IT has ever been customary to shew respect, by funeral rites, to the memory of the deceased, who have been eminently useful in the world. The manner of observing ceremo­nies, in honor of the dead, and to express grief and mourning on their account, hath been va­rious, in different ages and nations: Even the same people have varied in the manner and de­gree of their mourning, according to the char­acter or station of the deceased, and the degree in which they have been useful. God's cho­sen people were accustomed to observe such rites; several instances of which are upon re­cord in the scriptures. When Jacob died, even the Egyptians mourned for him three [...]re and [Page 6] ten days, GEN. 1. 3. And when the children of Israel and the Egyptians went to bury him in the land of Canaan, they mourned for him seven days, in the threshing-floor of A [...]ad, with a grievous mourning, Verses 10, 11. when Josiah di­ed, all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for him, and Jeremiah lamented for Josiah, and all the singing-men and singing-women spake of Josiah in their lamentations to this day, and made them an ordinance in Israel; and, behold, they are written in the lamentations, 11. CHRON. XXXV. 25. A very great burning was made in honor of Asa, king of Judah, 11 CHRON. xvi. 14. When Aaron died, all the house of the children of Is­rael mourned for him thirty days, NUM. XX. 29. So, also, the children of Israel wept for Moses, in the plains of Moab, thirty days.

It may be said that this is paying too much respect to man: I would reply, that it is not to man, but to worth—not to any one, merely as a man, but as a worthy and good man, and one deserving such respect. It may also be ob­jected, that it is a mere waste of time and ex­pense. So, when the woman came, with an ala­baster-box of very precious ointment, and pour­ed it on our Saviour's head, which he deemed a good work, his disciples had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? But she did it for his burial, MAT. xxvi. 13. It may be said also that those rites were observed in times of ignorance and superstition: But they have not been confined to those ages; the more on enlight­ened, [Page 7] and the most polished people have, in some way, expressed their veneration for illus­trious men after their decease. In the present century, there has been an instance of one, whose death was noticed in a religious manner throughout England and America, the Rev. GEORGE WHITEFIELD, who departed this life on the 30th of September, 1770, in New-England. Many funeral sermons were preach­ed on the occasion, containing high eulogiums of his piety—zeal, and usefulness.

Another great star has fallen in America: A great man has departed this life, in several res­pects, the greatest man that hath graced the present century, in any part of the world, his Excellency General GEORGE WASHINGTON, late Commander in Chief of the armies of the United States: He died at Mount Vernon, on Saturday, the 14th instant, "mature in years, covered with glory, and rich in the affections of the American people." It is not in our pow­er to speak his worth, or fully express our grief, yet it would be criminal to decline the attempt, however feeble. We shall, therefore, endeavor to improve the affecting and mourn­ful occasion, by attending to the words before us, in the manner following:

I. By drawing a parallel between the char­acters of Moses and Washington.

II. By shewing the propriety of a general mourning throughout the United States, on the present occasion.

[Page 8] First—We shall endeavor to improve the occasion, by drawing a parallel between these two illustrious characters. They bear a great resemblance, as to their personal virtues, and their public usefulness. 1. These great men may be compared with respect to the government of the passions. Moses was a meek man; there were but few instances of his yielding to the government of his passions, although he had much to try him, and was a man of like pas­sions with other men. It was undoubtedly a just indignation which moved him to slay the Egyptian who was barbarously smiting one of his burdened brethren. Stephen seems to justi­fy him, in ACTS vii. 24, And seeing one of his brethren suffer wrong, he defended him, and a­venged him that was oppressed, and slew the E­gyptian. Moses cannot, however, be justified for his conduct at the waters of Meribah Ka­desh: He trespassed against the Lord; they provoked his spirit so that he spoke unadvisedly with his lips. But, considering his trials and provocations, he well deserved to be stiled a meek man; and one or two instances of pas­sion ought not to deprive him of that charac­ter.

Those of you, my brethren, who were ac­quainted with the character of General Wash­ington, have undoubtedly anticipated what may be said of his resemblance to Moses in this res­pect: He had like trials, and like passions, yet he was equally calm and tranquil. It is said [Page 9] he was naturally passionate; but, from his youth, he so governed his passions, as very sel­dom to discover them at all. The only noted instance that I recollect, was in the year 1776, on York-Island, when a part of the army, sta­tioned in a breast-work, to oppose the landing of the British, in a dastardly and confused man­ner, fled before an inferior force: He was so irritated at the cowardice of his men, and so af­fected with a sense of the danger and disgrace to which his country was thereby exposed, that be hazarded his own person, in rear of his men, facing the enemy for a considerable time: But when we consider the importance of the cause in which he was engaged, and all the surround­ing circumstances, we cannot but overlook this single instance of passion. 2. These sages al­so resembled each other in self-denial. Moses had great inducements to continue in the Egyp­tian court, but he refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing rather to suffer af­fliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season. And how great was the self-denial of the ever-venerable Wash­ington, in forsaking the splendor—enjoyment, and tranquillity of his independent estate, and submitting to the fatigues—sufferings, and dan­gers of the army. 3. These patriots may be compared, also, on account of the work that each performed, in conducting a nation to free­dom, and independence. Moses was the great instrument, by which the Israelites were brought [Page 10] from under the unjust and cruel Egyptian bon­dage. And who, that saw the American revo­lution, is not sensible that Washington was [...] qually instrumental in leading us to freedom, from under the British yoke.

We may here take notice of one or two cir­cumstances which bear considerable resem­blance in their great work. 1. The number of people, which each of these heroes conducted to liberty, was nearly the same: The number of the children of Israel was about three millions; and that was nearly the number that were born to freedom in the day of the American revolution. 2. These men conducted not only the milita­ry, but also the civil concerns of their respec­tive nations. It is abundantly evident, from the sacred history, that Moses was, under God, almost the sole director in both those depart­ments, to the Israelites. So, Washington, while he superintended the army, and fought our bat­tles, during that tedious struggle, in which we arose into existence as a nation, by epistolary communication, afforded, unto Congress, much light and assistance, especially in cases of diffi­culty and perplexity; and in a considerable measure guided our councils while he led our armies. 4. These great men were much alike as warriors. The Israelitish hero, at all times of danger, manifested great firmness, prudence, and courage; one instance of which, was when the Israelites were encamped by the Red Sea: Closely pursued by the Egyptians, the people [Page 11] were sore afraid, and murmured against Mo­ses, saying, Wherefore hast thou dealt thus with [...]; hast thou taken us away to die in the wilder­ness? But his heart did not faint; he said un­to the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord. In several instances, during the war between Great-Britain and A­merica, there were seasons as dark and gloomy as that of the Israelites, and the people were as sorely afraid; but the American Moses hush­ed the murmurs of the people—dispelled the gloom, and opened a passage through the wa­ters. Fully to describe the martial talents which Washington displayed in the seven years of that war, would require much time, and a masterly pen. 5. They may be compared for their patriotism or ardent love to their coun­trymen. Moses loved his brethren more than his own life. When they had made the image of a calf, and worshipped it, the anger of the Lord waxed hot against them, and he threaten­ed to destroy them; but Moses stepped in, and stood between them and the devouring wrath: Yea, he plead with God the attachment between him and Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: He plead also that they were God's people, whom he had brought out of the land of Egypt, with great power, and likewise, what their enemies would say of all this work, if they were destroyed: He also plead the promise and oath of God, that he would multiply the seed of Abraham, and give them the promised land: Moreover, [Page 12] he offered his own life a ransom for them:—If thou will forgive their sin, and if not, blot me, [...] pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast writ­ten, EXOD. xxxii. 32. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friend: And how often did our immortal chief put his life in his hand, and step forth be­tween us and danger. If there be any signifi­cation to actions, and certainly there is more than to words, Washington expressed as great love to his country as could be expressed; yea, he gave all the manifestations that could be given, that he was a real and true patriot, in the strictest and highest sense of the word. 6. Washington may be compared to Moses, on ac­count of the meekness—firmness, and tranquil­lity with which he bore the reproaches of those for whom he hazarded his life, and devoted his time and talents. The murmurs of the chil­dren of Israel, against Moses, were as frequent as their trials of any kind; yet, with what meek­ness and patience did he meet them: It was so with our commander in chief: Though he pursued the wisest measures that could have been adopted, in his circumstances, he was re­proached as traitorous, cowardly, and deficient in martial skill; all which he bore with more than manly fortitude and patience: For, like Moses, he seemed to know, that what the peo­ple complained of, they would afterwards see to be most advantageous.

[Page 13] It is presumed that it will be no disparage­ment to either character, to mention some cir­cumstances in which the resemblance does not hold. 1. Moses was a prophet of the Lord, and perhaps the greatest of a mere man, that was ever in the world, and an eminent type of Christ. By the spirit of prophecy, he said un­to the people, The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me, DEUT. xviii. 15. With which of the other prophets hath Christ been thus compared? Moses was then, at least, a­mong the greatest of the prophets: But to this character Washington made no pretensions. 2. There was a difference as to their appoint­ment to office: Moses became the leader of the children of Israel by Divine appointment; and the people consented to it not, until they were convinced that God had chosen him:—Washington was chosen by the people; and succeeding events have abundantly manifested that Heaven approved, and ratified the appoint­ment. There was, indeed, a great resemblance in the manner of their accepting their appoint­ments:—Diffidence in their own abilities to ac­complish such great and arduous undertakings, which always accompanies real greatness of soul, was expressed by them both, and, not with­standing their local and conjugal attachments, they made to other objection; but, with an ar­dent zeal for their oppressed countrymen, and with a pious confidence in the God of Hosts, [Page 14] they accepted their appointments. 3. There is a difference, also, as to the completion of the great work, in which each of them was engaged, of leading a nation to liberty, independence, and glory. Moses, indeed, brought the chil­dren of Israel from under the yoke of Egyp­tian bondage, and they might be said to be free when they were in the wilderness, but he had not the honor, nor happiness, to lead them into the promised land, and see them regularly set­tled, in a state of rest, upon their own soil. But Washington, after leading to victory—disband­ing his army, and, Cincinnatus-like, returning to his farm, had the happiness to see his fellow-citizens dwell, every man under his vine, and under his fig-tree, and none to make them a­fraid.

Secondly—I am to speak of the propriety of a general mourning throughout the United States, on the present occasion.

If it was proper to mourn for one, there is such a similarity in their characters, and useful­ness, that it must, also, be proper to mourn for the other. The propriety of a general mourn­ing, on account of the death of General Wash­ington, will appear, when we consider our ob­ligations for his services—the loss we have sus­tained, and what that providence seems to por­tend by which he was removed 1. His servi­ces to our country, lay us all under obligations to pay this respect to his memory. He might, with great propriety, be stiled the savior of his [Page 15] country. Under God, he was our great deliv­erer from British tyranny, and our preserver from the wreak of that vengeance, which, by contending for our rights, we had provoked We have obtained liberty—independence—a name, and a standing among the nations of the earth, greatly through his instrumentality:—And what returns have we made for the dan­gers and fatigues he underwent for us, and the benefit we received?—Pecuniary compensa­tion he would not accept; he chose rather to be rewarded by the affection and respect of his fellow-citizens: And, my brethren, such is the nature of a sincere affection and respect, for a man of real merit, that it will be lasting: It dies not with the object; but lives with the sur­viving subject, and ought to be expressed in a suitable manner: Yes, my brethren, his name and memory will be honored and respected, and his matchless feats rehearsed as long as there is a pen to write, or a tongue to speak. 2. The propriety of a general mourning, on the pres­ent occasion, will appear, when we consider the loss our nation has sustained. It is now a time when all the nations of Europe, seem uncom­monly eager for conquest and domination, and to delight in war. We may not flatter our­selves, that so extensive and rich a country as America escapes their notice, or is beyond the reach of their avarice and ambition. The man who was our greatest human dependance, and the greatest terror to all our foes, is no m [...]re! [Page 16] As to the influence of his character abroad, our loss is irreparable; and as yet, we know not a Joshua who has the spirit, or can fill the place of the American Moses. Weep and mourn, then, Americans, for great is your loss. 3. The propriety of this will appear, also, when we consider what that providence seems to por­tend, by which he was removed. It becomes us to consider the death of that illustrious man, as providential, and to view the hand of God in the dispensation: Though it may have been in mercy to him, yet we cannot but consider it as a judgment upon this nation. If the righte­ous are taken away from the evil to come, we have reason to apprehend, that his virtuous and patriotic soul is removed from approaching na­tional calamities. We may then weep for our sins, which have drawn down this judgment upon us, and humble ourselves, and mourn in sackcloth and ashes, at the prospect of the ap­proaching calamities which this providence forebodes. Some may think it more proper to consider his death as merely the necessary result of what is called the course of nature, especially since he had arrived nearly to the age which is appointed unto man: But although he was almost sixty-eight years of age, yet he had lived so temperate a life, that his constitution was unimpaired, and his bodily and mental facul­ties remained in full vigor. It might be said of him, as it is of Moses, in the verse imme­diately preceding the text, viz. His eye was not [Page 17] dim, nor his natural force abated. Had he liv­ed to the age of four-score, in all human prob­ability, he would have been, in case of war, like Moses, when he held up his hands while Josh­ua fought with Amalek. We have then great reason to mourn; and our mourning should be sincere and universal. As his services were equally beneficial to the whole, the loss affects all, and one is threatened with danger, as well as another: And as he was no partizan, but a friend and father to the whole of the American people, so all should join, on this mournful oc­casion, and mingle the tears of filial affec­tion and orphan grief.

But, my brethren, although it is not only proper, but a duty incumbent on us, to weep and mourn for our loss, yet there should be due limits to our sorrow, and, in a proper sea­son, our mourning should be ended, or the ex­ternal badges of it taken off; for time cannot entirely efface the memory, of one so dear to us as Washington, from the minds of Ameri­cans. It appears, from the latter clause of our text, that the children of Israel ceased, after thirty days, from observing any funeral rites or ceremonies, on account of the death of Mo­ses, although there was no man, whose memory was more dear to them than his. This is, at least, a circumstantial evidence of the impro­priety of establishing anniversary mournings. The Israelites were not accustomed to appoint an annual observance of any day, in memory [Page 18] of their departed heroes and sages, as they were on some other occasions; but, in general, when they had mourned a proper season, the days of their mourning were ended. Lamentations for Josiah were indeed made an ordinance in Israel, and were written in the Lamentations; but it does not appear that this ordinance con­sisted in an anniversary mourning. The daugh­ters of Israel, also, went yearly to lament the daughter of Jepthah, the Gileadite, four days in a year, JUDGES xi. 40. But this seems to have been on account of the very extraordinary cir­cumstances of her death, rather than of any distinguishing merit in her.

One great reason why such establishments of anniversary mournings, would be improper, is, that succeeding generations cannot so sensibly feel the loss, as to observe the day in sincere mourning; thus the object of the establishment would be lost, and the day converted into a season of revelling and licentiousness. We have sufficient evidence of this, from the instan­ces of saint-days that have been appointed by the Papists: We have seen in what manner they have been abused, even to such a degree as to become a disgrace to the once honored saints.