in declaiming on the future misery of the ungodly; but it is my duty to warn them to flee from the wrath to come, and to do so in the language which God employs for that purpose, without endeavouring to fritter it down to a sense less awful than its obvious import. As to the inconsistencies and contradictions betwixt my sermons and letters, they are of no consequence to the point in question,— that must be determined by the word of God, independent of any sermons or letters of mine. You seem horrified at the idea of God having pleasure in the punishment of the wicked; and certainly I rejoice to know, that he has no delight in punishment, for its own sake; but if it be a righteous thing in God to recompense tribulation to his enemies,—the righteous Lord must love righteousness, and must of course have pleasure in the punishment of the incorrigible, for the vindication of the honour of his government; just as a wise and good magistrate, who, while he deprecates the necessity of punishment, nevertheless has pleasure in the execution of the laws, for the sake of the benefits thence resulting to society. It was in this sense, I used the expression so obnoxious to you; but I presume, no candid hearer of mine, would require an explanation, although a person disposed to quibble, perhaps might.

Again-The worm that dieth not, and the fire that never shall be quenched, are, in your opinion, parallel with the magnificent phraseology of Isaiah. I beg you, however; to recollect, that he writes in, the hyperbolical style of eastern poetry; and our Lord, and his apostles, deal only in plain prose. From the former, we must expect high-coloured figures, from the latter, nothing but blunt truth. My offence consists in repeating the passage in Mark, as I found it, in saying that the wicked shall remain for ever, under the operation of the deathless worm, and quenchless fire. Here you retort upon me by saying," Is it necessary for me to tell you, that not the sufferings, but the agents, are here said to be eternal." So then, you admit that the agents shall be eternal! Permit me to inquire, for what purpose? I think this admission fatal to your argument.

Farther-You confess you do not know the process, nor the discipline, by which those who die in unbelief, shall be reclaimed. Now, I do know the process, and discipline, the only process, or: discipline, by which God reconciles rebels to himself. It is by the death of his Son, and by faith in that death. Of course, I conclude, that he who does not now feel himself reconciled to God, by this all

powerful means, has no reason to believe, that he shall ever be reclaimed by any other process, or discipline, whatever. He who will not be persuaded to relinquish his sins, though one rose from the dead, is (I conceive), not very likely to become better disposed by dying himself.

Again-You ask me, whether I do not devoutly desire the general restoration, for which you plead, and inferring my answer in the affirmative,—you thence adduce an argument in favour of your hypothesis. Now, unless you are a thorough-paced disciple of Swanston, and believe sin and misery to be very agreeable to the will of God, consequently both very good of their kind, I say, if this is not your opinion, then were I to ask you,“ do you not desire that sin and misery had never existed?" You would reply, certainly I do. Now, supposing I were from thence to adduce an argument, in favour of their non-existence, would you not pronounce it the consummation of absurdity? You would; yet it

would not be more absurd, than is the one in question, which you have adopted.

Lastly-The universality of the atonement, furnishes, in your opinion, irrefragable proof of the certainty of universal restoration. To this I reply, first

Did men resemble degenerate vegetables, or disordered machines, proper culture, and mere physical force, would insure favourable results; but this is not the case. Man is a free and a moral agent, and can be restored to holiness and happiness, only by moral means; and those employed by his Maker, in the gospel; are admirably adapted to that end. But, should they fail, no physical force whatever, either on earth or in hell, will be employed to conquer the obstinacy of his nature; and that they do fail, in innumerable instances, the scriptures sufficiently assure us. God's people shall be willing in this the day of his power; but his enemies, who will not that he should reign over them, are to be slain before him. So, at least, says the Lord Jesus, but adds no hint of a resurrection ⚫ from the second death. But, secondly

The Saviour says, of many of those for whom the heavenly feast was prepared (of course for whom he died), but who despised his gracious invitation to the banquet, that none of the men, who were bidden, should taste of his supper. How they shall be excluded, from the marriage supper of the Lamb, and yet be ultimately restored to holiness, and happiness, I leave you to determine.

I observe, you lay some stress on the opinions of the fathers, of the second and third centuries. Now, it would be easy to prove, that these are decidedly against you, with a very few exceptions, and those by no means the most respectable. Origen, for instance, a corrupt disciple of the Alexandrian school, was an admirer of the Eastern, or Hindoo philosophy, and endeavoured, to the utmost of 'his power, to engraft many of its tents, on the stock of christianity. He believed, or rather speculated, on the restoration both of men and devils; the purification of departed souls, first on the earth, and then in the air; the possibility of their again falling into sin, even in heaven; and their consequent transmigration into other bodies, by way of punishment, and renewed probation. Such were the opinions of Father Origen; but to show how differently his cotemporaries thought on these points, he was, after his death, excommunicated from the church. The Apostle foretold, that after his decease, men would arise in the church, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them; and this prediction was awfully fulfilled, so early as the second and third centuries, and even long before. It is probable, that infant sprinkling, commenced about that period; and some of its advocates triumphantly tell us, of Father this, and Father that, who wrote in favour of the antichristian absurdity. But you, I presume, would tell them, you gave not a straw for the opinions of the Fathers, when they contradicted the lively oracles. Take then the same answer from me, and I shall add, that the opinions of Origen, and the doctrines of the counsels of Nice and Trent, are with me of equal weight,—and that is just none at all.

I shall conclude this letter with a few observations on the general tendency of your system. First,-It has an obvious tendency to relax the influence of the fear of God in the human mind, "Who knows," says the Psalmist, "the power of thy wrath as thy fear is, so is thy wrath."." For fear of thee," says the same speaker, " my flesh doth tremble; and my soul is much afraid of thy righteous judgements.".. "The wrath of God is revealed from heaven in flaming fire, against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men;" and our Lord commands even his disciples "to fear him, who, after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell:" and emphatically adds, "yea, I say unto you, fear him." I believe the first impressions of the majesty of God, on the mind of guilty man, arise from the terrible apprehensions he feels of the divine wrath. But your system

goes far to relieve him from any such terrible apprehensions, by assuring him that they are, in a great measure, groundless; that the doctrine of eternal torments, is a mere engine of the clergy, to keep the people in check; that future punishment, however severe, will be but temporary; that, when compared to an eternity of bliss it will be but "light afflictions, which are but for a moment;" and will, of course, ultimately work for the sufferers, "a far more exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory." Thus, instead of saying to the wicked, "Oh! wicked man, thou shalt surely die,”—it tells him, that he shall ultimately have peace, though he now walk in the ways of his heart, and the sight of his eyes, and add drunkenness to thrist.

If this does not obviously tend to relax the influence of the fear of God, on the human mind, I confess, I know not what does. I do not wonder if you are shocked at this statement, of the legitimate consequences of your principles; but that the conclusions are fairly deducible from the premises, Mr Swanston has saved me the trouble of proving. He proudly asserts them, and argues ably in support of them; and supposing his premises to be correct, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for a more cautious, though perhaps less honest Universalist, to disencumber himself of his conclusions, of which I have not stated the worst. Had he wrote a refutation of Universalism, I do not know that he could have done so more effectually, than he has done in the work in question, for he has certainly exposed the system, in all its naked deformity. It is affecting to observe with what approbation his principles, as promulgated by you, are received by some ungodly people in this place; one of whom declared, that he thought your work excellent. If, indeed, these are not your principles (as you have given the world reason to think they are) then a public disavowal, on your part, is a duty to the souls you may have injured.

Secondly-The system is eminently calculated to prevent any exertion for the spread of the Gospel. How indeed can it be otherwise? If the knowledge and belief of the Gospel is not necessary, in order to eternal happiness, and if the knowledge and abuse of it will, at all events, greatly increase the amount of intermediate misery; then the propriety of doing any thing to facilitate its promulgation, may, in a moral and philanthropic point of view, be fairly questioned, and if the question be answered at all, it must be in the negative. Of this negative, the Editor of the "Gospel

K

hell, and all the nations that forget God;" another, and another, assures us, that they shall be redeemed from hell-that "all nations shall serve him;" and that "he shall inherit all nations." One passage tells us that the Sodomites are "suffering the vengeance of eternal fire;" another declares-long after they were a people extinct, and known to be in hell-"I will bring again the captivity of Sodom." Well, then, let me ask,-have you any way of reconciling these passages? You have not. Why then are you so tenacious of the doctrine of endless damnation, and so hostile to the glorious doctrine of universal reconciliation; which, alone, can open up, and clear your way? Were those passages of a merciful, and those of a damnatory aspect, even balanced, throughout the scriptures, you might have some shadow of - excuse for your awful dogma; but you must admit the cheering fact, that the passages which bear an aspect of mercy to mankind, as sinners, in general, are both more numerous, and more plain, than those of an opposite tendency, that where sin abounded, grace did much more abound. What, then, is the conclusion we ought to draw from this? Why if we saw those passages balanced, as it were, in even scale, we might, even in that case, be justified in giving God the glory, by leaning to the side of mercy, as respected his dealings with mankind; but much more so, when we see pardon and mercy-which are styled his darling attributes-superabounding throughout the sacred volume.

But we may observe farther; there must be some way by which to reconcile those seemingly contradictory passages of scripture, or the scriptures must be chargeable with absurdity. Now, I have asked before, and I shall ask again,-Is there any possible way by which you can reconcile them upon your scheme? There is not. If, then, under such circumstances, we can perceive, by comparing the language used in scripture, with the accomplishment of the events described by the said language (and this, as before noticed, is the true way to ascertain the meaning of the scriptures); if we can perceive, I say, that the Lord has, in all ages, attached a meaning to certain words and expressions, different from the meaning we are in the habit of of attaching to them-and if this is calculated to solve the difficulty, here the matter ought to rest, and every mouth to be shut before God.

If it can be clearly seen from the result, that the punishments described by burning fire, fire unquenchable, burning pitch, and