The varnish of chivalry has been of If Mr. Ire pretty well rubbed off. g yet loves it well, and has perhaps kered it a little, he has, at the same e, not omitted to record the ignorant aticism, the calculating ambition, the retousness, treachery, and cold-blood ed cruelty, with which its shining qualities were alloyed. Nor is the antidote the worse for not being made conspicuous by the formality of a commentary, or for having only appended to it the very naïve reflections of Fray Antonio Agapida. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE. On the Defence of Napoleon. To the Editor. SIR, June 10th, 1829. As it appears to me that in the letter gned W. in the last number of your epository, the author has mistaken my eauing in his observations relative to ar, I think it incumbent upon me to xplain the subject more clearly than I id before, and in so doing I shall also answer some other remarks which he has uade. In the first place, he is mistaken in upposing for a moment that I could be simple as to mean that evil is not right and good, as overruled by a Divine government for wise and benevolent purposes. I firmly believe that it is, but this does not alter the truth of my affirmation, that we are not to do evil, for we are expressly forbidden to do evil, even that good may come. What did the author mean by his assertion that "the Divine permission is equivalent to his appointment" in the instance of war? Did he mean that war is justifiable? He says not; in his last letter he declares that he only approves of defensive war. I therefore suppose I have misunderstood him, though the only other sense the words will bear certainly render it an uncalled for truism; for I believe every Christian knows that both the natural and moral evils of the world are overruled for good by their Creator. No doubt, Napoleon did some good along with the evil in deluging the world with human blood; no doubt he swept away many old, corrupt institutious and prejudices while he was overturning kingdoms and changing their very existence, but this does not alter the question. I ay do the world a benefit, perhaps, by tting a murderer or an oppressor to ath, but I am not to assassinate him ou that account, because there are com mands of God which are supreme and antecedent to human judgments. The question at issue is this-Is Christianity to be recognized or not in our opinions? There are two ways of judging-there is the Christian standard and the opinion of the world. According to the first, war is unjustifiable-oppression, selfishness, and all political artifices and deceit, are unjustifiable, because they are wicked in their very nature: according to the latter, there is nothing right or wrong in itself; the Christian commands are not recognized in judging; but if a man attains to a certain height of power and fame, he is above the laws, and is not amenable to their tribunal; he is to be judged by the law of policy, and not by the moral law. He does not say, Is it virtuous, but, Is it expedient?-Is it necessary to secure my authority or increase my influence? And if he finds it is, then, according to his standard, it is right.— On the principle of policy, Napoleon put the Duke d'Enghien to death, and on the principle of policy he probably considered it justifiable; but, if a man be a Christian, he cannot conscientiouslynay, even decently-admit this standard; if a man be a Christian, to him there is but oue supreme authority, and that is the moral law, the law of Christ. Are we, then, to be told that a man is so great that he is not to be judged by this law, or so wicked that it would be uncharitable to judge him by it? Is it not to be the future test of his conduct in that world where there is no respect of persons, and where the highest will be on a level with the poor and the slave? Considered in this point of view, the death of the Duke d'Enghien was a murder, a cold-blooded and premeditated murder, and only aggravated by being perpetrated under the semblance of justice; and any person professing himself a Christian ought at least to pause before he comes forward in its defence; for it can only be defended by giving up those principles which ought to be the dearest and most sacred to his feelings. No wise man who is a Christian will become the apologist of a conqueror, because it is the very nature of conquest to permit, nay, to justify, deeds both contrary to the spirit of the gospel and opposed to its injunctions. He will only injure the cause of the man whose talents he admires by attempting to support him through those parts of his conduct which will not bear investigation; for, however severe and painful the sentence of a just condemnation may be, it cannot be es caped from. No subterfuges will avail, for what is not morally right is wrong; and crime is not the less crime because it is committed on a grand scale and on a regular system. There is no equivocating between the laws of religion and those of the world. A man may choose between them, but he cannot reconcile them; and by making the attempt, he will only involve his own character, either for sense or virtue. Our author appears to me to be in this predicament: he wishes to abide by the decisions of Christianity, and he wishes to defend the conquests and public conduct of Napoleon. He cannot do both. It is of no avail to say that other systems were worse, that the feudal system was bad; possibly they were, but this is not the question. In the same manner his accusa-tions against the Americans do not affect the subject. They may be all true, and yet the Americans may still be a moral and enlightened nation. Slavery is, indeed, a degrading stain, one of the darkest crimes the world has ever witnessed; but the educated part of the community in America regret it as deeply as its warmest opponents in this country can do. They have put an end to the slave-trade, and they will gladly put an end to domestic slavery also if it is in their power. In several of the states it has been already abolished, and they will, no doubt, proceed in the work of mercy. In regard to the treatment of the poor Indians by the Americans, such as it is represented in the author's letter, I make no attempt to defend it, for it is wicked and indefensible; but I do say that, though possibly containing some atrocious individuals, America, taken as a whole, is still a moral and enlightened nation; and that it would be as fair to judge of the English by their bull-baitings, and the shameful cruelties which are often practised on the brute creation, as it is to condemn the American nation in one sweeping censure for the conduct of a portion, and that the worst portion of it. I much regret that any expressions should be made use of in our public journals calculated to give rise to any unfriendly feeling towards a people so closely allied to ourselves in the principles of civil and religious liberty, in language, manners, and institutions-a people to whom we are indebted for so many valuable additions to our theological literature, and for some of the purest and brightest examples of living excellence. I sincerely trust that no feelings of selfishness or envy may prevail amongst us, or ever render us insensible to real worth, in whatever country it may be found, or in whatever sect or party. The good have a common cause, and they should strengthen each others' hands, not impede each others' progress. Instead of seeking for the faults and imperfections of other nations, let us amend our own. Let us reform the ignorance and the brutality of the lower classes in this country, let us ameliorate our severe penal laws, and, above all, let us wash our hands of the blood of the slaves who are perishing by hundreds and thousands in our own colonies. When we have done all this, it will be time enough to concern ourselves with the secret sins of other nations, and to bring to light their iniquities. I wish not to make any comparisons, for they are both unnecessary and invidious; but I should be sorry, indeed, if the reverence and love I feel for my own country should blind me to the improvement and progress of other nations, or prevent my rejoicing in it. I revere the memory of Dr. Priestley, as an indefatigable, pious, and excellent Christian; and, on the same principle, I revere and admire the writings of Dr. Channing, as inspiring an ardent love of virtue and of truth, and impressing the reader with a deep sense of the beauty of holiness. Dr. Priestley elucidated new and striking truths, and Dr. Channing has opened new lights in the moral and spiritual world, to my mind still more than the former; but why are we to set in opposition either their characters or their exertions? It is neither wise nor liberal to do so. Let us be thankful for all the intellectual advantages we receive from various minds, and improve them as we may; and instead of making needless distinctions amongst the good, let us reserve our opposition for oppression and vice, for evils which we can remedy, and which it is our duty to combat; and, even in doing this, let us be careful to do it with that mercy which we ourselves must individually stand in need of. A LOVER OF TRUTH AND FREEDOM. Baptism of John and of Jesus Christ. SIR, To the Editor. I SUBMIT to the consideration of your correspondents the following brief criticism on the baptism of John and of Jesus Christ, mentioned Matt. iii. 11, by the admission of which in your Repository you will oblige yours, &c. JOHN MARSOM. "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentauce; he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." First, then, as to the subject itself baptism. I indeed baptize you with water. I contend, then, that the true rendering of the Greek term baptism is immersion. For this sense of the Greek term I appeal to the Greek Lexicons, and to the writings of the Greeks in general; but we have stronger evidence than that of Lexicons, that is, their practice founded on the meaning of the term, which shews how they understood it; for it is an iucontrovertible fact, that from the days of the apostles to the present time, the Greeks have uniformly baptized by immersion, and have never adopted any other mode. Baptism, then, being immersion, it necessarily supposes an element in which it is performed. The element of John's baptism, however, is expressly said to be water. They were all baptized by him in the river Jordan, Mark i. 5; and so here, I indeed baptize you with water; which leads us to observe, Secondly, that with water is not a proper translation of the original, ev ibar, which is literally in water; so the preposition & is twice rendered in the first verse of this chapter; had it been rendered with, in the passage cited from Mark, as it is in this, it would seem to imply that as they were all baptized with the river Jordan, so also the river Jordan was baptized with them. But further, the rendering of the preposition , with, instead of in, is not only improper, but is also a perversion of the meaning of the passage, which represents baptism as the application of its subject to the element-1 indeed baptize you in water-whereas that rendering represents it as the application of the element to the subject. The known sentiments of the translators, and the influence they were under in making their translation, will naturally account for their retaining the Greek term baptisma untranslated, and for their rendering the Greek preposition &, with, instead of in; for were those words literally translated, the New Testament would every where have condemned the established mode of baptizing. Upon the same principle, the writers of our English Dictionaries studiously avoid making use of any terms which would convey to the reader any idea of the real meaning of the word baptism, of which they give the following explanation :-" To baptize, (baptizo Gr.,) to christen." * "To baptize, to christen, to administer the sacrament of baptism. Baptizer-one that christens, one that admiuisters baptism."+ Those ideas could not possibly be attached to the term baptism by the sacred writers, because the Scriptures were written long before those terms were invented, or had an existence; they, therefore do not give the true meaning of the word. Nor is washing the meaning of the Greek term baptisma; nor can it any where, with propriety, be so rendered, and in some cases such a rendering would be quite ridiculous; for instance, to render the words of our Lord, Luke xii. 50, “I have a washing to be washed with, and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!" And Acts i. 5: "Ye shall be washed with the Holy Ghost not many days hence." The translation of a term, in any connexion in which it may occur, which gives to the passage a sense manifestly absurd, or which obscures or perverts its obvious meaning, cannot be the proper rendering of the word. To immerse and to wash convey two distinct ideas; they are different actions, and each of them have their corresponding terms in the Greek. Why then should they be confounded? Baptizo is to immerse, nipto is to wash. Thirdly, in the words unto repentance, I contend the rendering of the preposi tion 5, unto, in this counexion is incorrect; it should have been rendered upon: I indeed baptize you in water UPON repentance. We have a striking instance of this sense of 5, Matt. xii. 41, and its parallel passage, Luke xi. 32: "They repented," as, at, i. e. “upon the preaching of Jonah." John first preached repentance in order to baptism, Matt. iii. 2. John, says Mark, i. 4, 5, did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance, and those who repented upon his preaching, and gave evidence of their repentance by confessing their sins, were &c. * Dr. Johnson. Walker's Pronouncing Dictionary, baptized by him in the river Jordan. On the contrary, those who came to his bap tism giving no evidence of repentance he rejected, and instead of baptizing them, called them a generation of vipers, and told them to bring forth fruits meet for repentance, Matt. iii. 7-10. John's baptism, therefore, was not unto but upon repentance. Fourthly, He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. Literally, He shall baptize you IN the Holy Spirit and fire; that is, says Whitby," appearing in the emblem of fire." The observations I have made on the substitution of the preposition with for in in the former clause, equally apply to the subject now before us, and therefore need not be repeated. I observe, however, that this substitution represents baptism in the REV. JOHN DAVIS. spirit as the application of the spirit to its subjects, whereas the words in the Holy Spirit evidently represent the spirit as the element in which they were to be baptized. This baptism is also commonly, though very erroneously, denominated the baptism of the Spirit, thereby representing the Spirit as the agent, the baptizer, whereas John expressly states it to be the baptism of Jesus Christ: He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit. I should now proceed to notice the fulfilment of this prediction, as recorded in the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, but to avoid prolixity I forbear, and conclude with submitting these critical observations to the consideration and correction of your learned correspondents. OBITUARY. 1829. May 5, at Calne, in the county of Wilts, the Rev. JOHN DAVIS, at the advanced age of eighty-two. He had been the minister for fifty-two years of what had formerly been denominated the Presbyterian congregation in that town, but for several years more appropriately, the Unitarian. He was a man of strict integrity, of gentle and engaging mauners, modest and unassuming, courteous and affable, devoted to study, and foud of retirement. Residing among such as differed from him in many of what are deemed the essential doctrines of the gospel, he conciliated by the urbanity and mildness of his deportment the respect and good-will of all that were acquainted with him; and of those who were not, there was scarcely known to be one who did not entertain a high regard for him, and speak of him in terms of veneration and esteem. Sensible of the importance of the apostolic injunctions to be temperate in all things, and to let the moderation of a Christian be known unto all men, his desire was, on the one hand, to preserve himself and his people from that zeal which is rash, hasty, and restless, and on the other, from that frigid apathy and indifference which is opposed to every species of improvement. He was solicitous to steer a middle course, and to pursue the noiseless tenor of his way without osteutation or parade. He wished his uniform career to resemble the soft refreshing rain J. M. from heaven, at once free from the impetuosity of the torrent, and the aridity of continued drought. When that intrepid assertor of what he believed to be the original doctrines of the gospel, Dr. Priestley, resided at Calne and its neighbourhood, filling the office of Librarian in the family of the Marquess of Lansdown at Bowood, Mr. Davis was favoured with his acquaintance. He enjoyed the enviable advantage of witnessing the enlarged and enlightened views of a mind replete with the richest stores of scientific and theological knowledge, and the conversatious they held with each other made au impression upon him which was not to be effaced by any subsequent occurrences. Amongst the members of his congregaunremitting tion he experienced an promptitude to shew him every attention, and to do him every office of kindness in their power; the hand of hospitality was always ready to embrace him, and a generous welcome was the regular order of the day. He had seen with much concern the desolating influence of the last enemythe seats of the sanctuary became year after year vacant, and very few could be found that were willing to fill them. He experienced, however, from those that survived every attention that was requisite to make his concluding days com fortable; they soothed the bed of sickness and death, and cheered him with the assurances of their friendly regards to the last. He breathed his dying breath with so much calmness and tranquillity, that his medical attendant, who was present, declared that he never witnessed a more easy, serene, and peaceable departure. His remains were carried to the tomb amidst the regrets and sorrows of considerable numbers of his townsmen, many of whom were of the most respectable rank; and a funeral sermon to his memory, delivered to a very attentive congregation of the same description, by the Rev. Theophilus Browne, who had the honour to be chosen for that purpose, set the seal to the attachment and regard which was retained for him. MRS. MAJOR. June 9, at her house at Carisbrook, in the Isle of Wight, aged 75 years, Mrs. MAJOR, widow of the late Joseph Roche Major, Esq. The deceased was one of the oldest members of the congregation assembling for Divine worship at the Unitarian Chapel, High Street, Newport; she attended the chapel during her whole life, and was a member of the church upwards of fifty years. Her earliest sentiments inclined to Arianism, but long before the writings of Dr. Priestley and others were so generally disseminated, she had become by her study of the New Testament, and the efforts of a mind naturally strong and acute, an Unitarian in the strictest sense of the word, ranking afterwards among those who at that period were commonly but mistakenly styled Socinians. These principles she maintained to the close of her life. She was often heard to express her devout gratitude to the Almighty Disposer of events, that she was so early led to entertain such delightful views of the being and attributes of God as are coptained in the sentiments generally termed Unitarian. These opinions she held from the strongest convictions, and evidenced the sincerity and reality of her faith in the purity and consistency of her life. To support the interests of the congregation to which she belonged, and promote to the utmost of her ability the general diffusion of her much-loved principles, was her chief delight; to partake of the pious pleasures of social worship, her principal enjoyment. Her attachment to the opinions she had espoused, and the practice she approved, subjected her to severe trials, and during a long period she suffered much for conscience' sake ; but her mildness and perseverance neutralized opposition, and triumphed over all persecution. The late Mrs. Major possessed a mind of no common stamp; it was formed upon the maxims of that gospel which it was her delight to study. To increase her love to God and her neighbour was her daily occupation, and her character displayed the Christian graces and vir tues in all their beauty and harmony. The unaffected piety, sterling integrity, and unbounded charity, of this excellent woman, commanded the respect and esteem of her friends; while the urbanity of her temper, the gentleness of her disposition, the sincerity of her hospitality, combined with her humble but dignified manners, secured the affection of all, and endeared her particularly to the young. As a proof of the benevolence of the late Mrs. Major's character, and the general good-will which was entertained towards her, it may be mentioned, that she numbered among her intimate friends persons of every religious party, Dissenters of all sects and persuasions, Protestant and Catholic, and members of the Establishment, and she was equally beloved by all. Every institution that had for its object the diffusion of useful knowledge, received the late Mrs. Major's zealous support; and especially those establishments appropriated to the moral and religious instruction of the children of the lower classes. She took a lively interest in the efforts made by the friends of civil and religious liberty, and warmly advocated the greatest possible extension of those sacred principles throughout the world. On her death-bed she often expressed her heartfelt gratitude to Almighty God that she had been spared to witness the triumphant success of the two great measures which have been lately achieved in this country. The illness which removed this pious woman from her earthly connexions was long and painful; her sufferings were protracted and severe; but the principles which enlightened her life, shone brilliantly to the close of it. No anguish of body could shake the firmness of her mind, while reason retained her seat; no repinings ever escaped her lips; and her faith in the unerring wisdom and infinite benevolence of the God whom she adored, and (to use her favourite expression) her belief that all things would finally work together for good to all his creatures," remained firm to the last. To all her friends the late Mrs. Major exhibited an impressive example of the great advantage of making religion a reality; with her it was not merely the |