that the sins of a nation are no more effaced by the mere lapse of time, than those of an individual; that as the sins of youth often find out the sinner, even here, in his age, and will find out every unrepenting sinner in the world to come; so too whatever nation sins against God, their sin remains written against them, until wiped out by a national repentance.
It is no idle speculation then, whether our national sin has been repented of: and surely, we cannot but answer that as restitution is in this instance possible, without restitution there can be no true repentance[1]. The very nature of
- ↑ It would be easy to show that this is no new opinion; perhaps indeed there are few of our great divines who have not expressed the same judgment. We are told that in a critical period of the great Rebellion King Charles the First, reviewing his own sins and those of his people, while he prayed "forgive I beseech thee my personal and my people's sins, which are so far mine as I have not improved the power Thou gavest me for Thy glory and my people's good;" bound himself by a written promise to a solemn act of repentance, first, for the legal murder of Strafford; which as restitution was impossible, could only be done by penance: next, for the sacrilege in question, for which, as restitution was possible, repentance could be shown no otherwise. The words of his vow with regard to the latter are remarkable.
"I do here promise and solemnly vow, in the presence and for the service of Almighty God, that if it shall please the Divine majesty of His infinite goodness, to restore me to my just kingly rights, and to re-establish me in my throne; I will wholly give back to His Church, all those impropriations which are now held by the crown; and what lands soever I do now, or should enjoy, which have been taken away either from any episcopal see, or any cathedral or collegiate church,
