERE is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth." There is joy likewise among the redeemed on earth whenever one is rescued from the enslaved host of Satan and numbered among the free sons of God; and their joy is great in proportion to the completeness and apparent hopelessness of his former thraldom. This truth was illustrated about two years since, when it became known to the Christian community in New England, that Matthew Hale Smith, who had been a popular preacher of Universalism at Hartford and Salem, had renounced the destructive errors of that sect, and by divine grace had been led, as was hoped, to receive and obey the truth as it is in Jesus, and to devote himself to the upbuilding of that faith, which for twelve years he had destroyed.

After the agitation in Mr. Smith's mind incident to such an entire change in his views, and to the peculiar internal and external conflict which he had experienced, had subsided, his Christian friends, thinking that his practical knowledge of the system and the influence of Universalism, would enable him most effectually to expose it, advised and requested him to deliver a series of lectures for that object. Accordingly he lectured in Hartford, New Haven, Boston, Salem, and many other places, to crowded and interested assemblies, and with great effect.

We were among those who listened to those lectures, and our wishes, and doubtless the wishes of all the friends of evangelical truth, have been gratified by their publication.

* Universalism Examined, Renounced, Exposed; in a series of Lectures, embracing the experience of the author during a ministry of twelve years, and the testimoDy of Universalist ministers to the dreadful moral tendency of their faith; by MATTHEW HALE SMITH. Boston, 1842. 12mo. pp. 396.

From the moment of Mr. Smith's decided renunciation of Universalism, he was made the object of bitter and unscrupulous hostility by his former associates and friends. His private character was assailed, his lectures interrupted by Universalist ministers and others, his person exposed to violence, and his family insulted. The foul-mouthed organs of that abusive sect set upon him in full bay, and all sorts of reproach and calumny were heaped upon him. He was pronounced a liar, a knave, and a madman. Taking advantage of an alienation of mind which he manifested when under the combined influence of disease and great mental anxiety and agitation, their most common charge was that he was insane. But he has given what, to them at least, should be convincing evidence of his sanity. He has written an exposure and refutation of their system of delusion and sophistry, which they cannot answer, or evade, or withstand.

These lectures are seven in number, with an address to Christians warning them against various artifices of Universalists. The style is perspicuous, and easy, and sometimes forcible, though somewhat diffuse and repetitious, owing probably to their being prepared for delivery to a popular audience, rather than for the press. Even in the most argumentative parts, the work partakes so largely of the nature of a record of personal experience-the author expresses himself with so unaffected a sense both of his former bondage to error and of his reader's attention, kept alive by emancipation by the truth-that the sympathy with the writer, rarely flags for a moment. The author thus announces his object :

"The design of the present course of lectures, is to present the reasons which

have led me from Universalism, and induced me to leave a ministry to which I have devoted twelve years of the best part of my life. In doing this, I respond to the call of the defenders of Universalism, and perform a work which they have professed themselves earnestly desirous to have performed. They invite, nay, challenge inquiry. They are confi. dent that Universalism is opposed be. cause it is not understood; they complain that their expositions of Scripture are unnoticed; that their arguments in defense of Universalism are either not examined at all, or lightly passed over; that doctrines are attributed to them, which they have never received, and which they disavow; and that those who speak of the moral tendency of Universalism, know not of what they affirm.

[ocr errors]

"My acquaintance with Universalism enables me to speak advisedly in relation to its practical tendency. An experience of years with the system and its friends, a settlement over one of the largest congregations of Universalists in the country, and an extensive acquaintance with the preachers of the system in all parts of the country, fit me to bear an intelligent testimony as to that system, and to state what I know and have seen.' pp. 3, 4. The first lecture gives an account of the author's religious experience, and of his life so far as is necessary to elucidate that experience. The second gives reasons for renouncing Universalism, arising from the difficulties that attend its defense; such as the character of its doctrines, striking at the root of all Christian faith and piety; the irreligious character of its ministers and their congregations; the want of confidence, both of preachers and hearers, in their own system, and their public use of arguments the sophistry of which they privately acknowledge; the number and character respectively of those who reject and those who defend it; its recent date; and its want of sanctions wherewith to enforce the duties of life. The third gives reasons for renouncing Universalism, drawn from the threatenings of the Bible. The fourth and fifth give reasons for renouncing the sys. tem, drawn from the entire insufficiency and fallacy of the arguments adduced for its support from the Bible, reason, and the light of nature.

The sixth gives reasons for renouncing it drawn from its moral tendencies and results. The seventh gives the argument against Universalism, drawn from future judgment.

We value the work chiefly for two reasons. The first, is its exhibition of the grace of God in reclaiming and converting one far gone in error, and of the means and process by which this was accomplished. The narrative of Mr. Smith's religious experience; the effect which the observation of the evil results of Universalism had upon his mindone of great natural sensibility; his mental conflict-the conflict between attachment to his theory and his aversion to its effects, and the happy conclusion with which divine grace crowned that conflict, must affect the hearts of God's people. We have read it with much emotion, even with tears. The second reason is, the testimony here given as to the dreadful moral influence and results of Universalism, by one who knows them from experience and thorough observation. We have always argued from the fixed principles of the depraved heart, that a system which takes off from that heart all restraint derived from the eternal world, which throws loose the reins on the neck of human passion, which cries to the conscience of the wicked "peace, peace," which promises to men eternal happiness live in this world as they list, which, in short, abolishes the sanctions of God's law and the whole influence of God's government in their bearing on human conduct, must be most disastrous in its effects on moral character. We have seen also something of the results of Universalism on society. We have known that a large part of professed Universalists, are among the dregs of the community, anxious for full license to sin. We have occasionally seen a congregation of Universalists, and been struck with the apparent symptoms of moral degra

« EelmineJätka »