nitely great toward sinners, whether they reform or not. If the former have the advantage, even when preaching the mercy of God, and also the additional advantage of urging the terrors of the Lord, which latter argument reason, Scripture, and experience, all unite in proving is by far the most effectual in reproving the vicious and impious, then it is a miserable shift to say, we may as well preach Universalism as eternal punishment, because those who preach the latter doctrine have not reformed all their hearers.

2. But another reason why the foregoing objection does not lie with equal weight against our doctrine, as against that we are opposing, is this:-none urge the doctrine of eternal punishment as an excuse for sinning; -they are not made easy by it;—they cannot silence conscience by it:-but, on the contrary, it is a powerful motive against sin,it makes all who believe it uneasy in their sins; it enforces the remonstrances of conscience, with the most powerful appeals to the judgment, the understanding, and the self love of man. And a man to continue in sin, with these views, has these strong motives drawing him in the opposite direction continually. Whereas Universalism, if believed, enlists the judgment, the understanding, and even self love itself, on the side of sinful indulgence. In preaching to the one we have only to enforce upon the heart the rational convictions of his mind, and we effect our

object. In preaching to the other, the appeals to the heart are warded off by the doctrine of the head, and the arguments to the understanding have but little weight, because the unhallowed affections of the heart conspire therewith in resisting the call to a virtuous reform.

3. But as a farther answer to the reply, which endeavours to turn the above objection against our doctrine, as well as against Universalism, we add, that so long as any man, whatever may be his professed sentiments, lives in sin and opposition to God, so far he is a Universalist. I do not say but that a man may have his judgment convinced that all men will not get to heaven, and yet live in impenitency; but if he is living thus, and yet expects, in some way or other, to get to heaven, this, with respect to himself, is the very essence of Universalism. What is that doctrine but this:-all men, their sins to the contrary notwithstanding, will get to heaven? And what is this man's principle but this :I shall, my sins to the contrary notwithstanding, get to heaven? If it be answered, that Universalists do not expect to get to heaven with their sins, but expect a preparation for heaven, so does this man. They think, some time or other, they know not when; some how or other, they know not how, they shall be prepared for heaven, and then, without fail, shall get there. Precisely so do all think who are living in their sins, and yet are

:

calculating that they shall be saved. So that the reason why all men who hear the doctrine of endless punishment preached, and give their assent to it, as a true doctrine, do not repent, is clearly and evidently this:-such men are, with respect to their own particular cases, building, to all intents and purposes, on the foundation of the Universalists. From this foundation, on which such a man builds his hopes of his own individual happiness, it is the business of the faithful preacher to shake him, by pointing out to him the inconsistency of his individual hopes, even according to his own general system; and by urging upon him that danger which his better understanding acknowledges, with respect to men in general who live in sin. But it is the business of Universalism to build him up in these hopes, by making him believe that the foundation on which they rest is sufficient, not only for himself, but for all mankind; and that he may make his individual hopes and general principles consistent with each other, and so remove all occasion of uneasiness. If then it was difficult to reform him, when his own general system was against him, how much more now, that his general theory in all respects coincides with his individual hopes and inclinations ?*

* On this principle we account, in part, for the spread of Universalism of late through the northern states. Men had a vague idea of a final retribution, as a general principle, but each had hope, by some means

OBJECTION VII.

UNIVERSALISM has never been received nor supported by the orthodox Church, Jewish or Christian.

This objection certainly ought to have weight, and will have weight, in all candid,

or other in his own case. And as long as he was allowed to indulge that hope undisturbed, he rested quite casy. But when a faithful ministry urged, upon his own principles, the necessity of repentance, and the danger of delay, he was made uneasy; he saw the inconsistency of his general faith with his practice; and he was driven to a kind of necessity, either to get a new doctrine, or a new heart. Many, to their great joy, chose the latter. But many others saw in the Universalist doctrine a system that would permit them to live as they had done, while it relieved them from a Scourge that was knotted with their own doctrine, and therefore cut to the quick at every stroke. So that the present apparent prevalence of Universalism is only reducing to a system, and giving a regular form, and establishing upon general principles, feelings and views which already existed in the hearts of many, and which were the foundation on which they built their hopes of escaping misery, each for himself. In proportion as the Gospel is faithfully preached, in the same proportion will such errors show themselves. Hence, as true religion has increased among us, so has this. Existing none the less before, because it was not seen, though now becoming visible, more systematic, and more for. midable. As the champions of truth become more active, and engage unitedly and vigorously in the cause, so the advocates of error more systematically arrange their forces, and more warily engage in their opposi tion. But we are not alarmed about the result of the contest; we only fear for those that may fall in the ranks of the opposition. If we are wrong, our very

reflecting minds. Such cannot but think, if God intended to make a revelation of truth, he would not have made it so obscure, that almost all receive and understand it in a sense infinitely removed from its real meaning. They cannot but believe that the great body of the Jews, the fathers, and in a manner the whole Christian Church, down to the present day, must have had the truth on this point. Universalists are aware of this, and therefore use every means in their power to do away its force. In the very language of the infidels of the last century, they talk much of tradition and superstition, with which they say the world has long been shackled. In the true spirit of their prototype of the last century, I mean the spirit of downright infidelity, they rank the doctrine that they wish to decry on a level with the most absurd doctrines and ridiculous ceremonies that have, for any period, disgraced any part of the professed Christian Church.

We should suppose that men, professing to be believers in revelation, and even assuming the title of Christian ministers, would not run fall will be our heaven,-and upon our opponents' own ground, that evil is necessary to make us prize the good, darkness, that we may value the light,-how much brighter and sweeter will be our heaven! But if they fail, alas for them! their disappointment and misery will be the greater, for having built strong hopes upon a sandy foundation. And what will the end be of them that have acted the chief part in these de lusions?