But this does not

allotments in the universal church. evince that we should not anticipate the arrival, and promote the extension, of a more perfect state. It does not evince that a higher allotment may not await their successors that days of greater purity and brightness may not arrive ;-of purity, when every motive of the Christian minister shall be simply Christian; and of brightness, when the light of truth shall be displayed with greater effulgence. When the Great Parent of all shall thus turn his favor towards his people: when He shall supply them with teachers exclusively of his own appointment, it will be perceived that the ordinary present state of the Christian ministry is adapted only to the twilight of the Christian day; and some of those who now faithfully labor in this hour of twilight will be amongst the first to rejoice in the greater glory of the noon.

CHAPTER IX.

PATRIOTISM.

Patriotism as it is viewed by Christianity-A Patriotism which is opposed to general benignity—Patriotism not the soldier's motive.

WE are presented with a beautiful subject of contemplation, when we discover that the principles which Christianity advances upon its own authority, are recommended and enforced by their practical adaptation to the condition and the wants of man. With such a subject I think we are presented in the case of patriotism.

"Christianity does not encourage particular patriotism in opposition to general benignity."* If it did, it * Bishop Watson.

The duties of the

would not be adapted for the world. subject of one state would often be in opposition to those of the subject of another, and men might inflict evil or misery upon neighbor nations in conforming to the Christian law. Christianity is designed to benefit, not a community, but the world. The promotion of the interests of one community by injuring another— that is, "patriotism in opposition to general benignity," it utterly rejects as wrong; and in doing this, it does that which in a system of such wisdom and benevolence we should expect.- "The love of our country," says Adam Smith, " seems not to be derived from the love of mankind."'*

I do not mean to say that the word patriotism is to be found in the New Testament, or that it contains any disquisitions respecting the proper extent of the love of our country-but I say that the universality of benevolence which Christianity inculcates, both in its essential character and in its precepts, is incompatible with that patriotism which would benefit our own community at the expense of general benevolence. Patriotism, as it is often advocated, is a low and selfish principle, a principle wholly unworthy of that enlightened and expanded philanthropy which religion proposes.

Nevertheless Christianity appears not to encourage the doctrine of being a "citizen of the world," and of paying no more regard to our own community than to every other. And why? Because such a doctrine is not rational; because it opposes the exercise of natural and virtuous feelings; and because, if it were attempted to be reduced to practice, it may be feared that it would destroy confined benignity without effecting a counterbalancing amount of universal philanthropy.

* Theo. Mor. Sent. The limitation with which this opinion should be regarded, we shall presently propose.

This preference of our own nation is indicated in that strong language of Paul, "I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites."* And a similar sentiment is inculcated by the admonition— "As we have therefore, opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith." In another place the same sentiment is applied to more private life;-"If any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith." t

All this is perfectly consonant with reason and with nature Since the helpless and those who need assistance must obtain it somewhere, where can they so rationally look for it, where shall they look for it at all, except from those with whom they are connected in society? If these do not exercise benignity towards them, who will? And as to the dictate of nature, it is a law of nature that a man shall provide for his own. He is prompted to do this by the impulse of nature. Who, indeed, shall support, and cherish, and protect a child if his parents do not? That speculative philosophy is vain which would supplant these dictates by doctrines of general philanthropy. It cannot be applicable to human affairs until there is an alteration in the human constitution. Not only religion therefore, but reason and nature, reject that philosophy which teaches that no man should prefer or aid another because he is his countryman, his neighbor, or his child :-for even this, the philosophy has taught us; and we have been seriously told that, in pursuance of general philanthropy, we ought not to cherish or support our own offspring in preference to other children. The effect of these doctrines, if they

* Rom. ix. 3.

† Gal. vi. 10.

1 Tim. v. 8.

were reduced to practice, would be, not to diffuse universal benevolence, but to contract or destroy the charities of men for their families, their neighbors, and their country. It is an idle system of philosophy which sets out with extinguishing those principles of human nature which the Creator has implanted for wise and good ends. He that shall so far succeed in practising this philosophy as to look with indifference upon his parent, his wife, and his son, will not often be found with much zeal to exercise kindness and benevolence to the world at large.

Christianity rejects alike the extravagance of patriotism and the extravagance of seeming philanthropy. Its precepts are addressed to us as men with human constitutions, and as men in society. But to cherish and support my own child rather than others; to do. good to my neighbors rather than to strangers; to benefit my own country rather than another nation, does not imply that we may injure other nations, or strangers, of their children, in order to do good to Here is the point for discrimination-a point which vulgar patriotism and vulgar philosophy have alike overlooked.

our own.

The proper mode in which patriotism should be exercised is that which does not necessarily respect other nations. He is the truest patriot who benefits his own country without diminishing the welfare of another. For which reason, those who induce improvements in the administration of justice, in the maxims of governing, in the political constitution of the state or those who extend and rectify the education, or in any other manner amend the moral or social condition of a people, possess incomparably higher claims to the praise of patriotism than multitudes of those who receive it from the popular voice.

That patriotism which is manifested in political

partizanship, is frequently of a very questionable kind. The motives to this partizanship are often far other than the love of our country, even when the measure which a party pursues tends to the country's good; and many are called patriots, of whom both the motives and the actions are pernicious or impure. The most vulgar and unfounded talk of patriotism is that which relates to the agents of military operations. In general, the patriotism is of a kind which Christianity condemns; because it is "in opposition to general benignity." It does more harm to another country than good to our own. In truth, the merit often consists in the harm that is done to another country, with but little pretensions to benefiting our own. These agents therefore, if they were patriotic at all, would commonly be so in an unchristian sense.

Upon the whole, we shall act both safely and wisely in lowering the relative situation of patriotism in the scale of Christian virtues. It is a virtue; but it is far from the greatest or the highest. The world has given to it an unwarranted elevation-an elevation to which it has no pretensions in the view of truth; and if the friends of truth consign it to its proper station, it is probable that there will be fewer spurious pretensions to its praise.