r tl '^": '.''

'-" ¦ iff i '
t%ho

C7

UNIYEHSALISM
EXAMINED, RENOUNCED, EXPOSED;
IN
A SERIES OF LECTURES,
EMBRACING
THE EXPERIENCE OF THE AUTHOR DURING A
MINISTRY OF TWELVE YEARS,

THE TESTIMONY OF UNIVERSALIST MINISTERS TO
THE DREADFUL MORAL TENDENCY
OF THEIR FAITH.

MATTHEW HALE SMITH.

BOSTON.
PUBLISHED BY TAPPAN & DENNET.
NEW YORK: DAYTON & NEWMAN; SAXTON & MILES.
PHILADELPHIA: PERKINS & PURVES.
1842.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1842, by
Matthew Hale Smith,
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.

stereotyped at the
boston type and stereotype foundry.

CONTENTS

LECTURE I.
PAGE.
RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE, .  1
LECTURE II.
REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, ARISING
FROM THE DIFFICULTIES THAT ATTEND ITS DE
FENCE, ...  55
LECTURE III.
REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN
FROM THE THREATENINGS OF THE BIBLE, ... 88
LECTURE IV.
REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, DRAWJN
FROM THE ARGUMENTS ADDUCED IN SUPPORT OF
THE DOCTRINE,  148
LECTURE V.
UNIVERSALISM NOT SUSTAINED BY THE ARGUMENTS
IN ITS FAVOR DERIVED FROM THE LIGHT OF NA
TURE,  177
LECTURE VI.
REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN
FROM ITS MORAL RESULTS,  214

IV CONTENTS.

LECTURE VII.
ARGUMENT AGAINST UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN FROM
FUTURE JUDGMENT,  353

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS,
IN RELATION TO UNIVERSALISTS AND UNIVERSALISM, 383

LECTURE I.

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.

PSALM lxvi. 16.
COME ASH HEAR, ALI. YE THAT FEAR GOD, ATiD I WILL DECLARE
WHAT HE HATH DONE FOR MY SOUL.
In these words of the monarch David, there is a
singular and a beautiful propriety. On matters be
longing to his kingdom, he would have called for his
national council. On subjects of taste or refinemeHt,
he would have invited the gifted and cultivated to
his presence-chamber. But when he spoke of the
dealings of God with himself, the influence and
operation of the Holy Spirit upon and within' his
own soul, he sought the society, the sympathy,,
and attention, of those who feared God. Monarch
though he was, he was not ashamed to own the
work of God upon his soul. Surrounded by the
great, and encompassed with all the sptendor that
ever shone upon an Eastera throne, he eotild so
far forget his princely position, as to call upon
some of the humblest in the land to come and hear
what God had done for his soul. Por those only»
who feared God, could sympathize with his an
guish, appreciate the distress through which' he had'
1

2 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
passed, or share the deliverance and rapture which
God had wrought in his soul.
I have thought these words appropriate to my
own case, and to this occasion. If my soul has
been transformed, and my heart renewed, God has
done it. If my feet have been taken from the way
of death, -r- if my work is changed from leading souls
to ruin, to turning them into the path of life, — the
glory belongs to God. And if I shall ever be of
any service in the kingdom of God's dear Son, and
shine at last with those who have turned many to
righteousness, the Holy Ghost has been the agent,
by whom it has been effected. Why, then, should
I not turn and give the glory to God?
And to whom shall I speak of what God has
done for my soul, if not to those who fear God?
Were the theme of my discburse pleasure, vanity,
or sensuality, I should call upon the lovers of
pleasure more than of God, the sons and daughters
of vanity, and the slaves of sensuality, to hear mb :
and I should address them upon a theme, and in
language, they could well understand. But my
single purpose now is to magnify the grace of God
. in the salvation of my soul ; to tell what God has
done for me ; to show you the way in which, the
Lord has led me, in brmging me up from death to
life. Many have no faith in the saving of the
soul by the Holy Ghost. Many regard the operation
of God's truth upon the heart, as a work that exists
only in the imagination. In respect to such a
change, by such an agency, the scoffer lifts a bold,
blaspheining voice. To speak to such, to ask them

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. d
to come and hear what God has done for my soul,
would be folly. Few would be disposed to hear
what they do not understand ; and of that few, the
most, having prejudged the case, would " speak
evil of the things that they understood not." To
those, then, who fear God, I must speak, if I would
have my subject appreciated ; though all may feel
interest enough to bestow a respectful attention upon
this lecture.
The design of the course of lectures, of which this is
the first, is to present the reasons which have led me
from Universalism, and induced me to leave a 'minis
try to which I have devoted twelve years of the best
part of my life. In doing this, I respond to the call
of the defenders of Universalism, and perform a work
which they have professed themselves eamestly de
sirous to have performed. They invite, nay, challenge
inquiry. They are confident that Universalism is
opposed because it is not understood ; they complain
that their expositions of Scripture are unnoticed ; that
their arguments in defence of Universalism are either
not examined at all, or lightly passed over; that
doctrines are attributed to them, which they have
never received, and which they disavow ; and that
those who speak of the moral tendency of Universal
ism know not of what they affirm.
My acquaintance with Universalism enables me to
speak advisedly in relation to its practical tendency.
An experience of years with the system and its
friends, a settlement over one of the largest con
gregations of Universalists in the country, and an
extensive acquaintance with the preachers of the

4 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
system in all parts of the country, fit me to bear
aii .intelligent testimony as to that system, and to
state what I know and have seen.
In discoursing upon Universalism, I presume to
speak as one familiar with my subject. Its doctrines
I learned in childhood. Its arguments I wielded
while I had cpnfidence in them ; and only resigned
thein when I was convinced that they were unsound.
Its moral tendency I know too well; its influence
upon man, and the best good of man, I have repeatedly
seen, And it is but just to say that its results are
TJipiform ; one tendency distinguishes it ; it bears one
kind 0,:^ (ruit ^ i% every where is peculiar for one sort
of iiiQi^ence ; and is ever characterized by the same
results. Describe its triumphs in one place, and you
describe, them in alL Exhibit its tendency in one
Qase,j and you have a picture of the system every
wh^re,. Ijf^el most: forcibly the peculiar circumstances under
which I speak. I am expected to exhibit reasons
vij^hiph have led ijie from a defence of,, and a belief in,
Universalism. My doubts touching the truth of Uni
versalism were not of my own seeking. They came
unbidd,en, and were unwelcome. I had no desire
to lea,ve Universalism. It was; bound up with my
earliest associations. Nearly aU my relations and
acquaintances were of that faith. For it I felt the
highest attaehment, and my desire was to live in its
djsfence, and die in its embrace.. And I cannot
describe my w;retchedness when I found myself sur
rounded with doubts,, and my system opposed by
difficulties, th9,t I could; not remove. Against my

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 5
wish, I was compelled to listen to those difficulties
and objections. And when I sat down to remove
them, I arose from my work convinced that the
attempt had only added to the number, and increased
my labor.
This to me was a source of very great anxiety and
trouble. Conflicts before unknown assailed me. Dis
trust, fear, and perplexity, multiplied on each side,
and well nigh overcame me. And when I finally
abandoned Universalism, the step was not a hasty one.
The conflict cost me almost my life. Nor was it for
want of dete-mination or desire on my part, that these
difficulties were not removed, and my mind set forever
at rest on my former faith. But no relief or comfort
could I gain until my refuge of lies was abandoned,
and I, EIS a penitent, sought, and, as I trust, obtained,
mercy at the foot of the cross of Christ.
In this course of lectures I shall lay before you this
whole process. I hope to do all this work in a kind
spirit. It has been my prayer to my Savior, that
nothing may appear in these lectures which shall
exhibit any spirit save that which he will own and
bless. While I speak plainly, I wish to do it kindly.
And while the only severity that will appear will be
the severity of truth, I desire to "speak the truth
in love." I have no animosities to revenge, no
passion to gratify. I bear Universalists no hatred. I
leave behind me many persons whom I would most
gladly take away from a system to which they and
I have been too long and too fondly attached. I
believe them to be attached to a ruinous error, to
a fatal delusion ; as fatal to the soul as the deadliest
1*

Q-, RELIGIOUS; EXPERIENCE.
poison is to the , body ; that the way in which they
walkj though it seemeth right to them, is the way of
destruction I — "the,end. thereof lis death." I believe
the whole tendency of Universalism to be baleful in
the extreme to the best interests of our race, and that
its ministryis engaged, in the ruin of souls, and every
wllere is stained^ with their; blood. I speak from the
character which my own labors have borne in that
c^use, and from my knowledge ofthe results of Uni
versalism. My. reasons for these opinions I shall lay
before you. I have no learned essay to present. I
d§,sign to meet Universalism as it is ; to give you the
result of my own sad experience upon this subject;, and
t© say afew plain things in a plain way ; to prove that
tlftiversalism fhas no claim upon anyxational'mind; to
seibforthithe: withering. power of error; to lift a warn
ing voice, and ,bddrall| not yet insnared, to shun a
delusion, which!, with a siren song, and with assur
ance of safety, leads down to everlasting despair all
who , trust, its teachmg.
The 1 present, lecture, consisting of a mere recital
of myr own t feeMgs,. experience, and ; investigation
uppn Universalism, demands, perhaps, = an apology
foEi introducing, it. Indeed, did I consult my own
feeUngs, I should strike this lecture from my course.
It lis not pleasant thus to speak of myself, to recall
harrowing and painful, scenes. Nor do I attach
importance enough to my personal feelings, to give
themfthe prominence which they hold in this lecture.
Bmt my friends, in whose judgment I place more
confidence , than , iiv, my own^ have urged me not
toj.omit.it, as it seems desirable that the process

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 7'

i4.ould accompany the result. I have been induced'
to waive all considerations of a personal: character,
to hush all suggestions arising from considerations of
delicacy, and at once approach the subject of this
lecture, — my religious experience,
MY EARLY LIFE.
Those who have enjoyed early religious^ instruc
tion, who in youth have been counselled^ and in
early life have been taught, of God ; who have grown
up under impressions made around the family altar,
and have all their life been followed by religious in
fluences, — can poorly sympathize with me. I never
enjoyed early religious instruction. In my father's
house there was no family altar ; , no voice of prayer
was there heard; no reading of the Bible as an act
of worship, I'never enjoyed the benefit of Sabbath
school instruction ; no friend told me of God ; no
one instructed me to lisp his name, or fear his law.
I have no recollection of having ever passed a night
in my life, till I was more than twenty years of age,-
in a house in which there was family prayer, or the
reading of the Bible, as an act of religious worship;^
My earliest recollections as to religion are identified
with Universalism. My first impressions upon • the
subject are very distinct at this hour. I thought the
gospel was designed simply to teach that men would '
not be damned ; that, however men died, God would
make all equally happy at death; that the Bible,
beside this, taught -little else that was impOr4;ant or'
interesting, and, on the whole, . was rather a ' dull

8 religious experience.
book. The Sabbath I was taught to regard as a day
of rest from toil, but not from sport ; and no one who
had influence upon my childhood interposed any
restraint from my doing my own pleasure upon the
holy Sabbath. When I was six years of age, my
father embraced the doctrine of Universalism, and
became a preacher of the system. Nearly all that
I heard upon the subject of religion, was favorable to
Universalism ; nearly all my relatives were of that
faith ; and almost all my acquaintances received the
same sentiments. Very early I imbibed a hatred
toward all systems that differed from this. So soon
were the seeds of error planted in my heart — seeds
watered by impure counsels and hurtful instructions.
FIRST SERIOUS IMPRESSIONS.
When I arrived at the age of sixteen years, my
attention was turned to the subject of personal
religion. A seriousness prevailed among many of my
associates, the influence of which I felt. Religion
seemed to me a great concern. I thought that my
life was not what it should be, and that, to be re
spected, I must change my associates. I knew that
my heart was not right in the sight of God, and that
to die as I then was, would expose me to the wrath
of God. My feelings were enlisted and changed. I
read the Bible with pleasure, and, in some small
meetings, urged my fellow-men to repentance.
But it was my misfortune to be thrown among
a class of professors who belonged to no Christian
denomination. They stood alone as a church ; and,

religious experience. y
though they held to experimental religion, they
rejected nearly all of the essential doctrines of the
gospel. They denied the divinity of Jesus Christ,
the immortality of the soul, and the doctrine of end
less punishment. Though my feelings were excited
upon the theme of religion, my understanding was
not informed. I had no settled religions opinions.
The amount of my faith was this: I believed the
Bible to be an insj»red book ; that Jesus Christ was A
man; and that annihilation was the doom of the
finally impenitent.
At this time, I was thrown into the^ company of
Universalists, and their system was commended to
my attention. I was invited and persuaded to aJteM
their meetings, and was assured that Universalism
and personal piety could harmonize, zmd that one
would be the better Christian, the more d^vOted man,
for receiving that faith. I foiMad the advocates 0?
Universalism frequently using tiertos Which others
employed in connection with religious fiWCh ; and,
presuming them to be sincere, I found myself graswriMg
daily in favor of Universalism. I examined' the argu
ments by which it was supported ; became familiar
with the exposition given to difficult |teits of the
Bible ; and as my early associationfe favored- the claims
of Universalism, I adopted the system When m my
seventeenth year. Believing that Universalism could
do for man what no other system could, I resolved to
enter its ministry. I made vigorous preparations for
the public advocacy of my faith ; and my first sermon
was preached in Medway, Massachusetts, in the month

10 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
of August, 1828 ; at which time I was seventeen years
and ten months old.

FIRST SETTLEMENT.
In the month of December, 1829, I removed to
Vermont, to take charge of two Universalist societies ;
the one being situated in Brattleboro', the other in
Guilford, Having the most unbounded confidence in
my system, I had no doubt that it would work a great
moral change in men, and soon cause the wilderness
to blossom as the rose, I used every exertion to
spread Universalism ; and preached with all the ardor
of youth, and the fervor of sincerity. Universalism
was the only system that I ever embraced till my
present views were adopted. By Universalists I was
ordained; and never was my name enrolled among
any other sect as a preacher, till my present connec
tions were formed, in January, 1841.
At the very outset, I was mortified at the results of
my ministry, and pained with what I saw in those
who were the loudest in their professions of regard for
" the blessed doctrine," as Universalism was usually
called. I saw none of that reform which I expected
would attend my preaching; no moral reformation,
though none needed it more than my personal friends ;
no change for the better, though I saw many changes
for the worse. Indeed, the practical tendencies of my
preaching were not what I had expected to see. They
were not what I saw attending the preaching of the
gospel in the very vicinity in which I labored. I was

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENqE. 11
praised in the bar-rooms, and my health drank in
almost every tavern in the county. On the Sabbath,
my congregation came direct from the tavern to my
meeting, and went as directly back to the tavern
after the meeting. The intermission was usually
passed in discussing the merits of the sermon, not
always in the most decorous terms ; and in drinking
my health, with their best wishes for my success
ful vindication of the salvation of all men. These
meetings were a source of no mean profit to tavern-
keepers in both towns in which I preached; and
one of them, though not a Universalist, avowed
himself to be "a liberal man," and contributed
something to keep our meetings along.
The opposers of Universalism, who were made sad
at my success, who trembled for the rising generation,
and prayed that such sentiments might not prevail, I
considered to be a bigoted and illiberal class of men.
Yet I was compelled to allow that they embraced the
sober, the intelligent, the religious portion of the
community, — that class of self-sacrificing men who
upheld the sacred altar, kept the Sabbath holy, and
feared God.
While those who attended upon my ministry were
called the liberal party, I knew that most of them
were profane men; a large portion were open dis
believers in the inspiration of the Bible ; and nearly
all had been peculiar for their habits of Sabbath
violation, .passing the day in business or in pleasure.
In all things save an attendance upon my preaching,
they remained professedly and really the same. Men
came together, but not to be made better. They

12 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
seemed to desire that their hands might be strength
ened in sin ; and thought the end of preaching to
be, to prove that all retribution was limited to this
life, and that all men would finally be saved. When
occasionally I urged upon my hearers the duties of
lifej and lightly reproved their vices, I was told that
such preaching was decidedly illiberal, and very much
like the. Oythodox. Nor were profaneness, gambling,
Sabbath-breaking, oi infidelity, regarded as in any
respect inconsistent with a profession of Universalism,
One of the officers of my society in Guilford, was
in the habit of going into the adjoinitig towns to hear
me pxea^eh ; amd I have known him repeatedly to pass
nearly the whole of Saturday night in gambling with
young men at a tavern,.-^ young men whom he had in-
vite^to accompany him to meeting. And at the same
time, this individual was engaged in a controversy
in a secular paper with a Methodist clergyman, upon
the moral tendency of Universalism !
I was very much troubled by these considerations.
My labors were not attended with the good results
which I desired, and which, I knew ought to follow a
system of truth. One uniform tendency accompanied
Universalism iai all places. One class of men hailed
the doctrine^ and wished the preacher abund^t suc
cess. .WheHjev^r called to preach in a place which
I had never visited, I knew what the character of
my congregation would be before I saw it. Often
have I been complimented with oaths ; heard the
scoffer and the vile hope the good work would go
on ; and been wished success in language too foul and
offensive to be repeated. When, I saw a man in my

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 13
congregation of an intelligent appearancCj I presumed
him to be an infidel, and never in this respect was
I mistaken. I never supposed that religion was given to make
men worse ; nor to exert the negative influence of not
doing any harm. That it was sent to make men bet
ter, and do for them what nothing else could do, I was
convinced. That such reformations as I desired to
see, did follow the preaching of the Savior and the
apostles, and now attended the preaching of doctrines
different from my own, I could not deny. How,
then, could my faith be correct, and yet be followed
by such fruits? For what purpose was a system,
marked by such tendencies as mine, sent from heaven ?
Often, in the solitude of my study, such questions,
searching and painful, would arise. A still, small
voice would seem to inquire, " Does good attend your
labors ? Are men made better by them ? Do profane
ness. Sabbath-breaking, intemperance, licentiousness,
fly at the approach of your faith, and cease when it
spreads? Do religious fear, godliness, holiness, dis
tinguish its reception among men? What good are
you accomplishing ? Who is made happier or better
by your ministry ? " These reflections troubled me,
and made me unhappy. But they did not shake my
faith in my system. I thought that to be good, but
men to be bad. I consoled myself with the reflection,
that the fault was in the professors of Universalism,
and not in the system.
With such feelings I attended the Franklin Asso
ciation of Universalists which met in Chesterfield,
N. H., in the month of August, 1831, A minister
2

14 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
from New York preached what I then thought to be
one of the greatest sermons I had ever heard. His
avowed object was to clear Universalism from the
charge of being a licentious system. The sermon
was a word in season to me. It met my case,
removed my difficulties, and enabled me to account
for the moral results of my faith without calling its
truth in question.
The argument of the sermon was this : — Love
fulfils the law of God ; smd all men actuated by love
will be obedient and happy — all who do evil are not
under the influence of love, for love worketh no ill to
his neighbor. From this the preacher drew the con
clusion that Universalism is love ; its preaching must
be beneficial ; and if men are immoral who profess
that faith, it is because they do not practise what they
profess. I thought the argument to be conclusive,
and felt great joy that my. difficulty was removed. I
thought that the great hinderance to my defending the
faith with satisfaction was now easily and forever
taken out of the way.
But my joy was of short continuance. I left the
meeting-house with two ministers ; both of whom had
preached Universalism many years, and are now
among its most popular advocates. I mentioned to
them the satisfaction I derived from the sermon. One
of them replied, "But the argument is sophistical.
The real objection has not been removed, nor touched •
and Mr. S. knew it. No one doubts but love will do
all that he says it will. But the point to be proved is
this: Does the preaching of Universalism produce
this love ? And that point the preacher has evaded,"

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 15
His words fell on my ear with power. My difficul
ties returned with sevenfold force. And with them
came the consciousness that my associates had not so
much confidence in Universalism, as they gave their
hearers reason to believe they had. And when, a
few years afterwards, I heard this preacher use the
same argument in defence of Universalism which
he had pronounced sophistical, I had great difficulty
in believing him to be sincere in the defence of his
avowed faith. REMOVAL TO HARTFORD, CONN.
In the year 1832, 1 accepted an invitation to remove
to Hartford, Connecticut, and take charge of the
Universalist society in that place. My labors were
successful, so far as securing a large congregation was
concerned. For me my society professed a great
regard; and in pecuniary matters, they did all that
I could desire. But no good moral results attended
my ministry. Though I expected, and fondly hoped,
to see in the state of Connecticut another class of men
espouse my cause, and different fruits spring from
my labors, than those 1 saw in Vermont, I was dis
appointed. The leading men in the Universalist
society were avowed infidels. And of such the
society had ever been composed. Its founders, those
who built the meeting-house, and who, from the
beginning of the society's existence, had sustained it,
were open infidels. The first minister who preached
in the Universalist meeting-house, found great trouble
from this source ; and finally was dismissed because

16 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
he preached against infidelity, and would not desist
when told that he must. A very large number of the
active men in the society under my charge, avowed
to me their disbelief in the inspiration of the Bible.
A majority of my committee, the clerk of the society,
with seven eighths of the pew-holders, were possessed
of the same opinions. My warmest personal friends,
those the most regular in their attendance on preach
ing, the most liberal in their support of Universalism,
women as well as men, were frank enough to tell
me, in my parochial visits, that they had no more
faith in the Bible than they had in the Koran. Some
few, perhaps, read the Bible to find proof texts of
Universalism ; but, for the most part, few opened it
at all ; and in no case that I ever knew, was it
read in the family as an act of religious duty.
If you ask, why such persons attended meeting at
all, if they were unbelievers in the Bible, I wfll give
you the reason they assigned to me when I proposed
the same question. They thought that superstition,
as they used to call religion, should be checked ; —
that something must be done to keep their wives and
children from being Orthodox ; — the world, they
thought, was not yet quite prepared for a full advo
cacy of truth, and Universalism came so near their
idea of truth, that it was the best thing the world
at present would bear. Hence they supported its
ministry. But the absence of good moral results was not the
only evil with which I was called to contend. I not
only turned no sinner from the error of his ways •
called back no soul from the road of death ; but I saw

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 17
positive evils attending my labors. Many who at
tended my ministry were grossly immoral, and more
were waxing worse and worse.
One fact that transpired among others, made me
very unhappy. On Sabbath evenings my church was
usually crowded with young men. Many of these
would leave the bar-rooms and dram-shops in the
vicinity of my meeting-house, attend my lecture, and
then retire a,gain, at its close, to those places of infamy,
and there pass nearly the whole night. They would
drink my health, and praise me and my sermons in
the awful words of profaneness and blasphemy.
Though I did not allow that my preaching encour
aged licentiousness, I could not, if I would, disguise
frora myself the fact, that those young men thought
that my doctrine strengthened their hands, and prom
ised life to the wicked, though they tumed not
from their wicked ways. Else, why should they
pause in their career of sin, enter my congregation,
and, at the close of my service,' retum again to their
licentious ways, and praise me according to my works,
in the fearful terms to which I have already alluded ?
The influence of these things upon my mind was
disastrous in the extreme. I was oppressed beyond
measure. I was not satisfied with the tendency of
my faith ; yet I thought my system was not an error.
I did not wish to do my fellow-men an injury ; still
I knew that many could justly accuse me as being
the author of their ruin.
When I removed to Hartford, I was a young man,
just passed twenty-one years; zealous and full of
hope. I had taken ^ my opinions on religion, second
2*

18 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
hand, from the oracles of Universalism, as my asso
ciates had done ; and was entirely ignorant of the
doctrines and character of the Orthodox community.
I was soon made acquainted with the general
character of those to whom I ministered. I was
appalled at the sight. Surrounded by a religious
population, I was mortified at the result of my labors.
When I attended a meeting of other sects, and felt
that among them was a good spirit, such as I found
not among my associates, I was more dissatisfied with
my system. Troubled with anxious doubts, pained
with the moral results of my faith, worn down by
anxiety and incessant labor, I was reduced by dis
ease ; the hand of sickness was laid upon me ; and
¦in a moment of delirium I revealed what was passing
in my mind. My whole theme, during my alienation,
was Universalism, its tendency, and the insufficiency
of the proof by which it was supported. I wrote
much and talked much, upon this subject. I siib-
sequently learned that I had held conversations with
Rev. Dr. Hawes and Rev. Mr. Fitch, upon the subject
of Universalism. The nature of my conversation
¦may be leamed by the subjoined extract from a letter
from Rev. Mr. Fitch.
When I wrote my lectures upon Universalism, I
took this letter, and drew them up upon the plan
suggested in it. " Hartford, June 29, 1835.
" Rev. Mr. Smith,
" Dear Sir, — I received your note this
morning, and with pleasure I hasten to reply. Events

religious EXPERIENCE. 19
which have transpired since your last communication
are doubtless known to you through your friends.
To these I wish to refer. I trust, however, that you
will do me the justice to believe that I do it with
feelings of purest kindness. Doubtless you will wish
to know the conversation which passed between us at
the time of your alienation of mind. On the morning
of the .19th of May, if I mistake not, you called at
my house, and, after common remarks on common
subjects, I placed in your hands Cooke's reply to
Balfour's Inquiry, asking whether you had read it.
You replied that you had read only extracts from it,
and said, ' I am not a Universalist. I am convinced
that it is not the doctrine of the Bible. I find stronger
arguments against it than I have ever seen penned,
and I have informed my people that I can preach for
them no longer. I find a large class of passages in
the Bible which I have never seen adduced to dis
prove the doctrine, which I think bear more strongly
against it than any others ; particularly that class
which represents the Christian as in a reice, and
running to obtain the prize. A greater part of those
who believe the doctrine of universal salvation know
no more about the Bible than they do about the
Koran. They do not open their Bibles once in six
months. There are a few who study the Bible hard
for proof of the doctrine, but the greater part know
almost nothing of what is in the Bible. I have often
noticed the character of those who came to hear me
preach as I went from place to place. After preach
ing, I must go to a tavern, as there was nowhere else
to go, and my hearers would fill up the bar-room, and

20 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
begin to talk loud, and I could not avoid overhearing
them. They would say, "He is a damned smart
felloio ; he preached a hell of a good sermon." I have
heard precisely that language in Oxford, in this state ;
and I have heard similar language a hundred times,
and it used to make me blush. I found that while I
would preach the doctrine of universal salvation, and
nothing else, my hearers were pleased ; but as soon
as I turned my face against any vice, they were
offended. I have preached against gambling, Eind
other sins, but I always found that my people did not
like it. I have known young men in this city, who
used to attend upon Orthodox preaching, and were
young men of regular and correct habits ; but they
were drawn into my meeting, embraced my senti
ments, and soon began to lead a very different life. I
could name a particular individual.
" ' Persons have frequently come to me with ob
jections which they had heard used against the doc
trine of universal salvation, wishing me to remove
them ; and I have replied to these objections, so as
apparently to satisfy those who brought them, but not
so as to satisfy myself. I have often been struck
with the difference between the meetings of your
denomination and ours. I have been in your meet
ings, particularly the union meetings of the different
Congregational churches, -the last winter. I found
there something like devotion. In our meetings there
was no devotion in the prayers, and no devotion in
the preaching. But in your' meetings I found a dif
ferent air. In relation to the society, ia this place,
many of them are infidels. You may divide the

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.

21

society, and out of it take every man who believes in
the divine inspiration of the Scriptures, and all these
together would not be sufficient to pay an organist.
I say this, because I know it to be a fact.'
" After you had an interview with your committee,
I saw you again, when you told me that they wished
to know your reasons for renouncing the doctrine of
universal salvation ; and that you stated to them the
three following : ' 1. That the passages of Scripture
on which you had relied for support of the doctrine
did not prove it. 2. That you found a large class
of passages which taught a doctrine contrary to it.
3. The fruits of the doctrine.' And, sir, if you would
but just listen to the dictates of your own conscience,
I believe that heaven would rejoice and earth be glad,
and that souls who are now entangled in the snares
of the great adversary, would be set at liberty and
guided into the path of life. You remarked to me at
your own house, that you had felt, that, like Paul,
you would like to preach the faith which you hsA
destroyed. I did hope that such a time would come,
and most fervently do still pray God that it may.
You have helped to forge and fasten the chaius of
Satan's bondage on many an immortal soul ; and it is
my prayer that God will yet make you a chosen
vessel of his to fit some of those at least for heaven.
Your friend, Charles Fitch."
When I had in some measure recovered my health,
I felt that I could not remain longer in Hartford.
I resigned my trast, and resolved to seek a new field

22 RELIGIOUS EXPERIEJNCE.
of labor. My faith in the ultimate salvation of all men
was unchanged. But/ upon many subjects my feel
ings and views were essentially different. I was
compelled to reject ultra Universalism, or, in other
words, that form of Universalism which limits all
punishment to this life, I had preached more against
the faith of other sects, than against the sins of my
own society. I determined to be more practical;
to preach more upon the duties of life, and less upon
the certainty of the salvation of all men. My removal
from Hartford, and a change of scene and occupation,
for a season diverted my mind, and I was com
paratively at ease in my ministry,
SETTLEMENT AT SALEM, MASS.
My last settlement as a Universalist preacher was
in Salem, Massachusetts. A short seeison of labor in
that city convinced me that Universalism was the same
every where. My congregation was one of the largest
in Salem. The practical results of my ministry were
the same as they had been in all other places.
I have already said, that, before I left Hartford, I
had adopted the doctrine of limited future punish
ment. It seemed to me that the Bible did reveal
future retribution, and that no good could attend the
preaching that assured men that, if they could but
reach the grave, reach it how they might, they would
be saved ; and that though they should die in their
sins, they would not be excluded from heaven. In a
practical point of view, the effect was the same as the
preaching of ultra Universalism. As punishment was

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 23
to end in eternal bliss, those who £idopted these
views had little care, whether it was limited to this
life or ran over into the next.
By adopting the doctrine of future punishment, I
found myself involved in difficulties that endangered
my faith in the salvation of .all men. If the reasoning
were sound by Avhich I proved limited future punish
ment, then endless punishment was true ; for the sarae
reasons which demand future punishment would
demand its perpetuity.
I could find no evidence that the future was to be
a life of probation ; or that men, in the next state of
existence, would have an opportunity to do what
they had failed or refused to accomplish in this.
The truth was clearly revealed that the "wicked
would be turned into hell," "and go away into
everlasting punishment ; " but it was not as clearly
revealed that the wicked would be delivered from the
one, or that the other would cease. The earnest
appeals of "To-day" — "Now is the accepted time,
now is the day of salvation" — "To-day if ye will
hear his voice" — "The night cometh, in which no
man can work" — "If ye believe not that I am he, ye
shall die in yojir sins " — " Whatsoever thy hand find
eth to do, do it with thy might, for there is no work,
nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave
whither thou goest " — these, and kindred passages,
seemed very clearly to teach that this is the world in
which to prepare for that life which is to come ; and
that all who waste or misimprove it, will find eternity
too short to repair the injury done to the sonl.
But not only did the Bible seem to teach, that this

24 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
life is the place in which to secure salvation, but
as clearly it seemed to say, that the destiny of man is
fixed at death, and remains unchanged forever. The
gulf that separates the righteous from the wicked,
which (xmnot be passed, proves it. In the resurrec
tion, there is to be no change of character. " He that
is unjust, let him be unjust still ; he which is filthy, let
him be filthy still ; and he that is righteous, let him
be righteous still; and he that is holy, let him be
holy still." The words of Jesus Christ to the impeni
tent Jews, "If thou hadst known, even thou at least,
in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy
peace! but now they are hid from, thine eyes;" and
the instruction of Paul, that to those who wilfully
resist the truth, God will "send strong delusions,"
and leave them to "believe a lie;" all teach that
probation may close before this life ends. The
zeal of the rich man in hell for the salvation of his
impenitent brethren, and the exclusion of the foolish
virgins, who came too late to be admitted, admonish
us, that, though remorse and repentance could be
found in the world of woe, no remission is there, and
from hell there is no redemption. Nor could I see
why Christ came into this world at all to save any
soul. If one man can be saved in the next life,
all can be ; and the sufferings of Christ were in vain.
Also, the simple fact, that, in the next state of exist
ence, there will be no Mediator ; that as soon as Christ
puts his enemies under his feet, he gives up the
mediatorial kingdom, — afforded evidence to my mind,
that the impenitent can enjoy no restoration from
punishment in the eternal world.

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 25
In any case, future pmiishment involved endless
misery. Universalists affirm that, in all cases, the
good of the punished alone is sought by the penalty
of the divine law ; that, if punishment extends to the
future world, it will continue till men repent, cease
sinning, and turn to God; and when this end is
answered, misery will end. Those who allow future
punishment, have never been able to determine how
long it will continue. A thousand years, ten thou
sand, and a million, have been mentioned as the
probable duration of future punishment. Mr. Win
chester, one of the founders of the sect of Universalists,
thought the ungodly would be punished an incon
ceivable number of years ; ages and ages would roll
away before their sufferings should end.
For the argument's sake, suppose we limit the
period of punishment to one thousand years. During
this period of time, the ungodly will sin, or they will
not. If they commit no sin, then why punish them
at all ? The end is attained at the outset. Before
one pang is inflicted, the victims are all that they will
be at the expiration of the thousand years. They
have ceased to sin ; and this is all that the punishment
was to accomplish. But if they sin, and if it requires
a thousand years to punish the sins of this brief state
of existence, how long will it take to punish the sins
committed in the next ? Let the punishment of the
impenitent continue as long as it may, there will be
always raore sins unpunished than have received a
just recorapense of reward. And the same reasons
which demand future punishment will demand .its
perpetuity. 3

36 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
Considerations such as these made me indescribably
wretched. I could not give up my faith in the salva
tion of all men ; I could not deny the doctrine of
future retribution ; nor could I separate future punish
ment from endless death. Neither was it from this
source alone that trouble arose. The more I reflected
upon the system of Universalism, the more perplexed
I became. I knew that my influence was not exerted
for the good of my race. I labored hard, preached
often, but felt I was not advancing the good of man.
Of the evil practical tendency of my faith I had no
doubt ; I could have none. I was not as confident as
I had been of its truth, nor as much so as I wished
to be. Many arguments, and those the most popular
among Universalists, I knew to be sophistical. Many
texts of Scripture urged in defence of Universalism,
I was convinced, had no reference to the salvation of
all men ; and many parts of the Bible so plainly taught
a different doctrine, that I was distressed beyond meas
ure. I could find no peace except when I banished
the whole subject from my mind, and by a great effort
turned my attention to something else. I wrote and
preached often under the influence of doubts, that, at
times, almost overwhelmed me. I once resolved to
settle the case with ray own mind, and put it at rest.
I wrote a sermon in which I arrayed all that I could
think of in defence of Universalism. The arguments
from reason, nature, and the Bible, in favor of the sal
vation of all men, I presented in their strongest form.
I wrote it under the influence of the most tormenting
doubts, to remove thpse doubts if possible. But the
effort was not successful. I preached the sermon but

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 27
once. My people requested it for the press. / gave
it to the flames.
My situation was a most trying and painful one.
I was determined to cling to Universalism. Yet I
could not with all my heart defend it, nor remove the
objections that rose against it. When I sought relief
by conversing with my ministerial associates, I found
them often deeper in difficulty than I was myself.
As they would relate their experience, and unfold
what they had seen of the moral results of Universal
ism, the effect was most startling upon my own mind.
As 1 heard men, who had been years in the ministry,
express their difficulty in defending Universalism, call
up objections to it more appalling than any I had ever
heard frora the lips of an opposer, and expose the
sophistry of many popular arguments used in its
defence, I was convinced, if the world knew the
objections with which the defenders of Universalism
had to contend, no stronger proof of its falsehood
would be needed.
CHANGE IN MY STYLE OF PREACHING.
To succeed at all, I was compelled to disraiss the'
subject of man's destiny altogether from my serraons,
and say nothing in respect to the final salvation of all
men. I could neither deny nor defend the doctrine.
And I thought, if I should dwell upon the practical
duties of life, and preach upon moral subjects, I might
relieve myself from trouble upon this point. I wholly
changed my style of preaching, and attempted to
instruct men in relation to the duties which belong to

28 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
this life. This change in the subjects of my sermons
was soon noticed, and complained of. Some desired
a little raore doctrine. Others thought the youth
ought to be indoctrinated, and that the rainister ought
to do it. From various sources, I would hear that
strangers who entered my church could not tell
what my views were; and my society considered it
a reproach, that men could hear a Universalist preach,
and not know whether or not he believed that all
men would be saved. While others, out of regard to
my health and ease, desired me to preach some of my
old sermons, — the design being to obtain the doctrine
which those sermons were known to contain.
My mind was far from being at rest. My difficul
ties increased, and the evidence of my faith seemed
to grow more and more faint. Most gladly would I
have dismissed this whole matter from my mind, but
I could not. Though I was not now an advocate of
Universalism, — though for some months I had ceased
to teach that all would be saved, — still I was known
as a Universalist preacher. I was settled over a
Universalist congregation, ^.nd my influence was ex
erted in favor of their known sentiments. I had
ceased to respect the system, or to feel much attach
ment to its advocates. I now felt that, as an honest
man, I could not represent a system which was at
war with the best interests of my race ; though I had
not given up my faith in the final salvation of all
men. After much anxiety and deliberation, I sent
to the comraittee of the Universalist society in Salem
the following letter : —

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 29
" Salem, March 17, 1840.
" To the Committee of the Universalist Society.
"brethren, — No man can feel more than
myself the sacred nature of that tie which unites
pastor and people, nor be more sensible that it should
not be severed for a slight or trivial cause. My
connection with the society whom you represent, has
been of the most pleasant character. For it I have a
high esteem, and the attentions which I have received
at the hands of its members have endeared them to
my heart. From repeated and friendly conversation
with prominent merabers of the society, I have reason
to believe that they desire and expect their minister
to subserve an interest which in conscience I cannot.
They expect him to feel a sympathy with the de
nomination of Universalists, to act in concert with
it, to be called by its name, and be in reality, if
not in form, identified with it. As I cannot answer
this expectation in any of the above-named particu
lars, justice to myself and to you seems tb require
that we have a clear understanding of this matter.
" Of the fact that I have received no new revelation
of theological faith, you are advised by the repeated
conversations I have held with you. And with the
motives that have led me to separate myself from the
denomination of Universalists, you are acquainted, at
least with most of them. And as you can inform the
society, who may wish to be informed, I need not
repeat them here. To the society of which I am
pastor, I have devoted a portion of the best part of my
life. I am firm in the consciousness of having served
it to the best of my ability, and of having spared no
3*

30 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
labor that I thought would add to its profit. I desire
no better friends, and I seek no better society. If I
could serve the society without acting in concert or
being identified with the denomination of Univer
salists, I should be ready and happy so to do.
" If, however, the society should insist upon such
a concert of action, I shall hold myself ready, cheer
fully, and with the kindest feelings, forthwith to
tender my resignation of the office of pastor, and with
it all the duties, trials, and responsibilities of that trust.
We have lived together affectionately, — let us part in
peace and kindness.
" I will call your early attention to the subject of
this epistle ; and, offering you, individually and col
lectively, the assurance of my esteem, I subscribe
myself. Affectionately yours,
M. Hale Smith."
Upon the receipt of this letter, the committee to
whom it was sent, called upon me, to induce me to
take it back. They were surprised at the letter ; the
step they thought was a hasty one, — one that I
should always regret. They were certain that to
remove from the society of which I was pastor, and
throw myself and famfly upon the world, was com
mitting a suicidal act. They assured me that, if I
would take back the letter, and continue my labors,
they would pledge me their honors that no mortal
should ever know it had been written. I told them
that I was prepared for almost any thing ; but I could
not eat the bread of dishonesty. The sentiments ex-

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 31
pressed in my letter, I could not change. By them I
must abide. My resignation followed the reception
of that letter, and my connection with Universalism
ceased from that hour.
Many of my friends urged rae to preach to them for
a few weeks. As I was not decided what to do, nor
where to locate myself, I yielded to their request.
This taking myself away from the denoraination of
Universalists, and renouncing the name, was simply
to obey " the voice of duty." It was a great step to
take, but I was not at rest. The same voice com
manded me again, and I could not refuse to obey. I
was assailed with doubts in respect to the truth of the
idea that all men would be saved. The threatenings
of the Bible were many, and they were awful. Much
of the reasoning employed to prove that all men
would be saved, I was certain was unsound.
REVIEW OF UNIVERSALISM.
To satisfy myself, I resolved to review the whole
matter. I collected the threatenings of the Bible,
with all the objections that I knew to exist against
Universalism, and placed them together. I then
selected all the texts of Scripture, and the arguments
used in defence of Universalisra ; and determined to
examine them, to be faithful to myself, and abide by
the result. I felt in some measure the responsibility
that rested upon me, and the awful hazard I was
running in encouraging the wicked to hope for life,
though they turn not from their wicked way. I
went to this work with a trembling, and, I trust.

32 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
a (prayerful spirit. As I shall bring out this inves
tigation in another place, I shall omit it in this
lecture. RESULT OF REVIEW.
I arose from this investigation firmly persuaded
that Universalism was supported neither by reason nor
revelation ; that it was as false in theory as it was
destructive in practice. But, "What is truth?"
" What shall I preach ? " were questions more easily
put than solved. For the system of doctrine usu
ally denominated Orthodox, I had the most perfect
contempt. Language does not enable me to express
the abhorrence in which I held it. If I ever detested
any thing, it was the doctrines of the cross. The
clergy who defended them, I thought to be narrow-
minded, bigoted, and, on many very important sub
jects, very ignorant. The people who professed those
doctrines, I regarded as a poor, infatuated class of men,
duped and blinded by their leaders, and as having
little comfort in this world, and little hope of any in
the world to come. My prejudice against the Or
thodox religion, and those identified with it, was very
strong. I had no inclination to search for truth
among them, and no desire to embrace it, if con
vinced that they held it.
CONVICTION OF SIN.
Up to this time, the investigation had been purely
an intellectual one. It had been an examination of
the question, whether Universalism were true or not.

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE, 33
With me, religion had been a mere theory, . I had a
system to defend, and must defend it. But now, my
attention was tumed to the subject of personal piety,
— to the question whether I had met with that
change, and formed that character, which the Bible
declared to be essential to salvation. I felt that there
was a reality in religion, which I had never known,
a power that I had never enjoyed. I longed for
something that would take hold of my own heart,
and allow me to speak to the hearts of my fellow-
men. I was now, in a measure, afloat. I had no
settled opinions upon religion. On what side soever
I turned, I found difficulties; and on all sides, the
horizon was black indeed. The system I had long
cherished, and which was bound to my heart by the
ties of early instruction and constant association, had
passed from my confidence. My warmest friends
had, in many cases, become my bitterest foes ; though
they had not yet learned to what extent I had
given up my feiith in Universalism. I had no re
ligious acquaintance, to whom I could unburden my
mind. My sufferings were great ; my anguish more
exquisite than language can paint. I did not know
where to go, or to whom I could speak ; and it
seemed to me literally, that " no man cared for
my soul." I would have given all I possessed, to
have found some friend to whom I could have un
bosomed myself; who would have said some kind
thing, or bid me hope in God. But I did not dare
trust even my own family. Though it seemed to me
that every man I met read my feelings in my coun
tenance, I kept them to myself till I was carried

34 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
almost into my grave. I was in very feeble health ;
my associations all were changed ; I was unsettled in
faith, and felt like a stranger in a strange land.
MEDICAL ADVICE.
My frame, never vigorous, could not sustain the
load placed upon it. My long anxiety in respect
to the moral results of my faith, my painful investiga
tion, the separation from my society, the scandalj"
hatred, and ill-will I was called to meet from those
whom I had long served according to my ability, my
anxious cares, my mental trouble, the fear that I was
not a Christian, — all impaired my health to a startling
degree. A complaint, which, from my childhood, has
been the bane of my existence, and which in Hartford
had led to temporary derangement, threatened to
return. I was admonished that it was time to seek
medical advice.
I could not answer the questions of my physician
without a full disclosure of my feelings. I had borne
my anguish alone, with none to help me. For some
time, I debated in my own mind the question, whether
I ought to confide in my physician or not. I decided
that it was my duty so to do. I told him all my feel
ings; how wretched I had been, and how afflict
ed I then was ; how much the results of my public
labors distressed me ; how dark the future seemed
to be ; and how unsettled, how unspeakably wretched
I was. I knew not what to do, nor where to look for
relief Life seemed to me a burden, and I would
igladly welcome the grave. My physician was touched

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 35
with my distress, and pitied my case. Though not a
professor of religion, he respected it, and wept with
me. It was the first sympathy I had received ; and
cold water to a thirsty soul was never more grateful,
than was the knowledge of the fact, that some one
could feel an interest in ray welfare, and wish rae a
happy deliverance from all my woes. He urged me
to seek assistance from some religious person ; and not
to bear my state of mind alone, as I was incurring a
great risk in so doing.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH REV. DR. HAWES.
I felt that it was my duty to comply with the
advice given. But I was not willing to commit my
self by seeking sympathy or instruction from those
near rae, who' were competent to the task. With
Rev. Dr. Hawes, of Hartford, Connecticut, I had some
acquaintance, growing out of my residence in that
city. I had confidence in him as a man and a
Christian ; and I resolved to write to him. I did it
with a trembling spirit, and with great misgiving as to
the probable reception my letter would meet. With
much prayer and many tears, I wrote and mailed the
following letter : — « Salem, April 21, 1840.
"Rev. Dr. Hawes,
"Dear Sir, — I have, after serious and pray
erful deliberation, resolved to address to you this
epistle. As its contents are known to none but my
Maker and yourself, I will ask you to hold in con
fidence its sentiments. My personal respect for you.

36 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE,
and the circumstances that transpired when I was
in Connecticut, are the only apology I offer to you
for my present freedom. The period of my residence
in Hartford was to me a very glooray one. My labors
were not attended with such results as I expected
or desired. Surrounded by a religious population, I
was mortified and grieved at the contrast. In the
silence of my study, and in the hushed watches of
the night, questions would arise that I could not
answer. Worn down by anxiety and incessant toil,
my health failed me, and a complaint which long
has been, and is even now, the bane of my exist
ence, obtained the mastery; and, in a moment of
delirium, I revealed what was passing in my mind.
Rev. Mr. Fitch informed rae of my interview both
with yourself and him. And the revelations of that
solemn moment were true. From that time to the
present, I have been unhappy. Though my faith in
the final restitution of all things was not shaken, I
was confident that ultra Universalism was not from
God, and that its preaching tended to injury. I
changed my style of preaching, and became raore
practical, not always to the satisfaction of my people.
Since my residence in Salem, my labors have been
all that I could desire, save in this, — that men have
not been turned to the service of God, from Satan.
But I have never been satisfied. Agitated, anxious,
doubting, miserable ; preaching in the face of evidence
I could neither gainsay nor withstand ; not daring to
express a doubt, nor to seek counsel ; and feeling that
the insane retreat, or the grave, would soon receive me,
if my mental conflict continued, — I signified to my

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 37
society that, cis I had no sympathy with the Universal
ists, I could not serve them, unless they wished my
services with that understanding. My committee
labored with me long and ardently, to have rae recall
the letter, saying, they would consider it as not writ
ten ; but if the matter came before the society, it
would not retain rae an hour. The result has been a
separation from ray society ; and raauy, who, a week
or two ago, would have plucked out their eyes, alraost,
and given thera to me, are now my determined foes.
About fifty families desire me* to preach to thera.
But, if I bear not the name of Universalist, they will
expect me to preach that all will be saved. My phy
sician, a member of the ' Tabernacle Society,' the only
man to whom I have breathed a word on this subject,
having advised me to take counsel from some one in
whom I could confide, I have thus spoken freely to
you. Now, my dear sir, what is duty? I know
the wrong. But how can I know the right, unless
some man guide me ? O tha% I could know the
way I Most cheerfully would I walk in the path
of duty. But these doubts, this rending anxiety, of
years' continuance, have driven me well nigh to
despair. "For the stand I have thus taken I have made great
sacrifices ; and I am ready to make more, if needful.
"If you think it worthy of your time and attention,
please write me soon. I shall wait your answer with
deep solicitude. May it be a word in due season I
" I am, reverend sir, with sentiments of great respect,
"Your obedient servant,
"M. Hale Smith."
4

38 RELIGIOUS Experience,
I had scarcely mailed this letter,^and returned to
my residence, before I regretted having sent it. A
thousand suggestions, temptations, fears, and resolu
tions, occupied my mind. They ended in a deter
mination to take the letter from the post-office. I
visited the office, and requested the privilege of
withdrawing the letter. I was told that it was too
late. It was on its way to Hartford. With the
deepest anxiety, I awaited the reply ; and my agita
tion and trembling I cannot describe when I took
from the office the following response: —
" Habtforh, Apnl 24, 1840.
"My dear Sir, —Your letter, received this morn
ing, has been read with deep emotion. I thank
you for the confidence you repose in me ; and the
prayer has already been more than once breathed to
Heaven that the good Spirit of the Lord, who, I doubt
not, is dealing with you in mercy, may guide you into
the right way, and gi|^ yoU peace in believing. There
is, my friend, a Way of peace : it is the way of cordial
reconciliation to God through Jesus Christ ; of love
to his character and service, produced within us by
the Holy Spirit, renewing the heart and sealing us
heirs of Heaven. You appear to me to be sincerely
'feeUng' after this way, and if you truly seek direc
tion from above, you will, I trust, ere long find it, and
walk in it with firm step and bright hope. May God
grant you this raercy! l' scarcely know to what point
to direct my remarks. You surely do not expect me
to enter into any discussion of the subject respecting
which we have held opposite sentiments. Your views

«EI,IGI0US EXPERIENCE. 39
on that subject are not settled ; mine are ; and should
you finally come to where I trust the Lord is leading
you, present' difficulties respecting future retribution,
would, I have np doubt, pass away, and your mind
would be at rest on that subject of deep and awful
interest. At least, you would be able to say, ' Even
so, Father, for so it seemeth good in thy sight.' Your
readiness to endure trials for what you deem the truth,
gives rae pleasing evidence that your faith, if not
now, will ere long be right on all essential points.
What I feel the raost solicitous about, is, that you
keep your conscience void of offence. On this point,
you have been, and will be, severely tried. The
Lord enable you to stand firm ! If former friends
desert you, or ' become foes,' other friends will rise
up in their place ; and, what is more, you will have a
friend in God, who will never forsake you.
" If you cannot preach Universalism through and
through with perfect confidence of its truth and fitness
to turn men from Satan unto G^, then have no connec
tion with it. If it is an error, — as I of course, believe
it to be, — it is certainly a great and dangerous one ; and
in your present state of mind, you cannot say or do
any thing which shall seem to uphold it, without
doing violence to conscience, and exposing yourself to
be left of the Holy Spirit, who, I doubt not, is waking
up your mind to inquiry respecting the true way of
salvation. I say this in reference to the ''families
who (you say) desire you to preach to them, though
not under the name of Universalist, yet as an advocate
of the doctrine that all will be saved.' I should fear
the result of such* an experiment. Better be silent,

40 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
than preach a gospel which in your heart you do not
know to be true. Is there not a deeper question than
whether all. will be saved, which is now pressing on
your mind for decision, viz. : Have you been born
again, born of the Spirit ? In other words, are you a
Christian in such a sense ar the Bible declares essen-
tial-to our entering into life ? The agitation, anxiety,
and doubts, which so' harass your mind, will never
pass away till this great point is settled. My pen so
poorly expresses what I want to say, that I have
hardly any patience in using it. I wish I could see
you, aud talk over all this great subject. But as I am
denied the pleasure, may I' recoraraend you to visit
Professor Stuart of Andover? He will enter into
your feelings at once, and I know of no Christian
friend to whom I could so readily direct you for coun
sel. You must not brood over your present state of
mind alone. You need Christian sympathy, and must
have it. In the mean time, rest assured that you have
a friend in me who ¦#ill be happy to afford you any
aid in ray power. " Most truly yours,
"J. Hawes."
A letter so full of Christian sympathy I did not
expect, and, I know not why, I was unraanned for a
season, and unfitted for any duty. As soon as my
feelings subsided, I resolved to be a Christian, if God
would give me grace, to live in his service, and die in
his cause.
But peace came not in an hour. A deep probing
of my own soul took place. My sins were set in

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 41
order before me, and unless help came from the cross, I
felt that I must perish, and perish most justly. Against
great light I had sinned, and long and wilfully resisted
the truth. I had employed my strength in strengthening '
the hands of the wicked, and peopling the world of
despair with immortal souls. What right had I to
expect mercy ? what claim upon the grace of God ?
I was encompassed with awful fears. My days were
wretched, — ray nights were passed in anguish that
drove sleep frora my pillow. I was awfully tempted
to leave this world unbidden, but I dared not do it.
I was certain, if I did, I should go to hell. My appetite
was gone, my health declining, ray strength alraost
exhausted. O, the worrawood and the gall of those
dark and trying moments ! How vivid they stand out
upon my memory ! How harrowing the recital I I
have barely firmness sufficient to pen these events.
But God at last heard my prayer, and gave me
peace — peace raore welcome to my lacerated heart,
than was the sunlight to the inmates of the tempest-
tossed ark, after their long sojourn upon the waste of
waters. Gladness was in my soul, and praise upon
my lip. MY WIFE INFORMED OF MY CHANGE.
I have already said, that, in the time of my trial,
I had not confided my feelings to any one. My
family knew I was sick ; but they were strangers to
my mental sufferings ; I did not dare trust any one.
My wife from her youth up had been a Universalist.
I knew she would pity, but could not relieve me ; and
4*

42 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
that a knowledge of my situation would make her
unhappy, while it could be of no advantage to myself.
But having made up my mind, and committed
myself to my Savior, I felt it my duty to give her
that iiiformation myself, which she would soon learn
from others. But another motive influenced me. I
knew that my former friends would never forgive me
for leaving Universalism. I expected bitter perse
cution and most intense hatred frora those who
professed to have the strongest regard for me before
my change. It becarae a question full of painful
interest, whether I should turn from all this scandal
and reproach, and find sympathy at my own hearth
stone; or whether I should find a divided home.
For aught that I knew to the contrary, my companion
was still fondly attached to Universalism. I expected
she would be disappointed, grieved, and I knew not
what else, when she learned that I was not only no
Universalist, but had embraced the despised doctrines
of the Orthodox faith. I prepared myself for what
ever might occur, prayed for wisdom and grace
rightly to perform my duty, and related to my wife
what God had done for my soul. I could gather
nothing during the narration to inform me as to the
effect. My companion was deeply affected ; but '
whether frora disappointment, or from sympathy with
my sufferings, I could not tell. I closed my recital,
and paused for a reply. Judge my astonishment,
when she said, " O, I am so thankful that you have
been thus guided ! " I could not trust my senses.
I asked to hear the remark again ; the same sentence
was repeated, and by it I was completely over-

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 43
whelmed. I learned, to my utter astonishment, that,
for more than one year, Mrs. S. had been convinced
that Universalism was an error, and had renounced
it. Her faith in Universalism was first shaken by the
conduct and conversation of Universalist ministers,
who visited at my house. She felt that a system
could be neither true nor profitable, which had such
advocates. She had long held communion with her
Savior ; and, in her own closet, unaided by religious
instruction, and uncounseled by religious friends,
sitting under a ministry of error, and with no guide
but her Bible, she had been turned from the way of
death, and, some months before my change, had
found the Savior to be precious to her soul. Her
fears that a knowledge of her change wohld make me
unhappy, and that I could not sympathize with her,
induced her to withhold frora rae the fact, that her
faith had been changed, and her heart been renewed.
Could I do less than adore the grace and goodness of
God ? Could any one raarvel that our first faraily altar
should be one of thanksgiving to that God who had
opened our eyes, touched our hearts, and enabled us to
begin together a new life in Christ ?
DREADFUL CONDITION.
My condition may be iraagined, but it cannot be
described. For a long tirae, I had been distressed
with the evil moral tendency of the system of which
I was the minister. For a long time, I was troubled
with heart-rending doubts, that almost overwhelmed

44 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
me. Often was I called to preach in the face of
evidence which I could not gainsay. Then I be
came anxious about my own soul, and was fearful
that the blood of souls would be required at my
hands. My former friends had nearly all forsaken
me, and become my bitter foes. They left no means
untried to ruin me, and render rae an outcast araong
men, by taking away my reputation, which was all
that myself and family had to depend upon for bread.
To the religious community I was comparatively a
stranger ; and it was supposed, that, if I were represented
as unworthy of their confidence, I should be in a
situation to do the cause of Universalism no harm.
Not only was all manner of evil said of me, but my
wife was more than once insulted in the streets, be
cause I had changed my faith.
This state of things imposed upon rae a weight
more than my frarae could bear. My eneraies had
greatly affected the public raind; and on every side
I found distrust and suspicion. I was poor in this
world's goods. I had given up a salary sufficient for
my wants, and was now penniless, and had no
means of support. My health was constantly de
clining. The future looked very dark. I was fearful
that my mind would be overturned, and my reason
lost, if relief came not to me soon.
For many weeks I was unfit for ordinary duties,
much less for such exciting scenes as those through
which I was called to pass. My head was the seat
of dreadful distress and anguish, that seemed almost
sufficient to drive me mad. I was for weeks in a state

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 45
of high mental excitement. At times, I was unable
to keep the connection in the column of a newspaper.
I was under the hands of my physician ; and from a
sick bed, on which I had been thrown by my pains,
with my head covered with leeches to relieve my
anguish, I was called up to address an iraraense con
gregation, under the raost exciting circurastances.
With great difficulty I discharged that duty. My
system was prostrated, my head almost bursting with
pain, and my agitation great.
I laid my head upon my pillow, but not to sleep.
The next day I was to meet the Association of Salem,
pass an examination, be received as a Christian min
ister, or be declared unworthy of confidence. I felt
that, in a great measure, ray future usefulness and
happiness depended upon the action of the Asso
ciation before which I was to appear the next day.
To most of the members I was an entire stranger.
Reports exhibiting me as any thing but an honest
man were in circulation ; and with what effect upon
their minds, I could not tell. I arose from a bed of
pain, to pass an examination. The circumstances,
as well as my own feelings, demanded a thorough
and faithful examination. I weis occupied all day
in scenes that almost overcame me ; which, joined
with my feeble health, and the almost entire pros
tration of ray strength, raade my case critical and
dangerous. On the next night, I was examined for
adraission to the Tabernacle Church in Salem, and
I closed the week with repeated, but exciting, con
versations upon religion, with my former friends.

46 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
CRISIS REACHED.
But the most anxious hour was to come. On the
approaching Sabbath, the first Sabbath in June, 1840,
I was to take upon myself a profession of religion.
This step seemed to me to be the most solemn and
momentous that any man could take. It was a
covenant with God, and not with raen. My mind
was greatly exercised in respect to this solemn trans
action. I looked forward to the • coming Sabba'th,
with fear, with trembling, with anxiety. With such
feelings I sought my pillow on Saturday night. I
had passed the week amid incidents of a peculiarly
trying character. I had arisen from a couch of sick
ness on Wednesday, to give my reasons to thousands
of my fellow-men for leaving Universalism- On
Thursday I met the Association, passed an exami
nation, and was approved. On Friday, I stood before
the church, related my experience, and was accepted
as a member. One step alone remained to be tg,ken,
and that step I was not permitted to take. Disease
triumphed ; my mind was impaired, and in an hour of
derangement, I had wandered from my home, — wan
dered I knew not whither. Then followed weeks of
suffering, bodily and mental, which it makes me sick
at heart to recall to mind. My physical strength was
gone ; my mind was weak, vacillating, and easily
moved; my appetite was lost, and sleep fled from
my pillow. My days were a burden ; my nights were
seasons of anguish. Almost every thing moved me, —
every thing excited me. Some of my former friends

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 47
still professed a regard for me. As oft as they saw
me, they were conversing upon Universalism ; urging
me to review my ground, suggesting difficulties, and
making objections to my new faith. I could not
remove myself frora thera, nor avoid being at times
perplexed at what was said. My mind was weak,
and impressions were easily made upon it. On the
other hand, a portion of my former friends followed
me with unrelenting hate. All manner of evil things
were said, published, and circulated. My weak and
feeble state, the awful conviction that my mind was
impaired beyond the hope of recovery, and that, if my
health were ever restored, it would leave me only a
wreck of ray former self, — all this was no protection
against the calumnies of my accusers. It excited no
pity in their minds. Week after week, their papers,
containing all the malice and falsehood that my eneraies
could invent, were thrown into ray faraily, that its
peace raight be ruined and its corafort destroyed ; and
this, too, while my family were watching toy sick
couch, frora which it was doubtful whether I should
ever again arise. VACILLATION AND DOUBTS.
But my disease did more than lay me low. It gave
an instability to my views and feelings that I could
not control. My raind was glooray. Upon the strict
eternity of punishment I had some doubt. Go back
ward I could not ; advance I could not, until with my
whole soul I could subscribe to all the doctrines of
the gospel. It was during this season of mental

48 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
gloom and vacillation upon the eternity of future pun
ishment, that the shout went up that I had returned
to Universalism.

VISIT TO REV. DR. HAWES.
I formed the resolution that I would for a season
leave Salem, and in other scenes seek a restoration to
health ; and if I was to be the victim of vacillation
and indecision all my days, I would seek some secular
employment. I visited Hartford, Connecticut, and
took up my residence in the family of Rev. Dr.
Hawes. He received rae as a son, and bade rae wel
come to his residence, and to all the instruction which
I needed. I remained four weeks in his family ; and
pleasant hours those were that I passed in the house
of that great and good man. My strength returned ;
my health improved to a very great degree ; my mind
becarae decided, and ray heart fixed. It is but just
to say, that, if I shall ever be of any service in the
ministry of Jesus Christ, it will be very much owing
to the friendly attentions, the judicious instructions,
and the Christian sympathy, which I received from
Dr. Hawes, his kind family, and his affectionate
church.

PROFESSION OF RELIGION.

After this, I passed a few months at New Haven,
Connecticut. On the last Sabbath in the year 1840,
both Mrs. Smith and myself united with the First
Church in New Haven, Connecticut, of which Rev.

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 49
Leonard Bacon is pastor. To me it was a solemn
day. And may it not be regarded as a peculiar provi
dence, that the year above-mentioned, so full of
change, suffering, and anxiety, should be closed as it
was ? At its close I could say, —
"Now rest, my long-divided heart;
. Fixed on this blissful centre, rest:
With ashes who would grudge to part.
When called on angels' food to taste?
"High Heaven, that heard the solenm vow,
That vow renewed shall daily hear.
Till in life's latest hour I bow,
And bless, in death, tbe bond so dear."
On the 5th day of January, 1841, I took license
from the' New Haven West Association, of which Rev.
Dr. Day, president of Yale College, was moderator.
Since my license, I have been constantly eraployed in
attempting to build up the faith which once I de
stroyed. And not for one moment have I had any
difficulty in relation to the great doctrines of the
gospel; nor has a shadow of doubt passed over my
mind in respect to any truth embraced in the con
fession of faith of the church to which I belong.
With my whole heart I embraced it ; with my whole
heart I defend it. CONCLUSION.
If any one has ever had reason to bless God for his
mercy, it is myself In my most trying moments, I
ever trusted that he who bruised the reed would not
break it. Long ago I had perished but for the good-
5

50 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
ness of God. But for this I had fainted. Against
very great light I have sinned, and most richly de
served to perish. For a long time, I have been visited
with serious impressions. God's Spirit has often
reproved me, and bid me turh. But long and wilfully
I rebelled. I trifled with my doubts, resisted light, and
hated instruction, till I mefited the sentence, " Let
hira alone; he is a blind leader of the blind." But
God in mercy followed me by hig Spirit, and would
not let me go. Against ray firm resolves, he stripped
my system from me ; against my wish, he made me
see its deformity, and abhor myself because of my
connection with it. When I hated the truth, and
reviled the employments of those who fear God, he
touched my heart, subdued my hatred, and caused me
to love the truth, and all who love my Savior's praise;
He has also nerved my frame, strengthened my feeble
system, and enabled me to stand in the place he has
allotted to me.
And now, as I enter the house of God with new
feelings ; when I find a new delight in the service of
God, and in the place of prayer and praise ; when I
remember that I sought no light, desired no change
of heart or opinion, and that I now love God, and his
people, and the doctrines I once despised, and the
duties I once detested ; and when even creation wears
a lovelier garb, and Providence, no longer dark and
frowning, sets forth the hand of my Father ; — can I
too much adore the grace that snatched me as a brand
from the burning ? can I too much magnify the
divine mercy ? or speak too often of his long-suffer
ing ? O, can any employment so become my tongue

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 51
as that which calls me forth to tell what God has
done for my soul ? It is the Lord's doing, — the work
is his. To his service be my days henceforth de
voted ! To his name be all the glory I
I have said that nearly all my near relatives were
Universalists. There is an exception to this remark ;
and did I not name it, I should do injustice to the
best friend I ever had. My own mother was not a
Universalist. She was a religious woman. I have
no remembrance of her ; for she died before my mem
ory received any impressions of her words or looks.
I cannot recall any thing in relation to her. But
those who knew her well, speak of her piety and love
for the things of God. I was her youngest child ;
and she wished to live to train me up for God, and to
guide me in the way of life. Very early in my life,
I was made acquainted with her dying employment.
As death approached, she called for rae, and took me
in her arms, and pressed me to her bosom with her
dying embrace. Her last tears were shed for rae ; her
last breath was spent in prayer to God for ray welfare
and my salvation. It was her dying petition that I
might be saved from impiety and sin, and become
a useful Christian. That death-bed, and the last mo-
raents of my mother, have never left my mind, since
first I was told of her dying hours. When far gone
in error, this scene has spoken to me. When many
have thought rae hardened, past feeling and past re-
deraption, this has made my mind tender, and some
times almost overwhelmed ihe. It has spoken to me,
when mothers have corae to me in relation to their
sons, — as mothers ofteti have done, — and have said.

52 RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE.
with streaming eyes, " My son has become vicious
and intemperate ; he is the companion of the dissolute
and the abandoned; he breaks the Sabbath, and scoffs
at the name of God. And when I warn him,, — when
I tell him of the judgment, and the retributions of
eternity, — he laughs ray fears to scorn. He tells rae
that there is no judgment, that the Bible reveals no
punishment for the future state, and he appeals to
you and to your preaching to sustain hira." And
when such persons have urged me to use my influence
to save their sons from ruin, and turn them from the
way of death, I have felt the force of such appeals.
The voice of my mother seemed to blend with the
touching eloquence of those who pleaded for their sons.
Then have I regretted my employment ; and, half con
vinced, been almost tempted to throw up a calling
that most manifestly strengthened the hands of the
wicked. Next to my existence, and the conversion of my
soul, I would bless God for a praying mother. I
could do no less than record this tribute to her memory,
and leave on record the part she bore in my rescue
from death. Let all take courage, who have the
moulding of young minds, who make the first im
pressions upon an immortal soul. No matter how
hard the soil, — how long the seed lies in the ground.
If it be good seed, sown in faith and prayer, it will
not fail. The hand that sowed may be palsied by
death ; the eye that wept may be closed in its long
sleep; the voice that counselled may be hushed;
and the heart that prayed may cease to beat. Still
the blessing will corae. Your son, or brother, or

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. 53
friend, may be upon the ocean ; he may fall into temp
tation and crime, or sit in the seat of the scorner.
But upon the mast-head at midnight, in the haunt of
sin, in the congregation of the impious, you will be
remembered. If faithful to their souls, your sons and
daughters will gather around your tomb, to bless you
for what you have done for them.
How can I review my past life ? The retrospect is
terrible beyond description. Twelve years of this
short life wasted, and worse than wasted I Employed
in strengthening the hands of the wicked ; in removing
the restraints of the Bible ; in preaching peace to the
ungodly; in assuring them that they would not die,
though they disobeyed God ; in alluring men to de
struction ; in turning men from life to death ; and in
speaking encom'agement to those already in the road
to destruction, and urging them on their perilous way !
O, what a retrospect ! My pathway seems strewed
with the wrecks and ruins of souls ! My hands and
my garraents seera stained with the blood of my
fellow-men. On every side, lost souls cry out,
" But for you, we might have been saved ! " 0 that
I could recall the past ! O that I could wipe out the
influence I have exerted, and make those twelve
years a blank I Could I do this, I would make any
sacrifice. I would weep tears of blood, if I had them,
to remove the impressions I have made upon the souls
of men, while I was in the rainistry of error. But
this I cannot do. All that reraains for me is, to lift
my voice in defence of truth, and tell men what great
things God has done for my soul.
5*

54 RELIOIOUS EXPERIENCE.
" The world will wonder^ ;when iljiejr see
A wretch Me me restored ;
And cry, Behold, how changed is he
Who once despised the Lord!"
Such are my reasons for renouncisBg Universalisni,
so fax as connected with my religious ezperienee.
These alone would be sufficient, i could not resist
such light. I could not trifle with such convictions.
God has been very gracious to me. To his name be
the glory, — to his service be my remaining days
devoted ! " People of the living God,
I have sougM the world around;
Paths of sin and foDy trod,
Peace and comfort nowhexe &und.
Now to you my spirit tuiii% —
Turns a fugitive unblest;
Brethren, where your altar bums,
O, receive me into rest.
" Lonely I no longer roam,
Like the cloud, the wind, the wave;
Where you dwell shall be my home,
Where you die shall be my grave-
Mine the God whom you adore,
Your iRedeemer shall be mine ;
Earth can fill tbis heart no more ;
JEveiy idol I resign ! "

LECTUEE IL

REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, ARISING
TROM THE DIFFICULTIES THAT ATTEND
ITS DEFENCE.

2 TIM. ii. 2S.
IN MEEKKESS ISSTKUCTING THOSE THAT OFFOSE THEMSELVES ; IF
GOD PERADVENTCRE WILL GIVE THEM BEPEHTANCE TO THE
ACSKOWLEDGING OP THE TRUTH.
The preaching of Universalism is attended with
great trial. Many are the objections to it, arising
from the contradictions in the system, its bad practical
tendency, the irrelevancy of testimony offered ^oim
Scripture in proof of it, the sophistical nature of a
large part of the arguments urged in vindication of
its claims, and the passages of the Bible which ob
viously teach the contrary. These difficulties often
appall even the most blinded advocate of this fearful de
lusion. I am very certain that, if those who lean upon
the ministers of this error, and look for salvation
without holiness of heart, becamse certain men assure
them that all will be well in the life that is to come,
could know the misgivings of a Universalist preacher,
fhe objections that surround him, and the suspicions
that he whispers to a confidential friend, they would
feel that the risk was great in tmstimg subh a doctrine.

56 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
The peril is fearful. There could not be a more CiO-
quent or impressive lecture upon Universalism, than a
collection of the confessions of its advocates.
Before my mind was much disturbed in respect to the
truth of Universalism, — before I seriously questioned
the soundness of the arguraents set forth in its defence,
— I met with difficulties which made my ministry a
painful one, and the support of my faith no easy task.
I will name some of them.

I. DIFFICULTIES ARISING FROM THE DOCTRINES OF
UNIVERSALISM.
Universalism in this country has had several fathers.
Mr. Murray is the father of Universalism as it was ;
Mr. Ballou, the father of it as it is. Mr. Ballou in
forms us that he was led to adopt his views of religion
by reading a Deistical book. By denying future
punishment and the divinity of Jesus Christ, he, in
1818, changed the whole fabric of Universalism ; and
has earned the title of originator of its present form
and character.
Though Mr. Ballou is the author of modern Univer
salism, it was not through his influence that it has
displaced the system of Murray. It is well known that
Mr. Ballou is a raan of little reading, and limited in
his knowledge of books. He had, at the beginning
of his public life, barely a common education. And
though, after preaching several years, he began to
study English gramraar, any one who hears hira will
be convinced that he must have abandoned the at
tempt soon after the commencement. He had neither

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 57
personal influence nor intellectual power enough to
make his notions popular. Though he published
them to the world, they met with little attention
among his associates.
About this time, Walter Balfour professed conver
sion to Universalisra. He adopted Mr. Ballou's senti
ments, and carried them out with a bold hand. He
went far beyond Mr. Ballou, aqd asserted such strange
doctrines, and unheard-of notions, that he claims a
place among the fathers of Universalism.
He professed to be a scholar. He talked about
Sheol, Hades, Tartarus, and Gehenna, to such a
degree, that his associates, unable to decide whether
he was a learned raan or a pretender, granted his
clairas, and shared his praise.
Mr. Balfour was brought up in the doctrines of the
church of Scotland. He renounced them, however,
and became a Haldanite, and as such came to this
country, as a missionary, to enlighten the descendants
of the Puritans in relation to the Bible, and to do the
work of a missionary upon the soil of New England.
He did not visit this country as a man of distinction.
He was not, as Universalists represent, a popular
Orthodox preacher. He was an open-coraraunion
Baptist, and the body of which he was a member,
was feeble and almost unknown.
Soon after he reached this country, he introduced
himself to the late Rev. Dr. Morse of Charlestown,
and made known the purpose of his mission. Dr.
Morse gave Mr. Balfour little encourageraent. Soon
after his arrival, Mr. Balfour changed his ground, and

58 DIFFICULTIES Of UNIVERSALISM.
avowed himself a Congregationalist. Still he failed
to secure that position which he thought his talents
ought to command. He soon left the Congregational-
ists, and announced himself a Baptist. But his stand
ing among the Baptists was not what he wished ; and
he left them in a short tirae. He next became a Puri
tan Baptist, celebrated the communion every Sabbath,
and washed his disciples' feet. Making a hurried
descent through Unitarianism and Restorationisra, he
came down to Universalism ; and was embraced by
Universalists as one of the greatest and most learned
of men.
Before he a/miwed himself to be a Universalist, Mr. Bal
four addressed a series of anonymous letters to Rev.
Prof. Stuart, professing to be in doubt upon some of
the great doctrines of the gospel, and asking for light.
These letters appearing in a Universalist print, en
dorsed by no responsible name, and bearing intemal
evidence that the writer was a confirmed Universalist,
as no douht he was, they received no attention from
Prof. Stuart.
Indeed, no one supposed, at the time, that the writer
expected any notice from the distinguished person
whom he addressed ; the whole being evidently in
tended for effect. He then threw off his disguise, and
addressed Prof Stuart over his own name. But he
commanded less attention, if possible, when known,
than when engaged as an anonymous writer. All by
whom he desired to be noticed, knew the man too
well to waste upon him either intellect or ink. He
gained his object, however. He came to Univer-

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM, 59
salists as a mighty raan ; as one whom his former
brethren dare nOt attack, and whom Prof. Stuart could
not answer.
Claiming to be a leamed man, as indeed he was, in
comparison with his present associates, Mr. Balfour
gave a new aspect to Universalism ; and so changed
it, that, when it came from his hands, it retained but
little of the form it had received from Mr. Murray, the
father of the system.
Mr. BalfoUr contended that no Such .place as hell
ever existed. The being of Satan he^ expunged from
the Bible. The imraortality of the soul he denied.
He taught that all punishment was limited to this life,
that all consciousness ceased with the death of the
body, and that men would know nothing after death,
till the general resurrection, when they would be
created over again.
When I began ray public life, the views of Mr. Bal
four were generally received by the sect to which I
belonged. The divinity of Christ was a therae of
ridicule. Future retribution was laughed at as a relic
of heathenisra. The iraraortality of the soul was a
thing that existed only in the iraagination. The Bible
was allowed to be an inspired book, provided it taught
Universalisra ; while it was a common remark from
the pulpit, that it would be unworthy of confidence if
it contained any sentiment inconsistent with the sal
vation of all men.
I embraced the form of Universalism then prevalent.
I was a Humanitarian. The immortality of the soul,
the native depravity of man, the apostasy and the
ruin of our race, the plenary inspiration of the Bible,

60 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
and future punishment, were all set aside by my
teachers, and were rejected by myself. There were
parts of the Bible that seemed to teach doctrines dif
ferent from those which I had espoused. But I re
lieved ray mind with the supposition that all systems
had their difficulties, and that mine had fewer than
others. In the course of my -rainistry, as I becarae femiiliar
with raen and opinions, I could not but be impressed
with the fact that a great many wise and good men
received the doctrines which I rejected. Many of
them stood high as men of sense and sound discern
ment. These men would be confided in, as to other
matters. How, then, could they receive doctrines
which, to my mind, were so contrary to reason ? How
could they discover their faith in the Bible, when I
knew it taught no such thing ? I thought much,
read much, and was much perplexed upon this sub
ject. Some parts of the Bible seemed to be built
upon the fact that the soul is imraortal. Other
parts seemed to assert the divinity of the Redeemer.
There was much, too, that intimated that this life is
one of trial, and that its actions will decide the end
less destiny of man.
Though the principles of interpretation which I
brought to the Bible helped rae to get over these
difficulties in a great raeasure, yet in all cases I could
not satisfy rayself And, besides, those principles
obliterated sorae of the most obvious truths. The same
reasoning that blotted from the Bible eternal death,
also blotted out endless life. When I extinguished the
fires of hell, I put out, at the same time, the light of

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 61
heaven. When I had proved that Satan had no exist
ence, the same arguraents would annihilate the being
of God, and make atheism the true faith.
From this perplexity I sought and found relief in the
following manner : Some years ago, I had presented
to me a book, containing the studies pursued at the
Andover Theological Seminary, together with the
doctrines there taught, and a reference to the Avorks
in which each doctrine was explained and defended.
Taking the book one day from my library, I resolved
to investigate this subject, and see what the advocates
of Orthodoxy could say in its defence. I had access
to a very valuable theological library, and availed
myself of its ample stores to obtain information as to
those doctrines which have so long composed the faith
of the church of Christ. I had no design or desire to
embrace the creed I was about to examine. But the
world seemed full of ideas about the fall of angels and
men, and of the doctrines of depravity, atonement,
regeneration, and eternal judgment. It was my desire
to know upon what these and kindred doctrines were
based ; to inform myself in respect to the amount of
evidence derived from the Bible in their support.
For some time I was engaged in this work. As I
proceeded, I was astonished to find how grossly cari
catured the doctrines of grace had been, and how much
reason and Scripture were on their side. I often found
those despised sentiments sustained by an amount of
evidence which I was unable to remove.
As the result of this inquiry, my views on most of
the important doctrines of the gospel were materially
changed. Indeed, from the coraraencement bf ray
6

62 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
ministry, my views had undergone a gradual and
imperceptible change, till the grace of God led rae to
erabrace fully the doctrines of the cross.

II. DIFFICULTIES ARISING FROM THE IRRELIGIOUS CHAR
ACTER OF UNIVERSALIST CONGREGATIONS.
Among those who composed the societies of Uni
versalists, I have ever found a general dislike to reli
gious duties and serious things. This seemed to be
the uniting bond. To cast off fear, and to restrain
prayer, was the great thing to be gained by a profession
of Universalism. In the congregations with which I
have had an acquaintance, I never found a faraily that
observed the reading of the Bible as an act of devotion,
or had regular family worship. And I have never
found settled religious principle among those calling
themselves Universalists. Not only have I never
found devout reverence springing from the system, but
none can live in it. I have observed it a fact inva
riably occurring, that, when a Universalist becomes
serious and thoughtful, he will at once leave the
Universalist meeting. And when a pious man em
braces that system, he will abandon his habits of
devotion in changing his faith. Men peculiar for their
habits of private and family prayer, and for a serious
study of the Bible, if they embrace Universalism,
become at once as peculiar for the neglect of these
religious duties.
The great purpose of those who unite in Universal
ist societies, is not to make theraselves better, and to
throw around themselves new restraints ; it is not that

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 63
the Sabbath raay be the better observed, and men
reformed, converted, and made holy. But the great
purpose is to put down Orthodoxy. All preaching that
gives satisfaction tends to this, and all effort is directed
to this point. If a minister, in place of preaching
against religion, preaches against the sins of his people,
he is at once censured as having " travelled out of the
record." Few make the daily reading of the Bible their de
pendence ; few rely on its teachings for the support of
Universalism. All its believers place great reliance
upon the periodicals deVoted to Universalism, to de
fend the system, and to explain away difficult texts. I
have long been of opinion that no people, not even the
Catholics, take their opinions so much upon trust as
do the Universalists. Every where I have found a
looseness of principle, and a disposition to ridicule se
rious things, that shocked ray mind. Men seemed to
value Universalism for the license it gave ; for its
power to cast off restraint, and remove from the con
science the sanctions of religion. When settled in
Salem, I once attempted to persuade a raember of my
congregation to join the church. He declined. I
urged him to do so, on the ground that for many years
he had been a professed Universalist, and, as such, be
lieved that all had a right to commune. His reply
was emphatic : "Forme to join your church would
be carrying the joke a little too far ! "
The fact that many of my ministerial associates pro
fessed to have little confidence in the truth of the sys
tem, or in its good moral tendency, was another source
of difficulty. In private social meetings, ministers do

64 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
confess to each other that there are objections to
Universalism which they cannot remove. I have
heard old men point out the sophistry of an argumenti
used in defence of the system by a young man, and
then employ the sarae argument, when preaching on
the same subject. Often have I heard a zealous
Universalist say, " Our Orthodox friends do not
know our weak points so well as we know them
ourselves." Araong thera also was a great amount of skepticism.
Some denied the existence of angels ; some, a future
life. Others rejected a part of the Old Testament,
and a part of the New. The idea that God answers
prayer was scoffed at. Many observed the forra, in
public service, because it was common so to do ; while
all admitted that it was the most difficult part of the
exercises. A student of Universalist divinity was asked
by his father, who was a Christian, if he prayed. His
reply was, "No, sir, not yet. I shall begin to preach
soon ; and then, I suppose, T must come to it."
III. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE DEPORTMENT OF
UNIVERSALIST MINISTERS.
Many preachers, those the most popular, allow that
they preach for money ; and that, unless well paid,
they would not preach at all. A near relation of mine,
a Universalist minister, has confessed to me that he
preached to get his bread ; that his preaching did not
reform men, neither did he expect it would ; that he
was well paid for his preaching, and sometimes his
hearers were pleased, and sometimes they were offend-

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 65
ed, and swore. But they paid him promptly, and the
rest was their concern.
Araong no body of raen can be found, I presurae,
so much ill-wfll, jealousy, and bad feeling, as raay be
found araong the advocates of Universalism. They
profess great love for all raen ; and for each other, in
a special manner. But it is needful to go behind the
curtain, to become familiar with the character of this
good-will which preachers bear to each other, and of
the brotherly love found in their borders.
Although associated with them twelve years, I never
heard the subject of personal religion introduced in a
meeting of Universalist teachers as a theme of conver
sation, or any topic designed to improve the under
standing or mend the heart. But irapure and indecent
jests, low and offensive stories, remarks that would
rule a man out of any respectable drawing-room in the
country, together with petty scandal, and criticism of
no friendly character upon some absent brother, make
up the conversation of Universalist preachers when in
company with each other. Sorae few of us used to
regret this state of things, and talk of it. But any
atterapt to check it would only have brought us under
the suspicion of all who were engaged in it.

IV. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE FACT, THAT BUT
FEW UNIVERSALIST PROFESSORS ARE CONFIRMED ' UV
THE DOCTRINE.
In a society of professed Universalists, you will find
two classes. The first consists of those who have
no faith in revelation, but support Universalist
6 *

66 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
preaching, because, in their opinion, it is better than
nothing, and because its chief work is to put down
Orthodoxy. In this class should be ranked those
who avouch theraselves to be "Universalists, if they
are any thing," and who have little concern in it any
way. If Universalisra is in the Bible, it will be well
with thera. If not, they will reject the Bible. A
second class is of those who are called Universalists,
and perhaps call themselves so. They attend a Uni
versalist meeting, because their friends do ; or because
a husband or a brother desires their attendance ; or
because they have not yet made up their mind in
relation to what the Bible does teach. They wish
Universalism to be true ; hope it is so, and try to
believe it. Such attend upon preaching, to have
their doubts removed. They will read Universalist
papers, argue in defence of the system, and attempt,
by removing doubts in the mind of others, to remove
their own.
I have been beyond measure surprised to find
persons in my congregation, whom I regarded as
decided Universalists, who would confess to me that
they had doubts of the truth of the doctrine ; and
that, when they looked forward to death, they were
fearful that the exchange of worlds would be for the
worse, and not for the better. Others would allow
that a moral change must take place in them before
they died, if they were to be blessed ; and yet try to
persuade theraselves that Universalism is true, and
that, though such a change were not experienced, it
would be well with them in the future. Whenever
you find a Universalist restless and uneasy, full of

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 67
dispute and argument, always ready for debate, and
challenging every one to a discussion, you may rest
assured that you are in the presence of one \vho has
serious doubts as to the truth of Universalisra.
When, in my intercourse with Universalists, I raet
so raany wavering and doubting, whora I had con
sidered to be the raost firm and decided, and so many
preachers confessing the existence of objections against
Universalisra which they could not remove, calling in
question the relevancy of important proof-texts urged
in favor of the systera, and suggesting difficulties that
no ingenuity could reraove, — I found it for a long tirae
no easy work to defend ray faith.
V. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE FACT, THAT REA
SONING WHICH SATISFIED OTHERS, DID NOT SATISFY
MYSELF. Persons would often visit rae when troubled with
doubts upon the doctrine of Universalism. They
would desire rae to reraove an objection, or explain a
text of Scripture. I have often succeeded in remov
ing their doubts, and have sent them away satisfied,
while the matter was by no means cleared up to my
own raind. Frequently a train of reasoning in de
fence of the salvation of all men, which, at the tirae,
appeared conclusive, would be swept away by sorae
apparently slight circurastance. An incident will
illustrate this. I preached once in Brattleboro', Vt.,
and atterapted to prove Universalisra from the deliv
erance of the Israelites frora Egypt. I made the
people of Israel a type of all mankind ; and from the
facts that all were redeemed from Egypt, that all

68 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
passed through the sea, and all joined in the sOng of
deliverance, I attempted to show that all mankind
would, in like manner, be redeemed from sin and
the grave.
The argument was satisfactory to my own raind,
and was received with marks of favor by my friends.
The next day, in a company of sorae of my friends,
the subject was introduced, and great satisfaction
was eXipressed with the ingenious and conclusive
argument which was presented the day before. A
young lady, of distinguished intelligence and piety,
who was present, thought the argument not quite so
conclusive in favor of the salvation of all men as was
supposed ; and intimated that the history from which
the argument was drawn, proved any thing rather
than the salvation of all men. Confident that I was
correct, and anxious to win over my fair opponent to
my faith, I requested her to sustain her assertions.
With modest decision she reraarked, that the salvation
of all Israel was admitted ; but Pharaoh and his hosts
were destroyed ; so all the Israel of God will at last
be raore than conquerors, while those " who obey not
God will be pimished with everlasting destruction
frora the presence of the Lord, and frora the glory of
hispower." "Now," added the yoimg lady, "youmust
allow, that, if the history proves any thing in relation
to the future, it proves the certain destruction of the
eneraies of God ; and as Moses and his brethren could
sing praise to God for deliverance in full view of the
destruction of the king and his numerous host, so
may the redeemed sing the song of Moses and the
Lamb, though many of God's enemies shall perish."

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 69
This unexpected refutation of my argument mortified
and silenced me. And though, once or twice after
ward, I ventured to use the same argument, I never
got rid of the impression made upon my mind at
that time.
VI. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE WANT OF SANCTIONS,
TO ENFORCE THE PRACTICAL DUTIES OF LIFE.
I felt, while preaching, like a lawgiver attempting
to enforce araong the dissolute obedience to a law, to
the violation of which no penalty was attached.
I could urge men to repent of sin, to reform, to love
God and serve him. But the answer would corae
back. Suppose we do not choose to do so ; what then ?
In reply, I could only urge that it was better not to
sin, that the way of the transgressor is hard, and that
it was more conducive to happiness to serve God,
than to rebel against hira. Upon the countenance of
my hearers, I seemed to read the inquiry. Suppose we
differ from you, and prefer the service of sin, and
choose to rebel against God; what will be the conse
quence ? The only answer that I could give was, —
" Nothing ! You had better not live in sin, but if
you do, you will be saved."

VII. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE NUMBER AND CHAR
ACTER RESPECTIVELY OF THOSE WHO REJECT AND
THOSE WHO DEFEND UNIVERSALISM.
Every one knows that some of the profoundest
scholars that have ever lived, have been in the church
of Christ. Their splendid talents, their lofty and

70 DIFFICULTIES OF UNI VEJRS ALI SM.
solid attainments, have been devoted to the mvesti-,
gation and the expounding of the truths of the Bible.
In all ages of the church since the ascension of
JesUSj the entire ministry, with a few exceptions,
have found eternal death to be the threatened doom
of all who die in impenitence. And the persons
excepted in comparison with the others, are not so
numerous, as those Who have denied the existence
of God, in comparison with those who have re
ceived it.
To believe that no such doctrines are found in
the Bible as the great mass of the Christian world
have found in it, is to impeach their discernment.
To presume that they knew that there Were no such
doctrines in the Bible as they profess, is to impeach
their honesty. In either case, if Universalism be
true, the Christian world, for eighteen centuries, have
not only been incompetent or dishonest judges of
divine truth, but the Bible ceases to be a safe book,
and no man can consider it as a true guide. If it has
misled the world for eighteen hundred years, if it has
deceived the most learned and judicious in respect to
its teachings, and turned astray those who have
sought with diligence and prayer to know God's wiU
that they might do it, then it is not what it professes
to be — a light shining in a dark place, an unerring
guide, giving such plain instruction, that the un
lettered man may by it be made wise unto sal
vation. If congress should pass a laW, which, in ninety-
nine cases out of a hundred, should mislead the people
Of the United States, and if those deceived should be

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 71
the best part of the community, — that part which h&d
studied the law that they might know the will of
congress and obey it, — there is not an intelligent man
in the world who would not spurn that statute as
unmeaning or demoralizing.
On the other hand, Universalism is a modem affair,
The man yet lives who originated the systera now
called Universalism ; and the father of the first system
of Universalism in America, has not been dead fifty
years. No society of Universalists existed prior to
the year 1785. It is not with Universalism as with
sorae other doctrines. No man can hold it, and at
the sarae tirae receive any doctrine in coraraon with
Evangelical Christianity. For Universalism denies
not only one doctrine, but every doctrine which has
been peculiar to the Christian church, since the as
cension of its Founder.
It needs no argument to prove that no class of men
ever before advanced such doctrines as distinguish
Universalism, and at the same time professed faith in
the Bible. The advocates of Universalism have given
to the winds, as idle talk, the learning and research of
centuries. As I have already shown, they deny the
learning, the discernment, or the honesty, of all good
men, who for eighteen hundred years have enriched
biblical science, and left raonuraents of their piety,
zeal, and learning," to us their children. And not only
so, but, to defend Universalism, it must be asserted
that the fathers of the church deserve censure rather
than praise, as having done great injury in the depart
ment of biblical criticisra. Their writings, based
upon eternal rewards and punishraents, are raonuraents

72 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
of folly, they having overlooked the obvious meaning
of the Bible, if Universalism be true.
Now, the ^world has a right to expect learning the
raost profound, and research the raost extensive, from
those who despise the wisdom of the fathers. Such
men must be prepared araply to compensate the world
by the vast additions which they bring to biblical
science, for the sacrifice they demand. These persons,
who have upturned all past research, who have de
clared that all was wrong till they arose to enlighten
the world, ought only to have arrived at their positions
by the most learned and patient investigation. But
what have Universalists done in the depairtraent of
biblical knowledge ? what additions have they raade ?
what learned and valuable works have they sent forth
to throw light upon the Bible ? The reply shall be
given in a few words.
Mr. Kneeland, when a Universalist, made a transla
tion of the New Testament that should teach his faith.
He completed his work, and, by the light of it, ran off
into atheism.
Mr. Ballou has written a work intended to be criti
cal, called "Notes on the Parables; " and, in illustra
ting such passages as the following, " So shall it be in
the end of the world; the angels shall come forth,
and sever the wicked from araong the just, and shall
cast thera into a furnace of fire ; there shall be wailing
and gnashing of teeth," (Matt, xiii. 49, 50) Mr. Bal
lou very gravely tells his readers that this raeans to
cast raen into the love of God, to purify and save
them. In later times, Mr. Whittemore, conscious of the

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 73
failure of Mr. Ballou's attempt, has given to the world
a book, which is also entitled " Notes on the Para
bles." Unlike Mr. Ballou, he allows that the passage
above cited, and kindred texts, do indicate the punish
ment in reserve for the eneraies of Christ. But with
a gravity equal to that of Mr. Ballou himself, Mr.
Whittemore infomis his readers, that all these threat
enings had their fulfilment some forty years after they
were spoken, when certain Jews were cast into a
valley on the south side of the city of Jerusalem.
(^Notes on Parables, pp. 44 — 52.)
Mr. Balfour has written three professedly critical
books, in which he has raade quite a dazzling display
of learning. But it is just such a display as any
man could make, who knows the Hebrew and Greek
alphabets, and could obtain a Hebrew and a Greek
lexicon !
The design of Mr. Balfour's first book, is to prove
that there is no hell ; of the second, to show that there
is no devil ; a!nd of the third, to prove that, raan has
not an iramortal soul. Add to this list sundry tracts,
newspaper articles, and essays in periodicals, and you
have at hand the leamed researches of the Universal
ist ministry.
But what ability have they to raake contributions
to biblical literature ? The comraunity have little
acquaintance with the character and qualifications
of a Universalist rainister. In the place where one
resides, he is, as a general thing, unnoticed and un
known, save by the raembers of his own sect. The
system is so absurd, so manifestly at war with com
mon sense, so fraught with disaster and ruin to all
7

74 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM*.
that is dear to man, that, there most justly clings to
it so disagreeable an odor, that moral and sober men,
as well as the religious, desire no connection with
its advocates. All the reputation, therefore, that the
ministry of Universalism enjoys, it derives from the
profession itself. It is supposed that a minister is a
man of education, a moral raan, and a gentleman;
and knowing nothing about the Universalist minis-
,try, or about the moral and intellectual qualifications
required of candidates, the comraunity are surprised
to leam, that a raan may retail liquor by the glass,
use profane language, and be an open infidel, and
yet be a Universalist minister in good standing.
People are astounded when they learn, that a min
ister guilty of bigamy is declared to have committed
no crime against morality or religion, and that this
declaration is made, too, by an asserabled council of
Universalist preachers. Men can scarcely credit the
statement, that an acquaintance with English gram
mar is not required in a candidate for ordination;
and that a man may arise from a shoe-bench, or a
work-bench, to-day, ignorant of grammar, unable to
write a page of composition correctly, and in six
weeks become an accredited Universalist preacher.
Yet such is the truth. The ministry of Universal
ism, while I write, holds just Such men as I have
described. On this subject, Mr. H. Ballou, 2d, Who is good
authority, says : — " Whatever is the amount of good
nuiterial in our denomination, it is still a fact, which
no well-informed meraber will deny, and which
should be held up before us in the plainest terms, that.

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 75
with respect to general culture, we are behind most of
the other sects. We confess that, for ourselves, we do
not believe that Universalism is thus to be identified
with ignorance." (Expositor, March, 1839, p. 100.)
In the Hudson River Association of Universalists, a
few years since, an atterapt was raade to establish a
rule-, requiring of candidates for ordination, the study
of grammar, logic, and rhetoric, for the space of six
raonths, mider some Universalist preacher; no the
ological study being demanded. The introduction
of the resolution produced a commotion that, for a
time, threatened the existence of the Association. It
was declared to be " absolutely useless " to possess
such qualifications. It was said to be "one of the
abominations of partialism." Some of the ablest
ministers threatened to "leave the order" if the
resolution were not withdrawn. But the excitement
went beyond the bounds of the Association, and
the periodicals expressed their indignation at the rule
proposed. The editor of one of the raost widely
circulated Universalist papers says, in respect to gram
mar, " We do consider this an absurd requisition for
^ the candidate for the ministry, particularly when
many of our ablest, preachers could not even noio
pass the required examination," (Mag, and Adv.
iii. p. 342.) Mr. Andrews says, "Many of our raost
popular and useful preachers have no pretensions of
that sort ; and are, in fact, unable to write a serraon
correctly, that is, without gross violation of the most
common principles of rhetoric and English gram
mar." (Gospel Anchor, ii. p. 141.) Suppose an ig
norant, unlettered man should arise in sorae obscure

76 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
town in this country, and call in question the univer
sally-received opinions of the great principles of the
Constitution of the United States ; scoff at and reject
the expositions of the most able and accomplished
statesmen who have expounded that instrument; talk
of improvement, of the increase of light, of the progress
of society, as an apology for introducing his opinions,
and avow doctrines upon government not only at war
with all that the constitution was supposed to teach,
but such as were never before advanced; would his
notions be regarded for one moment ? No ! A serious
consideration of them would not be entertained an in
stant by any intelligent mind.
Yet such is the attitude of Universedism. Its
originators and defenders have a poor claim to schol
arship, while its "ablest" preachers, and those the
"most useful," "camiot pass an examination in Eng
lish gramraar." These axe the raen who wish to be
credited when all the Avorld is against them. These
are they who ask you to leave the way of holiness as
the path of salvation, and to lean upon them and their
teaching, while they announce to the wicked, as
was done of old, " Ye shall not surely die." This
consideration makes the defence of Universalism a
difficult task.

vm. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE RECENT DATE OF
UNIVERSALISM.
Error is as old as creation. That instruction which
causeth to err, and leads down to death, began in
Eden as soon as God's law was proclaimed. But the

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 77
peculiar form of en-or known as Universalism is a
modern affair. Upon no subject are many persons
more deceived. The present form of Universalism
can date back no farther than 1818, when Hosea
Ballou c avowed the doctrines that now compose the
system. I say its present form,, for the system has
never been the sarae in any two periods of time.
The doctrines of Universalism ; the arguments offered
in its favor ; the expositions of Scripture, which dis-^
tinguish it in one age, are set aside in the next ; and
other doctrines, and other expositions, conflicting and
contradictory, take their place. An argument ad
vanced against Universalism in one age, will not
touch the system in the next. Nothing connected
with Universalism is permanent, except its raoral
results ; these reraain unchanged, — always destruc^
tive, every where licentious and feital. Mr. Murray
is called " the fether of Universalisra ; " but not one
doctrine that entered into the systera, as defended by
Murray, enters into it now. To this subject I
shall devote more attention in my lecture upon the
moral results of Universalism.
No one pretends that the present form of Uni
versalism runs back any farther than 1818 ; while the
system, under any form, can date back no farther than
to John Murray, who is styled the " father of Uni
versalisra." (Mod. Hist, of Univ. p. 318.) The child
is evidently no older than the parent, and Mr. Murray
did not coramence his public life till 1770.
I ara not ignorant of the fact that Universalists
atterapt to show that Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus,
and some of the early Fathers, believed in Univer-
7*

78 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
salism. But, Universalists themselves being judges,
they have no claim upon these men.
Mr. H. Ballou, 2d, in his "Ancient History of
Universalism," cites Origen as a Universalist. But
his own testimony proves that Origen did not believe
in the salvation of all men. He held that all souls
that have lived, or ever will live, were created at one
time, and were all equal ; that all will be ransomed
from hell, and stand as at the beginning. But while
the damned will be restored, others will fall from
purity, and take their place ; and as the once lost
ascend to heaven, the once blest descend to hell ; and
those restored can again fall, and be lost. Thus the
soul would alternately experience the joy of heaven
and the woe of hell. Origen believed that hell would
always be full, and its fires never cease to burn.
Such was his Universalism, amounting only to the
doctrine of the migration of souls, frora a place of pain
to a place of bliss, and back again. (Anc. Hist. Univ.
pp. 95, 99, 114, 156.)
Clemens Alexandrinus was no more a Universal
ist than was Origen. He believed that to some
the future life would be one of probation. He
taught that all who died without a knowledge of
Christ, would have space for repentance ; implying
that others would not. That he believed that all
those would repent who have space for repentance,
he does not assert. (Anc, Hist, Univ. pp. 71, 72.)
Universalisra, as a system, we repeat, is a modern
affair, not yet thirty tears of age. Can any re
flecting raan believe that God would give us a reve
lation, and the meaning of that revelation be ume-

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 79
vealed eighteen hundred years? or that the true
doctrines of the Bible were unknown till Mr. Murray
landed in this country in 1770 ?
IX. DIFFICULTY ON THE GROUND THAT UNIVERSALISM
is OPEN TO THE SAME OBJECTION THAT IS URGED
AGAINST ATHEISM.
It is a strong presumptive proof that there is a God,
that no nation or tribe of the human family has
rejected the belief of his existence. As with atheism,
so with the doctrine of Universalism. Not only have
the entire mass of the Christian world, with few
exceptions, rejected it, but also all the nations of the
earth. Find a nation, and you find thera in pos
session of faith in a Supreme Power, and faith in the
doctrine of future retribution. Even among those
who, from habits and customs, might have been dis
posed to limit all suffering to this world, you find the
most fearful descriptions of future woe, and the most
"fearful looking for of judgment." If Universalism
were true, it would be written sorae where. God is
not the God that Universalism represents hira to be,
if it is his purpose to save all raen ; for he has
created us with a faith in future punishraent, and
written upon the conscience of no nation the doctrine
of universal salvation. The patriarchs knew it not.
Inspired men of old wrote of the misery of the
damned. (Luke xvi. 29, 31.) The chosen people of
Giodg instructed by his inspired prophets, have ever be
lieved that eternal death is the doom of the wicked.
The entire mass of the Christian world, with those
few exceptions that hardly deserve a notice, have

80 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
found the same truth written, not only in the New
Testament, but also " in the Law, in the Prophets, and
in the Psalms." And all the nations of the earth,
savage or civilized, bond or free, enlightened or de
graded,. have> alike, with one consent, rejected the
doctrine that all men will be saved. We say that
atheism is false, because the common sense of all
nations has rejected it. All nations have rejected
Universalism,, which, by the same rule,_ is false.
X. DIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE OBVIOUS APPLICA-
TION OF THE DESCRIPTIONS OF FALSE TEACHERS, IN
THE BIBLE, TO THE ADVOCATES OF UNIVERSALISM.
The Bible abounds with declarations such as these v
"Let no man deceive you;" "Take heed how ye
hear;" "Be not deceived, God is not mocked;"
" Beware of false prophets, which come to you in
sheep's clothing." There are two reasons why the
followers, of Clmst should be on their guard. The
first is, that deceivers never come in their proper garb.
They appear to be what they are not. They take
the name, and use the. words, of Christ only to de
ceive. If the disciples trust to appearances, they will
be misled. A second reason for vigilance is, that, if
they are deceived, and follow after error, they will
as surely be devoured by a wolf in sheep's clothing,
as if they had voluntaiily given themselves up .to
destruction. The man who takes a cup of poison
supposing it to be a cup of health, is destroyei^ aa
certainly as if he intended to take his own life.
You cannot place before any intelligent mind the
character of false teachers, as exhibited in the Bible,

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 81
, without leaving the impression that you have refer
ence to the advocates of Universalism. For their
business, and the business of false teachers in all ages
of the world, is one. They deny the threatenings of
God's word ; and cause raen to believe that, though
they rebel against God, and live in impenitence, God
will not do as he has threatened.
What was the work of Satan in Eden ? Was it not
to prove that God would not be true to his word ? and
that, though Eve were to sin, she would " not surely i
die " ? In the days of the prophets, the seducer was
found. And what then was his design ? Was it not
to " cry. Peace, Peace, when there was no peace " ?
to heal slightly the hurt of the people of God?
with lies to make the heart of the righteous sad? to
strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should
not return from his wicked way, by promising him
life ? Let any intelligent - person read the thirteenth
chapter of Ezekiel, and he cannot resist the conclu
sion, that it is graphically descriptive of Universalist
preaching. When God's prophets threatened war and calaraity,
the false teacher cried peace. When the whole
nation was sick unto death, he proclaimed health.
When the Almighty expostulated with our guilty
race, saying, " Turn ye, for why will ye die ? "
the impostor raised his voice in opposition, saying,
" Be not alarmed. God is good. Ye shall not
surely die ! "
In the days of the apostles, it was the usual device
of the false teacher to appear as a disciple, that he
might devour the flock. Paul says, "Be not de-

82 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
ceived; God is not mocked: fbr whatsoever a man
soweth, that shall he also reap." (Gal. vi. 7.) Thus
early were false teachers employed in deceiving raen,
and teaching that God could be raocked ; and that a
man might sin, and escape the penalty ! Peter, after
announcing the destruction of the universe, informs
us that scoffers would arise, denying the judgment.
What Satan taught in Eden ; what his servants
announced in the days of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Eze
kiel ; what the enemies of the truth taught when Paul,
Peter, and other apostles, were upon the earth, — the
same do Universalists now teach. The substance of
those delusions which lay scattered upon the surface
of time, since the first transgression in Eden till the
Scriptures were corapleted, raay now be found im-
bodied in one form. In 1818, they were gathered
up, and moulded into the system now called Uni
versalism. For the great business of the system is,
to explain away the threatenings of the Bible, and
teach men that the menaced death of the soul, the
warnings to the wicked, the denunciations of " hell-
fire," "eternal damnation," "everlasting punishment,"
" losing the soul," being " punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the Lord," all are
figures of speech, or Oriental' metaphors.
The point is proved^ that the descriptions in the
Bible of false teachers and their doctrines, are adapted
to describe Universalism and its adVocates. And our
duty in relation to perverters of the gospel, is cleasly
pointed out. " If there come any unto you, and bring
not this doctrine, receive hira not into your house,
neither bid him God speed; for he that bi(Meth him

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 83
God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." (2 John
10, 11.)
No Evangelical minister hesitates to apply this to
the preachers of Universalism. He believes that Uni
versalism is " another gospel." And guided by this
passage, he cannot receive thera as ministers, nor
in any way countenance their claims. Universalist
preachers understand this. They know that they are
not regarded as Christians, and that as false teachers
they are excluded frora the pulpits and the cora-
munion of Christians. They feel this ; they complain
of it.
But a Universalist preacher cannot apply this text
to Evangelical ministers. He dare not close his pul
pit against them on the ground that they preach error,
and that he is commanded not to bid such "God
speed." Any Universalist preacher would gladly
exchange with Orthodox ministers. And should a
Universalist teacher decline an exchange, his people
would not sustain him.
To quote a text from the Bible that describes false
teachers, calls up to every one who hears it, the advo
cates of Universalism. So obvious is fhe application,
so true the description.

XI. OIFFICULTY ARISING FROM THE FACT TpAT THE
BIBLE IS NOT WRITTEN AS A TEXT-BOOK UPON
UNIVERSALISM WOULD BE WRITTEN.
When it was ray business to explain the Bible in
harraony with Universalisra, I used often to think that
I could write a revelation and defence of Universalism

84 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
which would not require that laborious explanation
which the Bible must receive to make it teach that
doctrine. When I read a chapter in the course of
public worship, I was very careful about my selection.
Many parts I thought unsafe to read, unless accom
panied by an explanation ; and sorae I never ventured
to read at all.
If raen would apply those principles of common
sense to this subject, which they apply to others, they
could never be the victims of Universalism.
The history of Napoleon Bonaparte is before the
world. His ability as a warrior, his splendid military
triumphs, axe acknowledged by all nations. Suppose
that sorae one should arise, and affirra him to be a
cowEird, ignprant of the first principles of military
tactics, and, when at the head of his army, the flower
of France, and the best disciplined in the world, was
frequently routed by a handful of stragglers gathered
from the streets and fields ; — who, I ask, would credit
hira? Or suppose that sorae one were to write a coraraen-
tary upon the life of Washington, atterapting to prove
hira the eneray of his country ; calling upon the world
to give up their long-cherished and universally-
received opinion of his character, as the friend and
savior of his country ; and contending that the evi
dence by which these novel opinions were sustained,
was to be found upon every page of his life ; — whb, I
ask again, would credit such a raonstrous and slan
derous assertion ?
And yet these imaginary cases afford but a faint
exhibition of the preposterous claims of Universalism.

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 85
For it opposes the faith of the entire Christian world.
The learned and the pious, ever since the ascension
of Jesus, have found, plainly written m the Bible, the
truth that all are bound to the judgment, that all who
die in sin are exposed to punishraent after death, and
that this life is given to prepare for another.
On the other hand, a few unlettered raen stand up,
after the religion of Christ has been established for
eighteen hundred years, and say that the Bible reveals
no such doctrine as the leamed and pious have found
in it ; nay, teach that our race have nothing to fear
after death ; but that, reach the grave as they may, the
evil and the good will have one resurrection, and
one destiny beyond it.
Bring, then, to this subject those principles of com
mon sense which you would apply to the charge of
cowardice in Napoleon, or treachery in Washington,
and you will be safe from the delusion of Univer
salism. Such, then, were sorae of the difficulties in the
way of defending Universalism. Its doctrines strike
at the root of all Christian faith and piety. They are
so near atheism and infidelity, that both of them can
take refuge under their wing. The congregations
which attend upon its ministry are irreligious, and
wish so to remain.
Many preachers have little confidence in the system,
and privately admit their inability to remove objec
tions that are urged against their system. Their in
tercourse is distinguished for any thing, rather than
good-will and brotherly love. Few of the professors
of Universalism are at ease, or confirmed in their
8

86 DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM.
faith. A preacher can more easily remove doubts
frora the minds of others than from his own ; and he
is frequently fouud using ai-guraents in which he has
very little confidence. He has no sanction with
which to urge home truth upon the heart. And then,
when he remembers the names, the number, the char
acter, the standing of those who, in all ages, have
rejected Universalism ; and the character, talents, and
standing, of those who defend it, and their writings
on the subject ; and when he adds to all, the modern
date of the system, — we have a mass of difficulties
not easily overcome.
These difficulties have .been thrown across my
path ; they have troubled and perplexed me. They
have had the same effect upon others, and I offer this
as another reason for renouncing Universalism.
I might swell the list, and add to the number almost
ad infinitum. Universalism has no fixed principles of
interpretation. Ten men will give ten different and
contrary interpretations to one text, to reraove a
present difficulty. The advocates of it believe or
reject future punishment, receive or discard the
atonement, as the circumstances in which they are
placed seem to require.
At times, these considerations have pressed upon
me, as I have stood in my desk, and cast my eyes
upon my congregation, and felt that all, in a great
measure, were resting their imraortal interests upon
my preaching. When these doubts and difficulties
have weighed upon me, I could not but tremble in
view of the fact, that, if this life were one of proba
tion, and through my instrumentality was wasted,

DIFFICULTIES OF UNIVERSALISM. 87
and if these souls were ruined, and their sandy foun
dation were to fail in the day of trial, their loss would
be great, and my portion at last must be with the
deceivers and the deceived.
Allow rae to ask, in conclusion. Can such a system
as Universalism be of God ? Is it not a delusion of
the raost appalling kind ? Does not he who trusts it
injure his own soul ? Fly, then, all of you, frora
such delusion, so fatal, so deceptive. Let not Satan,
the enemy of souls, secure you as a subject of his
dark dominions. If he has in any raeasure got hold
of you by raeans of a systera of deception, tum to
Jesus ; " if God, peradventure, will give you repent
ance to the acknowledging ofthe truth." Fly, then,
from error, lest you perish. Fly from sin to holiness,
from death to life.

LECTUEE III,

REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN
FROM THE THREATENINGS OF THE BIBLE.
2 COR. V. 11.
KNOWING, THEREFORE, THE TERROR OF THE LORD, WE PERSDADE
MEN.
When resolved to review the whole subject of the
final destiny of mankind, I set myself down to a can
did, critical, and prayerful examination of £ill that the
Bible teaches on this momentous question. With the
threatenings of the Bible I thought myself familiar.
I knew the chapter and verse wherein each of those
testimonies raight be found, which are supposed to
refute Universalism. I could recite them without the
Bible. I also had an interpretation for each of them ;
and felt prepared to defend ray sentiments -against all
objections drawn from the Word of God.
But now, as I looked at thera, they assumed an
aspect that they never before seeraed to wear. There
was a soleranity about them, which to ray mind had
never before rested upon them. I approached them,
not with a design to explain them away ; not to see
how I could make them harmonize with Univer
salisra. I had no wish to trifle with the Bible. I

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 89
DURST NOT DO IT. lu somc racasuic I felt the respon
sibility of my position, and the danger of my hands
being dyed in the blood of ^souls. I went to this
work with a trembling spirit of supplication.
In reviewing the threatenings of the Bible, I did so
as a Universalist. This book, I said to myself, sus
tains my faith. Nothing, therefore, will be found in
the Bible which cannot be easily explained in har
mony with Universalism. If this system be true, the
Savior was its Author: he carae to reveal the sal
vation of all men, to enforce it upon men. But the
people to whom the Savior came and preached, were
far from believing in this doctrine. Their belief in
endless punishment is as well known as their belief
in the existence of God. They declared, openly and
constantly, that impenitent men were exposed to
eternal death. This sentiment was as universal
among the generation to which the Savior was sent,
as their faith in a future life. No raatter frora what
source they derived this opinion, the fact that they
held it cannot be questioned by any student of the
Bible ; and is fully admitted in the writings of the
Universalists. As a Universalist, I must regard this
doctrine as an error, fraught with evils of an appalling
nature, being at once dishonorable to God and inju
rious to man. Moreover, the Savior could do nothing
towards inducing the Jews to receive Universalism,
until the idea of endless death should be removed
from their minds. As a teacher sent from God, he
will speak as decidedly upon this great evil as Uni
versalists now do.
But when I examined the sacred writings, to see in
8*

90 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
what terms the Savior rebuked this sentiment, I was
surprised to read no rebuke, no warning, no testimony
against it ; no, not ong ! But, on the contrary, the
language eraployed by the Redeemer was most evi
dently adapted to confirm the Jews in their opinions.
THE PREACHING OF JOHN BAPTIST.
John the Baptist came to herald the Messiah ; to
prepare the way of the Lord, that the people who be
lieved in the eternity of future punishment might
receive the doctrine that all will be saved. As I read
the sermon with which his ministry began, it seemed
to me that it was not such a sermon as might have
been expected under the circumstances.
John commenced his ministry by calling men to
repentance, by warning them of " wrath to come," by
assuring them that the august Personage whom he
came to announce, would burn up the wicked, in the
last day, " like chaff in an unquenchable fire." How
laswich instruction of this kind would it take, to con
vince raen that there was no wrath in the future
world, no unquenchable fire into which the wicked
"wodld be cast ? PREACHING OF CHRIST.
The preaching of the divine Redeeraer was equally
inexplicable upon the same principle. If he was a
Universalist, he came to introduce ideas at war with
the opinions of the whole world; and not only to
teach, but to create them. But so far from asserting,

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 91
in direct terras, the salvation of all raen, and em
ploying language that would leave no room to doubt
his meaning, he used language which has led nine
tenths of the Christian world, and those the most
competent to judge, to believe that he taught, and
designed to teach, that many souls would perish
forever. Let a sermon in defence of Universalism be printed,
and a copy thrown into every house in the country ;
and no difference of opinion would arise in respect to
the faith of the author, or the design of the sermon.
And should a Universalist preacher send forth to the
world a sermon so written, that the great mass of
intelligent men in the comraunity would suppose that
the writer meant to teach that many of our race would
finally be lost, all would regard the writer as destitute
of common honesty or common sense.
If Universalism be true, it impeaches either the
honesty of the Savior, or his competency to teach.
He used language which no Universalist can har
monize with his system ; language which none but
an insane man would use, if he were a sincere be
liever in the salvation of all men.
Like his forerunner, Christ began his ministry by
calling raen to repentance. In his first sermon, he
describes the class of men who are blessed and ac»
cepted of God ; and, by contrast, those also who are
cursed and rejected. He adverts to the broad way,
through which the thronging multitudes go down to
death, and points out the narrow way, in which few
travellers are found. He mentions sins, the com
mission of which exposes men " to hell-fire" — "afire

92 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
that never shall be quenched." He urges raen to lay
up for themselves treasures in heaven, for so only can
they have an inheritance there. He plainly teaches
that all who heed not his words will, in the last day,
resemble the foolish man who was ruined in the hour
of tempest and storm. How many converts would
this first sermon of the Savior secure, if now repeat
ed, from place to place, by the advocates of Univer
salism ?
The whole teaching of the Savior was of the same
character. A few instances I will produce.
" Fear not them which kill the body, but are not
able to kill the soul ; but rather fear Him which is
able to destroy both soul and body in hell." "But
I wfll forewarn you whom ye shall fear : Fear Him
which, after he hath killed, hath power to cast into
hell ; yea, I say unto you, fear him." (Matt. x. 28.
Luke xii. 5. )
This was always a perplexing text to rae, and diffi
cult to harraonize with Universalisra. This difficulty
all Universalist writers adrait. No two of thera ex
plain it alike. No interpretation satisfies. The siraple
fact that Christ warns raen to fear God, who can cast
the soul into hell after the body is destroyed, and
cautions them that, as men can commit an act which
will forfeit their life, so can they corarait sins which
will expose the soul to hell, is too apparent to be
denied, and too awful to be trifled with. And not
oiily could men corarait such sins, and be thus
exposed, but sorae already had done so. This is
implied in Christ's exclamation, " How can ye escape
the damnation of hell ? " (Matt, xxiii. 33.) Could he

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 93
who warns men of some fearful doom after the death
of the body, — something more dreadful than the death
ofthe body, — could he be a Universalist ?
" But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost
hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal
daran ation," .(Mark iii. 29.)
The interpretation of Universalists is evasive, when
called to explain the penalty of blaspheray against the
Holy Ghost. They select the language of Matthew,
in which the phrase occurs, " neither in this world,
neither in the world to corae," (xii. 32,) and then
attempt to prove that the Savior's meaning is, that i
the sin under consideration would not be forgiven,
either in the Jewish or the Christian age. But not to
speak of the absurdity of supposing Christ, who had
already ushered in the Christian age in his own
person, to be talking to his disciples about the Chris
tian dispensation, or age, as yet future, — it does not
relieve Universalists at all frora their difficulty, even
were this point granted thera ; for the sin against
the Holy Ghost being unforgiven, both in the Jewish
and the Christian dispensations, those who commit it
m,ust die in their sins. And those who die in their
sins will be excluded from the place to which Christ
has gone. (John viii. 21.)
But Mark says nothing about any age ; he writes
that the sin cannot be forgiven. His language is era-
phatic. " He that shall blaspheme against the Holy i
Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of
eternal damnation." A man cannot be exposed to that
which does not exist. If no such thing as eternal
damnation exists, then Christ weis a deceiver. If

94 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
there is such a damnation, then Universalism is false ;
hell is not a fable ; damnation is eternal ; and those
who are exposed to it "have never forgiveness" — no
escape, no deliverance.
The instructions of the Savior in respect to the
resurrection of the dead, I found it impossible to ex
plain in harmony with Universalism. I will refer to
the language of the Redeemer, as recorded in John v.
28, 29. " Marvel not at this ; for the hour is coming,
in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his
voice, and shall corae forth ; they that have done good,
unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done
evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."
The interpretation of Universalists is, that this is
not a literal, but a moral resurrection ; and that the
resurrection of daranation is spiritual conderanation.
But such an interpretation is absurd. In the first
place, it makes the violation of the law and the penalty
to be the sarae thing. The crime and the punishment
are one. "They that have done evil" are already
spiritually dead. This was their crime, and Christ
commanded them to believe, and pass frora death to
life. It was for being spiritually dead that they were
to corae forth to damnation. According to the Uni
versalist exposition, the crime was spiritual death ; and
for that crime they were to be punished with spiritual
death. Suppose a parent wishes to secure obedience
to his coraraand ; he informs his children that they
must obey him ; that his law is just, and its penalty
righteous. Do any of them steal ? as a punishment,
they shall steal. Do any utter falsehood? uttering
falsehood shall be their chastisement. And in general,

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 95
for every act of disobedience, just such another act
shall be added, as a punishment. How long would
parental authority be maintained in that family? How
much of such discipline would it deraand to promote
reformation, and preserve peace and good order?
Or suppose a government were to prohibit vice and
crime, and threaten the transgressor with the severe
displeasure of the authorities, and with certain pun
ishment. Then let it be announced, that in all cases
the crirae and the punishment will be identical ; that
all acts of insubordination will be punished by other
acts of the same kind ; that robbery and murder will
be avenged by corapelling the guilty to pursue their
unhallowed employraent, and dip their hands in the
blood of other victims. Who could endure such
mockery of justice ? Could government stand one
hour with such a penalty ? And is this the character
of the government of God ? Did the blessed Savior,
who came to redeem us frora the curse of the law,
come to this world to announce that crime and its
punishment is one and the sarae thing ? and that to
save raen from the curse of the law is impossible ?
But how plainly does the Savior, in its connection,
put down the Universalist interpretation of this pas
sage ! He says, " He that heareth my word, and
believeth on Hira that sent me, hath everlasting life,
and shall not come into condemnation ; but is passed
from death unto life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, ,
The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall
hear the voice of the Son of God ; and they that hear
shall live." (John v, 2i, 25,) No one can misunder
stand this language. The Savior speaks of the spirit-

96 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
ually dead, and of a moral resurrection ; they heard his
voice ; they passed from death to life ; " the hour is
coming, and now is;" "they shall not come into
condemnation " when the evil corae forth to dam
nation. Beholding on the countenances of his auditors marks
of surprise at this doctrine, he adds, "Marvel not at
this I " that those who are dead in sin now hear my
voice, and live. A greater thing than this is to take
place. " The hour is coming, in the which all that are
in their graves (raaking a distinction between those
morally and those literally dead) shall hear my voicf,
and shall corae forth ; they that have done good, unto
the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil,
unto the resurrection^ of daranation." Now, in these
words, if the Savior is speaking of raen dead in sin,
and representing them as buried, he would, to have
preserved sense, have represented the good as being
already alive. But both classes, the good and the evil,
are dead ; both are in their graves ; both hear the
voice of the Son of God ; both corae forth from their
graves, the one to a resurrection of life, the other to a
resurrection of damnation.
Nor is it true that all men have at some time done
both good and evil ; and hence, as Universalists main
tain, must share in both resurrections. In the sense
of the Scripture under consideration, all have not done
\ good. The standard of goodness among men, is not
I the standard of the God of holiness. A man raay be
good in the estiraation of his fellow-men, and yet be
j destitute of that goodness which he must have that he
I may stand accepted before God.

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 97
When the Almighty "looked down from heaven
upon the children of raen," he said, "There is none
that doeth good, no, not one." (Ps. xiv. 3.) But it
is by no raeans asserted that at that time there were
no raoral or amiable men upon the earth ; or that no
raan was good in the opinion of his fellow-raen.
But no one did good, because " none did understand
and seek God." (v. 2.) On the other hand, it is
said of Barnabas, " He was a good raan ; " which is
explained by the words "full of the Holy Ghost and
of faith." (Acts xi. 24.)
That faith in Jesus Christ is the principal feature
of that goodness which secures to its possessor the
resurrection of life, we learn from the Savior — -"He
that heareth ray word, and believeth on him that
sent me, shall not come into condemnation." What
is proraised in the twenty-fourth verse to the believer,
in the twenty-ninth is proraised to all that do good.
Not only is the believer to escape conderanation, but
he is to corae forth at last to the resurrection of life.
To do good, in the sense of the passage under con
sideration, is to believe in God. To do evil, is to
reraain in unbelief. " He will reprove the world of
sin, because they believe not on me." (John xvi. 8, 9.)
All who live and die in unbelief, live and die in sin.
In the resurrection their doora will be "daranation."
, Not only in the text and connection is the dis
tinction plainly drawn between those spiritually and
those literally dead; between those who at the tirae
heard his voice, and all the dead in their graves who
in the resurrection should hear ; not only has the Sa
vior stated the crirae to be punished, as well as the
9

98 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
nature and the time of the punishment; but his
instruction in this place corresponds with the general
tenor of the Bible upon this subject.
In no part of the New Testament is the resurrec
tion of the dead mentioned, in which is not found
the same distinction in character and condition, ex
pressed or implied, that is found in John v. 28, 29.
In all places are there set forth two resurrections, and
also two kinds of character, each, of which is formed
and chosen here.
" But when thou makest a feast, call the poor,
the maimed, the lame, the blind; and thou shalt be
blessed ; for they cannot recompense thee ; for thou
shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just."
That the people who heard this, understood hira to
refer to the future state of existence, is evident from
this remark-— "And when one of them that sat at raeat
with him heard these things, he said unto him. Blessed
is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God."
(Luke xiv.^15: compare Matt. xxvi. 29.)
" So shall it be at tl\e end of the world : the angels
shall corae forth, and sever the wicked from among
the just." (Matt. xiii. 49.) ,
When defending himself before the Roman tribunal,
in the presence of Felix, Paul announces his belief in
the resurrection of all the dead, " both of the just and
unjust." And when he applied this subject to the
conscience of the guilty governor, and " reasoned of
judgment to come, Felix trembled." (Acts xxiv.
15, 25.)
In the fifteenth chapter of his Epistle to the Co
rinthians, Paul speaks of those " who have fallen asleep

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 99
in Christ," who shall be " Christ's at his coming ; "
plainly teaching that some were not Christ's ; and, at
his final coming, would not be numbered among those
whom " God will bring with hira." (1 Cor. xv.
18, 23.)
To the Thessalonians Paul writes, " Thera also
which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him :
— the dead in Christ shall rise first." (1 Thess.
iv. 13, 18.) The resurrection of life precedes the
res:jrrection of damnation.
The Revelation of St. John says, " Blessed and
holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection;
on such the second death hath no power." (Rev.
XX. 6.) This teaches that all others are neither
blessed nor holy, but on thera the second death
hath full power. What the second death is we
learn frora these words : — " And all liars shall
have their part in the lake that burneth with fire
and brirastone ; which is the second death." (Rev.
xxi. 8.)
In presenting the natural order in which the doc
trines of Christ stand, Paul speaks of "the resurrec
tion of the dead, and of etemal judgment ; " showing
that the raising of the dead precedes the eternal judg
ment. (Heb. vi. 2.)
We have, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, a cata
logue of those who, by faith, pleased God. They
are spoken of as having endured cruel mockings and
scourgings, bonds and imprisonment, and every other
suffering, and all that "they might obtain a better
resurrection." (Heb. xi. 35, 36.)
Thus the reference of the resurrection of damna-

100 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
tion, spoken of by the Savior, to the future life, is
established beyond the power of cavil to reraove.
It is confirmed by the united testimony of all the
•inspired writers who have alluded to the' subject;
and it presents an unanswerable argument against
Universalism. " Lord, are there few that be saved ? " (Luke xiii.
23.) This inquiry of the disciples, taken with the
reply of the Savior, was the occasion of much per
plexity to my raind. Up to this tirae it is certain
Jesus had not inforraed his disciples that all men are
to be saved ; for it would be an impeachment of their
coraraon sense to suppose that the disciples would
have asked the Savior if few were to be saved, had
he already taught thera that all men shall be saved.
The apostles were Jews ; they held the faith of their
nation in respect to the destruction of the wicked, and
they must retain it until Christ should remove it.
The direct question as to the number to be saved,
afforded the Savior an excellent opportunity to settle
the question forever, and, by a direct and unequivocal
reply, to teach that all raen are to be saved.
But his reply settles the point that all will not be
saved. "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for
many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall.
not be able." (v. 24.)
These words reprove the curiosity of the apostles ;
they teach that none will be saved but those who
enter in at the strait gate ; that, to enter in, each
must " strive; " to " seek " is not sufficient ; that raany
who would merely seek to enter in will fail of sal
vation. And if those who only seek in this sense

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. lOl
are not saved, will those have a better fate who seek
ftot at all?

RICH MAN AND LAZARUS.
" There was a certain rich man, which was clothed
in purple and fine linen, and fared suraptuously every
day : and there was a certain beggar naraed Lazarus,
which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring
to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich
man's table : moreover, the dogs came and licked his
sores. And it came to pass that the beggar died,
and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom.
The rich raan also died, and was buried: and in, hell
he lifted up his eyes, being in torraents, and seeth
Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he
dried, and said. Father Abraham, have mercy on me,
and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger
in water, and cool ray tongue : for I ara torraented in
this flame. But Abraham said. Son, remember that
thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and
likewise Lazarus evil things : but now he is com
forted, and thou art torraented. And besides all this,
between us and you there is a great gulf fixed : so
that they which would pass frora hence to you, can
not ; neither can they pass to us, that would come
from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore,
father, that thou wouldest send hirii to my father's
house : for I have five brethren ; that he may testify
unto thera, lest they also corae into this place of tor
ment. Abraham saith unto hira. They have Moses
and the prophets ; let them hear them. And he said,
9*

102 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
Nay, father Abraham ; but if one went unto them from
the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him. If
they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will
they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
(Luke xvi. 19—31.)
With the explanation which Universalists give of
this scripture, I was never satisfied. I have conversed
with many Universalist preachers about it, and found
them as much dissatisfied as myself. But, as no other
explanation was presented, and as soraething must be
done to do away with the tremendous argument it
contained against Universalism, I was corapelled to
adopt it.
Universalists caU this passage a parable, in which
" the rich man represents the house of Israel, abound
ing once in all spiritual advantages." "By Lazarus
the beggar, the poor Gentiles are represented, excluded
from . the advantages that ' God's chosen people en
joyed." "The death of Lazarus represents the con
version of the Gentiles to the faith of Abraham."
" The rich man's death indicates that the Jewish
nation had ceased to exist." " By the gulf, we ' may
more particularly understand that purpose, of God, in
which it is determined that the Jews shall not believe
the gospel until the fulness of the Gentiles come in."
(Notes on Par, pp. 161, 166.)
That this interpretation is both false and absurd, a
slight consideration is sufficient to demonstrate.
1. In the history, as recorded by inspiration of God,
both the rich man and Lazarus died. But, if the in
terpretation of Universalists be true, only one died;
— the beggar was already dead. And when the rich

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 103
man died, by losing his spiritual advantages, the beg
gar, by obtaining them, of course came to life. In
the room of placing the rich man in hell, and sending
Lazarus into Abraham's bosom, the Savior, on the
ground of Universalism, would have placed the beggar
in the rich man's house, adding to his splendor and
suraptuous fare, and then placed the rich raan at the
gate, to beg a few crurabs frora Lazarus's table. Such
was actually the change which took place, if the death
of the rich raan was the loss of his spiritual privileges,
and the death of the beggar was the conversion of the
Gentiles to the faith of Abraham. But Jesus says,
" The beggar died, and was carried by the angels into
Abraham's bosom ; the rich man also died, and was
buried ; and in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in
torments." (v. 22, 23.)
2. The rich man says, " Father Abraham, have
raercy on rae, and send Lazarus, that he raay dip the
tip of his finger in water, and cool ray tongue." (v.
24.) This, as Universalists teach, signifies the great
desire, on the part of the Jews, to be blessed with the
gospel by means of the Gentiles. But iu what age
have they eyer expressed such a desire ? They have
never acknowledged, up to this hour, that the Gentiles
have the faith of Abraham. They have never solicited
instruction frora them, nor desired the consolation
which the Gentiles enjoy. Hence, if the interpreta
tion which Universalists give is correct, then, in the
passage, the Savior has not spoken according to truth ;
for all history teaches that the Jews have never al
lowed that the Gentiles have the true faith, or ever
sought light or relief from thera.

104 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
3. " Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed ;
so that they which would pass frora hence to you
cannot ; neither can they pass to us that would come
from thence." (v. 26.)
The explanation makes these words teach that, by a
divine purpose, or fixed decree, the conversion of a
Jew is impossible. How much soever he raay desire
to be a Christian, or a Christian may desire to convey
the gospel to the sons of Abraham, it cannot be done.
But the fact is obvious and incontestable, that a Jew
can be converted to Christ. And not only have nu
merous Jews been blessed with the gospel, but some
have apostatized to Judaism frora Christianity. So
that, either the interpretation of Universalists, or the
teaching of the Savior, is not true.
4. "I pray thee therefore, father, that thou
wouldest send hira to my father's house ; for I have
five brethren ; that he may testify unto them, lest
they also come into this place of torment." (v.
27,28.) But have the Jews ever made such a request ? Do
they desire Christians to seek out their brethren, and
testify in relation to the gospel ? Would they receive
such a message gladly ? Does not all history teach
that the opposite is true ?
5. Universalists can give no consistent account of
the "five brethren" for whom the rich man had so
ranch solicitude. If the rich raan was a type of his
nation, his request was an absurd one. " I pray thee
therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him (Laza
rus) to -my father's house." If the rich raan repre
sented the Jewish nation, then Abrahara was his

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 105
father ; and in what place soever Abraham was, there
was properly his father's house. And the reason
assigned for not complying, is ludicrously untrue —
" Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed."
How could the gulf keep Lazarus from the house of
the rich man's father, if Abrahara were his father, and
Lazarus were at that moment in his bosom ?
And how could the rich man have brethren any
where, if he stands as a type of his nation ? How
could five brethren be exposed to that place of tor
ment,, from which they could be saved only by timely
repentance, if the whole nation, in the person of the
rich raan, were at that raoraent all of them " in hell,
lifting up their eyes, being in torments " ?
But, if five of the six brethren were out of hell,
then the rich man does not typify the house of Israel ;
for all know that not a sixth part, but almost the
whole nation, have been cut off for unbelief.
But, in the history, the rich raan recognizes Abra
hara to be the father of his nation at large, and also
speaks of his own particular father's house, and his
five brethren there. This proves that he spake as an
individual, and not as a representative of his nation.
" Father Abraham, have raercy on rae. I pray thee,
father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's
house." (v. 24, 27.) And hov.' could Lazarus repre
sent the Gentiles, seeing he was a Jew, and was as
much the son of Abraham as the rich raan ?
6. " And besides all this, between us and you there
is a great gulf fixed ; so that they which would pass
frora hence to you cannot ; neither can they pass to
us that would come frora thence." (v. 26.)

106 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
f Universalists tell us that we are " by this to under
stand that purpose of God, in which it is determined
that the Jews shall not believe the gospel until the
fulness of the Gentiles come in."
But in what part of the Bible is this divine purpose
recorded ? If this be so, why did God send Jesus to
this people ? Why did the Savior warn them, teach
them, call them to repentance, and attempt to save
them, if they were excluded from faith by the decree
of God ? Why did he send forth his disciples to the
"lost sheep of the house of Israel"? And, after his
death, why did he command them to begin at Jeru
salem ? Why does Paul say, " But seeing ye put
it (the word of God) from you, and ^ judge your
selves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the
Gentiles" ? (Acts xiii. 26.) Were these offers made
in good faith to the Jews ? Then was it in their
power to believe the gospel.
The explanation given of the gulf, by Universalists,
proves that a Jew cannot believe the gospel until
the fulness of the Gentiles come in. " A great gulf
fixed, so that they which would pass from hence to
you cannot." If this unbelief is fixed by the purpose
of God, then the conversion of a Jew is impossible.
But such is not the fact. All the apostles were Jews ;
so were the seventy disciples ; the five hundred
brethren that saw the Lord at once, were Jews ; and
the converted thousands at Pentecost were of the
same nation ; and yet the fulness of the Gentiles had
not corae in. In every age since the ascension of
Jesus, many of the sons of Abraham have believed
on Christ ; and still the fulness of the Gentiles tarries.

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 107
If, then, the gulf is unbelief, it can be passed, and
Christ is made a deceiver. But if it be so "fixed"
that it cannot be traversed, — if there is no passing
from the world of woe to the world of joy, — then
are the opinions of Universalists false, absurd, and
destructive. Having proved that the atterapt to explain away
this passage has failed, I wish to call your attention
to the instruction conveyed in this history.
First. The teaching of the Savior would not have
been coraplete, without the instruction, contained in
this history. As he was a teacher sent from God,
all would expect from him plain instruction in regard
to the future life. If beyond the grave there is a
world of bliss, he would speak of it in plain terras.
If there is a world of woe, he would lay it open,
and warn men of their danger, and urge them " to
flee from the wrath to come."
And this he has done. The gates of Paradise have
been thrown open by his command. Its inhabitants,
with their employraent and their endless felicity, are
so graphically set forth, that we can almost see the
shining throng around the throne ; we can alraost
hear the anthem shout that comes from beyond the
tomb. In the history under consideration, Christ has
taught us, in terras that few impenitent raen can read,
and feel at ease, that there is a world of woe. He
has lifted up the curtain that covers the dark world
of death, and bade us know how fearful a thing it
is to be lost. We are raade to look in upon one
who, in his lifetirae, was rich, living in ease and

108 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
splendor, clothed in purple and fine linen, and fanng
suraptuously every day. But after death he was so
poor, that he could not purchase a drop of water to
cool his tongue. In this account there is no argu
ment, no pathetic appeal. It is uttered as if the
speaker knew what he said, and had authority to say
it. Open your statute-book. You find no argument
in it ; no reasons assigned why a murderer raust be
hung, or a felon be imprisoned for life. You find
in it mandate and authority. You are forbidden to
do certain acts, and if you do thera, are threatened
with imprisonment or death.
So in the history before us. The Savior has set
forth the bliss of heaven and the woe of hell. He
teaches us that the destiny of men is fixed at death ;
and that if men will not be warned and persuaded to
escape the "place of torment" by the instrumen
tality God is employing, none othei* will be provided,
neither will it avail any thing though one arose from
the dead.
Secondly. The scripture we have been consider
ing is not a parable. Not one of the many parables
spoken by the Redeeraer, from the first to the last,
leaves any person in doubt as to its character or its
design. At a glance, the most unlettered man takes
in the instruction of the parables. Most of them
begin thus, " And he spake a parable," or thus, " the
kingdom of heaven is likened to a certain man," &c.
And those that convey very important doctrine are
expounded. The parables of the sower, and of the
wheat and tares, are very carefully explained. (Matt.
xiii. 18—23, and 36—43.)

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 109
But in what part of the history of the rich man does
the Savior intiraate that he is speaking a parable ?
To what has he applied it ? If it is a parable, what
do the Scriptures say it teaches ? If it was necessary
to explain the parable of the tares, was it not as ira-
portant to explain the "rich raan"? Who was the
rich raan who died, and in hell lifted up his eyes in
torment ? In what condition in this world have raen
ever been placed, in which they have sought relief,
and have been told that there was no raitigation,
no relief, no escape from such dreadful torments?
Would the Savior so minutely illustrate other para
bles, and leave this unexplained ? If, as Dr. Whitby
affirms, an allegory similar to this history was in
existence in the tirae of the Savior, it cannot alter
the case. Christ, by adopting it, sanctions the doc
trine taught in it, and presents the narrative before
us, as a clear representation of the world of woe. In
this whole recital is there one word which intiraates
that it was an allegory ? or a word to justify the in
terpretation of Universalists ? Do the apostles explain
it as they do ? Does inspiration in any place come to
their aid ?
But am I told that there is imagery here, and that
all of it cannot be literal? But in what case does
the embellishment destroy the thing embellished ? in
what case does the imagery take from the truth of
the subject illustrated?
Do Universalists allow this objection to have any
force in other raatters ? Do they believe that heaven
has literal walls, whose gates are salvation and praise ?
Do they believe that heaven has streets, which are
10

110 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
paved with gold or precious stones ? But has heaven
no existence ? Is there no world of blessedness be
yond the grave, because around the representation
such drapery is hung ? Yet if their reasoning is
sound in respect to the history of the rich man, it is
equally so in regard to heaven. And if there is no
world of woe, then there is no realm of endless bliss.
Both are destroyed by the same objections.
Nor does it avail any thing to offer a criticisra upon
the word here rendered hell, and say that its priraitive
meaning was the grave. For in reply it can be
shown that the word rendered heaven originally sig
nified simply the atmosphere that belts the globe. It
is a sufficient answer in either case to say, that such
was not the meaning attached to the words heaven
and hell, when the Savior was upon the earth. It
was only by departing from the primitive raeaning,
that the word heaven was used to signify a state of
bliss beyond the grave. And if, in the text, the word
hell cannot signify a place of torment in the imraortal
state, because its primary meaning was the grave,
then heaven cannot mean a place of endless felicity,
because the word originally signified the atmosphere.
Thus Universalism destroys itself In its anxiety to
put out the fires of hell, it exterminates the glory of
heaven itself
Nor does it amount to any thing to allege that
hades, the place of punishment to the rich man, is
to be destroyed. But how? Inspiration replies,
" And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire.
This is the second death. And whosoever was not
found written in the book of life was cast into the

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. Ill
lake of fire." (Rev. xx. 14, 15.) But does this
promise relief to the rich man? Is the lake of fire
a place of happiness ? Is the second death imraortal
felicity ? '
So rauch is certain, even upon Universalist ground.'
Hades is a place of exquisite torraent ; and as no raan
can enter hades till he is dead, the punishraent of the?
rich raan must have taken place after death. It was!
a punishment awful in its nature, one that adraittedj
of no cessation or raitigation. For if there had been'
any prospect of deliverance, Abraham would have
reminded the rich man of the salutary nature and
limited duration of his present pains ; and encouraged
him to fortitude, for that relief would corae, and
deliverance not be long delayed. But he affords no
hope ; "the gulf is fixed, it cannot be passed!"
It is a fact that all Universalists, who are corapetent
to judge, allow that the Jews, in the time of the Sa
vior, were firm believers in the doctrine of endless
misery. Their faith in the existence of God was not
more universal. .Mr. Balfour says, "Now, I adrait that
to this heathen notion [that hades was a place of
punishraent after death] our Lord raight allude in
the parable before us. The Jews had, in our Lord's
day, irabibed many heathen notions, and this one
among the rest." (First Inq. p. 58.)
Another writer say^s, " The Jews in the time of
the Savior believed in endless punishment ; they
believed that hades was the place of punishment. |
Jesus, in the parable of the rich raan, uses the figures!
that the Jews eraploy to express endless woe. Christ '
added to their opinion only in the anguish of the

112 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
rich raan. The Jews thought that hades was a place
of endless silence, darkness, and gloora. Jesus taught
it was a place of exquisite anguish." That Christ
added to the opinions of the Jews in respect to the
anguish of the rich man, is true. But he also added
to their information in another and an iraportant
sense. They thought that no Jew could be exposed
to endless woe. But Jesus reraoved this idea by
taking one of their own nuraber, whom Abraham
acknowledges to be a son, and placing hira in the
anguish of the realm of despair.
It matters not where or how the Jews obtained
their faith in endless misery. They may have derived
it from God or raan ; from Moses or the heathen. We
have only to do with the fact that such faith upon
this subject existed.
When the Savior began his ministry, he found this
doctrine prevailing upon the earth. It was the faith
of his nation. If it was an error, he knew it to be
such, and saw at a glance all the evils that attended
it. How, then, as an honest teacher of Universalism,
would he have conducted ? What success could he
expect in preaching the salvation of all men to a
people who believed in endless death, till this opinion
should be reraoved ?
Suppose a philanthropist finds in the way of his
efforts to do good, a gigantic evil ; an evil that meets
him on every side, and prevents his success. Would
he countenance and uphold it ? Or would he give it
a vigorous opposition, and on every occasion seek to
destroy or reraove it ? Suppose a missionary meets,
in his field of labor, with a* wide-spread, all-opposing

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 113
error, which stands between him and success, and
makes hira toil for nought. Would he not feel that
nothing could be done till he had conquered the
error ?
How do Universalists now conduct ? By all who
know any thing of their style of preaching, it will be
remembered that the great burden of their sermons
is to disprove endless misery. Nine tenths of all
the Universalist serraons that I ever heard, had this
end in view. And the reason assigned is, that end
less misery is the popular faith, and, as such, it stands
directly in the way of Universalisra. A raan will not
receive the idea that all raen will be saved while he
believes that raany will perish forever.
The sarae state of things encountered the Savior
in his teaching. Endless raisery was the popular
faith. How, .then, did the Savior meet it ? In no
instance did he reprove the Jews for holding this
doctrine. " Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees,"
is the .only phrase in the Bible in which Universal
ists pretend to find a censure upon the general belief.
But remeraber that the doctrine was not peculiar to
the Pharisees ; and that they believed in the existence
of God as much as in eternal death. The declaration
as much commands the disciples to be atheists, as it
does to deny the doctrine of endless raisery.
But not only is it an incontestable fact, that the Sa
vior did not oppose this doctrine ; that on no occasion
did he call in question the eternity of punishraent ; but
when he spoke of punishraent, he used the language,
the figures, the expressions, coramonly eraployed by
those who believed in it. He made no explanation,
10*

114 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
qualified them not, gave no intimation that he em
ployed them in any other than the popular sense ;
nor did the Jews ever accuse him of denying their
views of future punishraent. He differed from thera,
as Universalists allow, in making the punishment in
hell more severe, and including in it the sons of
Abraham, as well as the Gentiles.
That the Savior admitted the popular idea, the ad
vocates of Universalisra have been unable to deny.
Mr. Balfour says, " Is there any thing, then, sur
prising, that, in this parable, [of the rich raan,] our
Lord should introduce the popular idea which the
Jews had irabibed about hades 1 " (First Inq.
p. 56.)
Mr. Whitteraore says, " Let it be distinctly under
stood, that it is our opinion Jesus introduced those
views of hades [that it was the place of endless pun
ishraent] which the Jews had received frora the
heathen, and used them in a parabolic sense, to il
lustrate his instructions." (Notes on Par. p. 159.)
So much, then, all allow, — that the people of
whom Christ was, and to whom he carae, believed
.in endless punishment. The Savior admitted their
opinions, used their language, and added to the inten-
isity of the woes of hell. He believed in endless
misery, or he did not. If he did, then Universalism
is a fatal error. If he did not, then our Lord was not
honest ; he was a deceiver of the people ; for he
acquiesced in a fatal doctrine, and confirmed the
Jews in their opinions. Universalism blasphemously
impeaches the integrity of the divine Redeeraer !
And the reasons Universalists present, why the

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 115
Savior admitted the doctrine in question, do but add
tp the difficulty, and raake the conduct of the Savior
still more inexplicable. Universalists tell us that this
doctrine was borrowed frora the heathen ; that neither
Moses nor the prophets taught it.
Had the doctrine of endless punishment, so gen
erally received by the Jews, originated in the misun
derstanding of sorae portion of the Bible, it must
seera strange that Jesus, the Teacher of truth and
righteousness, did not correct a mistake so ruinous ;
more strange that he should countenance it in any
forra. But that such a notion, borrowed frora the
heathen, and one that Universalists affirra to be dis
honorable to God and injurious to man, — that such
an idea, coming frora such a source, should be
adopted, confirmed, and still further extended, by
Jesus, cannot be allowed, if the truth was in him.
In comparison with the Savior, how much more
frank and open, upon this same subject, do Universal
ists appear ! They find the sarae doctrine in the
faith of the church that our Lord found araong the
divinely-instructed people of God. Do they adopt its
terms, or use its expressions, to teach Universalism?
Did any raan, when hearing a sermon upon Universal
ism, suppose he was listening to a defence of endless
misery ? Take up a Universalist book ; do you think
you are reading an argument in favor of eternal
death ? How is it, then, that these men are so rauch
more manly and open than was the Savior, if he was
a Universalist ?
Suppose a preacher of Universalism were to go into
an Orthodox pulpit for the express purpose of defend-

116 ' PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
ing Universalism. He announces his text, — '•¦' Fear
not them that kill the body, and after that have no
more that they can do. But fear him which, after he
hath killed, hath power to cast into hell." He ex
plains it as the Orthodox do, uses the same figures
and language in illustration, and in no way intimates
that he departs from the coraraon opinion in respect to
the passage. What irapression would the preacher
leave ? This, raost surely, — either that he was not a
Universalist, or that he was a hypocrite and a deceiver.
Under such circurastances the Savior taught. Uni
versalists say, that his errand to this world was, to
teach that all men would be saved. He stood in the
synagogues of a nation -which believed in eternal
death. He there speaks of future punishment in the
customary language of his nation, and in no case
intimates a departure from their opinion. If Univer
salisra is true, can it be that the Savior was honest ?
Does it not exhibit him as a deceiver ? Must not
every mind which feels the least respect for the char
acter of Jesus of Nazareth, regard the consequences
of such reasoning with the utmost horror?
Neither is it true, as Universalists assert, that the
history contains no proof that the rich man was a
wicked person. . He was sent to hell, not because he
was rich, but because he was wicked. He desired
that Lazarus raight be sent to his five brethren to
"testify unto them." And he was sure that "if one
went from the dead, they would repent." (v. 30.) If
not wicked, why did they need repentance ? and if
timely repentance, could keep his brethren from that
place of torment, it would have kept him from.it.

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 117
It was because he was a wicked man, and in his
lifetime did not repent, that he perished. (See also
Ezek. xviii. 27.)
I conclude my notice of this portion of the divine
threatenings with the remarks, that Universalists are
not able to remove the objections which the history
of the rich man and Lazarus presents to their system ;
that their interpretation of this history is inconsistent,
absurd, and untrue ; that, upon their own admission,
our Lord, in this passage, inculcated the popular doc
trine of endless misery ; and that this proves that he
believed it, and was not a teax;her of the salvation of
all men, or that he was what his eneraies pronounced
hira to be, a deceiver. No labor, sophistry, or inge
nuity, can turn this passage from its application to
the future world, nor remove, nor weaken, the solemn
warning it contains, to all who live in sin, to repent in
their "lifetirae," "lest they also go to that place of
torraent." PARABLE OF THE TARES OF THE FIELD.
" Another parable put he forth unto them, saying.
The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which
sowed good seed in his field : but while raen slept, his
eneray carae and sowed tares among the wheat, and
went his way. But when the blade was sprung up,
and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
So the servants of the householder carae and said unto
hira. Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field ?
from whence then hath it tares ? He said unto them.
An eneray hath done this. The servants said unto

118 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
him. Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
But he said, Nay : lest while ye gather up the tares,
ye root up also the wheat with thera. Let both grow
together until the harvest : and in the tirae of harvest
I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the
tares, and bind thera in bundles to burn thera: but
gather the wheat into ray barn." (Matt. xiii. 24 — 30.)
I can well recollect the impression made upon my
mind, when I was a Universalist, by the remark of a
gentleman, that my explanation of this parable dif
fered very materially from the explanation given by
Jesus Christ to his own words. I felt the force of
the rebuke. No raan can read the explanation of this
parable given by Universalists, and place by its side the
explanation given of it by the Savior at the particular
request of the disciples, and not be amazed at the
audacity and recklessness of the men who would sub
stitute an exposition so different from our Lord's.
To make the facts apparent, I will present the two
interpretations side by side.
We are told that the disciples came to Jesus, saying,
" Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field."
(Matt. xiii. 36.)
Christ's I&planatixin. Universalist Explanation.
« He answered and said unto " By the Son of man, Jesus
them, He that soweth the good means himself.
seed is the Son of man.
"The field is the world: the "The field signifies the ma-
good seed are the children of the terial universe ; the children of
kingdom ; but the tares are the the kingdom were those to whom
children of the wicked one. tlie kingdom was preached, or
those who had actually embraced
the gospel ; the tares simply sig
nify wicked persons.

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.

119

" The enemy that sowed them
IS the devil ; the harvest is the
end of the world ; and the reap
ers are the angels.

" As therefore the tares are
gathered and burned in the fire,
SO shall it be in the end of this
world. « The Son of man shall send
forth his angels, and they shall
gather out of his kingdom all
things that offend, and them
which do iniquity ; and shall cast
them into a furnace of fire ; there
shall be wailing and gnashing of
teeth. Then shall the righteous
shine forth as the sun, in the
kingdom of their Father." {Matt
xiii. 36—43.)

" The devil is that perverse
and wicked spirit, so opposite to
the spirit of Christ, which led
men to say, ' Lord, Lord ! ' while
they performed not the will of
God. [Thus the tares sown, and
the devil who sowed them, are
the same thing.]
'' The harvest took place at the
end of the Mosaic age. The
angels mean the Roman armies,
which God sent to destroy his
rebeUious people, the Jews.
" The furnace was the city of
Jerusalem ; and the righteous,
which are to shine as the sun,
are those Christians, who, after
the Jews were destroyed, would
experience comparative earthly
felicity, and have an enlarged
enjoyment, in this life, of gospel
peace." {JVotes on Par. p. 52.)

Such, then, is the explanation of the explanation of
Christ, which Universalists give ; and are these men
to be trusted, when they thus impiously presume to
correct the Son of God, and in so doing say that he
was not able to express his own meaning ? Does he
say any thing in his explanation about "evil prin
ciples," "Roman armies," or "the destmction of
Jerusalem " ? If he meant to teach such things, his
explanation of his parable needs more explaining than
the parable itself But if the Savior clearly expressed
his own meaning, then Universalists bring upon
themselves the deep guilt of "handling the word of

120 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
God deceitfully," and "wresting the Scriptures to
their own destruction."
The principles of interpretation which Universal
ists bring to this parable, if applied to future life and
blessedness, would disprove them also ; and the Bible
could not teach future life at all. As an example,
turn to Luke xx. 35 — "But they which shall be
accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resur
rection frora the dead, neither marry, nor are given in
marriage ; neither can they die any more ; for they
are equal unto the angels, and are the children of
God, being the children of the resurrection."
Universalists, without any hesitation, apply this
text to the imraortal state, and cite it as a proof of
sorae of their notions. Yet it has no raark of refer
ence to the future life that the parable of the tares
has not. If the principles of interpretation which
they bring to that parable are sound, I challenge
Universalists to prove that this text has any reference
whatever to future life.
Does the phrase " worthy to obtain that toorld,"
prove it? But it is said that the word "world" raeans
nothing but "age," and the phrase "this world and
the world to corae," raeans only "the Jewish and
Christian age." Nothing more, then, can be meant
than this — " they which shall be accounted worthy
to obtain that age ; " that is, the Christian age.
Does the phrase "resurrection from the dead,"
prove a reference to the life to come ? By no raeans.
On John v. 28, 29, Universalists argue that coming
forth out of the graves to a resurrection of life, or of
damnation, does not even prove that the persons were

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 121
dead ; rauch less, then, can the siraple phrase "resur
rection of the dead," prove any thing as to a future
state of existence, especially when limited by the
phrase "that world," or age.
Is such a reference proved by the words " they are
equal unto the angels " ? But we are told that the
"Roman armies are the angels." It would not be
necessary to go out of this world to become equal to
such angels !
Is a reference to future life proved by the assertion
that, in the resurrection-state, men will " neither
marry nor be given in marriage"? But such a eon-
dition of things is attainable even in this world.
The Romish priests have always exhibited this fea
ture of the resurrection-state ; and it is well known
that in the community of Shakers, they neither
marry nor are they given in marriage.
If Universalists will be consistent, they will have
their heaven in the same state of existence where
they place their hell. Let a man believe in Univer
salism, and, in their opinion, he wfll have already
obtained "that world, and the resurrection of the
dead." Let him do as did the Roraan arraies, and he
will be equal to the angels. Then let hira attach
himself to the fraternity of Shakers, and he will have
obtained that world whose children neither raarry
nor are given in marriage.
I feel that I should insult the good sense of my
readers, did I deem it necessary to dyvell longer on a
parable whose meaning has been declared by its
author, the Son of God himself
11

122 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.

JUDGMENT OF THE LAST DAY.
" When the Son of man shall come in his glory,
and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit
upon the throne of his glory : and before him shall be
gathered all nations : and he shall separate thera one
from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from
the goats : and he shall set the sheep on his right
hand, but the goats on the left. ' Then shall the
King say unto them on his right hand. Come, ye
blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared
for you from the foundation of the world : for I was a
hungered, and ye gave me raeat : I was thirsty, and
ye gave me drink : I was a stranger, and ye took me
in : naked, and ye clothed rae : I was sick, and ye
visited me : I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Then shall the righteous answer him, saying. Lord,
when saw we thee a hungered, and fed thee? or
thirsty, and gave thee drink ? when saw we thee a
stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed
thee ? or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and
came unto thee? And the King shall answer and
say unto them. Verily, I say unto you. Inasmuch as
ye have done it unto one of the least of these my
brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he
say also unto them on the left hand. Depart from me,
ye cursed, into everiasting fire, prepared for the devil
and his angels : for I was a hungered, and ye gave
me no raeat : I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink :
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in : naked, and
ye clothed rae not : sick, and in prison, and ye visited

PROOFS AGAINST UN I V*E R S AL I S M . 123
me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying.
Lord, when saw we thee a hungered, or athirst, or a
stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not
minister unto thee ? Then shall he answer them,
saying, Verily, I say unto you. Inasmuch as ye did it
not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
Aud these shall go a,way into everlasting punishment :
but the righteous into life eternal." (Matt. xxv.
31—46.) The passage here presented is called, by Univer
salists, " the parable of the sheep and goats." By
what authority they call it a parable, they do not in
form their followers. The Savior gives no such
intimation ; and if Universalists have such knowledge,
they "are wise above what is written." But, if
these verses contain parabolic instruction, that instruc
tion is not a parable of sheep and goats ; the Savior
spoke no such parable. The instruction begins,
"When the Son of man shall come in his glory,
and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit
upon the throne of his glory ; and before him shall be
gathered all nations ; and he shall separate them, one
from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from
the goats," Separate whom? Sheep and goats?
Certainly not. But before hira all nations are to be
gathered ; and he, the Son of raan, will separate them,
the nations, as a shepherd divideth his sheep frora the
goats. Here, in this plain description, he refers inci
dentally, by way of illustration, to the custom of the
shepherd, and then resumes the narrative, without
alluding again to the shepherd or his flock.
In Matt. xxiv. 27, Jesus says, " For as the lightning

124 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the
west, so shall also the coming of the Son of man
be." Suppose some one should attempt an explana
tion of this chapter, and style it "an examination
of the parable of thunder and lightning." Who
would not be astonished at his stupidity ? But could
it not be done with as much propriety as there is in
calling the latter part of the twenty-fifth chapter of
Matthew " the parable of the sheep and goats " ?
I ask aigain. By what authority is this passage called
a parable ? If this be not literal instruction, there is
inone in the Bible. If this is a parable, the fifteenth
jchapter of the First of Corinthians is a parable,, and so
is every other part of the Bible.
Umversalists find this a difficult passage. They
must first make it a parable, and then find what they
please to call its meaning. This granted to them,
they can remove the difficulty which this passage puts
in their way.
If it had never been clearly shown that it is not a
parable, but is a fearful representation of "the judg
ment of the great day," it can be clearly proved that
the passage bas no reference to the event which Uni
versalists say it was intended to teach. All know, I
presume, that Universalists refer the fulfilraent of this
prediction to the destruction of Jerusalem. I am pre-
paised to show that it has no reference to that event ;
that, at the destruction of Jerusalem, no such events
took place as are described in the verses ; and that the
whole refers to the future life.
The interpretation which Universalists give of this
passage is the following : —

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. li
1- " The coming of Christ was a display of chF
vine power and majesty." Then why designate his
coming as peculiar to that event ? In what way did
his power and majesty, as displayed in the destruc
tion of Jerusalem, differ from his coming to destroy
the cities of Sodom, or Tyre, or Babylon ? He made
no greater display of power than he has displayed on
numerous occasions.
2. " The gathering of all nations was the as
sembling of the Jews at Jerusalem." But did Christ,
in any sense, at any tirae before that destruction,
gather all the Jews before hira, try them, condemn
thera, and then send them into everlasting punish
raent ? The Savior says that, when the Son of raan
shall come with his holy angels, all nations shall be
gathered before him. Did any event transpire, at
the destruction of Jerusalera, that corresponds with
this ? Who were these angels ? The Roman ar
mies? Were these fierce heathens "the holy an
gels" of Christ? Or were the Jews, in any true
sense, all nations ? When Universalists allege, in
proof of their sentiment, that "all nations shall be
blessed," are we to understand thera to mean all the
nations of the Jews? The Jews were but one
nation. All nations did not appear before Christ and
the holy angels, at the destruction of Jerusalem ; and
therefore it is impossible to explain the passage by
that event.
3. " The devil and his angels were the leading
Jews and their emissaries." But how could Christ
say to this devil and his angels, " Depart from me, ye
cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and
11*

126 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
his angels," ? Why use such language,- if the persons
sentenced were the sarae beings as those whose pun
ishraent they were to share ? and the idea of calling-
the Roraan array, under Titus, the holy angels of God
and the Son of man, is too absurd to demand even a
passing remark ; for " all the holy angels " raust mean
the entire military force of the Roman empire,
4. The word "everlasting," as applied to life and
puaiishment, is said to indicate, not endless duration,
but a long period of tirae.
All adrait that aionian signifies a period of 'dura
tion as long as the nature of the subject with which,
it, is connected will allow. An everlasting priesthood,
possession, or mountain, is to last a long time ; an
everlasting God signifies an etemal being; How
long, then, can everlasting punishment continue when
the immortal soul is to suffer?
No stronger terra than everlasting is employed, in
presenting the bliss of heaven and the joys of the
immortal, state. No stronger term can be employed ;
if, there had been a stronger* term, it would have
Hseen, used.
But if eternal punishraent has limits, so too has
etemal blessedness ; so has the mercy of God, and his
kindness, which is said to be only everlasting.
In the scripture before us, Christ teaches that when
the Son of raan shall come, the following events will
transpire. Having all the holy angels with, him, he
will sit upon the throne of his glory ; all nations
will be gathered before him ; he will separate the
righteous from the wicked ; to the one he will say,
"Corae, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 127
prepared for you from the foundation of the world ; "
to the other, " Depart firom me, ye cursed, into ever
lasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels;"
then the wicked shall go away into everlasting pun
ishraent, but the righteous into life eternal.
No such events have yet transpired. They cer
tainly did not attend the destruction of Jerusalem.
They are yet future, and will transpire in that day
of judgment, unto which the ungodly are reserved
to be punished. (2 Peter ii. 4 — 9; iii. 7.)
But if this passage refers to the fall of the city of
David, why were the Jews so awfully threatened?
The Univerealist answer is, that they rejected Jesus,
and put him to death; for this they were to "go
away into everlasting punishraent," whenever Jeru
salem should be destroyed.
Turn now to the history of that destmction, and
see if the event corresponds with the predictions of
Christ as to what is to transpire "when the Son
of raan shall come in his glory."
1. Jerusalem was destroyed about forty years after
the Savior's death. Most of those who took part in
that dreadful tragedy, were either in the prime of life
or had passed it. No one will pretend that all of
thera were alive when Jerusalera was destroyed, who
were guilty of the criraes for which that judgment
was sent. If all who were thus guilty were alive
when their punishment came, the miracle would not
have been unrecorded. If any of them died, then
they were not " reserved unto the day of judgment to
be punished." (2 Peter ii. 9.) Either for forty years
there was no death in the Jewish nation, or the
threatened doom was so far evaded.

128 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
But we know that in the fierce and bloody civil
wars which preceded the overthrow of the Jews, thou
sands of that nation were slain in battle, thousands
raore died by the hand of authority, and many raore
were swept away by the united power of famine and
pestilence. All these escaped the doora which was
threatened in the destruction of Jerusalera. But Jesus
told the guilty that they could not escape the dara
nation of hell ; that they should all be punished in
the day of judgment. He could not have referred to
the ruin of Jerusalem; for most of those to whora
he spoke did not live to that tirae; and sorae, per
haps, survived it, and went into captivity.
2. The Savior, in all his instructions to his disciples,
inculcated watchfulness and fidelity. In the parable
of the talents, (Matt, xxv, 14 — 30,) he exhibits the
respective rewards of fidelity and disobedience, when
he should call them to their account. The recreant
disciple is often threatened with perdition. Men
are warned against shrinking from duty, even though
the body should be killed ; for it is better to al
low men to destroy the body, than to expose the soul
w hell. Christ assures those who may deny him be
fore men, that he will deny thera before his Father
and the holy angels.
All this, and much more of the sarae iraport, as
Universalists tell us, has reference to the fate jsf
Jerusalem. At its destruction, the apostles, if faith
ful up to that hour, were to be rewarded with life
eternal; if unfaithful, punished with everlasting
misery. But is it true that Jesus thus promised
and threatened in relation to this event ? Then did

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 129
he threaten them with that to which they never
were exposed, and to which he knew they would
not be exposed, even if they should become apos
tates. They were all dead, save one, before Jerusa
lem was destroyed; and the Savior knew it would
be so when he thus urged them to faithfulness.
Now, what mockery, what trifling, to urge men to
duty from fear of a temporal calamity which was
not to occur until the men addressed shffuld be in
their graves ! But no one can deny that the Savior
threatened the disciples, if they abandoned his cause,
with banishment from God, with a> "denial- before
the face of his Father," with " the destruction! of
the soul in hell," with a portion in that "fire pre
pared for the devil and his angels," with an abode
among those who dwell "where there is weeping
and gnashing of teeth," and with "everlasting pan-
ishment." These threatenings could not refer to the
destruction of Jerusalem, because the persons threat
ened could not be involved in that calamity, as they
died before it occurred. Had they even blasphemied
against the Holy Ghost, they could neVCT have been
in danger of eternal damnation upon Universalist
groimds; for they were beyond its reach before it
came. These threatenings can only refer to that
eternal worlds in which all men will stand before
the judgment-seat of Christ, and receive according
to the deeds done in the body. (2 Cor. v. 10.)
They can only have their accomplishment in that
world in which death triumphs, and the "wicked go
away into everlasting punishment."
But if all the threatenings, of fearful import, such

130 PROOF.S AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
as we have quoted, which denounce woe upon
"the ungodly," and threaten the irapenitent with
"wrath to come," with "hell-fire," with "the dam
nation of hell," refer. to the destruction of Jerusalera,
then all who died before that event escaped the pun
ishraent, and avoided the irapending and raerited
calaraity. Thus ungodly men, and all apostates,
received a much better portion than did the apostles
and the faithful Christians. For the apostles suffered
bitter and cruel persecution all their lives, and died,
most of them, an ignominious and dreadful death ;
while the enemies of Christ escaped previous perse
cution, died before Jerusalera was destroyed, and
escaped that too; and thus evaded punishraent in
both "worlds" or "ages." Thus the threatenings of
Christ are made a mockery, and his warnings a
deceit. But shall I be told that those enemies who died
before Jerusalem was destroyed, did not escape pun
ishment, being punished in the deed? To this I
reply, if Christ threatened the ungodly with the dam
nation of hell, which daranation was punishraent in
the ruin of Jerusalera, then all who died before that
ruin carae, escaped the threatened doora. But, on
the other hand, if raen are punished as they pass
\ along, it is not true, as asserted in the Bible, that
I God "reserves the wicked unto a day of judgment
to be punished !" If those who died before Jerusa
lem was destroyed, were punished as much as they
deserve, then all who suffisred what they did, and
were, besides, involved in that destruction, were pun
ished more than they deserve ; and the judgment

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 131
is not what the judgraent of God is said to be,
"righteous and just," but partial and unequal.
But suppose all the wicked Jews had lived to
perish in the siege of their capital, — in what would
their condition have differed from many other nations,
which have been invaded, conquered, and carried
away into captivity? What did those in that siege
suffer more than their brethren did in those bloody
civil wars that preceded their political overthrow ?
How was that to be so peculiarly dreadful, beyond ah
other example, whereas other nations had been de
stroyed by fire and sword, as well as they ?
In what sense would the temporal condition of the
apostles, had they lived till that destruction, have
been raore desirable than the fate of the enemies of
Christ, even of those who perished with Jerusalera?
During all their life, they were poor and persecuted ;
often iraprisoned and scourged ; often destitute of
food and raiment; and at last they died an igno
minious death, because they " endured to the end."
In what respect did death, at the siege of Jerusalem,
appear worse than the death suffered by each of
Christ's chosen and faithful disciples ? In what way
in this life could the enemies of Jesus have suffered
more ? The persons involved in the overthrow of
Jerusalem could not have endured raore than did the
faithful apostles during their natural lives, nor have
suffered a more violent and crUel death. Where, then,
was the fulfilment of the promises of rest, victory,
salvation, a crown of life; of the taking away of all
things that offend ; of the saving of the life ; of free
dom frora toil, care, woe, and pain ; of perfect deliver-

132 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
ance from their enemies, and from death itself? They
found it not in this life ; they expected it not. " If
by any raeans I might attain unto the resurrection of
, the dead." " There is laid up for me a crown ©f
righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge,
\ shall give me in that day." {Phil. iii. 11. 2 Tim, iv.
'8.) If in this life only their reward was to be found,
they were not only " of all men most miserable," but
of all men most deceived !
The Bible teaches us that, at the judgment which
all must meet, the suffering is for the guilty, and fbr
those only. But in the destruction of Jerusalem, the
innocent suffered raore than the guilty. In that
dreadful siege, women, children, and babes, endured
the most. Mothers cooked their own children ; and
as they ate, fathers snatched the hoiTid food from the
unnatural parent, only to satisfy with it the relentless
cravings of their own hunger. And yet those guilty
men, whose crimes brought down this calamity, long
before, had gone down to their graves ; and, upon
the Universalist's theory, were in glory, far from all
trouble and pain, leaving others to reap the whirl
wind which they had sowed. Such is tender mercy
as it is understood by men who \eject the doctrines of
Jesus Christ.
3, Nor is it true that, after the destruction of Jeru
salem, the condition of Christians was improved. It
was, in fact, made raore intolerable. They were
delivered frora the Jews, whose power to harm was
limited; and were placed in the hands of enemies
whose power was unlimited, and whose disposition to
persecute the followers of Christ was equal to their

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 133
ability. Christ said that, at his coraing, his followers
should receive the greatest of blessings — " life eter
nal," " treasures in heaven," " resurrection of life,"
an end of persecution, a relief frora all conflict and
warfare, a perfect deliverance frora all eneraies, and
frora all who troubled thera, and an adraittance into
the presence of God, and to "the glory prepared for
them frora the foundation of the world."
The destruction of Jerusalera brought no such
blessings as these to the disciples. Their teraporal
condition was raade worse. The Roraans, to whom
they were made subject, after Jerusalem was de
stroyed, took away their few privileges, and in all
things proved theraselves severer oppressors than the
Jews ever were. They had power to do the Chris
tians a deeper injury, and visit upon thera a more
dreadful persecution. And on every occasion, they
made the Christians feel their power. This Univer-.
salists admit. In a labored article in the Expositor,
(vol. ii. pp. 238, 239,) it is said, " The religious ene
mies of the disciples, who were Jews, being Roman
subjects, had not the prerogative to take their lives.
After the divine Instructor had presented his disciples
with these two authorities, [Jews and* Romans,] which
would be employed against thera, it was natural for
hira to warn them to be more on their guard against
falling into the hands of the Roman authorities, than
into the hands of those whose power toas less exten
sive." So, then, when Christ proraised his followers
endless blessedness and rest at his coming, encour
aged them to bear up under their fearful persecutions,
and prompted thera to duty by hope of " great reward
12

134 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
in heaven," he simply meant that the Jews would be
destroyed, and the disciples be delivered over to the
Roraans, who could raore cruelly persecute thera, and
put them to death ; and against "falling into whose
hands the disciples were warned, by the divine In
structor, to be on their guard!"
That the destruction of Jerusalem broke the power
of the Jews is true ; that it relieved the faithful disciples
from sufferings is not true. It only changed their op
pressors, and delivered them over to a raore cruel and
savage foe, who could inflict upon them all the raise-
ries that the Jews had power to inffict, and then add
death in its raost appalling form. No student of his
tory can be ignorant of the fact, that, for more than
two hundred years after Jerusalem, ivas destroyed, the
Roman power followed the Christians with unre
lenting persecutions, to which history furnishes no
parallel. In a temporal point of view, the destruction
of the city of David was an injury to the disciples.
It increased the temporal sufferings of Christians, and
added to their woes. So far frora affording them
relief or salvation, it opened the flood-gates of dread
ful anguish.
If, then, the blessings referred to were to be con
ferred at the downfall of Jerusalem, they never came ;
and the faithful in Christ were of all men most mis
erable. I close my remarks upon this passage by saying
that it refers to the eternal world, and will have its
fulfilment in that day in which Christ shall come
to judgment, and separate the righteous from the
wicked. No event, such as is described in this scrip-

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 135
ture, has ever transpired upon earth. The destmction
of Jerusalem did not introduce the righteous into life
etemal, but into deeper raisery. The text points to
the next existence, and is yet to be fulfilled. It
warns the impenitent of that hom- in which the as
sembled universe shall stand before their Judge, and
pass the final test. It describes the process, the sen
tence, the changeless destiny, of both the godly and
the ungodly. The one will go away into endless life,
the other into endless punishraent.
Universalist teachers inforra their followers that
Christians reject their interpretations of Scripture, be
cause they will not examine thera. But the truth is,
so far as they are credited, they are credited for this
very reason. No rational raan would risk his hopes
of eternity upon such perversion of Scripture, such
palpable and violent perversion of the word of God,
if he would give the subject a few moments of calm
and prayerful consideration.
The remarks I have offered upon the interpretation
of Universalists, given to the words of Christ in Mat
thew XXV., will apply to all that portion of the divine
teachings which they apply to the destruction of Jeru
salem. To thera I refer my hearers. (Matt. iii. 12 ;
V. 22; xi. 22—24; xiii. 47—50; xvi. 25, 26; xxiii. 33.
Mark x. 29, 30. 2 Thess. i. 7—10. Heb. x. 26—31.)
TEXTS THAT EXPRESS OR IMPLY CONDITIONS.
Many of the reasons against Universalism, drawn
from the threatenings of the Bible, will be introduced
into the discourse upon future judgment, and, on that
account, will for the prespjit he "T^^ted.

136 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
That class of texts which expresses or implies
conditions, I have ever regarded as among the raost
unanswerable arguraents which can be brought
against Universalism. When an advocate of that
system, I was more perplexed with these portions of
Scripture than almost any other. When texts were
given me to explain, such as usually are adduced
against Universalism, I could offer a plausible inter
pretation, which would frequently satisfy the inquirer,
if not myself But when a text, accompanied by a
condition, was presented, I found an unanswerable
difficulty in the simple query, " Suppose that any
one does not comply with the condition ; what then ? "
1. The Savior, in his Sermon on the Mount,
describes those who are blessed and accepted of
God, and what their final reward will be. If men are
not "poor in spirit," "meek," "merciful," "pure in
heart," " peace-makers," do not " hunger and thirst
after righteousness," they are cursed ; they have no
inheritance in heaven ; they shall not obtain mercy ;
they shall not see God ; they shall not be called the
children of God ; for them there will be no reward in
heaven. (Matt. v. 1 — 12.) Many live and die with
out forming those characters which alone can render
them blessed.
2. The Savior says, "Lay up for yourselves
treasures in heaven." "If ye forgive not raen their
trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your
trespasses." (Matt. vi. 15, 20.) Yet raany waste
this whole life without laying up treasure in heaven, '
and live and die in the raost deadly hatred toward
their fellow-men. Will these, in heaven, enjoy

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 137
treasure they have never laid up, and receive for
giveness, when they have disregarded the condition
on which the promise of forgiveness rests, and by
which alone it can be secured ?
3. " Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy
la4en, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon
you, and learn of me ; and ye shall find rest unto
yoiu souls." (Matt. xi. 28, 29.) Of many who
heard him, Jesus said, " And ye will not come to rae
that ye might have life." (John v. 40.) Millions, in
our day, refuse the offer of life, and " tread under foot
the Son of God," and " die in their sins."\ Will
these have life ? Though they refuse to come to the
Savior, will they have rest ? Though they reject the
yoke of Christ, will they be ¦ entitled to that rest
which " remaineth for the people of God " ?
4. To Nicodemus Jesus said, " Except a man be
born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God,"
(John iii. 3. ) Call this change what you please,, it is
essential to salvation. Universalists will not pretend
that all men are born again. How, then, upon' their
own acknowledgment, can all men see the kingdom
of God?
5. "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wil
derness,, even so must the Son of man be lifted up ;
that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but
have eternal life." (John iii. 14, 15.) The occasion
referred to, when Moses lifted up the serpent in the
wilderness, is recorded in. Numbers xxi. 8, 9. The
people were bitten by serpents, and the bite was fatal.
God commanded Moses tO' make a brazen serpent, and
erect it on a pole. Healing was conditioned upon
12*

138 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
looking at the serpent. All who looked' were healed.
Those who refused to look, died. There was virtue
enough in the serpent to heal the whole nation. If
all were not healed, it was not for want of virtue in
the reraedy, but because sorae who were bitten would
not look upon it. " Even so raust the Son of raan
be lifted up," to heal the fearful raalady of sin. And
what looking upon the serpent did to the bodies of
the Jews, believing on Christ does to the souls of
sinners. " Whoso believeth in him shall not perish ; "
all others will. Those who believe will have eternal
life ; those who believe not will have eternal death.
The condition must be coraplied with, if the blessing
is to be secured; as rauch so under the gospel, as
when Moses lifted up- the serpent in the wilderness.
6. " He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting
life ; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see
life ; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John
iii. 36.) Christ carae not to conderan the world, for
the world was already conderaned. He carae not to
proclaira the wrath of God, for it was already pro
claimed ; it rested on men, as the sentence of death
abides upon the criminal before his execution. Christ
came, because men were already condemned, and be
cause the, wrath of God was then resting upon them.
His mission was to offer pardon to the guilty, and
"to save them that believe." (1 Cor. i. 21.) But the
condition of pardon and salvation is to believe on the
Son. Those who, by faith, have the Son, have ever
lasting life ; they are no longer under condemnation,
no longer exposed to eternal death; they are par
doned ; their sins are blotted out. (Acts iii. 19.) And

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 139
they obtain the evidence of their recovery frora
spiritual death, and of their inheritance in heaven.
But those who "believe not are conderaned al
ready." Upon those who reject the condition, the
wrath of God settles down, to abide forever. They
are left to that eternal conderanation, to save frora
which Christ carae ; but from which they cannot be
saved, " because they believe not in the name of the
only-begotten Son of God." (John iii. 16 — 18.)
7. " Know ye not that they which run in a race >
run all, but one receiveth the prize ? So run that ye ,
may obtain. And every raan that striveth for the \
raastery is temperate in all things. Now, they do it '¦
to obtain a corruptible crown ; but we an incorruptible.
I therefore so run, not as uncertainly ; so fight I, not
as one that beateth the air. But I keep under my
body, and bring it into subjection ; lest that by any
means, when I have preached to others, I myself
should .be a castaway." (1 Cor. ix. 24 — 27.)
1. Upon this passage I remark that Paul here, as
in^ther places, corapares this life to a race, in which
sorae lose, and some win. He declares that the great
prize to be obtained is an incorruptible crown; and
that, unless sought for, it will not be obtained. " So
run that ye raay obtain." (v. 24.) He_ in this lan
guage refers to the well-known garaes which were
celebrated near Corinth. Those who entered their
names as competitors were called upon to undergo
great privations ; to abstain from all stimulating meats
and drinks, and every indulgence having a tendency
to enervate the body ; to endure a long and painful
course of preparation; and then, with a number of

140 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
rivals, run for the prize, which could be won only by
the greatest exertions, and, when obtained, was but a
garland of forest leaves, that must soon fade away.
Christians were engaged in a race ; and this life
was the race-course. The prize was a crown of life,
which would be awarded by the Judge only when
the race was concluded. And while those who did
not enter upon the race would not be . crowned,
neither would they that did, unless they "endured to
the end."
2. He alludes also to the conditions upon which
the prize was to be obtained, and applies thera to the
gaining of the crown of life proposed in the gospel.
" Every raan that striveth for the mastery is temperate
in all things." (v. 25.) "And if a raan also strive
for raasteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive
lawfully." (2 Tim. ii. 5.) A man raust not only
strive, but, in order to be crowned, he must strive
lawfully. Though he strive, and touch the goal,
yet if, in the race, he violates the rules or conditions
of the games, he is not a victor ; he is covered with
disgrace. So a man who wishes an incorruptible
crown must strive, and strive lawfully, or he will not
gain it.
3. He shows the encouragement the gospel holds
out to all. In those races all ran, but one only could
obtain the prize. Though they strove lawfully and
hard, devoted raonths to preparation, denied them
selves food and rest, and endured all manner of
privations, — still they ran uncertain of success : the
victory might be given to another, for "the race is not
always to the swift." But in the Christian race, alt

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 141
who strove lawfully, and strove to the end, should be
victors. And wisely does he reason that, if raen, to
secure an earthly crown, underwent so much, then
such as have an immortal crown in view may well
suffer and toil, strive lawfully, and strive ever, to gain
the reward.
4. The awful consequence attending a neglect of
duty, — not running at all, violating the rules of the
race, or not complying with the condition upon
which success depends, — is graphically set forth in
the words, " Lest that by any means, when I have
preached to others, I myself should be a castaway."
(v. 27.)
Paul here refers to those officers or judges of the
garaes, whose business it was to proclaim the condi
tions of the games, display the prizes, animate the
competitors, proclaim the victors, and confer the
crown. If, after he had preached, and warned, and
pointed out the way of salvation, he shoidd be un
faithful, or fail to keep under his body, or to mn on
to the end, his high office would procure hira no
favor. Not only would he not obtain a crown of life,
but he would be a castaway.
If, then, so much preparation, toil, circumspection,
lav/ful striving, diligence, and perseverance, is need
ful to obtain a wreath of laurel, will less suffice to
obtain a crown of life ? and can Universalism be
true ? Will all men at last obtain the crown, though
not one of them ran? If these conditions are essen
tial, — if, as the apostle argues, this life is a race which
they must run who would win, — are there not mil
lions of our race, who not only do not strive la^yfully,

142 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
but do not strive at all? Can they be saved, if the
apostle has written the truth as it in Jesus?
5. " For our light affliction, which is but for a
moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and
etemal weight of glory." (2 Cor. iv. 17.) But how
can this be, if the present life has no connection
with the future? How can Paul, or any one, have
a far raore exceeding and eternal weight of glory,
if all men are to be equal in the resurrection?
6. " Wheref6re we labor, that, whether present" in
the body, "or absent" from the body, "we may be
accepted of him." (2 Cor. v. 9.) If there were no
doubt of his acceptance, why labor to secure that
which was already certain ? Why preach, toil, and
strive, in reference to this one event, if it were not
doubtful, and there were no certain danger? But
there was doubt, there was danger, that he should at
last " be found naked." His whole life was devoted
to one end, — to secure his acceptance with God; and
he assigns the reason why he thus labored, in the
words which follow : "For we must all appear before
the judgment-seat of Christ." (v. 10.) Would this
have been needful, if all raen will stand accepted,
whether they labor to please God or not? whether
they attempt to do his will, or sin with a high hand
and a blaspheming tongue?
7. To attempt to cite all the cases in which a
blessing is promised to raen upon conditions, would
be to transcribe a large part of the New Testament.
I am unacquainted with a promise in the Bible that
has not annexed to it a condition expressed or evi
dently implied. Indeed, in almost all cases in which

PROOFS AG.'.IKST UNIVERSALISM. 143
divine power has been miraculously displayed, it has
been in connection with human agency. God has
annexed conditions to all things. He would not heal
the Israelites without the brazen serpent. Naaman
must go and wash in Jordan. The blind man must
wash in the pool of Siloam. When sinners were
pricked to the heart by the Holy Ghost, their first
question was, " What must I do to be saved ? " I
shall close this arguraent by noticing one other pas
sage. " I ara now ready to be offered, and the time of
ray departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight,
I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of right
eousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall
give me at that day ; and not to rae only, but unto
all them also that love his appearing." (2 Tim. iv.
6 — 8.) These words suggest the following consid
erations : —
1. Paul was about to die. His course was almost
ended. He was conderaned to the cross ; and was
in prison, waiting to hear the tread of the execu
tioner who was to lead him forth to death. But he
was ready at any raoraent to be offered up as a
sacrifice. We have before us his dying words. They
have all the sanction that attends the death-bed of an
inspired raan.
2. The chief thing that aniraated and supported
hira was the great blessing in store for him as soon
as he was " offered." " There is laid up for me a
crown of righteousness." " The Lord, the righteous
Judge," was to give him that crown. It was to be
given "at that day," the day of judgment.

144 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
3. He gives us the foundation of his hope in
Christ. The reasons why he expected that the right
eous Judge would thus reward hira at that day, are
stated. They are three in number — "I have fought
a good fight;" "I have finished my course;" "I
have kept the faith." He likens himself to a warrior,
a winner in a race, and a steward to whom is com
mitted an important trust.
A successful warrior must do raore than enlist ; he
raust fight manfully, and spare neither toil nor blood,
when the cause of his country demands the sacrifice.
He who should desert the standard of his country in
the hour of peril, would be dooraed to eternal infaray.
He only would deserve or receive a crown of vic
tory, who should fight till he conquered, or lay his
lifeless body upon the field of conflict.
He is not a successful runner who only enters the
lists, though he come well prepared ; nor would he
secure the prize, if he should run on a little way,
and then turn back. Better would it be for him
had he never entered. But he who strives lawfully,
runs on, in spite of all obstacles, to the end, and
reaches the goal ; — he it is that is crowned.
Neither is he a good steward who neglects his
trust, or gives up the treasures when assailed. But
he who keeps his trust, and says to his coming Lord,
"I have kept the treasure," will hear the blissful sen
tence, "Well done, good and faithful servant; enter
thou into the joy of thy Lord."
As a warrior, Paul had well fought the good fight
of faith ; and in the battles of his Sovereign, he was
about to end his warfare with his life. It had ever

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. ] 43
been his chief labor that, in the Christian race, he
"might finish his course with joy." (Acts xx, 24.)
His desire was granted ; he had run well, and run to
the end. And his dying moraents were consoled
and cheered by the truth, that now his arduous
race was run, and his reward was on .high. As a
steward, too, of the faith, and of the manifold grace
of God, "he had been " found faithful," and with his
dying breath he could say, in the presence ' of the
Searcher of all hearts, " I have kept the faith."
But suppose it had not been so. Suppose he had
found the warfare arduous, and, in the time of conflict,
had deserted the cross, and joined the eneraies of his
Savior. Suppose he had run a short distance in the
race, and, finding it a severe and painful struggle, had
turned back, as many had done before him, or
returned to his former enmity. Or suppose that,
knowing that the safe-keeping of the faith raust be
attended with great sacrifices, watchfulness, trials, and
persecutions, he should have abandoned his trust, or,
like Judas, betrayed it; what effect would this con
duct have upon his future condition if Universalism
is true ? Would it make any difference ? Would
there not still be in reserve for him a crown of glory?
Would he not, as Paul the traitor, have as high a seat,
as loud a song, as clear a voice, a diadem as bright,
as he now will have as Paul the triumphant warrior,
Paul the successful runner, Paul the faithful steward,
who resigned his life rather than yield up the faith ?
Would not he and Judas sit side by side upon their
thrones of light, in the presence of that holy Being,
whose body the one betrayed, and whose cause the
13

146 PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM.
Other abandoned into the hands of his enemies. If
not, then Universalism is false. And if it was trae,
Paul could have known nothing of it ; for his dying
breath announces that, had he not fought a good
fight, finished his course, and kept the faith, not only
he would not have received a crown of life, but at
last raust have been a castaway.

RECAPITULATION.
I think no man can go forth from this investi
gation without the firmest convictions that Universal-
isrn is not of God. All nations have rejected it, and
all rational minds fear a judgment to come. It pre
sents doctrines at once novel and fatal — doctrines
which the entire Christian world have rejected.
We have seen, Universalists themselves being judges,
that the nation of whom Christ came, and to which
he preached, believed in the eternal punishment of
the wicked; that Jesus and the apostles used language
designed to confirra this opinion; that Universalisra
can only blot out this doctrine frora the Bible by the
raost violent wresting and dreadful perversion of the
word of God. We have proved that the reasoning
which deduces Universalisra frora the Bible, would
also deduce paganism or atheism ; and that the same
reasoning which blots out' future woe, and quenches
the fires of hell, ends the joy of the blessed, and puts
out the light that surrounds the throne of God and
the Lamb. And not only sp, but Universalism does
violence to the plainest teachings of Scripture, and
makes the inspired penmen either incompetent or dis-

PROOFS AGAINST UNIVERSALISM. 147
honest. It demands of you the sacrifice of the faith
of the church, the piety and learning of eighteen cen
turies ; it invites you to mock at sin, to laugh at the
judgment, and to scoff at threatened danger. It tells
its deluded votaries that if they do not enter in at
the strait gate, if they do not lay up treasures in
heaven, if they do not in this world repent and be
lieve, it will be as well with them beyond the grave.
Though they die thieves and drunkards, adulterers
and fornicators, they shall at last be saved ; and all
this though the Bible says that such shall not inherit
the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10.)
Upon the ministers of Universalism the blood of
souls must rest ; their hands are stained with the crim
son flood. Upon them the deep condemnation must
fall of " handling the word of God deceitfully," of
" wresting " the Bible to their own destruction, and
that of others. May they be turned from their peril
ous and ruinous employ ! May God " give them
repentance to the acknowledging of the truth ; and
that they may recover themselves out of the snare of
the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will" !
(2 Tim. ii. 25, 26.)
Can any immortal souls be so unwise as to incur
such risk eis they raust run in building upon such a
foundation, and following such guides? How will
they, when this season of probation is lost, awake to
their situation only to say, " The harvest is past, the
sumraer is ended, and we are not saved " !

LECTURE IV.

REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN
FROM THE ARGUMENTS ADDUCED IN SUPPORT
OF THE DOCTRINE.

ACTS xvii. 11.
AND SEAKCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY, WHETHER THOSE THINGS
, WERE SO.
In the discharge of his duty, as an ambassador of
Jesus Christ, Paul visited Thessalonica. The Jews
of that city were offended because Christ was preached
among thera ; and they were enraged because he was
preached by one, formerly of their own number, who
was now preaching the faith that once he destroyed.
Knowing that it would be impossible to answer or
refute his reasonings, they first assailed his character ;
and then, gathering to themselves certain lewd fellows
of the baser sort, they assaulted the house in which
Paul lodged, and compelled him to depart frora the
city. He went by night to Berea. His reception
there is thus described : " These were raore noble
than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the
word with all readiness of raind, and searched the
Scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
This raore noble conduct is recorded for our imi
tation. It .is a great thing to know what the Bible

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 149
teaches in relation to huraan duty, and huraan des
tiny, in regard to the effect this life has upon the
next ; and how mubh our conduct and character in
this state of existence will result in our eternal weal
or woe. The Bible gives plain instructions upon
these important truths. So clearly is our duty re
vealed, that " the wayfaring men, though fools, need
not err therein." Though we may very properly
avail ourselves of helps that we may understand the
word of God, the responsibility returns upon us as
individuals. We must hear and decide for ourselves ;
and to our own master we raust finally stand or fall.
Universalists have always professed an ardent desire
to have their sentiments examined. They invite and
challenge inquiry. They complain that their faith is
opposed as licentious ; that it is rejected as untrue ;
and that many parts of the Bible are arrayed against
it ; while their expositions of Scripture are unno
ticed, and the arguments urged in defence of their
faith are passed by without examination.
One of the defenders of Universalism, who stands
at the head of the sect, thus records the coraplaints
of his brethren upon this point. He says, speaking
of one who attempts to examine Universalism, —
"And what does he adduce? Why, nothing but
the sarae texts that have been invariably quoted, for
the sarae purpose, by his nuraberless predecessors, for
the last twenty or thirty years, and as invariably
explained with rauch care by Universalists in their
replies and other writings. Not an allusion to their
interpretations escapes in a single instance ; not an
intiraation that any other meaning had ever been
13*

150 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
pointed out, or attempted to be shown, than what
he assigns. Let the opponents of Universalism, if
they would be thought candid and honorable, change
imraediately their mode of warfare." (Expositor,
vol. iii. 139, 140.)
Universalists cannot complain of this investigation.
I purpose to do the very thing which they say has
been left undone. I have already examined their
interpretations of scriptures alleged against them. I
shall now show that the proofs adduced in favor of
Universalisra do not sustain it ; and that reason, nature,
and the Bible, are arrayed against it. I tak<e the
ground that, if nothing could be said against its moral
tendency ; if no objections of any kind were urged
against it ; if it were to be tested simply by the
amount of evidence it could suraraon in its own
behalf, — all reasonable rainds would be compelled to
reject it on account of the entire want of evidence in
its favor. The scriptures quoted in its defence have
no reference to universal salvation. The arguraents
:urged in its support, drawn from other sources than
the Bible, are either sophistical, or they prove too
much, and so prove nothing ; or they prove the
very opposite of what they are brought forward to
maintain. Universalism stands before us as an error of the
first raagnitude. If it does not preach against repent
ance, it reraoves all motive to it, by teaching that
repentance is not needful for salvation. If raen do
not repent, they will not perish. So argue its advo
cates. If its instructions do not openly encourage
vice, " it strengthens the hands of the wicked " by

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.

151

assuring them, that, live well or ill, do good or not,
keep God's law or break it, die a felon or a martyr,
live in lust and die in crime, — all this, though it may
subject thera to sorae temporal inconvenience, will
have no effect upon their future condition. Be pure
in heart or vile, follow holiness or pollution, all will
at last see God alike, and dwell with him forever.
But imraortal souls should deraand affirmative
proofs, abundant, conclusive, irrefra.gable, before they
rest upon a systera, which, if true, will not hurt thera
if they reject it ; and if false, raust ruin, for both
worlds, all who trust it. I shall prove, I think, that the
evidence offered in its defence affords it no support.
My purpose is to say a few plain things in a plain
way ; to raeet Universalisra as it exists in the com
munity ; and so to present the subject as to commend
it to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
The arguraents advanced in behalf of Universalisra
are of a twofold nature — those drawn frora the Bible,
and those drawn from reason. In this lecture I
shall confine my remarks to such as are drawn from
the Bible. I select them as I used them Avhen de
fending the systera, and as they are now eraployed by
others. I shall give thera all the force they receive
when used by the advocates of Universalism.
The following proposition I offer as the subject of
this lecture: — The arguments adduced from, the
Bible in favor of Universalism do not support it.
I. Gen. iii. 15 : "I will put enmity between thee
and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed ;
it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his
heel."

152 arguments examined.
It is a fact which any one so disposed may ascer
tain, that a large part of the proof-texts cited in favor
of Universalisra is found in the Old Testament ; and
yet, when pressed with the threatenings of the Old
Testament, and called upon to explain texts like the
following, " The wicked shall be turned into hell,"
" Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth
shall awake, sorae to everlasting life, and sorae to
shame and everlasting contempt, "_ (Dan. xii. 2,)
Universalists tell us that such texts cannot refer to
the future state, because the Old Testaraent does not
reveal a future existence; and that its proraises and
threatenings are liraited to this life. How, then, can
universal salvation be taught in a book which has no
reference to the future ? If all the threatenings con
tained in it are bounded by time, so are all the prom
ises. This answer is alone sufficient to sweep
away the whole argument derived from the Old
Testaraent. But, not noticing this inconsistency any further,
let us exaraine the texts said to teach Universalisra,
and see how they bear upon the question.
In what way does the passage quoted above prove
the salvation of all raen? It asserts that the head
of the serpent shall be bruised ; but what does this
prove ? It begins and ends with the victory of the
seed of the woraan over the seed of the serpent, but
says nothing of the doom of the incorrigible. Uni
versalists say that to bruise the head of the serpent
is to conquer him, and deliver all who are subject to
his power. But what will become of the millions
who have lived and died in sin before this event

arguments examined. 153
transpires. They cannot go where Christ has gone.
(John viii. 24. ) Paul informs us that all that know
not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord
Jesus Christ, shall be punished with everlasting de
struction, frora the presence of the Lord, and frora
the glory of his power. (2 Thess. i. 8, 9.)
Moses announces the destruction of the serpent.
Paul announces the destruction of impenitent men,
who shall be punished with everlasting destruction.
Does this language intimate that all men will be
saved ? Is it not plain that the text has no reference
to universal salvation ?
II. Gen. xxii. 18 : " And in thy seed shall all the
nations of the earth be blessed."
This is a prominent argument. I have no recollec
tion of having ever heard a sermon in defence of
Universalism, in which this text, or the repetition of
the promise to Isaac and Jacob, did not hold a conspic
uous place. Should we adopt the limitation which, in
Mat. xxv. 32, Universalists apply to "all nations,"
it would be very difficult for them to prove that "all
nations " in this place means all men.
That no people was to be excluded from the light
and favor of the gospel, is true. Unlike the law of
Moses, it extended to all nations. But that all raen
in those nations would believe the gospel, obey it,
and be saved, the text cited does not assert. Not
only is it true that the text does not prove universal
salvation, but I ara prepared to prove that it teaches
the contrary doctrine.
St. Paul understood this passage, I presurae, as
well as Universalists. He was acquainted with this

154 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
promise ; with the nature of the blessing, the terms
upon which it was offered, and the extent to which
it should reach.
In the third chapter of Galatians, he quotes, in the
eighth verse, the very promise under consideration.
He then goes on to show* the relationship of the
Gentiles, who should be justified by faith under the
preaching of the gospel, to Abraham ; and closes the
chapter by showing that those who are Christ's, or in
Christ by faith, be they Jew or Gentile, are " Abra
ham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."
The plain meaning of the proraise is this : Under
the gospel there are no national disabilities, no na
tional preferences. All nations stand upon the same
level. The Jew is no raore the child of Abrahara
than is the Gentile. None are the children of Abra
ham, but those who are " Christ's " by faith and
obedience. If none but the seed of Abrahara are
heirs to this proraise, — if none are Abraham's seed
but those who are Christ's by faith and obedience, —
then all who are not Christ's are not Abraham's seed,
nor have they any part in that blessing which was to
be offered to all nations. As to the question, " Who
are Christ's ? " Paul answers, " If any man have not
the spirit of Christ, he is none of his." (Rom. viii. 9.)
The same truth is taught by Peter in the following
words : " Of a truth I perceive that God is no respect
er of persons : but in every nation, he that feareth
hira, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with
hira." (Acts x. 34, 35.) Here we are told that men
are accepted, not according to their national, but
their personal character. The acceptable worshipper

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 155
was not exclusively found among the sons of
Abraham ; but, in every nation, those who " fear
God," and " work righteousness, are accepted with
him." If such only are accepted, then all who fear
not God, and who do not work righteousness, are not
accepted with him. I would ask if any can suppose
that Christ could have sent the apostles to proclaim
the salvation of all raen, when it required a special
revelation and heavenly vision to convince Peter that
righteous men among the Gentiles would-be saved.
The promise to Abraham included the gift of a
Savior, who should tum men frora their iniquities,
and "redeera thera frora the curse of the law." Un
like the law, it was to exclude no nation frora its
benefits. The terras upon which the blessing w^s
offered, were faith in Christ, and obedience to his
commands. And though Christ will be preached to
all nations, and " raany will be redeeraed to God by
his blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and
people, and nation," (Rev. v. 9,) yet all who "obey
not the gospel," who "are not Christ's," who "have
not his spirit," who " work not righteousness," will
have no part in this blessing; they will perish as
surely as if Christ had not died.
III. Isaiah xxv. 8 : " He will swallow up death
in victory ; and the Lord God will wipe away tears
frora off all faces."
This text raay represent that class of proofs drawn
frora the Old Testaraent, in which blessings are
promised to " all people," to "all men," to "all the
ends of the earth."
Does the passage before us contain a promised

156 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
blessing for all men ? When it is said, " He will
wipe away tears from off all faces," does it include
all men ? If so, then the passage is a proof of Uni
versalism. If not, then it has no reference to that
system. I presume that it is well understood that the
phrases "all men" and "all people" do not neces
sarily include the whole human family. Of John
the Baptist, it is said, " Then went out to him Jeru
salem, and all Judea, and all the region round about
Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, con
fessing their sins." (Matt. iii. 5, 6.) We should
hardly believe that raan to be sane, who should at
terapt to prov6, frora these words, that every man,
woman, and child, in Judea and the region round
about Jordan, confessed their sins, and were baptized
of John.
Again ; sorae one said to John, " Rabbi, he that
was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest
witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come
to him." (John iii. 26.) But did the high priest, the
chief priests, the scribes, the elders, the Pharisees, and
the great body of the Jews, corae to Christ, and re
ceive baptisra at his hands ? No one will advance
such an idea. Then the phrase "all men," in the
Bible, any more than in coraraon discourse, does not
always include the whole human family. If you ask,
"As the phrase soraetiraes does include all our race, and
soraetiraes not, how are we to know when it is lim
ited, and when unlimited ? " I reply, " The context al
ways limits or restricts the application, when only a
large number is intended." It does so in the cases just

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 157
alluded to. It does so in the Old Testament, when
blessings are promised to all nations, and they are said
to bow down before the Son of God. It does so in
the text under consideration. That the prophet does
not include all men in the proraise that God will wipe
away tears from off all faces, is evident from the con
nection. He is speaking of " his people," the people
of God. As to thera, " death shall be swallowed up
in victory ; " frora all their eyes " tears shall be wiped
away ; " all " rebuke shall be taken frora thera ; " and
they shall say, " Lo, this is our God ; we have waited
for him, and he will save us."
He then turns to speak of another class ; of those
who are not the people of God, and who have no part
in these blessings ; but for ¦\^hom a different destiny
is reserved. They are to be " trodden down undgr
the Lord, even as straw is trodden down for the dung
hill ; " and " he shall bring down their pride together
with the spoils of their hands." (v. 10, 11.) But how
can this be trae of any one, if all the human family
is included in the proraise ? Every one must see that
the prophet, inspired of God, speaks first of what God
will do to his friends, and then of what he will do to
his foes.
This remark applies to other texts of the same
general character, which Universalists quote to prove
that all will be saved. " And it shall corae to pass in
the last days, that the raountain of the Lord's house
shall be established in the top of the mountains, and
shall be exalted above the hills ; and all nations shall
flow unto it." (Isaiah ii. 2.) But the connection
proves that no reference is made to the eternal world ;
14

158 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
for the writer adds, that in that day " the lofty looks
of man shall be humbled ; " they shall go into the
holes of the rocks, and each shall in that day " cast
his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, to the moles
and to the bats." (v. 11, 19, 20.) These things are
predicted as about to take place in that day in which
all nations shall flow to the house of the Lord.
Hence they will not take place in the immortal
world ; and the promise yields no support to Univer
salism. IV. Isaiah Iv. 10, 11: "For as the rain cometh
down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not
thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring
forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and
bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goeth
out of my mouth : it shall not return unto me void,
but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it
shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it."
This passage is called an unconditional promise,
implying no conditions, involving no contingency.
The argument is this : " The snow and rain are sent
to the earth to accomplish a particular purpose, — to
water the earth, to make it bud, to give seed to the
sower, and bread to the eater. They always do this,
and never return to heaven void. The gospel was
given to save the world ; it cannot fail of its object,
any more than the snow and rain ; and, as it will ac
complish the design of Him who sent it, as certainly
as do the snow and rain, all men must be saved."
This interpretation destroys the spirit of the pas
sage. The figures introduced in the text expose the
sophistry of the argument, and put down the false
interpretation.

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 159
The passage presents no unconditional promise. It
offers a contingent blessing ; one that rests upon, the
cooperation of raan with God. Upon this thei prora
ised favor rests, and without it no good can be clairaed
or expected. We have an analogy between the in
fluences of the snow and rain and the influence of the
gospel. "As the snow and rain, so shall ray word
be." Where the one is limited by huraan neglect,
the other is. In whatever sense the former demands
labor and diligence to insure seed for sowing and
bread for eating, the latter requires huraan exertion
and obedience to secure salvation.
Has man nothing to do to obtain the blessings
which attend the snow and rain ? Will the earth
be fruitful, and give seed to the sower and bread to
the eater, if raan folds his hands iu indolence? Will
com grow upon the raountains, or grain wave in the
valleys, if raan perforras no labor ? May the farraer
recline all day upon his couch, or spend his months in
folly and pleasure ; and when his industrious neigh
bor reaps a golden harvest, may he put in his sickle,
and reap what he never sowed ? Can he gather a
crop, who never planted ? Will he find food without
labor, because God has promised that the snow and
rain shall never fail tp water the earth, and give bread
to the eater?
Yet to this absurd conclusion must we come, if
the argument of Universalists is sound. For, on
their supposition, man has no labor to perform, no
fallow ground to break up, no sweat to spend for
bread. But let two men try the experiraent. Let
the one employ well the season of preparation, use

160 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
the means God has appointed, break up the ground,
and sow with a liberal hand. Let the other refuse
to labor ; let him go from place to place, arguing and
disputing about the promise of God ; and attempting
to dissuade men from labor, on the pretence that God
had made an unconditional proraise that the eater
should have bread ; and that it would be wrong to dis-
tmst God by ploughing, sowing, and toiling, when
the snow and rain were to do the work, and bring the
blessing. Which of these raen's places would you
desire in the sejison of harvest ?
Carry this subject up to the judgment ; and tell me
whose character you would prefer to bear in that
day, when the secrets of all hearts shall be known.
Would you choose the character of the reckless and
impious man, who has laid to his so'il the flattering
unction that God is too good to punish sin ; who has
wasted this life, abused all his privileges, and died
in sin? or that of the raan who has feared God,
whose whole aira has been to please God, to secure
that good part which shall never be taken from him,
and to die the death of the righteous ?
Were all raen to cease from labor, God would be
faithful ; the sun would shine, the seasons roll around,
and the rains frora heaven, and the feathery snow,
would fall till time should be no more. But the dis
obedient and unfaithful would still be unblessed. For
to secure the fruits of the earth, not only must the
showers fall, but the ground must be broken up and
prepared ; painful labor must be borne, and diligence
and care alone can obtain what God has promised.
The indolent or unfaithful will have no share in the

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.

161

promise. They will adopt the lamentation of old,
" The harvest is past, the sumraer is ended, and we
are not saved."
In the Epistle to the Hebrews, we find this figure
introduced with great effect, sustaining the principles
we have here maintained.
" For the earth, which drinketh in the rain that
cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs raeet for
them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from
God. But that which beareth thorns and briers is
rejected, and is nigh unto cursing ; whose end is to be
burned." (Heb. vi. 7, 8.)
In this passage, the human family is likened unto
the earth, watered by the rain that cometh oft upon
it. A part is dressed or cultivated ; this bringeth forth
fruit for man, and is blessed of God. Another part is
neglected, and, though watered by the same rain, and
warmed by the beams of the same sun, it is rejected ;
it is nigh unto cursing, and its end is to be burned.
So with raen. Those who obey the truth are blessed
of God ; those who are disobedient are rejected and
accursed. The same sun that warms and vivifies the well-
tilled field, hardens the barren soil. The same raois-
ture that raakes the well-prepared ground abundantly
fruitful, raakes the neglected land a waste of thorns
and briers, whose end is to be burned.
God's word is now ready to do his bidding. Al
ready has it blessed raen in a thousand ways. But
if raen harden their hearts, and refuse to obey the
truth, they cannot be saved. Nor will the word
return void. It will have some effect. Like the
14*

162 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
rain which makes the land a fruitful field, or a spot
upon which fuel for the flames is found, — like the
sun, that either invigorates or hardens the soil, — the
gospel, which is "the power of God unto salvation
to every one that believeth," becomes " a savor of
death unto death " to all who reject it. (2 Cor.
ii. 14—16.)
V. Isaiah xlv. 23, 24: "I have sworn by myself;
the word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness,
and shall not retum. That unto me every knee shall
bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely, shall one
say. In the Lord have I righteousness and strength."
Universalists cite this to prove that God has pledged
himself by an oath to save all men. They call this
"a raost striking passage." So it is; but not in
favor of Universalism. This will be made apparent
when we consider the tiMie when the subjection
-spoken of will take place. Universalists say that it
will be fulfilled in the day when all shall be saved.
But St. Paul, who spoke by the inspiration of God,
assures us that the passage is to have its fulfilment in
the day of judgment.
" But why dost thou judge thy brother ? or why
dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all
stand before the judgment-seat of Christ. For it is
written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow
to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So
then every one of us shall give an account of himself
to God." (Rom. xiv. 10, 11.) The prediction which
the Universalist applies to the salvation of all men, St.
Paul applies to the judgment of the great day. Which
of them must be right ? Does the prophecy teach

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 163
that all men will be saved ? or that all, however stub
born or submissive, will have to bow the knee at
last before the Judge, and receive from him their sen
tence ?
But who shall receive in that day, the day of judg
raent, " righteousness and strength " ? All raen? By
no means. The seed of Israel are to find in him jus
tification and glory. Those who are Christ's are the
seed of Israel. All are to come to the Lord ; all are
to bow the knee ; all are to give an account of them
selves , to God ; many to " be justified and glorified;"
many to " be ashamed and confounded." (v. 24,
25.) In this passage, Universalists take for granted
the very point they are required to prove. They
assume that all are to bow the knee willingly, that
all are to be willing subjects ; while the very language
shows that it is a compulsory submission, a bowing
of those subdued by the power of the conqueror;
for, while all bow the knee, many are ashamed and
confounded. As I shall refer to this point again in
my remarks upon 1 Cor. xv., I leave this text, simply
adding that while Universalists rest their systera in a
great measure upon this text, it speaks in decisive
terms against them. For God has sworn by himself
to bring the rebellious to punishment. And in the
day of judgment, when all the nations of the earth
shall appear before God, then all must bow the knee
as friends or as foes ; the one will receive righteous
ness and glory ; the other will be ashamed and con
founded, when they hear the sentence, "Depart from
me; I know you not."
VI. Lam. iii. 31 : " For the Lord will not cast off

164 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
forever." Of 'whom spoke the prophet? of the hu
raan race ? of all raen ? No ; but of his nation, whom
he calls " the daughter of Zion " and " the daughter
of Judah." The connection proves that it was the
nation whora God would not cast off forever.
Does he refer to the future state, when he makes
the declaration we have quoted? Does he mean to
teach, in this place, that, in the future life, not one
of the Jewish nation would be lost ? The context
shows that he had no reference to the future life at
all. His nation at that moment were cast off. They
were in captivity at Babylon. The city of Jerusalem,
once full of people, now was solitary. The princess
among the provinces was now tributary. "Judah,"
says the prophet, " is gone into captivity, because of
affliction, and because of great servitude ; she dwell
eth among the heathen ; she findeth no rest ; all her
persecutors overtook her between the straits." " The
Lord hath afflicted her." "Her children are gone
into captivity before the eneray." (Lam. i. 1 — 3, 5.)
The people of Israel in captivity knew not whether
they should ever retum to their own loved city, or
they and their children be doomed to hopeless ser
vitude. The prophet received encouragement from
God, that their captivity should at some time end;
that God would not cast off forever, but, in his own
tirae, would bring thera back from their captivity, and
restore them to their own land.
Whoever will read the book of Lamentations, will
see that the prophet has no reference in the text to the
future life ; that the people of whom he spoke were
his own nation, the Jews ; and that he speaks of no

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 165
other casting off than what they at that moment
were enduring, when " their inheritance was turned to
strangers, and their house to aliens;" when they
" drunk their w^er for money, and their wood was
sold unto them ; " when their " princes were hanged,
and the faces of their elders were not honored;"
when " the joy of the heart ceased, and the dance
was tumed into mouming." (Lam. v. 2 — 15.)
Though at that time, and under those circum
stances, the Lord would not cast off that people for
ever, it by no raeans proves that he will not do so to
the impenitent who die in their sins. Indeed, were
such the meaning of this passage, it would only array
scripture against scripture ; for the Bible expressly
asserts that God will finally cast off all who die in sin.
David, in his dying advice to Solomon, says, "And
thou, Solomon, my son, know thou the God of thy
father, and serve him with a perfect heart and a will
ing mind; — if thou seek him, he will be found of thee ;
but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off forever."
(1 Chron. xxviii. 9.)
Paul says that those " who know not God, and that
obey not the gospel," " shall be punished with ever
lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and
from the glory of his power." (2 Thess. i. 8, 9.) The
same truth fell from the lips of the Savior : " And
these shall go away iuto everlasting punishment ; but
the righteous into life eternal." (Matt. xxv. 46.)
God had cast off his people. They were in cap
tivity at the time the prophet wrote ; though God
purposed to restore them. But this no more proves
that God will not finally cast off the impenitent, or

166 ' ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
that all men will be saved, than does the fact that
the governor of a state has pardoned one crirainal out
of the penitentiary, prove that none will ever after be
sent there ; or, if sent, be obliged Jo remain till the
expiration of their sentence. In the judgment, God
will cast off, and cast off forever. Then all who are
filthy, unholy, and unclean, will so remain forever.
VII. Acts iii. 21 : " Whom the heaven raust re
ceive, until the times of the restitution of all things,
which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy
prophets since the world began."
Universalists, here assume the very point in debate —
that this restitution of all things is the salvation of all
men. But by what authority do they ascribe this
meaning to the phrase " restitution of all things " ?
Does the word restitution mean the salvation of souls ?
We find the following question put by the disciples to
the Savior : " Wilt thou at this time restore (the same
word that is rendered restitution) again the kingdom
to Israel ? (Acts i. 6.) Did they mean to save the
kingdom of Israel in the sense in which Universalists
use that word when speaking of the salvation of all
men ? Had the kingdom of Israel been once saved,
and was Christ to save it again ? The disciples were
Jews. The kingdom of Israel was in the hands of
the heathen. The disciples supposed that the Messiah
would be a temporal sovereign, as well as spiritual ;
and that, when the appointed tirae should arrive, he
would hurl the usurper from the throne of David, and
restore the kingdom again to the royal line. The
question was, whether the time had arrived in which
that event should take place. In this place, then, the

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 167
word "restore," or "restitution," does not raean to
save in the eternal world.
Again it is written, " Elias truly shall first come, and
restore all things." (Matt. xvii. 11.) Here we have
the sarae phrase, " restore all things," denoting a resti
tution of all things. But did the Savior mean to
teach that, before he could begin his own mission,
John the Baptist must first come, and save all raen ?
For what, then, did he corae, if all were saved by his
forerunner? We see, then, that the word restitution
does not raean salvation in the future world ; nor does
the " restitution of all things " include the salvation
of all raen.
The context affords abundant proof that the author
of the text under consideration did not believe in
universal salvation. Though he was a firm believer
in all the restitution of which God's holy prophets
had spoken, he was also a firm believer in the truth
that many will perish.
To those who listened to his preaching, Peter said,
"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your
sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing
shall come from the presence of the Lord." (v. 19.)
Here is a duty enjoined: "repent, and be converted."
Great inducement is offered : " that your sins may be
blotted out : " you shall be pardoned, and be as though
you had never sinned. The time is specified: "when
the times of refreshing shall come frora the presence
of the Lord." "The times of refreshing," and "the
restitution of all things," are the same ; to enjoy
which, raen raust repent and be converted. But if
they do not repent, and are not converted, then their

168 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
sins will not be blotted out ; nor will they enjoy that
"restitution of which the prophets have sipoken."
And the apostle further adds, " And it shall corae to
pass, that every soul which will not hear that Prophet
shall be destroyed from araong the people," (v. 23,)
— a most singular conclusion, if the sermon were de
signed to teach that no one shall be destroyed !
That the kingdoms of this world will yet be restored
to him to whom they belong, is true. But that very
event is, in all parts of the Bible, coupled with the
destruction of the enemies of the Son of God. " He
must reign till he hath put all eneraies under his
feet" (1 Cor. XV. 25.) "Frora henceforth expect
ing till his enemies be raade his footstool." (Heb. x-
13. ) " But those raine enemies, which would not that
I should reign over them, bring hither, aud slay them
before me." (Luke xix. 27.)
VIII. 1 Tim. ii. 4 : " Who will have all men to
be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the
truth." Who has ever expressed a doubt upon this
matter ? The gift of his Son, the perpetuity of the
gospel, the offer of pardon to all who will repent and
believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, are abundant proof
that God is willing, nay, desirous, that all men should
be saved, and "come to the knowledge of the truth."
He will have all raen now corae to the knowledge of
the truth ; but do they ? If Universalism is truth, all
raen have not, and millions more will never, in this
world, come to the knowledge of it. God is "not
willing that any should perish, but that all should
come to repentance." (2 Peter iii. 9.) But do all
men repent? Do none of our race perish, allowing

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 169
even the Universalist definition of the word " per
ish"? By the prophet the Almighty inquires, " Have I
any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?"
(Ezek. xviii. 23. ) And do not the wicked die ?
If men perish, though God is not willing they
should ; if he wishes them to repent, and yet they do
not ; if he has no pleasure in the death ofthe wicked,
and yet the wicked die ; — then the siraple fact, that
God desires the" salvation of all men, does not prove
that all raen will be saved.
The reason why men will perish, is not because
God is not willing they should be saved. Christ has
assigned the reason : " And ye will not come to me,
that ye might have life." (John v. 40.)
If any suppose that the will of man can in no
sense prevail against the will of God, and, if God wills,
in any sense, the salvation of all men, all men will
eventually be saved, — I reply, that Christ sought the
salvation of the Jews ; he prayed for it, labored for
it, and would have brought thera to that repentance
which is unto life ; but he could not. And the reason
why he could not save thera, he gives in these words
— "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,  how often would I
have gathered thy children together, even as a hen
gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would
not!" (Matt, xxiii. Z7.) Christ wowZd have saved them,
but they would not be saved. So God will have all
men now repent ; he commands it ; but raen will not.
He will have all men come to the knowledge of the
truth, and be saved ; but men refuse to obey ; they
will not come to Christ, and have life. Thus they
15

170 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
perish by their own hand. The loss of the soul is a
suicidal act ; and as much more dreadful than the
rash act that ends this life, as eternity is more impor
tant than time.
IX. 1 Tim. iv. 10: "We trust in the living God,
who is the Savior of all men, specially of those that
believe." Although Universalists place much reliance on this
text, it is worthy of notice that it teaches no such doc
trine as they mean to sustain by it, and even bears upon
the face of it a doctrine which Universalists reject.
Are all men now saved, in the sense in which they
contend the huraan race will be in the eternal world?
No one pretends this. The argument is, that all men
will be saved ; that the time will come in which all
will be redeemed. Then why cite this text to sus
tain such an idea ? It gives no promise of a coming
solvation. It does not say that all men can be saved,
may be saved, or will be saved. It asserts a present
truth; it announces a fact already existing, that God
is the special Savior of all that believe, and also is the
Savior of all men. That he was, at the time these
words were penned, the special Savior of believers, no
Mie will dispute. Then was he eighteen hundred
years ago, in the sense intended, the Savior of all men.
This text teaches, what all believers in revelation
allow, that in one sense God is the Savior of all men :
in another, and a higher sense, he was the Savior of
those only who believe.
To press this text into the support of Universalism,
it must be raade to teach, not only that, in a sense,
God is now the Savior of all raen, — for that is admit-

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 171
ted, — but that he^will be their eternal Savior. That
God is the Preserver of all men, and in that sense
their Savior, we admit. That he is not their eternal
Savior, we are prepared to prove. The author of the
text under consideration has settled the point in de
bate : " And being made perfect, he became the Author
of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him."
(Heb. V. 9.,) Now, in whatever sense God is, or raay
be, the Savior of all men, he is not, he never will be,
the eternal Savior of any who do not obey him. And
the exact number saved will be neither more nor less
than all who obey our Lord Jesus Christ.
X. 1 Cor. XV. 22 : " As in Adam all die, even so
in Christ shall all be raade alive." The fifteenth
chapter of the Epistle to the Corinthians, Universalists
have long clairaed, as teaching, in the plainest terms,
that all men will be saved. Some have called it the
"Magna Charta of Universalism." I know of scarce
a chapter in the Bible that presents a stronger, and a
more unanswerable, argument against Universalism.
Take, as an illustration, the proof-text under examina
tion — a text familiar to all who have read or heard
any thing in favor of this system: "For as in Adam
all die, even so in Christ shall all be raade alive."
This text is presented with an air of triumph, as if it
must settle the controversy, and close the mouth of
every opponent. But what does it prove ? Nothing
in favor of universal salvation. It simply asserts that
all men will be raade alive. But what their charac
ters will be, or what will be. their final destination,
after they are raade alive, it does not inform us. It is
but another part of that teaching which assures us

172 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
that, in the resurrection, all who are in their graves
will corae forth by the power of Christ ; that all the
dead, sraall and great, will hear his voice, and stand
at the bar of God. But Avill all who are made alive
by the command of Christ, have one resurrection, one
character, one destiny ? This proved, and Universal
ism is proved. The connection, however, settles the
question the other way. " For as in Adam all die,
even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every
man in his own order : Christ the first-fruits ; after
ward they that are Christ's at his coraing." (v. 22,
23.) But, if all men have one character in the resur
rection, why does Paul inforra us that every one will
be raised " in his own order " ? All do not belong to
the same order when they die ; nor will they when
they are raised. "He that is unjust, let hira be un
just still ; and he that is holy, let hira be holy still."
(Rev. xxii. 11.) If there is to be no distinction in
the resurrection-state, why does the apostle speak of
those " who are Christ's at his coraing " ? How plain
ly are we instructed that all are not Christ's I " If
any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of
his." (Rom. viii. 9.) As men die, so will they be
raised ; and so will they continue forever.
In the arguraent drawn frora the twenty-eighth
verse, by which Universalists attepipt to prove uni
versal salvation frora the subjection of all things to
Christ, they present a false assuraption. They pro
ceed very gravely to prove the fact that all things will
be subdued — a truth which no one denies. And
then they assume the point, that the subjection is
spiritual or voluntary, and not forcible or corapulsory.

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 173
But this is the very question at issue. The point to
be proved by Universalists is, not whether all things
shall be subdued, which no one disputes ; but is the
subjection a willing one? This proved, and they
have gained the argument. But that the argument is
against them, the context clearly shows.
Speaking of the conquest of Christ, the apostle
says, " For he must reign till he hath put all enemies
under his feet." (v. 25.) But is this a willing sub
jection ? To be put under the feet of a conqueror, is
the subjection that awaits the enemies of the Son of
God. But is this the same as salvation ? Then why
not put all raen under his feet ? Why speak of any
of them as eneraies, if they are holy and subraissive
subjects ? All, indeed, will be subject to hira ; a sub
jection bringing salvation to all who are Christ's ; a
subjection to be trodden under his feet, for all who
obey not the gospel. The figure here introduced is
borrowed from the custoras of ancient warriors. A
sovereign subdues a rebellious province. He enters it
with the deterraination to put down all opposition.
His friends, who have been faithful to him, he re
wards. His enemies he conquers, and places his feet
upon their necks, as a token that they are subdued.
So Christ is to reign till his eneraies are conquered,
and placed where they can do his government and his
friends no more harm. His friends are then rewarded,
after which there can be no escape for his enemies ;
for, as soon as they are placed under his feet, Christ
gives up the office of Mediator, and there is no more
redemption. Men cannot be saved without a media
tor in this world, nor can they be in the next. But
15*

174 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
there they will have no mediator. When all things
are thus subdued, and the enemies of Christ are
trodden under his feet, "then comes the end" of
the mediatorial kingdom. The Son gives up the
kingdom to his Father ; and, without a viceroy in his
government, God reigns " all in all."
Thus we perceive that the whole chapter is as
decidedly against the system of Universalism, as if the
apostle had written it with the intent to oppose that
delusion. XI. Rev. xxi. 4 : " And God shall wipe away all
tears frora their eyes ; and there shall be no more
death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there
be any raore pain."
Although it is painful to follow up men whose
business it is to wrest the Bible to their own destruc
tion, still it is hard to suppress a smile, at seeing Uni
versalists appeal to the book of Revelation to sustain
their system, when they have always maintained that
the whole book had its fulfilraent nearly eighteen
centuries ago. They are compelled to do this, in
order to avoid the otherwise unanswerable Eu-guments
cagainst their systera which this book contains, partic
ularly the twentieth chapter. Then, after arguing
that the book had its fulfilment centuries ago, they
.select a part of it, and urge it in defence of the salva
tion of all men in the future state. This inconsisten
cy in raen " who oppose theraselves," has been re
buked by one of the sect.
Mr. H. Ballou, 2d, says, "Universalists have not
-wholly ceased to quote, as proof of the final rec-
oncfliation of all raen, the following text : — ' Ev-

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 176
ery creature which is in heaven, and on the earth,
and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and
all that are in thera, heard I saying. Blessing, and
honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth
upon the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever ; '
a text which, if we mistake not their views concerning
the general plan of this boek, they can by no m,eans
suppose, on careful refiection, to refer to a period yet
future. It should not be forgotten that all the pas
sages we have set down are taken from those very
chapters which are now universally regarded as
having their fulfilment on the earth; and that, un
less we renounce this opinion, we are, of course, pre
cluded from adducing them as proof of the state of
things in another world," (Expositor, iii. 196.)
But to return to the passage that we have intro
duced. No one supposes that it will reraain unful
filled. All who have a part in that promise will have
their tears wiped away, and for them there will be no
more pain, no more sorrow, nor crying. But is this a
blessing proraised to all men without distinction ? It
is not. The people of God are to receive this favor ;
while "the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abomina
ble, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers,
and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the
lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which
is the second death." (v. 8.) In" this chapter, as in
other portions of the Bible, God declares what he will
do in the eternal world to his friends, and what he
will do to his foes.
XII. I shall close with remarking that the argu
ments drawn from the nature of God do not sustain
Universalism.

176 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
He is love. But evil, sin, woe, and death, exist, in
this life, in harmony with this love. The good share
in this woe, often raore than the wicked. The ab
surdity of the argument is glaring. God, it is said,
cannot punish men in the future world, because he is
love ; when he has been doing the self-same thing in
this world for thousands of years.
God is powerful. But he will have no more power
in the eternal world than he has in this ; no more
love ; no more goodness. He can make all raen as
happy in this life as Universalists say he will make
them in the future, or he cannot. If he cannot now,
he never can. If he will not now, he never will.
May God lead you into all truth ! Of none of you
may it ever be said, " They received not the love of
the truth, that they might be saved : and for this
cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they
should believe a lie, that they all might be damned
who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in un
righteousness." (2 Thess. ii. 10 — 12.)

LECTURE V.

UNIVERSALISM NOT SUSTAINED BY THE ARGUMENTS
IN ITS FAVOR DERIVED FROM THE
LIGHT OF NATURE
GAL. i. 23.
BUT THEY HAD HEARD ONLY THAT HE WHICH PERSECUTED US
IK TIMES PAST, NOW PREACHETH THE TAITH WHICH ONCE HE
DESTROYED.I CONSIDERED in the last lecture the principal proofs
advanced from Scripture in favor of the salvation of
all raen. The arguments drawn frora reason, nature,
and other sources, reraain to be examined. No one
can attend carefully to the proof which Universalists
produce from the Bible, without being struck with
the meagre amount they bring forward, even with the
help of their principles of interpretation, and the most
violent wresting of the sacred word. In order to
number up so many as a hundred scriptural argu
ments, they are compelled to cut up some passages
into three or four parts, making a separate argument
of each. They are also obliged to repeat the sarae
proraise several times, to change the forra of a proof
once before presented, and at last to add, as scriptural
evidence, an inference or two of their own. (See
Guide to Univ. 23.)

178 ^ ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
If the Bible contained not one line that could by
any possible raeans be wrested into the support of
Universalisra, it would make little difference with the
advocates of the systera. Their proof of Universal
ism is outside of the Bible, and independent of it. I
have often heard them say, in the pulpit and out, that
they would reject the Bible, if they thought it did
not teach Universalisra. Universalisra relies on proofs
independent of revelation. Its advocates first an
nounce what God is, and what he is not; what he
will do, and what he will not ; what he can do, and
what he cannot. With every thing established as
to what God is, what he will do and can do, they
approach the Bible. Their language is, "If ihe Bible
is a revelation frora God, then Universalism will be
found in it ; and if any part of it seems to counte
nance a doctrine opposed to Universalisra, either that
portion raust be explained away, or the Bible thrown
aside." The Bible, therefore, has little to do in set
tling the question of the truth or falsehood of Univer
salism, The sect would get along much better With
out it. So much of it seeras to be against them, that
at least two thirds of all their preaching is designed
to explain away these unfavorable appearances.
When they read a chapter in public, great care is
needful to select the right kind of chapter ; or else to
accompany it with an explanation, so that the bane
and antidote may go together. Moreover, the proofs
adduced from the Bible in favor of Universalisra, are
so irrelevant, that Universalists would succeed far bet
ter without the Bible than with it. On this account,
most of the arguments urged in support of the system

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 179
are drawn from sources independent of the Bible. To
the consideration of these, I will now ask your
attention.

I. ARGUMENT DRAWN FROM THE CHARACTER OF GOD AS
A FATHER.
God is said to be the Father of all men. He is
better, more kind, raore tender, than an earthly
parent. Therefore he cannot punish men with
eternal death.
But he is now doing, and has, ever since the crea
tion of man, been doing, what no earthly father would
do, and what no good government would allow him to
do, even if he had the disposition. The providence of
God every day is a practical refutation of the argu
ment we now have under consideration. What father
would drown his family, as God drowned the old
world ? What father would bum his children, as God
bumed his in the destruction of Sodom and Gomor
rah ? What father would make his children suffer
from woe, sickness, pain, sin, and death, such as beset
our race, and encompass thera on every side ? Now,
one of two things is true ; either these things are con
sistent with the character of God as a tender Father,
or they are not. If not, then God is not now a
Father ; and the Universalist arguraent falls to the
ground. But if God can drown and burn his chil
dren, plague thera with faraine, pestilence, disease,
and death, and still be a " tender Father," then he
can do all that the Bible announces that he will do to
the wicked in the future world, and yet be as kind a
Father there, as here.

180 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
Before sin entered into the world, God was the
Father of Adam, who, for all that, did not reraain holy.
Why, then, should that relation be certain to restore
our race to holiness, when they have long and wilfully
disobeyed God ? Before any had suffered the miseries
of this life, God was as much their Father as he has
been in any age since ; but that relation did not save
them frora affliction, though an earthly parent would
have kept his children from woe, if it were in his
power. The argument drawn from the paternal char
acter of God is decisive against Universalism. He
does, and ever has done, what no earthly parent
would dare to do. And whatever is consistent with
his unchangeable character in one age, is consistent
with it in all ages, and in all worlds.
But it is not tme that all men are the children
of God, in the higher and spiritual sense of that term.
There is a sense in which God is the Father of all
men, as there is a sense in which he is the Savior of
all men. But no truth is raore clearly taught in the
Bible than this, — that men by nature are not the
spiritual children of God..
Men are said to become the children of God by
"adoption." (Rom, viii. 15.) A man cannot adopt
his own child, which is already as much his child
as it can be. But he raay take a child not his
own, and raake it his by adoption. If all men are
the children of God by nature, then are they not so
by adoption. But if men only become children by
being adopted into his faraily, then those not adopted
are not children, nor have they any part in. the divine
inheritance. We are told expressly, " They- which

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 181
are the children of the flesh, these are not the children
of God." (Rom. ix. 8.)
If any people upon the earth could claim God as
their Father without a change of heart, that people
was the Israelites. In opposition to the Savior, they
boasted of their sonship. But idid he allow their
claim? "Ye are of your father the devil, and the
lusts of your father ye will do." (John viii. 44.)
Men cannot at the same time be the children of God
and the children of the devil, any more than they
can serve both God and Maramon. The beloved
disciple assures us, that " in this the children of God
are manifest, and the children of the .devil ; " the one
doing good, the othfir evil. ( 1 John iii. 10. )
You perceive in this instance the common error of
all Universalist reasoning. It applies to all men what
is promised only to the obedient. It makes no dis
crimination between that which is proraised to allj
men, and that which is offered as a reward for duty'
done or obedience rendered. I close my notice of
this argument with a full assurance, that it does not
sustain Universalism. 1[. MERCY OF GOD.
Those declarations in the Bible which assert that
God " is merciful," that " his tender mercies are over
all his works," and that " his mercy endureth forever,"
are cited as proof that Universalisra is true.
Upon no subject have men so vague and erroneous
notions as upon mercy. All believe in the mercy. of
God. But what that is, to what extent, and under
16

182 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
what circumstances, it may be exercised, and what
may hinder its interposition, few^ seem to understand.
And Universalists, when they talk about the mercy of
God, have evidently no just conception of the subject
on which they speak. For, instead of being an argu
ment in favor of Universalism, the fact that God is a
God of mercy, proves their system false. Multitudes
repose a delusive confidence in what they call the
mercy of God. They think they may indulge in sin,
live in all lust, and die in crime, and at last be saved,
because God is plenteous in mercy.
But what is mercy ? It is not merely goodness.
Goodness led to the creation of angels and men, and
to the making of provision for their happiness. But
mercy has nothing to do with innocent beings. It
can be exercised only toward the guilty and unde
serving. Where no guilt is, there can be no mercy.
Goodness blesses the innocent ; mercy, the guilty, and
only the guilty.
It is not justice. It is the opposite. Justice deals
with men as they deserve ; raercy, contreu-y to their
deserts. Justice by no raeans clears the guilty ; but
mercy shows favor where punishment is due.
Mercy can be shown only to those on whom it
would be just to visit the evil from which raercy
proposes to save them. In all other cases, men want
only justice. It is no mercy in a ruler, that he does
not imprison his innocent subject ; for there would be
no justice in the act. It is no act of mercy to open
the prison-doors to those who have been unjustly im
prisoned ; they ask no mercy ; they ask only justice.
To release a prisoner at the expiration of his term of

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 183
imprisonment, is not mercy; he can demand libera
tion as a right. He has satisfied the demand of the
law, and is entitled to a discharge as an act of siraple
justice. In these cases there is no roora for mercy or
grace. Mercy, then, is pardoning power, or favor
shown to guilty men. The innocent do not need it ;
for mercy always implies ill-desert in those who re
ceive it. The words of penitence are ever a confession
of sin. No man would claim exemption frora punish
ment on the ground of mercy, who could appeal to
justice for protection.
Universalists affirm that they have the only worthy
and expanded views of divine mercy. They charge
others with making God all justice. But with them,
to what does mercy amount ? They are shocked at
the idea of future woe. They assure us that men do
not deserve hell; and God is too raerciful to send men
there. What ! God too merciful to send raen to
hell, when they do not deserve to go there I Ab
surd ! There can be no mercy in the case. If raen
go to hell, it will, on Universalist grounds, be for
want of justice in God, not for want of mercy.
What great thing is it to save men, who are alraost,
if not quite, innocent ? who deserve little or no pun
ishraent from the hand of God ? Is it any great
stretch of skill for a physician to cure a headache
which a night's slumber would have removed, and
which would have done no great harm if not removed
at all ? If it would be unjust to cast men into hell, it
is no raercy to save them from it. What have men
to do with mercy who can claim exemption from hell
on the ground of justice ?

184 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
Again ; it is said that raen are punished as much as
they deserve in the present life ; and God is too raerci
ful to send them away into everlasting punishment.
But what room is there for raercy, when the crirainal
has in his own person answered the deraands of the
law ? Can you pardon a raan who has served out his
term of imprisonment? Will he thank the officer for
his clemency in opening the prison-door, when it could
lawfully be kept closed no longer? He wants no
mercy ; he has satisfied the clairas of justice, and can
demand his liberation as a right. If Universalisra be
true, and raen are all punished as much as they de
serve, what has mercy to do in the salvation of our
race ? You cannot pardon a crirainal who is punished
to the extent of the law. A physician cannot cure a
man who has healed hiraself You cannot save a
person frora drowning who by his own exertions has
reached the shore. A governor cannot rerait the pen
alty, after it has been fully executed upon the convict.
And yet we are told that these are the only worthy
views of raercy ! A sinner becomes his own savior.
Compassion, grace, love, and forgiveness, are swept
ftWay by these exclusive magnifiers of the divine mer
cy, which turns out to be an empty pretence. Noth
ing remains but stern, exact, erad even-handed justice.
If God is a God of mercy, then there is guilt, deep
and awful, frora which raercy offers to save men. Its
conditions are plainly written. " Let the wicked for
sake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts ;
and let hira return unto the Lord, and he will have
mercy upon hira; and to our God, for he will
abundantly pardon." (Isaiah Iv. 7.) If, then, the

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 185
wicked do not abandon their ways and their thoughts,
and turn unto the Lord, he will not have mercy upon
him, nor wfll he abundantly pardon. That the
mercy of God may be exercised to some, at the same
time others are destroyed, we leam from Ps. cxxxvi.
13—20. III. NATURE OF THE GOSPEL.
The Universalists argue thus : " The gospel is good
tidings to all men, to every creature. If it is good
tidings, it cannot announce endless raisery ; for that
would be good tidings to no one. Hence endless
misery cannot be true."
This argument wholly overlooks the nature of the
gospel, and the things which make it welcome and
cheering to all who understand it. The design of
the gospel is not to threaten men with endless death,
but to otfer them salvation from that death, to which
they were already exposed. When there is no dan
ger, there can be no deliverance. To make a mes
sage welcome or good, men raust feel themselves to
be exposed to an evil, from which the message prom
ises that they shall be delivered. To go through a
country, crying, " Peace, peace ! glorious tidings !
there is no war, and never will be any ! " would
only excite a smile at the folly of the messenger.
No one would feel any interest in the message, while
no one is exposed to danger.
Universalists make the gospel an unmeaning mes
sage. They go about, crying, "Glorious news!
blessed tidings ! unbounded salvation ! " And when
16*

186 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
inquired of, as to the nature of their joyful message,
they gravely tell us that raen were never " in danger
of hell-fire ; " God is not angry with the wicked ;
and all men will certainly be saved, though Christ
had not died. They tell us that we were in danger of
nothing, and shall be saved from nothing. What,
then, is the gospel to us ? It proposes no deliverance,
for there is no peril. It offers no atonement, for men
never were exposed to God's wrath. It presents no
salvation, for men never have lost their title to
heaven. What interest could a nation take in the professed ,
ability of a man to deliver it from war,, faraine, or op
pression, if p^ce had never been disturbed, plenty
had always crowned their board, and misrule or law
lessness had never triumphed one hour? What in
terest would a man feel in a professed cure for the
consumption, if no one had ever been affiicted with a
pulmonary complaint ?
The gospel is a good message, because it comes to
deliver raen from fearful evils to which they are ex-
(posed, and from which there is no escape but through
the gospel. It is good tidings to all people, because
.all are liable to the evil from which it comes to save
them. The knowledge of impending danger makes
a message welcome which offers deliverance ; and
the greater the danger, the greater the joy to hear of
relief Men are exposed to eternal death. There can be
no evil to compare with this. Angels, who know
what an awful thing it is to be lost, rejoiced when
they knew that, for men thus exposed, a way of

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 187
escape was provided. There can be no message so
joyous, as that which offers pardon to rebels doomed
to die. And the gospel is good in its nature, and in
its intent, though all men should refuse to hear or
obey, and consequently perish in their sins.
In no case does it abate from the value of a raes-
sage, when, in addition to the benefits of receiving it,
you add the consequences, awful as they may be, of
rejecting it.
A criminal is condemned to die. On certain con
ditions, the governraent proposes a pardon. An offi
cer enters the cell of the prisoner, and says, " There
is yet hope, though you deserve to die. I ara the
bearer of good tidings. You may obtain a pardon on
certain rational and necessary conditions. Accept
them, and you shall live and be happy." The pris
oner hesitates. The messenger then informs him of
the awful consequences of not complying : it is the
only way of escape ; and, if this is rejected, he must
perish. But does this change the gracious nature of
the message?
Famine sweeps over a land, and its inhabitants fall
before it, and are consumed with hunger. A messen
ger is sent to inforra that suffering nation that, in a
place easy of access, " there is bread enough and to
spare." This is good tidings to all. But does it
change the kind nature of the message, when it is
added, " If you do not accept this offer, you must
die " ? Pestilence rages in a city, unsettling public
"confidence, carrying terror into every family, and
sending great numbers to an untimely grave. Re
lief is found, and offered to that diseased and dying

188 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
city. The welcome sound that deliverance is at
hand, that the pestilence can be stayed, falls upon
the ear like pardon to the condemned. But does
the announcement cease to be "good tidings of
great joy to all" the diseased, when the messen
ger assures thera, that all who refuse the proffered
aid must die ?
The gospel does not create eternal death. Ages
before it carae, raen were exposed to the wrath of
God, and conderaned to perish. All unbelievers are
now under condemnation, (John iii. 18;) and the
gospel is preached to "save them that believe." (1
Cor. i. 21.) If raen reject the overtures of pardon,
emd refuse to believe and obey the gospel, it does not
condemn them. They were conderaned before it
carae. It siraply leaves thera to that condemnation,
wherein they were already involved, and frora which
it could have saved them if they would. So we read,
" He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life ;
and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life,
but the wrath of God abideth on hira." (John iii. 36.)
"He that despised Moses' law died without mercy
under two oj three witnesses. Of how rauch sorer
punishraent, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy,
who hath trodden under foot the Son of God?"
(Heb. X. 28, 29.) , , ,
Suppose a province to be in a state of revolt. The
sovereign sends an ambassador to treat with the rebel
lious state. He announces to them their guilt, and
assures them that they deserve the severest punish
ment. But he adds, "I am the bearer of good tidings
to you all. Your sovereign desires not your death; he

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 189
is 'not willing that any should perish.' There is
pardon offered to you all, and the terras are easy upon
which it rests. Obey, and you shall live." They
refuse to obey. The raessenger does not conderan
them. They were condemned before he came, and
on that very account he visited thera with proffered
forgiveness. When they refuse to hear and obey, he
withdraws, and leaves thera to that condemnation
which already rested upon them, and from which
he would have delivered thera.
So coraes the gospel. It does not condemn men.
But the fact that our race were previously conderaned
to eternal death, gives the gospel all its value. If one
escapes, it is good ; if more, it is good. But it would
be good in nature, good in intent, though all should
refuse to hear, and should stumble and perish. The
gospel is every where " a savor of life unto life, or
of death unto death." (2 Cor. ii. 15, 16.)
IV. NATURE OF PUNISHMENT.
Universalists argue that raen are punished for their
own good; and that punishment ceases to be just
when it secures not the good of the persons punished.
As men are never punished but for their own ben
efit, it is thence argued that punishraent cannot be\
endless. But is this true, that raen are always punished
with reference to theraselves, rather than to the state
or coramunity? For whose benefit is a murderer
put to death ? for his own, or that of others ? Is the
felon incarcerated for life for his own good, or for

190 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
the protection of the innocent? For whose advan
tage was the old world drowned, and Sodom burned ?
their own, or that of others? Was it to introduce
thera at once into heaven, or to adraonish those
who hereafter should live ungodly ? (2 Peter ii.
5, 6.) It is not true, then, that punishment always
secures the good of the punished.
But if the principle is sound, that, when punish
ment ceases to be corrective, it ceases to be just,
then it follows that all hardened and incorrigible
transgressors, who are made no better by the pun
ishment inflicted upon thera, are unjustly chastised.
Men with a seared conscience, and hands dyed in
the blood of their race, must run at large, because
they are too inveterate to be reformed, and all pun
ishraent that does not reforra is unjust. A criminal
who, at the expiration of his term of confinement,
comes forth worse than when he entered the prison,
must not be a.gain imprisoned. His punishment
has made him rather worse than better; and, if the
reasoning of Universalists is sound, it would be un
just to repeat it. Drunkards, too far gone to be
reclaimed, should suffer neither at the hands of God
nor of man ; as such suffering would not reform them,
and would therefore be cruel.
No fact is more obvious than that punishment
seldom does reform the punished. Men imprisoned
for a minor offence, will usually, dm-ing the punish
raent, fit themselves for deeds of bolder daring ^and
deeper depravity. Lads sent to the house of
correction at fifteen, will, in all probability, be can
didates for the state prison at thirty.

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 191
But is all punishment, therefore, cruel and unjust ?
Does no good result frora it because the crirainal is
made raore obstinate and rebellious? Who can
estiraate the value of its influence upon the whole
coraraunity ? Who can tell how vast ' the amount
of crime, suffering, and death, from which the cora
raunity is delivered by the prorapt and exeraplary
retribution, which those who "are a terror to evil
doers " inflict upon offenders ? In human govern
ments, criminals are punished for the good of the
whole coramunity, for the support of govemment
and law, for the protection of the innocent, and that
vice and crime may be checked. To a prisoner who
complained that it was hard to be hanged for steal
ing a horse, an English judge rightly explained the
object of the penalty — " You are not hanged for
stealing a horse ; but that horses may not be stolen."
If the offender is reclaimed, that is an incidental
good. If he is rendered more obstinate, the chief
end in punishing hira is still answered.
So is it in the governraent of God. The old
world was drowned, not to bring thera to repent
ance, but as a punishraent for disobeying God. Guilty
Sodora was bumed up, not for her own advantage,
but that the ungodly, in all ages to corae, raight
take warning. God scattered the Jews, not to secure
to thera the things that belonged to their peace, but
as a punishraent for not hearing the Savior, when
he would have gathered them together. . Men are
now punished under the moral governraent of God,
because they transgress his law. In the sight of
all intelligent beings, angels or men, God has estab-

192 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
lished the truth that men cannot sin and escape
the consequences.
It is not true, then, as Universalists assert, that
raen are always punished for their own good. It
is not true that, when pmiishraent fails to reform
the criminal, it is unjust. It is not true that pun
ishment is reformatory in its nature. Therefore, as
men may be punished all their lifetime for the good
of the community, so, for the same reason, may they
be punished throughout an imraortal existence.
V. THE WORK OF CHRIST AS A SAVIOR.
He is called " the Savior of all men," " the Savior
of the world," and by his death is said to have given
"hiraself a ransora for all." This is presented as a
proof of Universalism.
It is worthy of remark how eagerly and promptly
all passages in which Christ is called the Savior of
the world, and the Savior of all, are applied by Uni
versalists to the future state ; while all texts in
which salvation is offered on conditions, or is limited
to the obedient, are at once discovered to refer only
to this life. " He that believeth shdl be saved ; "
"He that endureth to the end shall be saved;"
"Are there few that be saved?" "Believe on the
Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved;" "If the
righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the un
godly and the sinner appear?" Offer these and
kindred texts to a Universalist, and he informs you
that all which is asserted in thera is very true ; but
they have no reference to a future life : they are ful-

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 193
filled in fhis. And yet, with the sarae breath, he
will urge you to believe that no one will be lost in
the future world, because Christ is called the Savi«r
of the world. But if salvation belongs to this life^
Christ raay be the Savior of all men, and yet no one
finally be saved. By what principle of interpretation
do the Universalists reach the conclusion, that the
numerous texts which positively teach that many
will not be saved, are limited to this life, while the
few that they select to prove their faith, refer to the
future ? The sarae word is used in either case. It
has the sarae signification. If in the one case it is
restricted to this world, it must be in the other.
But if one refers to eternity, both have their ful
filment there.
Universalists expressly declare that Christ saves
men only in this world. " The evils from which
Jesus came to save men are in this world; and for
this reason he came into this world to save thera."
(Plain Guide, 254.)
" All those passages of Scripture which define the
nature of salvation, agree that Jesus Christ saves man
from evil which attaches to him in the present
world." (Expos, iii. 65.)
To what, then, do those texts cited by Universal
ists to prove the final holiness of all men amount,
when the salvation of the gospel relates only to the
present world ?
But, waiving this difficulty, let us pass on to another.
Universalists talk of "salvation," of "universal sal
vation," of "Christ the Savior of the world." What
do they raean by this? Do they indeed regard
17

194 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
Christ in any just sense as the Savior of the world ?
They do not allow that raen are exposed to any
thing hereafter from which Christ does or can save
them. They have declared to the world that the
death of Christ is not essential to salvation ; and
though Jesus had not lived, the world would never
have perished. On the theory of Universalism, what
has Christ done to obtain the title of " Savior " ?
From what does Jesus save the world ? Frora wrath ?
No ; it assures us that raen never were exposed to
God's wrath. From sin ? Not in this life are men
saved from sin. It is one of the pillars of the sys
tem that raen sin till the day of their death, and are
fully punished for all the sins they commit. Not in
the next life does Christ save raen frora sin ; for the
system announces that there can be no sin after the
resurrection. From deserved punishment? Univer
salists say that that would be unjust ! From death ?
By no means. All are spiritually dead ; and all must
die a natural death ; and if Universalism be true,
there can be no eternal death. Frora what, then,
does Christ save raen ? From nothuig ! According
to Universalism, what is salvation but a mockery and
pretence ? How opposite to this are the representa
tions of the Bible ! There it is declared that the death
of Jesus is the only medium through which God can
be just, and justify those who believe in Jesus ; that,
if Christ had not died, all would have been lost;
while Universalism proclaims that raan is to be his
own savior ; or rather is to be saved from nothing at
all ! Such is the beauty of Universalism. It makes
the mission and death of Christ a useless exhibition

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 195
of cruelty, and all the representations of the Holy
Scriptures, based upon the necessity of Christ's rais-
sion to the world to save souls, it staraps with deceit.
But suppose it were not so ; suppose that men are
really exposed to some evil frora which Jesus came to
give them an opportunity to be saved. What then ?
The bare fact that Jesus died for all, does not prove
that all will actually be saved. The abundance of a
blessing is no benefit to those who will not partake
of it.
The effects of Christ's atonement can be enjoyed
only by faith and obedience. " As Moses lifted up
the serpent in the wilderness, even so raust the Son
of man be lifted up ; that whosoever believeth in him
should not perish, but have eternal life." (John iii.
14, 15.) There was virtue enough in the serpent to
heal all Israel. If any died, it was not for want of
abundance of healing power in the remedy, but be
cause the wounded would not look and live. So is
the Son of man lifted up on the cross and in the
preaching of the gQspel ; in hira there is all fulness.
But many refuse to believe. They perish, and sink
down in endless death. Salvation is offered to man
upon conditions; and to invite raen to accept the
terms of salvation, and yet promise to save them
whether they accept or not, would be to trifle indeed.
A certain king made a great supper, but said of
some, " Not one of them shall taste of ray supper ; "
not for want of sufficient provision, but because they
refused to corae when invited. The law of Moses
was enough to save from idolatry all the people of
.Israel. It did not, because they would not obey. No

196 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
abundance of rain will ffil the bams of the slothful
with plenty. No abundance of light wfll guide those
who close their eyes, stumble, and perish. An
abundance of knowledge will not assist those who
despise instruction. There was " bread enough and
to spare," in the house of the prodigal ; but he would
have perished with hunger, if he had not arisen, and
retumed to his father. Though there is balm in Gil
ead, and physicians there, yet men are not all healed;
nor are the ravages of death stayed.
The freeness and sufficiency of the gospel provision
reraove from men all excuse. If they perish, their
blood is on their own heads. Many will perish, not
for want of a sufficient supply to raeet the necessities
of all, but for the reason which inspiration has so
graphically set forth in these words — " Because I have
called, and ye refused ; I have stretched out my hand,
and no raan regarded ; but ye- have set at nought all
my counsel, and would none of ray reproof; I also
will laugh at your calamity ; I will mock when your
fear coraeth. — Then shall they call upon rae, but I
will not answer ; they shall seek rae early, but they
shall not find me." (Prov. i. 25 — 28.) The gospel
is freely offered to all ; but men refuse to do the will
of God, and perish forever.
Vl. THE IMPARTIAL GOODNESS OF GOD.
This is assigned as a reason why all men will be
holy and happy in the next state of existence. It is
argued that God is now good to all; that, in his
dealings with our race, he makes no distinction, treat-

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 197
ing all with the sarae favor, and raaking no difference
araong raen, either in nature, providence, or grace.
And as his governraent never changes, he will be thus
universally good forever. But to cast off any in the
future world, it is said, would change the whole char
acter of his governraent.
This arguraent assumes as truth what is disproved
by facts. To prove that God is good to all men, is
an easy affair.. But to prove that all men share ¦
equally in that goodness, is another task. That God
has not seen fit to make all men equally happy in this
life, raust be apparent to any reflecting raind.
Where is the proof of this equality of which Uni
versalists so often speak ? Does it appear in nature ?
The contrary is evident. No raan can defend the
divine character for goodness, in the works of nature
and providence, without admitting a future state,
in which the seeming inequalities in this will be
removed. Do nations exhibit this equality? At this rao
raent there is alraost as great a diversity in nations,
as there will be in the condition of our race in the
iramortal world. One city is in possession of health ;
another, equally deserving, is blasted with pestilence,
and encompassed with the atmosphere of death. One
nation is blessed with plenty, and its garners are
full. Another is oppressed with faraine ; want and
suffering abound, the feeble cry for bread, and the
strong raen are bowed down for want of food. One
country has waving over it the olive branch of peace ;
another is disturbed by the shrill clarion of war ; its
fields are drenched with blood, and rapine and car-
17*

198 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
nage revel in all that is lovely and revered. One
kingdora is free, and is blessed with civil and religious
liberty ; another, as worthy, is trodden down in the
dust by the iron heel of oppression, and raillions are
sacrificed to gratify the avarice, the ambition, or the
caprice, of a despot. And while a portion of the earth
is lighted up by the beams of the gospel, by far the
larger part of the world is shrouded in heathen gloom,
where the people are the victims of the most appalling
vices and the most degrading superstitions.
No one will pretend that this diversity is according
to merit. Where, then, I ask, is that equal goodness
which proraises equal and endless happiness to all our
race in the world to corae ? It does not appear in the
dealings of God with the nations of the earth.
But look around you, my friends, and see if this
¦equality, of which Universalists speak, appears in the
common walks of life. Is there no difference in the
characters of men, in their circumstances and pri-vi-
leges? Do all share equally in wealth, distinction,
and happiness? Are all equally exempt from mis
fortune, affliction, and death ? And is the existing
diversity according to merit? Do the good always
prosper in this life ? In order to be successful in this
life, to amass wealth, to be honored by the world, to
tread the paths of distinction, must men have a char
acter above reproach, and be distinguished for their
piety? Do the amiable and the virtuous receive a
marked share of the good things and blessings of this
life? There can be but one answer given to these
questions. The contrary is obviously the fact. Many
of the best of our race are subjected to a state of

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 199
things in which evil triumphs over ¦ good, and grief
over joy.
On the other hand, do the wicked always suffer ?
Are disappointment and sorrow raade their portion all
their days? Can they be distinguished from others
by their troubles ? All observation teaches us that it
is not so.
We see, then, in this life, — both as respects nations
and individuals, either in providence or grace, — that
which Universalists assure us cannot exist consist
ently with the impartial goodness of God. We see
the greatest diversity in the characters, privileges, and
blessings, of our race. The fact is undeniable. Now,
this diversity is consistent with the impartial goodness
of God, or it is not. If it is not, then God is not now
impartially good ; and if not now, he never will be ;
and so the argument fails at once. But if the char
acter of God, as an impartial Ruler, can be vindicated
in view of all the difference there is in the character
and enjoyment of our race, then it can be vindicated
in the future world, when the wicked shall be sepa
rated from the good, and " go away into everlasting
punishment." Thus the argument for< Universalism
is at once refuted. The history of raan, in all ages of
the world, is a conclusive reply to the assertion that
the goodness of God forbids those distinctions which
the Bible declares shall exist in the future world.
VII. ARGUMENT FROM THE OMNIPOTENCE OF GOD.
It is said that God is allowed on all hands to be
infinitely wise, powerful, and good. When he created

200 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
man, he made him for endless happiness beyond the
grave, or he did not. If he did not, then he was not
good. If he did, and yet man fails to secure this
result, God is not powerful. Hence it is argued that
all men will at last be saved.
But when God raade this world, he was as good
and as powerful as when he raade man. He could
have made this world a theatre of perfect bliss, or he
could not. If he could not, — to adopt the reasoning
of Universalists, — then he was not powerfu. if
he could, and yet would not, then he was not good.
Then why is this world a place of pain, ciffliction,
and death? Why is not this a place of imdisturbed
felicity ? Why did not the Almighty make this world
all that Universalists assure us heaven will be ? Any
answer you give refers to the next world. When
Adam was placed in the garden of Eden, God coifld
have kept hira holy, or he could not. And eis he did
not interpose, but left hira to obey and live, or eat
and die, if there is any force in the arguraent, it
proves that in this case God was either not good or
not powerful. It is absurd for Universalists to at
tempt to find relief in the remark that God will
overrule this condition of things for final good, and
thus, in the end, a greater good be secured than if no
evil had existed ; for their system forbids such a
result. The sin and sorrow, woe and death, in this
world, overruled for good! for the good of whom?
Not of the sufferer, certainly : he would be much hap
pier in this life without it. All he suffers, every pang
he endures, is so much abstracted from the positive
felicity of this world. Neither in the next life can it

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 201
be overruled for his good ; for Universalisra denies
the connection between the events of this life and the
condition of men in the next. Our present life is to
have no effect upon the future. Our conduct here
will not affect, in any degree, our happiness hereafter.
We are assured that all, frora an infant of a day to a
sinner of a hundred years, start again upon the sarae
level. How, then, can the sufferings of this life be
overruled to eventual good to the sufferer ? Or how
can our present existence be reconciled at all with
goodness and wisdora upon the principles of Univer
salism ?
But will it be said that the raisery of sorae in this
world will be overruled to the good of others ? to the
whole family of man ? Adrait this, and what becomes
of Universalism ? Its advocates deny endless punish
ment, on the ground that men are always punished
for their own good, and not for the benefit of others.
But if the sufferings of one raan can be raade subser^
vient to the good of others, then one man may suffer
hereafter to proraote the good of his race ; and Uni
versalism is at once swept away. If a man may
suffer in this life for the good of others, he may suffer
in the next for the same cause. If he can be punished
all the days of this life to promote the greatest amount
of good of the greatest number, then he raay suffer
all the days of the next life for the sarae reason.
Coraraon sense teaches that the goodness of God
does not save raen from suffering in this world,
though God is infinite in power. Will it in the next
world? How can you know what God will do, but
from what he has done ? Sin and misery exist here

202 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
consistently with divine goodness. They can always
so exist ; for God and his government never change.
Hence Universalism must be false. But if sin and
misery cannot exist consistently with goodness, then
God is not now good, and Universalism has no support
whatever. The argument, if it has any force, would have
prevented the creation of this world as it is. Had it
been communicated to Universalists prior to the crea
tion of the earth, that God, wise, powerful, and good,
was about to speak a world into existence, — a world
in which sin would abound, and pain, disappointment,
and sorrow, be the inheritance of all who were to
dwell in it, — and that disease and death would tri
umph over all, would they not have declared such
a creation to be at war with the attributes of God?
They would have argued that God was too powerful
to allow such a creation against his will, and too good
to call it into being by his own power. But there
has been such a world created, the reasoning of Uni
versalism to the contrary notwithstanding; and we
now live in it.
The argument we are discussing, if true, ought to
have prevented the drowning of the world. The
antediluvians, no doubt, thought God was too good to
bring in a flood upon the ungodly, as he would have
been, if this sort of reasoning were sound. They
might have" said that sin was a trivial matter, which
did no injury to God ; for which men were punished
as they passed along ; and that God was too raerciful
to sweep thera all away with a flood. But did this
reasoning save thera ?

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 203
So reasoned, raost probably, guilty Sodom. " God
destroy us by fire from heaven ! Does he keep fire
there? Will he involve the innocent with the guilty?
.Did he not make us? Did he not know what we
should become before our creation ? Would he have
given us an existence if we were to be swallowed up
in a deluge of fire and brimstone ? O, no ; he is too
good, too powerful, to do so. Such an act would mili
tate against his character." But did Sodora escape?
So raight have reasoned the people of Nineveh.
"Yet forty days," said the prophet, "and Nineveh
shall be overthrown." They raight have responded,
"What, this great city be destroyed! — a city that
contains sixscore thousand persons that cannot dis
cern between their right hand and their left hand;
and also much cattle ! Impossible ; God is too good
to destroy us, though we repent not." But not so rea
soned the people of Nineveh. They "believed God,"
— so records the sacred historian, — and that belief
was their salvation. They saw the little cloud in the
distance, and knew it to be the harbinger of the
coming tempest. They all bowed before God. All,
from the king on his throne to the humblest subject
in the land, repented, and sought to " turn away the
fierce anger of God," lest all should perish together.
Their repentance was accepted. " God saw their
works, that they tumed frora their evil way," and
he pardoned thera. The angry cloud was rolled
back. The avenging sword was sheathed. Nineveh
was spared.
These examples show us how absurd and false is
the argument pretended to be drawn from the char-

204 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
acter of God. They teach us that, though God is
good, he will not clear the guilty ; nor will he re
cede from his threatenings. He will execute them,
whether they relate to the overthrow of a world by
water, the burning of cities by fire from heaven, or
the destruction of the soul in hell.

VUl. RELATION OF MAN TO MAN.
Universalists argue that man is bound to his fellow-
man by such close, intimate, and tender ties, that, in
view of the future suffering of one, all raust feel it ;
that no one could enjoy heaven with the conscious
ness that any were cast down to hell. If, therefore,
heaven is a happy place, all of the human famfly will
be saved.
This argument, if such it deserves to be called, is a
very popular one. I have heard very pathetic appeals
made to mothers and friends on the question. Whether
they could enjoy heaven, if any that they loved were
excluded. Some have gone so far as to say that they
should not wish for heaven if all were not to be
saved. Will these raen reason thus in regard to the things
of this world ? Will they refuse wealth, because all
are not rich ? Will they refuse honor, because it is
not conferred on all? If a post of distinction is
vacant, or a seat among the high places of the nation
IS unoccupied, will none of these reasoners enter it, if
invited, because all cannot be accomraodated, — be-
caiise a large proportion of all with whom they
are acouainted is utterly excluded?

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 205
But is it true that a man, in the discharge of his
duty, cannot enjoy the rewards of his fidelity, because
some one is disobedient, and is punished? Is it true
that a man cannot be happy in the discharge of his
trust, because sorae other man has neglected his?
Could not the children of Israel rejoice in their
deliverance, because Pharaoh and his hosts were
drowned in the Red Sea? Let their shouts of ex
ultation and their notes of triumph give the reply.
(Exod, XV.)
Can we not enjoy liberty, because the lawless and
the unprincipled are confined in prison ? Is life no
blessing because the murderer or atrocious felon is, by
a just sentence, doomed to die? We see on every
hand poverty, suffering, and distress. Must our whole
life be one of anguish, because others are in sorrow?
If a man is industrious, frugal, and temperate, can he
have no enjoyment from this source, because others
are indolent, profuse, and intemperate ?
The argument would make God unjust. The
good could have no advantage over the evil. He that
served God and he that served him not would be put
on the same level. However diligently a large pro
portion of the huraan race might seek a blessing from
God by fearing hira and working righteousness, their
happiness would be destroyed, if one or two should
refuse to obey God ; for this argument contends
that a man cannot be happy in obedience and ho
liness until every other creature shall be obedient
and holy.
But how clearly do coraraon experience and com-
18

206 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
mon sense refute this argument ! We all know" that
life is a blessing, though raany die by the law of the
land. The coraforts of industry can be enjoyed,
though the indolent raay suffifer. The teraperate nian
can bring a blessing to his hearth-stone, and rejoice
in it, though the inebriate is cursed, a!nd his chfldren
cry for bread. Liberty is sweet, though the la-wless
are deprived of the boon. The good raan can be
satisfied frora hiraself And our Crea:tor has so
constituted our race, that they can love life, see
good days, and be blessed, though bondage, misery,
ahd death, extensively prevail. So will it be in the
etemal state. This the Savior has taught in the
history of the rich raan and Lazarus. There the
Savior has shown that, in full view of the anguish
of the rich raan, Lazarus was not disturbed, nor his
felicity destroyed. He had a perfect knowledge of
God's justice ; he knew and felt that the suffering of
the rich man Was right. So will all the redeemed
have a pfeirfect khowledge of the magnitude of sin, the
amouiit of pUnishraeht it merits, and the righteous'^
ness of God in sending away into everlasting piihish-
ihent all " wh(!) know not God, aiid obey not tlie
^bSpel of his Son." The fact that raany perish for
ever, will no raore disturb the bliss of heaven, than
the peace 6f all good iheU is forever fled, because a
felon or raiirderer is sentenced to die. We see, then,
the arguraent assuraes as truth what all experience
denies. Men who obey God can be happy in both
worids, though raany refuse to obey, and so perish'
f6i!eVer.

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 207

IX. THIS LIFE A STATE OF PERFECT RETRIBUTION.
All men, it is said, are here rewarded according to
their deeds. Therefore they can neither deserve nor
receive punishraent in the future world.
The idea that this life is a state of perfect retribu
tion, and that all the results of human action are
bounded by time, is at once raonstrous and destruc
tive. To all reflecting rainds it is apparent that there
is not a perfect apportionraent of suffering and hap
piness according to merit in this world. A just distri
bution of rewards and punishments does not here t§,ke
place. The contrary, assertion is refuted by the slightest
glance at the actual state of things. "If the expe.-
rience of the present life is to have no effect hereafter,
— -if all are to start again upon the same level, however
they raay have lived here, — why live here at all? Why
the pains, the sufferings, and distresses, incident to tho
preseut constitution of our being ? Why live, and go
through all the various pains and perils frora birth to
4e^th, if no piirpose is answered ?
If it be a true doctrine, that, whatever our condition
a,nd conduct may be in this worid, — however we raay
live or die, — we shall be equally and infinitely happy
hereafter, then suicide becoraes a virtue. Once con
vinced that death puts an end to all his woes, a final
period to all his sufferings, and the only consistent act
of raan would be — to avoid his coming troubles, and
,the blighting of his earthly pJans — to cut the slender
thread of life, and step at once into endless felicity.
This is as natural as for the weary traveller to seek

208 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
his couch, or the laboring raan to rest frora his toils.
That this idea does lead toward suicide, I shall show
when I corae to speak of the practical tendencies of
Universalisra. The doctrine that all sin is adequately punished in
this life, denies the divine justice, and leads to conclu
sions of a most appalling character. On this theory
it 'must be adraitted that all suffering results frora sin,
and all prosperity is the fruit of virtue. It follows
that all the poor, the diseased, and the unfortunate,
araong whom are some of the brightest ornaments of
virtue and religion, are the most wicked and hate
ful in the sight of God, and that this is the explanation
of their great sufferings. Moreover, all the rich and
exalted must be the favorites of Heaven. No matter
how they obtained their wealth and distinction, — no
matter what their characters are, or whora they have
ruined, or what their pEist life has been, — their pros
perity raust needs be proof that their conduct is well
pleasing to God ; for it has drawn down upon them
peculiar raarks of the divine favor.
If, as Universalists contend, sin brings its own
punishraent, how comes it that the more a man sins,
the less he is punished ? Every one knows that the
purer the heart, the more powerful is the conscience.
The humble Christian suffers raore in his raind from
the neglect of secret prayer a single day, than does a
hardened pirate while bathing his hands in the blood
of his race. If reraorse of conscience were all the
punishraent which God intended for the sinner, then
all the additional pain inflicted by parents, teachers,
and raagistrates, by the rod, the prison, and the gal-

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 209
lows, must be unjustifiable treatment of the transgress
or, already sufficiently chastised for his faults by the
lash of conscience. The villain who escapes the legal
punishment of his crimes, so far from escaping justice,
escapes injustice.
Reason as you will about the evil results of sin to
the sinner in this life ; paint his character as black and
gloomy as you may ; beset his path with thorns; make
sorrow his portion ; prove that, like the troubled and
tempestuous ocean, he has no rest ; affirra that con
science, like a gnawing, worm, allows him no peace;
and after you have exhausted your eloquence, one fact
meets you every where, overthrows all your reasoning,
and proves, if God be just, that this life cannot be a
state of perfect and final retribution. The fact is
simply this ; here the innocent suffer with the guilty,
and often m,ore than the guilty.
Who is harmed the most, the incendiary who lifts the
torch, fires a village, and gets off with his plunder; or
those who, at midnight, escaping barely with their lives,,
are by him turned houseless and penniless upon the cold
charity of the world ? Who suffers the keenest anguish,
the drunkard, who half the time is rioting in his mad
ness, and the other half is senseless, nearly, as a stone ;
or his needy family, his half-fed, half-clothed, ignorant,
and debased children, his heart-broken, abused, and
suffering wife? Who has the most sorrow, that reck
less young man, maddened by the wine-cup, and wild
with licentious passions and debasing pleasures; or
those fond, but disappointed parents, who nurtured him
with tenderness, watched over him with solicitous
care, and hoped in old age to lean upon hira for support,
18*

210 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
but who find their prop already broken, and whose gray
hairs are descending with sorrow to the tomb ? Does
not the libertine suffer less from his unhallowed career
than do his wretched victims ? He revels in sin, boasts
of his successes, and in old age looks back with fiend
ish exultation upon his pathway, strown with the spoils
of virtue, and recounts the numbers which have fallen
by his arts. While he glories in his crimes, who can
estimate the bleeding hearts, the blasted reputations,
the parental wretchedness, the desolated homes, the
shame, the anguish, the despair, and the untimely
deaths, he has caused ?
Reason, speculate as you will upon this subject,
stern facts teach you that the retributions of this life
are usually such, that innocence and purity, for the
present, suffer the most. And if there is no other
world in which a just retribution takes place, and
these inequalities are requited, then God is not just ;
and man is a monument, not of the justice and
righteousness of God, but of partied and inequitable
dealing. It is in vain to argue that raen raust be punished in
the same state in which they commit the sin ; for we
'know that such is not the case. The results of crime
.are not " confined to the place where the act was
comraitte'd. Sin, in youth, raay lay the foundation
of a disease that shall coraplete its work on the other
side of the globe. An early career of dissipation in
America may fix in the frame the elements of a dis
order, that shall coraplete its work in the splendid
capital of the French, or, it may be, in the sands of
the equator, or the snows of Siberia." Men are sel-

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 211
dom punished on the spot in which the crime is per
petrated, but in the place appointed by the govern
ment against whose laws the offence is committed.
God's government extends over heaven, earth, and
hell. In any part of his dominions he could have set
his throne of judgipent. He has announced that
" the ungodly are reserved unto the day of judgment
to be punished ; " and that, in the judgment of the
great day, raen will be rewarded according to the
deeds doue in the body.
I have thus reviewed the principal arguments upon
which Universalism rests. I have also presented to
you the reasons which prove these arguments to be
unsound. Should we consider the system without
reference to its alarming moral tendency, and regard
it simply as a systera to be received or rejected, as the
arguments advanced in its favor did or did not sup
port it, we should find an unprejudiced public render
ing the verdict, " Thou art weighed, and art found
wanting." It must, I think, be apparent to all, that Universal
isra deserves no consideration as a religious system.
Its claims are founded in sophistry and assumption,
and supported by the most violent wresting and pal
pable perversion of the word of God. It is a delusion
of the raost fatal kind, and destructive of the choicest
good of raan. All who trust in it fatally injure their
own souls. The claims of Universalisra are un
founded. It clairas to be of God, and yet preaches
as did the serpent in Eden. It clairas to be the gos
pel of Christ, and yet was not known till nearly
eighteen hundred years after the ascension of the

212 ARGUMENTS EXAMINED.
Savior. It clairas to be the doctrine of the Bible, ai^d
yet contradicts the whole tenor of its teaching, makes
the threatenings of the Bible a mockery, the mission
and death of Jesus a pretence, and proves the inspired
penmen to be incompetent or dishonest. It claims
to seek the good of raan, and yet, so far froni turn
ing the transgressor from the error of his way, it
" strengthens the hands of the wicked, that he should
not return from his wicked way and live ; " assuring
men that without holiness they will see the Lord, and
that, however they may live or die, none will be ex
cluded from heaven.
But let us not be deceived. The Bible teaches
that the unholy, the vile, the unbelieving, wfll be
punished with eternal exclusion from the presence
of God ; that the holy, the pure, and the believing,
only, can hope for eternal salvation ; that all who re
ject Christ, shall not see life, but perish. Can you,
then, trust the delusions of Universalism? Can you
cling to a system having such tendencies and such
feeble proofs ? Can you build your hopes of eternal
happiness upon a foundation so sandy, so certain to
fail when most it "is needed, and to give way when
too late to repair or rebuild ?
If you have no confidence in the system, give it no
place, no, not an hour ; but say every where, to all
persons, on all occasions, — :say it kindly, but firmly,
— that you regard Universalism to be what it is, — an
awful delusion, a destructive error, fatal to man in
both worlds. Be induced by no consideration to
countenance its ministry, or mingle with those who
sit in the seats of the scorner.

ARGUMENTS EXAMINED. 213
But if it already has got hold of you, let rae en
treat you calmly and prayerfully to review the ground
on which you rest, the evidence of your faith, and
your preparation to meet your God. If this life is a
life of probation, — if these powers and privileges are
given to prepare us for another life, — then you are aw
fully wrong. Your mistake is of a most fearful raag
nitude. Eternity is not long enough to enable you to
correct the wrong. Many, very many, are reviewing
this subject. Many of your number are escaping
from the dreadful delusion that long has bound them.
O, be not deceived ! Let not the enemy of souls se
cure you for his dark dominions ! Fly, this hour, to
the Rock of Ages ! Fly from error to truth, from sin
to holiness, from death to life ! " If thou art wise,
thou shalt be wise for thyself ; but if thou scornest,
thou alone must bear it."

LECTURE VI.

REASONS FOR RENOUNCING UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN
FROM ITS MORAL RESULTS.
MATT. Tii. 16.
YE SHALL KNOW THEM BY THEIR FRUITS.
The Saviof clearly foresaw that, after his death,
men would arise, who would assume his name, and
profess to love his truth, while they would bear in
their hearts the same hatred to Christians that wolves
bear to sheep. The chief danger from their hatred
would result from their being disguised. Were they
to appear as the eneraies of truth, and openly assail it,
little harm would attend their opposition. But Satan
often " transforms himself into an angel of light ; " and
his servants often transform "themselves into minis
ters of righteousness."
How, then, shall they be distinguished frora the
servants of God ? Not by their appearance, nor by
their claims ; for they seem to be, and claira to be,
what they are not. Not by their, appeals to the
Bible. Satan did this in the teraptatioii of our Lord ;
and his rainisters have also done it in all ages of the
church. The Son of God knew that such a state of things
would exist; and that, without great watchfulness

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 215
and care, none would escape its dangers. That the
sincere followers of the Savior raight know the ser
vant of their Master frora such as came to destroy, he
gave them a decisive test in the text, "Ye shall know
them by their fruits. Do raen gathef grEipes of thorns,
or figs of thistles ? " Wherever the grape ahd the fig
are found growing, there raay be found, also, the vine
and the fig-tree. By this, Christ Jeshs meant to teach
that his religion is distinguished by peculiar results,
which will always attend it ; and where these ate
wanting, there his doctrine does not exist. The text
is a simple, yet positive test, given for all ages and
all climes. I shall apply it to Universalism, and ofier,
as the subject of this lecture, the fblloMving propb-
sition : —
Universalism does not produce TiiE fruit that
ATTENDED THE PREACHING OF ChrIST ANT) THE APOS
TLES : ON THE CONTRARY, ITS MORAL RESULTS ARE
SUCH AS COULD NOT ATTEND A SYSTEM HAVING GOD
FOR ITS Author.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS.
No one can have a just view of the practical ten
dency of Universalism, or be prepared candidly to
weigh its claims, unless he is made familiar with the
doctrines which distinguish it at this day. I say at
this day, for it has never been the same thing in any
two considerable periods of time. Mr. Murray is
called " the father of Universalism." But hot one
doctrine which he defended enters into the composi
tion of the present system. He differed frora the

216 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
evangelical coraraunity but in one thing. The advo
cates of the present systera differ in every thing. If
Mr. Murray were now alive, he would have no raore
syrapathy with Universalism than with atheism.
He would wholly renounce his reputed child.
Though they boast of Mr. Murray as their father,
Universalists cannot regard him as a preacher of
truth; for they reject all the doctrines which he
taught. They admit that he was not competent to,
expound the Bible, for they do not respect any inter
pretation or opinion which he advanced.
The Universalism of the present day denies the
native depravity of raan, the suprerae divinity of
our Lord, the vicarious atoneraent of Christ, and the
free raoral agency of raan. It teaches that this life
is not a probationary existence, that the consequences
of huraan actions are all liraited by it, and that the fu
ture life will be in no way affected by the conduct of
men in this. It teaches that the Sabbath is an insti
tution of expediency, and not of divine appointment ;
that oral prayer is not a duty ; that sin is not an evil
in the government or sight of God ; that there is no
such place as hell ; and that the devil is either " a
figure of speech," "a Sabean freebooter," "a disease,"
or, at most, "an evil principle" in man. It also
teaches that the soul of man is not iramortal, and that
there is no retribution in the future world for our con
duct in this ; but that all start again upon the same
level, whatever their characters may have been in this
world. Such, in miniature, is that system which claims
to be the religion of the cross — the religion to defend

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 217
which Christ came, suffered, and died. Were it my
purpose to show what the tendency of Universalism
must be from the nature of its peculiar doctrines, I
should have no occasion to travel beyond the sum
mary just introduced. Such doctrines must be bale
ful in their tendency ; they must be, from their very
nature, positively licentious. The spread of them
cannot but be destructive to human peace and morals
in this life, and to the soul in the life to come.
The Universalism of this day can date back no
farther than 1818. This is the precise age of raodern
Universalisra. The man yet lives who moulded the
present systera. And already has he begun to reap
some of the bitter fruits of his labor.
It is not denied that some Universalist preachers of
the present day profess to believe in limited future
punishment ; but they do not preach it. They hold
their places because they are silent upon that topic.
Thus they throw their influence against it ; for, while
they maintain silence, the advocate of ultra- Universal
ism makes his faith the burden of every serraon. In
some cases, I have known a special contract to be
made with a believer in future punishment, when
about to settle. The society agree to give the preacher
no trouble because he believes in future retribution,
and the preacher is not to trouble the society by main
taining it. Such a contract was made by my pred
ecessor in Salem. Mr. Balfour says, " I have been
among Universalists over twenty years. I have never
heard it [future punishment] preached but once, and
the preacher hardly said enough about it to let his
hearers understand that he believed this doctrine."
(Christ. Mess. July 17, 1841.)
19

218 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
In speaking of the moral results of Universalism,
I shall look at it as it touches the great interests of
raan, show what it has done and is doing for our
race, and set forth its influence upon the best good
of the human family. It has been, in sorae forra, in
the world fifty years — long enough for seed-tirae and
harvest. It has been weighed in the balance, and
found wanting ; or it has not. What it is now pecu
liar for, it ever will be. In what it now lacks, it
raust ever be deficient. ,
The advocates of Universalism claim for it a benev
olence and a philanthropy not found in any other
system. They assure the benevolent that it has
strong claims upon thera, as it seeks and advances all
that affects well the human race. They assure the
world that it breathes good-will to all men, and
secures all the good that can be found in any other
faith, without the evils which attend them.
Whatever it may be worth in a practical point of
view will appear in its history and progress. It has
little to do with eternity; and nothing with prepar
ing for it. It can, therefore, have no excuse for not
attending to this world. If it is fit to live by, we
shall know it when we see its practical influence. If
it has a good moral and benevolent tendency, it will
take the lead in all the benevolent enterprises of the
day. Nay, all of them will originate with it. The
advocates of it will be found spending their strength,
and employing the means of the denomination, in
carrying onward every good work, and ameliorating
the condition of raan.
On this subject I speak what I know. With Uni
versalisra I have had a long and a familiar acquaintance.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 219
My childhood was passed under its influence. Twelve
years of the best part of my life have been devoted
to its defence. I have seen its results in the con
duct it promotes ; in the religion it enforces ; and in
its effect upon the bereaved, the sick, and the dying.'
What I say is the fruit of ray own experience, ob
servation, and knowledge. I hold myself responsible
for the statements I make, and the facts which I pre
sent. I shall speak of Universalism as it is; of its
moral tendency and practical results. I come *as a
traveller, from a land to which you are invited, to tell
you of its clime, its soil, its inhabitants ; and offer to
you some advice in respect to a settlement there. I
shall be assisted by those who still dwell in the land.
Startling as some of the fact^ which will appear in
this lecture may seera, I think it will be seen that
not one is asserted that cannot be sustained by the
testiraony of many of the prominent advocates of
Universalisra. I have read much and heard much
of the raoral tendency of Universalisra ; but all this
has not weighed a feather in my mind, in comparison
with what I have seen of the practical influence of
that deadly delusion.
The proposition presented as the subject of this
lecture has a twofold character. It is negative and
positive. It asserts what the system is not, and what
it is ; what it does not do, and what it is peculiar for
doing. I will first present the negative part of the
subject. Universalism does not produce the fruit
THAT ATTENDED THE PREACHING OF ChRIST AND THE
APOSTLES.

220 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
The preaching of the Savior and the apostles
was distinguished for three results. Wherever they
preached, these fruits were found : —
1. Their preaching alarmed men. The great end
to be gained by preaching the truth, was to reprove or
convince of sin and of judgraent, that raen might
seek to be saved. The Savior's teaching al\<(ays
pointed out the sinfulness and danger of men. Those
who heard the truth, and believed, were convicted,
and' pricked in their heart.
You may see this result, on an extensive scale, on
the day of Pentecost. Thousands heard, and were
alarmed. One sensation pervaded their souls; one
expression gave utterance to the feelings of all. It was
the expression of alafhi — "Men and brethren, what
shall we do ? "
To take a single instance. The jailer at midnight
heard of Jesus. Alarm-took hold of hira. He uttered
alraost the same sentiment heard at Jerusalem on
the day of Pentecost — " Sirs, what must I do to be
saved ? "
When Jesus preached, whole congregations were
often filled with wrath. As Paul, eloquent and mighty
in the Scripture, stood before Felix, reasoning " of
judgraent to corae," that irapious ruler trerabled be
fore his prisoner. We are assured by the apostle that
" knowing the terror of the Lord," in that all are to
" stand before the judgraent-seat of Christ," he " per
suaded men," and ceased not to warn thera day and
night with tears.
2. It REFORMED mcu. It did more than startle the
conscience. It reformed the raan, changed his habits

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 221
and his life. To this moral change, produced by their
preaching, the apostles ever confidently appealed, to
prove that their religion was from God, and that they
were its divinely-appointed teachers.
By it the Roraans had been turned from "being
filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wicked
ness, maliciousness," and from being "haters of God,"
to a course of life so opposite, that their "faith was
spoken of throughout the whole world."
To the Corinthians Paul writes, " Know ye not that
the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God ?
Be not deceived ; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves
with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunk
ards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the
kingdom of God. And such were sorae of you : but
ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are jus
tified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit
of our God." (1 Cor. vi. 9—11.)
History inforras us that Corinth, at the tirae this
Epistle was written, was one of the raost corrupt and
licentious cities on the earth. Its very religion tended
to and encouraged irapurity and sin. But into this
corrupt place, Paul introduced the gospel of his Mas
ter. He lifted up the cross, and coraraanded and saw
a change — an immediate change — in the character of
those who received his word. He could appeal to
them to remeraber what they had been, and what
they were, through the Spirit of God. Out of that
polluted class of men whose crimes he enumerates, the
apostle was able to exhibit in their reforraation, before
a gainsaying world, the truth, that the religion of
19*

222 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
which he was the minister could change the charac
ters of men. He set them up as trophies of the
renewing grace of God, as raonuraents of the trans
forming power of the gospel.
The Galatians, before their conversion, "fulfilled
the lusts of the flesh." But when they " put on
Christ," they " crucified the flesh, with the affections
and lusts," and brought forth in their lives "the
fruits of the Spirit." The Ephesians had been "dead
in trespasses and sins," walking "according to the
course of this world," in "all unrighteousness and
uncleanness," "being disobedient, and unto every
good work reprobate." But the word was preached
unto them ; it turned them from the way of death,
and in their lives and conversations they glorified
God. And so was it in every place where the gospel
was preached. Its triumph was seen in the reforma
tion and purity of those who felt its power.
3. It did more than alarm the sinner and change
the outward raan. It touched and changed the heart.
It went down to the deep foundations of the soul, and
wrought there a thorough change. It attuned the
heart to the service and the praise of God. It took
off the affections from low and sordid things, and
placed them on God. It rendered the heart to God,
that he raight reign suprerae in that spot, so long
the strong-hold of the adversary of God and raan.
It not only hushed the blaspheraous ravings of the
impious, but it caused them to bend in prayer. It
not only made raen raoral ; it raade them also devout.
It not only broke in upon the jiractice of sin ; it took
away the love of it. It converted men ; made them

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALIS!

223

men of prayer, and caused thera to be as rauch dis
tinguished for their habits of devotion, as they before
had been for recklessness and irapiety.
Such results ever attended the preaching of the Sa
vior, and of his chosen and divinely-inspired servants.
In no age, since the tirae of the Savior, has his truth
been preached, when these results have not followed.
They as rauch distinguish divine truth at this day, as
they did eighteen centuries ago. But Universalisra is
not attended with thera. They are not expected ;
and in raany cases, 1 presurae, they are not desired.
1. Does the preaching of Universalism alarm raen ?
When it is for the first tirae preached in a place, do
men begin to tremble on account of sin ? Do they
cry out, " What must I do to be saved ? " Do raen
begin to think of death, of judgraent, and eternity,
when they leam that all raen will be saved ? Alarra
men ? alarm them with what ? ¦ With its siren song,
its assurance of safety, its reiterated assertion that all
will be well at death ? Absurd. Its great business is
to allay fear. It coraes to men recommending itself
as a system designed to remove all occasions of fear.
It teaches that, while some systems present future
woe, and alarm the ungodly in prospect of being lost,
this coraes to say, " Be not alarraed ; there is no eter
nal judgment ; you cannot be lost; God will save all
raen ; take your ease, eat, drink, and be raerry." No
preacher of this scherae of delusion has the question
put to him by an aroused and startled conscience,
" What must I do to be saved? "
2. Does the preaching of Universalism reform men ?
Twelve years in its ministry have not brought one

224 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
instance of reformation from that cause under ray ob
servation. I have never heaid of an instance, nor
have I ever seen a man who had been raore favored
than myself in this respect. I have heard it stoutly
asserted that raen were made better by the preachuig
of Universalism ; but in the oldest settlements of the
faith, when the individuals thus reformed were sought
for, they could never be found.
I have known raoral raen to embrace Universalism,
and continue moral. I have known them to em
brace it, and become iramoral. I have 'known bad
men to erabrace it, and continue as bad as ever. But
never, in a single instance, have I known a bad man
to be reformed by attending the preaching of Univer
salism. Nor do I believe that the united labors of all
the advocates of Universalism, under any of its foims,
for the past fifty years, have produced ten cases of
reforraation, if they have so rauch as one.
So far frora reforraing raen, it is the fact that
alraost all persons excoraraunicated from evangelical
churches fly to Universalism for shelter. It is the
boast of Universalists that raost of their preachers
come from other denominations. It will take away
much of the occasion of boasting, when it is known
that almost all of these men have been excommuni
cated from evangelical churches. I have before me a
certificate of the excommunication of an individual
from a Christian chmch in Boston, for an offence
which it would be improper to name. Immediately
upon his excoramunicatibii, lie embraced Universal
ism ; and in less than a year from the day when he
was cut off frora the church for iramorality, he was an
accredited minister of Universalism.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 225
You hear much of the spread of Universalism. Is
its prosperity indicated by a reforraation in character
and raorals ? Does profaneness cease at its approach ?
Do persons once distinguished for their licentiousness,
become patterns of purity as soon as they believe that
all men will b^ saved? Do Sabbath-breakers learn to
hallow the Sabbath? Do seriousness, solemn atten
tion to religion, and the habitual and devout reading
of the Bible, raark the diffusion of this sentiment ?
Or is the opposite the fruit of Universalisra ? All can
answer, as far as their observation goes. And but one
answer will be returned.
Who rises up, and says, " Once I was an unbeliever
in Universalisra. Then I was profane, and all ray
words were mixed with blasphemy. By accident I
heard the doctrine of Universalism, and learned that,
in the future world, God will hold thera guiltless who
took his name in vain, and that all blasphemies, none
excepted, will be forgiven unto men. I turned at
once from my evil way ; and from the hour that I
heard and believed, I have feared an oath." Who
says, " Once I was a drunkard ; I was a degraded
being, a burden to myself, a curse to ray friends. But
I embraced Universalisra. I learned that the drunkard
shall inherit the kingdora of God, and that, though I
were to die in my sin, I should ^ot be excluded from
the favor of God. When convinced of this, I dashed
the poison from my lips. I have since been a sober
man." I again remark, you hear much of the spread
of Universalism. Are its trophies and the fruits of its
triuraphs such as these ?
It is sometimes said by Universalists, in extenuation

226 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
of this state of things, that they have not time to
attend to moral culture. They are so much opposed,
they tell you, — so many things are said against them,
— they are so constantly required to defend their faith,
— that they have little time to attend to moral truths.
But have they as hard a warfare as Paul ? He was
scourged, stoned, imprisoned, and persecuted, in every
city. Yet he had tirae to speak to the consciences of
men, and reform the guilty. That a conversion to
Universalisra begets a hatred of Orthodoxy, is true.
But that it creates a hatred of sin, and a love for
holiness, does not appear. Whatever its progress may
be, it exerts no reforraing power.
3. Does it convert men, and lead to habits of devo
tion ? In almost all congregations you raay fiud some
persons who secretly or openly trust in Universalism.
Let such persons be converted, and at once they abhor
-Universalism. Let a man who once professed to be
converted, fall away ; and just so far as he forsakes
his profession, will he turn to Universalisra. A man,
in any evangelical congregation, who is converted to
God, will find no occasion to leave the congregation
with which he has worshipped to find spiritual food.
He will love the place better, feel a livelier interest in
the truth which now he can understand, and enjoy
and prefer the office of a door-keeper in the house of
God, to the highest seat in the tents of sin. A man
converted in a Universalist congregation, leaves the
place at once. He feels that he is in a deadly at
mosphere ; and the man surrounded by fatal conta
gion, flies not more swiftly to breathe the healthy
mountain air, than flies a ransomed soul from the

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 227
ministry of Universalism. In this the experience of
all Christians unites. No converted man can dwell
satisfied with Universalism. It cannot, therefore, con
vert the soul. Its every tendency proves it to be that
delusion, which with "lies makes the heart of the
righteous sad, and strengthens the hands of the wick
ed, that he should not return frora his wicked way,
by promising hira life." (Ezek. xiii. 22.)
It is' not a systera of prayer. No raan embraces it
because he has become a man of prayer, or a devout
student of the Bible. Any religious man, who feels
the slightest inclination towards Universalism, will
own, if he is an honest raan, that this inclination
began when he allowed himself to neglect secret
prayer, and the duties of a Christian life.
It does not tend to a serious and prayerful reading
of the Bible. Many read it to find proof-texts for
their opinions. But most of them settle down into
the belief that no one wfll finally be lost. What
salvation is, of what the bliss of heaven is to consist,
or how they can be happy to spend an eternity in
eraployraents they so perfectly detest in this world,
few seera to know, or care at all.
No minister of the sect whom I ever knew, main
tains family prayer. I have known many to ridicule
the custora ; but no one to observe it. I have been
often in the farailies of the principal advocates of Uni
versalism, and passed the night. They have been at
my house. I found no family devotions at their
dwellings. They exprtessed no surprise at not finding
an altar at my fireside. That Universalist preachers
would pray in a family if asked to do so, is raost

228 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
probable. Of this, of course, I do -not speak. But
the custom of regular, family prayer is not to be found
in any preacher's family with which I ever had any
acquaintance. I knew one man who asked a blessing
at his table. But he did this only when he had com
pany ; and was led to the practice by the remark of a
friend, who told hira he thought it looked strange for
a rainister to have no blessing craved at his table.
So far as ray own custora was concerned, I neither
read the Bible in my family, nor prayed with them.
I did not feel it my duty to do so. I should as soon
have thought it ray duty to turn ray parlor into a
Mahometan mosque, and gather my family together
to see rae perform those ablutions which the religion
of Mahomet requires, as to have engaged with them in
family worship. Nor is this a hard saying. The sect
do not consider this thing as a blemish. They are
proud of it. They affect to pity the poor, blinded,
superstitious raen, who are chained to the famfly altar.
I have known some clergymen and sorae laymen to
leave evangelical denominations, and join the Univer
salists. But I have observed it as a fact invariably
occurring, that no sooner is this done, and the convert
firmly settled in his new faith, than he abandons his
habits of family prayer. A person of ray acquaintance
once said to rae, after his conversion to Universalism,
" I wonder that the Universalist clergy do not pray in
their farailies, if it were only to stop the mouths of
the Orthodox." He set up family prayer for this pur
pose ; but the flame soon went out upon his altar.
He gave up his devotions, and ceased to wonder that
his new brethren did not pray, even though it might

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 229
have accomplished the great results anticipated in
stopping the mouths of the Orthodox. Indeed, a^rop-
ical plant could sooner bloom in Nova Zembla, than a
praying man continue such, when identified with
Universalism. Why must it not be so ? Universalists do not allow
that faraily prayer is a duty. They do not admit that
any prayer is necessary. Their theory is, that God
will do as much unasked, as he will when men suppli
cate favors by prayer. In no case do they allow that
prayer changes or affects the dealings of God. I once
heard a serraon frora the father of modem Univer
salism, [H. Ballou,] designed to prove that so much
prayer as the Orthodox indulged in was not coraraend-
able. It was an impeachment of the divine goodness
to suppose that it would withhold favors from men
simply because they refused to ask for them. " He
argued that this ceaseless importunity, so far frora
being pleasing to God, raust be offensive. To sustain
this point, the preacher reraarked that a father who had
proraised a favor to his child, would be displeased if
that child should, night and raorning, — indeed, every
raoraent that he was in the presence of his parent, —
be asking for the proraised favor. It was thought that,
so far frora speedily conferring the favor, the parent
would most probably withhold it altogether.
With such views of the subject, is it at all strange
that they do not have faraily or social prayer? Is it
strange that this service in public is felt as a burden
which they would gladly lay down ? Is it singular
that some preachers have already abandoned public
prayer? or that they can point to others who con-
20

230 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
tinue the practice, not from principle, but because
"the comraunity are not sufficiently enlightened to
allow them to lay aside the practice " ?
When I resided in Hartford, Connecticut, the editor
of the Universalist paper in that city announced,
through its columns, that, for the future, he should
refuse to pray in public when he conducted pubhc
service. He contended that such prayer was wrong ;
that he had conversed with a large number of Univer
salist preachers, who agreed with him in theory, but
thought the public not yet enlightened enough to
dispense with it ; and that offering prayer in connec
tion with a serraon, was a tribute to Orthodoxy that
he was not willing to pay. He offered a reward of
one thousand dollars to any man who would prove
that the Savior ever made a public prayer.
The manner of this individual was, to begin his
service by singing ; he then read his discourse ; after
which, in the room of the customary benediction, he
would announce to the congregation that the exercises
were closed, by taking his hat and walking out of the
pulpit. Nor did this preacher stand alone. Mr. Grosh, the
editor of one of the raost widely-circulated Universal
ist journals in the country. Undertook to defend this
course. Sorae persons, and myself araong the num
ber, opposed the abandonment of public prayer. Mr.
Grosh calls this "bigotry and persecution." And,
giving utterance to his views, he says, " While I agree
with hira, that they [public prayers] are not com
manded, I do not believe that they are altogether for
bidden. On the whole, however, I do not believe

FRUITS OP UNIVERSALISM. 231
there is much difference of opinion between br.
R. S. and myself, or between him and other breth
ren." Mr. Grosh adds, " I was once conscientiously
opposed to all public vocal prayers. I preached sev
eral months without them." (Mag. and Adv. vol.
iv. 334.)
Again Mr. Grosh says, "It is true, as a denoraina
tion, we have not even family prayers statedly per
formed. As to prayer meetings, I never heard of but
one instance where they were regularly held for any
period of time, and but a few instances where they
were held occasionally. To the charge implied in
the above question, [Why have not Universalists
prayer meetings ? &c.] I am therefore prepared, on the
part of Universalists, to plead guilty, if guilt there be
in it." (Mug. and Adv. iv. 245.)
When these things are urged against their system,
Universalists reply that the same things were urged
against the Savior. He was said to be irreligious,
blaspheraous, interaperate, and the friend of sinners.
Therefore it is said that the preaching of the Savior
and the preaching of Universalists must be the sarae.
, There is some difference, we apprehend, in the in
stances said to be parallel. The eneraies of Christ
sought his ruin. They could find no fault in him.
To condemn him, they must invent charges. All
their accusations were false. They fabricated the
worst things that could possibly be said, and which,
if true, would have proved that the Son of God was
all that his enemies declared hira to be. They were
not true ; and Christ was innocent. That the same

232 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
charges are preferred against Universalism is probable.
The system, as to its moral tendency, is accused of
doing all that the enemies of Christ laid to his charge.
But there is this difference : In regard to the Savior,
the accusation was utterly false ; but in regard to Uni
versalism, it is raost strictly true.
We have seen what the religion of the Bible does,
when it enters the heart. It takes impious, ungodly,
prayerless men, changes their whole character, and
makes them prayerful and devout. But Universalism,
so far frora raaking such a change in the reckless and
irreligious, takes men whose habits of devotion are
already formed, breaks thera up, cuts loose all re
straints, and, as far as its influence is felt, assists raen
to " cast off fear and restrain prayer."
I now ask, "Was not the Savior habitually dev-out ?
Is there any feature of his character more prominent
than this?" He began, continued, and ended, his
ministry with prayer. So was it with the apostles.
Every act was sanctified by the. word of God and-
prayer. All the holy men of God have been noted
for their spirit of prayer and supplication.
If the gospel alarraed, reforraed, and converted
raen, — if it led to religious conduct and devotion, —
then a systera so opposite in its effects eis Universal
isra, cannot be the gospel. If it is, then is there no
truth in the text. Men can gather grapes of thorns,
and figs of thistles ; and there is no such thing as
knowing them by their fruits. But, if the test con
tained in the text be certainly true, it follows that
Universalism is a gross and fatal delusion.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 233
I shall now present the positive part of my main
proposition : —
The moral results of Universalism are such as
COULD NOT attend A SYSTEM OF WHICH GoD IS THE
Author; for its tendency is downward, and al
ways DOWNWARD, BOTH IN DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE.
I. UNIVERSALISM IS DOWNVaRD IN DOCTRINE.
When Universalism was first introduced into this
country, its advocates denied but one article of the
Orthodox creed. They rejected simply the eternity
of punishraent. Mr. Murray is styled the " father of
American Universalisra." (Mod. Hist, of Un(v. p.
318.) He came to this country from England, and
landed in the month of September, 1770. Though a
believer in the doctrine of Universalism, he disguised
his sentiments for nearly three years. During this
time, he preached as an Orthodox man in various parts
of the country. With the Congregationalists, he
passed as one of their number. When with the
Presbyterians, or the Baptists, or the Methodists, he
was supposed to belong to the sect in whose society
he happened to be.
The disguise was first stripped frora him in Upper
Freehold, New Jersey, by Rev. Mr. Tennant. Mr.
Murray was thrown off his .guard, and a complete
knowledge of his principles obtained. He soon became
an open advocate of Universalism, and then found his
true level. Mr. Murray, in his autobiography, made
loud complaint that his confidence was betrayed when
his real sentiments were made known. For proof of
20*

234 FRUITS of universalism.
these facts, consult " Life of Murray," pages 195, 206,
209, 241, and 244.
But Mr. Murray was a Calvinist, with this excep
tion, that he believed that all were elected to endless
life. He believed in the supreme divinity of Jesus
Christ, in original sin, in regeneration, and in endless
punishment. He believed that the curse of the law
TVas endless death ; that all men were justly exposed
to it ; and that from this Christ came to redeem men.
He believed salvation to be deliverance frora deserved
punishraent. First Downward Step.
Before the death of Mr. Murray, Mr. Ballou, now
of Boston, denied the divinity of the Savior and the
atonement. To give his own words: "I had preached
but a short time before my mind was entirely freed
from all the perplexities of the doctrine of the Trin
ity, and the common notion of atonement. As fast
as those old doctrines were by any means rendered
the subjects of inquiry, they were exploded." (Mod.
Hist. p. 437.)
The denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ, Mr.
Murray regarded as a denial of the Christian faith.
Never, from the hour that Mr. Ballou's opinions were
known till the day of Mr. Murray's death, did he
regard Mr. Ballou as a Christian. He would not as
sociate with him, nor allow him to preach in his desk.
After Mr. Murray's death, the committee of his society
in Boston engaged Mr. Ballou to preach for them a
few Sabbaths. Before his first sermon was closed,
difficulty arose. Mrs. Murray announced to the con-

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 235
gregation that the sentiments advanced by Mr. Ballou
were not those which her husband had preached to
them. The society would not allow him to proceed.
They said he was not a Christian, but was preaching
deism in disguise. They would not allow him to com
plete his engagement ; and he was obliged to retire.
Mr. Mitchell, of New York, had similar views of
modern Universalisra. He died a few years ago, and
was the last of the Murray school of preachers. When
Mr. Sawyer removed to New York, he called upon
Mr. Mitchell as a brother in the faith, and wished his
countenance and cooperation in building up Univer
salism in that city. Mr. Mitchell replied, in direct
terms, that he did not look upon Mr. Sawyer as a
Christian, but as one whose system, at best, was
refined deism ; and that Mr. Sawyer, and those whom
he represented, must expect frora hira only the most
uncomproraising hostility.
It is worthy of notice here, that Mr. Mitchell died
in a house in which a Universalist preacher boarded.
Mr. Mitchell would receive no religious attentions
frora his hands, on the ground that he was not a
Christian rainister. And yet you will find Universal
ists clairaing Mr. Mitchell as a preacher of their order.
Universalists complain of the Christian comraunity
for not allowing thera the narae of Christians, nor
owning their preachers as ministers of the gospel.
But why complain ? Evangelical Christians do no
more in this respect than the father and founder of
Universalism did before his death ; and the sect was
not so degenerate then as now. If they had degen
erated so much before the death of the father of the

236 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
system that he would not own thera, have they just
ground to coraplain that others entertain the same
opinion of thera and their systera, and treat them
accordingly, now that they are even more degen
erate ?
After the death of Mr. Murray and the generation to
which he preached, the downward tendency was
further seen in the universal rejection of the divinity
of the Savior. Second Downward Step.
Until the year 1818, the sect generally admitted the
doctrine of future punishment. About the time men
tioned, Mr. Ballou announced the theory, that " the
Scriptures begin and end the history of sin in
flesh and blood; and that, beyond this mortal exists
ence, the Bible teaches no other sentient state, but
that which is called by the blessed name of life and
immortality." (Mod. Hist. pp. 437, 438.)
To this sentiment, for some time, rauch opposition
was made. Mr. Ballou was editor of the principal
Universalist journal at the period when he denied fu
ture punishment. For a season, he admitted into his
paper articles in defence of future retribution. But
when arguraents were urged against his theory which
he could not answer, Mr. Ballou closed his paper
against the Restorationists ; and while he continued to
attack the doctrine of future punishraent, the believers
in that sentiraent were excluded from raaking any
reply. Great dissatisfaction arose among those who
felt themselves aggrieved. On several occasions, a
separation from the body of Universalists was threat-

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 237
ened. It took place in 1828 ; when the believers in
the salvation of all men were organized into two
denorainations. The one, called "Restorationists,"
erabraced the believers in future punishment. The
other, called "Universalists," embraced those who
confine all the consequences of sin to this world.
Though formerly the term " Universalist " was ap
plied to all believers in universal salvation, it now
refers to those only who reject future punishment.
I have already shown how Mr. Murray and Mr.
Mitchell regarded modem -Universalism. You will
perceive that Universalists bear little good-will toward
the Restorationists.
In 1831, the editor ofthe "Trumpet" atterapted to
prevent the settleraent of a preacher in Chesterfield,
New Harapshire, on the ground that he "was opposed
to the doctrines of ultra-Universal ism," and that
though a meraber of the "Providence Association,"
(the Restorationist body,) that did not entitle hira to the
fellowship of Universalists, for that association "has
nothing to do with the Universalist denoraination."
( Trum. vol. iii. 182. ) The Restorationists are called
"anew denomination," (Trum. iii. 201,) and- their
separation from the body of Universalists is announced
publicly. (Trum. iv. 38.) In vol. v. 118, there is a
most imbittered article against the Restorationists ; and,
on page 122, the editor declares that the opposition
of the Restorationists to " Universalists is strong and
unititermitting ;" that "the Universalists in Mas
sachusetts are not opposed more bitterly by any
sect, than by the members of the Restorationist As
sociation."

238 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
In another part of this lecture, I shall introduce
the testimony of Restorationists in respect to the
moral tendency of Universalism. This testimony
will account, in part, for the hostflity of Universalists
toward them. Third Downward Step.
After tne rejection of the Deity of Christ, and the
doctrine of future retribution, the flood-gates of error
seemed to be lifted up, and all the doctrines of the
cross were soon swept away.
Sin was declared not to be an evfl. The existence
of hell was denied. The being of the devil was
rejected. The imraortality of the soul was set down
as a relic of heathenisra. The existence of angels
was denied, those passages which speaJc of angels
being regarded as figures of speech, intended to
represent messengers or rainisters who preach the
gospeL Fourth Downward Step.
The institutions of religion were next assailed by
Universalists. They regard the Sabbath as an insti
tution observed on the ground of expediency, and not
of divine appointment. To labor on the Sabbath
would not, in their opinion, be sinful, though it might
be improper. Journeys of pleasure are begun on the
Sabbath. Secular employments are engaged in by
officers in Universalist churches, on the principle that
the Sabbath is a human institution. I have, on the
Sabbath, passed, on my way to the church, from the
house ui which I now write, the workshop of one of

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 239
the Universalist deacons in this place, and seen him
engaged in painting wagon-wheels in the highway.
And as I paused to look at him, he seeraed as little
discoraposed, as when handing around the wine to his
fellow-communicants. Nor are these opinions and practices peculiar to lay
men. It is a fact of public notoriety, that the leading
preachers in the Universalist connection are in the
habit of passing the intermission of the Sabbath in
selling books, settling accounts, and doing any busi
ness that falls in their way.
Abel C. Thomas, pastor of the Second Universalist
Society in Lowell, a raan of sorae notoriety araong
his sect, used all the influence he possessed to induce
some young men in Lowell to work for hira on the
Sabbath. He told them they must do it ; that there
was no harm in jt ; that he had done so himself
repeatedly ; and, finally, that no one could see them
if they would put curtains up to their windows. I
insert the certificate with which I have been favored
by the young men referred to.
" The undersigned state that, in the month of
February, 1840, while Mr. Watson was engaged in
printing a -pamphlet conceming 'Miller's Theory,'
for Abel C. Thomas, it appearing that the work could
not be issued at the tirae required, Mr. Thoraas
suggested in our hearing that it might be done if
the hands would work on the intervening Sabbath,
saying that each might ' stick up a little curtain at
the window, so as not to disturb any body ;'' adding

240 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
that ' he had done it many a time,' and that ' there
was no harm in it,' or something to that amount.
"A. E. Newton.
" j. j. judkins.
" George N. Brown.
" Lowell, ZvdY 19, 1841."
Mr. Thoraas has publicly acknowledged that he
did use the language here attributed to hira; and
defends his conduct on the ground that the Sabbath is
not a divine institution. Besides, having the fact
established, that Universalists do reject the claims of
the Sabbath as a divine appointment, we have a prac
ticed commentary upon one part of the Bible. The
coraraand of God is, " Reraember the Sabbath day to
keep it holy ; " which, by way of interpretation, Mr.
Thoraas being authority, must mean, " When you
work on the Sabbath, put curtains up to your
windows." How long woiUd the Sabbath be hallowed if such
sentiments were to prevail ? How long woxfld it take
to corrupt our youth, if men professing to be the minis
ters of Christ were to visit them, urge them to break
the law of God, 'assure them that there is no harm in
it, and, as an inducement, offer their own example and
practice ? Can any one believe that God would first
coraraand us to keep the Sabbath holy, and then send
a corapany of men to urge us to violate his command ?
The institution of the Lord's supper is not sacred
in the eyes of modem Universalists. Some reject the
institution altogether. They say that Christ simply

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 241
ate the Jewish passover, and that it is no raore binding
on us than circumcision, or any other Jewish rite.
Others teach that it was to continue in force till the
destruction of Jerusalem, when it was abolished ;
while others, who observe the supper, deny that it
has any thing sacred in it ; it is open to all ; all
who are fit to attend meeting, are fit for the commu
nion. In most of the societies in the cities and large
towns, churches may be found. But these are invari
ably small ; twenty being probably a large average of
Universalist church merabers. This fact appears sin
gular at the first view. All can go to the table ; all,
on their ground, ' have a right there ; and no barriers
are in the way. Why, then, do so few attend ? I re
ply, that it is felt to be too serious a raatter to be
trifled with. There is, in the coraraunity, so rauch
latent Orthodoxy, that even these raen are affected by
it. And then the Bible gives some solemn admoni
tions on this subject. " He that eateth and drink
eth unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to
hiraself" (1 Cor. xi. 29.) Men are willing to hear
Universalisra preached; they are willing to profess,
defend, and support it ; but they are not quite ready
to incur the curse denounced upon those who eat or
drink unworthily.
Araong the few who unite in such an association,
the principal induceraent is, to be like other denomi
nations, and do away the reproach that tlie sect is in
fidel. This is the strong argument used by preach
ers, when they urge men to unite with their church.
When I removed to Salem, Massachusetts, though
the church had been organized over thirty years, it con-
21

242 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
tained but about twenty raembers. As I presented
the subject to their attention, and urged the members
of my congregation to come to the communion, some
would laugh at me ; some tell rae that " that would
be carrying the joke too far;" others would say that
" they were Universalists if they were any thing ; "
while many would own that they were not confirmed
in Universalism, and thought that a change of char
acter was necessary to salvation.
Men join a Universalist church as they would a
lyceum, and leave it in the same way. A profession
of faith throws over them no 'new restraint; it im
poses no new obligation. A change of character is
not necessary to the enjoyment of its privileges. Pro
faneness is no disqualification for church membership ;
deism is none ; atheism is none.
In all the Universalist churches in Boston, there raay
be found raen habitually profane. They are among
the oldest and most influential members. The same
reraark holds trae in respect to all the Universalist
churches in the vicinity of Boston. Indeed, it is true
of all churches of that sect which I have any ac-»
quaintance with. I speak advisedly on this subject,
and challenge contradiction. I have broken the bread
at the coraraunion table, frequently, to persons whom
I knew to be habitually profane swearers. In raany
churches you will find deists ; and, in one of the
oldest Universalist churches in the vicinity of Boston,
there was a raan who was an atheist. His usual
practice was, to attend the Universalist meeting in the
moming, and go into Boston, ahd hear Abner Knee-
land, in the afternoon, except on communion Sabbaths,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.

243

when he would pass the afternoon in his own church,
to partake of the sacrament.
Wheu I resided in Haverhill, a raan joined ray
church. The next week he attended the annual
rauster, and spent a large part of the day in garabling.
I know of one Universalist preacher who used to call
the sacrament the "devil's supper," and yet, without
any change of views, administer the ordinance when
ever called upon for that purpose.
Men are not required or expected to be better men
because they profess Universalism. They can lead
the same prayerless, profane, and irreligious life they
led before. They can play at cards, drink, gamble,
and attend balls and theatres, with a full conviction
that this conduct is inconsistent with no profession
which they have raade.
Fifth Downward Step. — Universalism leads to
Infidelity.
1. Carry out those principles of interpretation by
which Universalism is deduced from the Bible, and
objections to it removed, and you will deduce, not
only deism, but atheism, also, from the Scriptures.
A man who believes Universalisra upon the reasoning
of its advocates, will, if he is a consistent man, be
compelled to admit the claims of atheism.
If it be proof that there is no such being as Satan,
because the term in the Bible is soraetiraes applied to
raen, then there is no God, for the sarae reason. If
there be no evil angels, because the terms used to
indicate them are employed to designate bad raen,
then there can be no holy angels, because this phrase

244 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
is sometimes appropriated to good men. If there be
no hell, because the original word, in its primary
sense, did not denote the world of woe, then there
can be no heaven, for the original word, so far from
teaching a state of immortal felicity beyond the grave,
only signified the atmosphere which surrounds the
globe. If the phrases " everlasting punishraent," " ever
lasting destruction," " eternal daranation," do not
point out an endless state of suffering, then there can
be no proof of endless felicity ; for the same epithets
are used to denote the duraition of punishment that
are used to denote the duration of felicity. No others
are used, — no stronger can be used. By their very
principles of interpretation, Universalists must become
infidels, for those principles deny future existence, as
well as future retribution. Such interpretation has
been, and ever must be, the prolific source of infi
delity. 2. Infidels have a great sympathy with Univer
salism. They frequently hold important offices in
Universalist societies, and are among the raost active
members. I have already stated that the Univer
salist society in Hartford was mostly composed of
infidels. The principal men, the most active and
liberal in pecuniary raatters, were of this character.
Nor is this the first time this has been told. Mr. J.
Bisbee, when pastor, spoke openly and boldly, in the
pulpit and out, of that prominent feature of the
society ; and it is well known that his plainness on
this subject drove hira frora the society.
And I know that my warmest and best friends,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 245
while pastor of the society, — those most constant
at meeting, — women as well as men, — avowed thera
selves to me to have no faith in the Bible.
It wfll be but just to let infidels speak for them
selves. An infidel agent at the west writes to a
friend in Boston, as follows : " There are thousands
and tens of thousands of skeptics and liberals through
out the western country. And in the absence of raore
liberal and philosophical lecturers, they employ Uni
versalists. For two years past, the liberals in this
town have eraployed and paid a Universalist preacher.
But the moment I arrived, he was set aside. Indeed,
the Universalist clergymen here are not to be sneezed
at. Mr. Kid well [one of the oldest and most popular
Universalist clergyraen in Ohio] preached last Sabt
bath. I went to hear him ; and, of a trath, he
preached as good sense, reason, philosophy, liber
ality, as I want to hear, or expect to. In short, he
is a very good Kneeland man." (Inves. July 19,
1840.) When Frances Wright gave her lectures in Boston,
the Universalists were araong her raost ardent ad-
rairers. And it was confidently asserted, by leading
Universalists in Boston and vicinity, that what she
taught was what Universalisra would be in twenty
years. The prominent ministers of Universalism were
among her audiences, and were seated upon the stage
with her at the Federal Street theatre. She visited
them at their houses. And I heard Mr. Ballou, of
Boston, say that he agreed with M'ss Wright in the
sentiments she advanced in her leictures, except in one
21*

246 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
thing ; what she cEtlled religion, he should call super
stition. She opposed religion. Mr. Ballou opposed
superstition. But both opposed the same thing under
different names.
Since that period. Miss Wright has felt toward Mr.
Ballou the warm respect of a zealous coadjutor.
This may be seen frora the following letter, which,
with a notice accorapanying it, I take from the
" Trumpet " of December 10, 1836. It was copied
into that paper frora " Zion's Herald."
" Frances Wright Darusmont has raade a moving
appeal, in the ' Investigator,' for one of the Universalist
meeting-houses, in which she may hold forth. It
seems, by the following paragraph, that she entertains
a high respect for Mr. Bflllou. The infidels seera,
of late, to be courting the favor- of the Universalists
very rauch. What can be the object ? a union of the
two parties?
" ' I hereby request, raost respectfully, permission
to occupy any one of the more coramodious Univer
salist churches, on any evening of the first week in
December, for the purpose texplained, namely, the elur
nidation of the subject of southern slavery. It would
please me more especially to be permitted to occupy
that of Mr. Ballou, for whose character I entertain
high respect. With all due deference, therefore, I
prefer to hira more especially this request.
" ' Frances Wright Darusmont.' "
Infidels are admitted into Universalist meeting
houses, to lecture upon infidelity. This is true of

fruits of universalism. 247
Milford, Attleboro', Pawtucket, and other places. The
sympathy of infidels with Universalism may be seen
by the following extract from the " Trurapet : " —
" I would allude to another town, not a thousand
miles from Marblehead, where, previous to the estab
lishment of a Universalist society, sorae fifty of Abner
Kneeland's papers went regularly ; but since Univer
salism has found a footing there, those papers have
dwindled away almost to nought. I ask the reader
again to make his inference."
The inferences we make are these : first, that it is
perfectly natural for the " Trurapet " to take the place
of Abner Kneeland's paper ; secondly, that Universal
isra, to all intents and purposes, fully raeets the wishes
of infidels.
When the tidings reached this country of the infi
delity in Gerraany, it was hailed with joy by Uni
versalists. The news was published in their periodi
cals, under the iraposing caption of "GloriouS news
from Germany." Public njeetings were held, resolu
tions passed, speeches made, and a day of thanksgiving
appointed, in attestation of their joy.
One of the most learned defences of Universalisra
that has been published, was written by T. S. Smith,
of England. And yet, after laboring to prove that
Universalisra was the doctrine of the Bible, that gen
tleman threw the Bible aside, and is now an infidel.
The Purchase Street Universalist Society in Boston,
called the Sixth, in 1840 ran down. Its minister re
nounced Universalism. The hall and fixtures were
transferred to the infidels, who hold meetings in it on
the Sabbath. And araong the most active in the

248 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
infidel meetings, may be found the men who got up
and sustained, while it existed, the Universalist society.
The editor of " Zion's Advocate," in giving an acr
count of a Baptist association at Turner, Maine, re-
raai-ks, -rr-
" We are not acquainted with any other town in
the state, where Universalist sentiments have obtained
so much control. And -the history of that doctrine
here is a just commentary on its tendency. Not a
few have passed the purgatory of Universalism into
the paradise of infidelity.
3. The testimony of raen who have been led into
infidelity by Universalism proves the same thing.
Mr. Kneeland was many years one of the most
popular advocates of Universalisra. He is now an
atheist. He states raost explicitly, that Universalism
is but a stepping-stone to infidelity. Years before he
publicly renounced his faith in the Bible, he was
known to be an infidel. His ministerial associates
knew this. But it did not hurt his standing, or injure
his popularity. When he preached in Philadelphia,
long before he openly rejected Christianity, he had
discarded the whole Bible, excepting the book of
Luke ; and the beginning of that he thought had
better be dispensed with. Mr. Kneeland says that
he, as an atheist, has reached his position only by
carrying out those principles of interpretation which,
when a Universalist, he brought to the Bible.
Rev. O. A. Bronson, who was an influential de
fender of Universalism in Western New York, gives
the following, as his experience upon this subject. It
is from a review of "Whitman's Letters," published
in the " Monitor."

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 249
"In his eleventh Letter, Mr. Whitman presents his
objections to Universalism. They are truly formida
ble, and most of them are well founded. To many
of thera we can bear the testimony of melancholy
experience. That the legitimate tendency of Univer
salism, — or at least the present manner of teaching it,
— is to skepticisra, we have not the least doubt. The
writer of this 'Review ' was for a nuraber of years as
sociated with the Universalists as a preacher, and as
the editor of a Universalist periodical. It was very
common for the clergymen with whom he was
acquainted, to speak of Universalism as a ' stepping-
stone,' as ' the best weapon to destroy the Orthodox,
do away the clergy, and to prepare the way for
something better.' Of the twenty-five hundred sub
scribers to the .paper which he conducted, it was
presumed that more than half were skeptics, or at
least skeptical. He has conversed with hundreds of
professed Universalists, who would own to him that
they support Universalism only ' because it was the
most liberal sentiment they could find, and because it
was better than deism to put down the Orthodox. ' "
Men settled over Universalist congregations, and
editing Universalist periodicals, have been allowed to
advocate infidel sentiments, and do so unrebuked.
They have engaged to join infidel communities, and
have spoken contemptuously of the rainistry as a
calling ; yet retain their standing in the denomination.
When these things are charged home upon Univer
salism, its advocates appeal, by way of offset, to the
fact that three or four books have been written by
sorae of their preachers in defence of Christianity —

250 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
books unknown save among themselves. In his
"Guide to Universalism," Mr. Whittemore seems to
be conscious of the infidel tendencies of his writing ;
for, at the close of the work, he inserts Leslie's
" Short and Easy Method with the Deists ; " as if
convinced that the bane and the antidote ought to
go together.
4. Universalists sometimes state that their explana
tions of the Bible have been the means of converting
infidels to the Christian religion. But how is it done ?
Simply by levelling Christianity to Universalism ; by
striking out of the Bible or explaining away all that
is offensive to them ; by raaking it teach just as infi
delity teaches. The infidels are unchanged. And if
they receive the Bible through the instruction* of
Universalism, it is because the Bible, is raade to har
monize, in appearance, with their views.
Infidels, as a general rule, are intelligent men.
They reject the Bible, because it teaches the doc
trines which the Orthodox find in it. I was once in
conversation with an infidel, a meraber of my society-
I was attempting to bring him to receive the Bible,
by explaining away its threatenings. Having heard
me for a while patiently, he, at length, interrupted me
with the remark, " It is of no use to talk in that way ;
the Bible is fifll of hell, and every body knows that
it is." A few months since, I was conversing with a
Universalist upon the doctrines of the gospel. He*
pronounced thera to be unreasonable and absurd. He
cited in proof the opinion of infidels, who unanimously
rejected them on that ground. I replied, "Ask the

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 251
infidel who rejects these doctrines, why he rejects the
Bible, and he will tell you that he does it because the
Bible contains those very sentiments against which
he speaks. Hence, the infidel being the judge, Uni
versalism has no place in the Bible."
To make these men believers by bringing the Bible
down to their notions, would be as irrational as the
attempt to raake rogues honest men, by abolishing the
laws they violate.
When infidels join Universalists, and take upon
themselves that name, and profess to h& hearty in the
cause, it is not because they have changed their
ground ; but they find in Universalism the same
general principles they professed before. They can
better secure the end they have in view in that dis
guise, than by open infidelity. An influential meraber
of my society iri Hartford, a physician, was an open
infidel. When 1 asked hira why he joined the Uni
versalists, he replied, "Because they are the nearest to
nothing, of any thing I know of"
5. A peaceful death in infidelity is regarded as a
triuraph of Universalism. This the following state
ment will show. It is from the pen of a highly-
respected clergyman, who knew the young man, and
all the circumstances which he records.
" In the town of Springfield, Massachusetts, lived a
young man of respectable connections, who was early
led astray by evil and unprincipled associates. Having
broken away entirely from the moral restraints that
were thrown around hira in early life, he abandoned
himself to the perpetration of vice in its most de
grading forms. He was habitually profane : profane-

252 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
ness seemed to issue from his lips as naturally as
his breath.
" About the age of twenty-one years, he was seized
with a mortal disease ; the result, as was supposed, of
a life of dissipation. He was visited frequently, during *
his sickness, by pious friends, who took a deep inter
est in his welfare. These visits were always received
with displeasure. In these interviews, he always
ridiculed the idea of a future state, and spoke with
perfect contempt of every thing of a serious nature.
He said he had not read the Bible for years, and that
he never wished to read it, or hear it read again. He
died a bold blasphemer and a professed atheist.
" His funeral was attended by a Universalist minis
ter. He eulogized the young man's character, and, to a
large concourse of young people, held up this dissolute
infidel as a ^pattern for their imitation.' He was
spoken of as having '¦finished his allotted work on
earth, and gone to heaven.' His death was said to
afford ' another evidence of the triumph of Universal
ism in the dying hour.' "
In what respect, then, I ask, does Universalism differ
from infidelity ? What are its doctrines, but " deism
in disguise," as Mr. Mitchell pronounced them to be ?:
Could not atheists and deists receive the Bible as the
basis of their theories, if they would adopt the course
pursued by Universalists ? What is there to, prevent
the atheist from raaking the Bible his text-book, if he
raay strike out all the passages that speak of the exist
ence of God ? In what respect do infidels have looser
notions of the Sabbath, of prayer, and the institutions
of religion, than those expressed by Universalists?

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 253
The difference is in favor of deism ; for Universalism
hjis denied those obvious truths which reason and
nature teach.
6. Universalisra inspires no respect for the institu
tions of Christianity. Universalists look upon their
preachers as hired men, who preach only for money ;
who wfll go where they can get the raost of it ; and,
when one is gone, his place raay be easily supplied
by another equally as good.
The minister of the First Universalist Society in
Boston once reproved one of the most influential
members of his society for profane swearing. His
reply was, " I know that I swear a great deal, and
you pray a great deal ; but we do not either of us
mean any thing by it;" thus making his swearing
equally important, or equally harmless, as the prayers
of his pastor.
Their pl&ces of worship have in their eyes nothing
of a sacred character. They are opened for infidel
lecturers, and for theatrical shows and exhibitions. In
proof of this, read the following frora the " Trumpet"
of Aprfl6, 1839: —
" Dramatic Exhibitions in Milford, Mass. Some
body has sent us a bill of a draraatic exhibition,
given by the Milford Social Club, at the Universalist
Meeting-House in Milford, on Friday evening, 29th
ult., consisting, 1st, of the tragedy of Douglas; 2d, a
few silly songs : and 3d, a farce, in one act, called a
Race for a Dinner ; the whole concluded with the
Rsujcoon Hunt, by Mr. Freeman."
I saw, some time ago, a bill, advertising a circus in
Pawtucket, Rhode Island. As an inducement for peo-
22

254 fruits of universalism.
pie to attend, it was announced, that the profits r^ult-
ing from the exhibition would be appropriated to the
building of a Universalist meeting-house in that
town. It speaks volumes for the moral sense of that
community, that the receipts were less than the ex
penses. What worse, or what raore of evil, could
infidelity do, than this ?
7. The only institution for education that has had
any success among Universalists, shows the tendency
of the system to infidelity.
The Clinton Liberal Institute, at Clinton, New York,
is a denominational school. One of the most distin
guished clergymen of the Universalist sect in New
York became its agent. It was commended to the pat-
tronage of the Universalist comraunity as their institu
tion, and by thera sustained. But it is essentially an
infidel institution. It was founded as such. The
charter and articles of compact were framed by men
who designed to teach infidelity under the name of
Universalisra. It was so understood by the Univer
salist clergy, to whora these facts are well known.
The articles of governraent forbid the introduction
of religion into the Institute. Neither pubhc prayer,
nor the reading of the Bible, as an act of religious
worship, can be performed in the school.
The design of the friends of this institution, in
establishing it, may be learned frora Universalists
theraselves. " We bespeak the attention of a liberal and enlight
ened public to this literary institution. Disgusted
with the continual interraeddling of sectarists, and
with the undue, unjustifiable, and unwarrantable

fruits of universalism. 255
exertions raade to bend the minds of the rising gen
eration into a certain train of thinking, and to the adop
tion of certain prescribed notions of religion, as was
witnessed at all our seminaries of learning; and deter
mined to no longer submit to a policy that reduced
every thing to an engine for promoting sectarian pur
poses, — a few liberal-ininded individuals conceived the
noble idea of raising and establishing an institution
based on such principles as should forever exclude
the religious domination of the clergy, and where
the youth raight receive a, polite and liberal education,
untrammelled by the superstitious dogmas of the age,
and where they should be permitted to enjoy their
own private opinions, without being reproached or
taunted for the sentiments they chanced to erabrace."
(Mag. and Adv. vol. v. 12.)
S. R. Smith, the agent of the Institute, thus writes :
" No public religious services can be performed during
class hours ; and no minister, of any sect, may hold
meetings in the Institute." (Trum. Aug. 21, 1841.)
That is, the school can neither be opened nor closed
by prayer or the reading of the Bible.
Mr. Grosh says, " The constitution forbids the per
formance of public religious services within the walls
of the institution." (Mag. v. 134.) The character
of the institution can never change. " The articles
of the constitution, which secure the religious liberty
of the students, are unalterable." (Mag. vii. 6.)
Recently a legacy has been left to the institution,
by one of the founders of the school, upon condition
that every teacher professing Christianity shall be ex-

256 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
eluded from the school. And Mr. S. R. Smith says,
" When the legacy becomes due, no teacher shall be
employed who is a professor of the Christian reli
gion." (Trum. Aug. 21, 1841.) Again, he says,
" The first step was deliberately taken for its [the
Institute's] creation by the 'Central Association of
Universalists,' in the state of New York, which ap
pointed, as was thought, a full board of Universalist
trustees, with the exception of one or two instances.
The executive committee were, and continue to be,
professed Universalists, who give their entire influence
to the support of that denomination." (Christ. Mess.
Oct 9, 1841.)
That the institution is in all respects a Universalist
school, the following authority will prove : —
" At a raeeting of the trustees and executive com
mittee of the Clinton Liberal Institute, Aug. 21, 1841,
it was resolved, that the Clinton Liberal Institute was
projected by Universalists ; its substantial and com
modious buildings erected and paid for with their
money; and its library and apparatus presented by
their liberality ; and, moreover, the said Institute has
always been controlled, and principally sustained, by
that denomination." (Christ. Mess. Sept. 11, 1841.)
If any further proof was needful, the south would
furnish it. Universalists have made great efforts to
spread their sentiments at the south, but without
success. The frankness of the southern character
disdains disguise. Those who are religious give
Universalism no countenance ; those who are not
wish for no cloak. It is no reproa,ch at the south

FRUITS or UNIVERSALISM. 257
to be irreligious ; at the north it is. Universalism
flourishes at the north ; in the south it cannot live.
The same class in the one section who erabrace
Universalisra, in the other are open infidels.
Besides this proof of its tendency to infidelity, al
low rae to ask. What claira has Universalism upon
the world, in a moral point of view, which infidelity
cannot raake ? Universalism cannot present one sanc
tion that raay not be found in deism. Deism has
raore sanctions than Universalism can urge. It has
all the motives to a good life which can be drawn
from this world. And then it presents that natural
dread of something after death, which makes the
worst of men "rather bear the ills they have, than
fly to others that they know not of."
But Universalisra sweeps this all away. It assures
men that they have nothing to fear after death ; and
that any man who has courage to break the brittle
thread of life, will step at once beyond the reach' of
sorrow and suffering, into perfect happiness forever.
The point is sustained, I conceive, that Universalism
tends to infidelity.
Need I add raore to prove the downward tendency
of Universalism, in doctrine ? Within fifty years, it
has run through all the grades of unbelief, down to
deism, and even below it. No intelligent deist, not
even Thomas Paine, has denied the immortality of
the soul, or the doctrine of future retribution. Mr.
Paine believed in both these sentiments, alleging that
reason and nature taught them. Universalism already
has gone below deism. What its next developraent
will be, we cannot tell. How literally, in the history
22*

258 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
of this delusion, are fulfilled the words of Paul —
"But evil raen and seducers shall wax worse and
worse; deceiving and being deceived " ! (2 Tim.
iii. 13.) II. UNIVERSALISM IS DOWNWARD UN PRACTICE.
Let rae not be misunderstood. I do not mean to
assert that all the advocates of Universalisra are
immoral men. I do notxmean to say that, as soon as
a raan receives this doctrine, he runs down at once to
the lowest point of degradation. His early habits, the
power of early religious instruction, may neutralize
his errors.- He raay be ^ moral man, in spite of his
deraoralizing creed.
Were I to give my opinion of atheism, I should
say, that it saps the foundation of religious fear and
human accountabflity. It derides law and its sanc
tions, by denying the existence of the lawgiver and
the judge. But we do not always see the legitimate
tendency of atheism in those who profess it. We do
not always witness that daring impiety, which springs
from the theory, and which spurns the providence of
God, and laughs at all devotion as the offspring of
a blind credulity. The strength of early and good
impressions ; the religious atmosphere that surrounds
thera ; the strong raoral feeling that pervades the
coraraunity, — prevent the atheist from exhibiting in
fuU the practical results of his evil principles. But
for all that, atheism, in its nature, is demoralizing,
and at war with righteousness, though some atheists
may be amiable men. So with Universalism. As a

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 259
systera, it is altogether iramoral ; and it is with its
practical tendency we have now to do.
1. Universalism promotes Itnpiety.
It breaks up the devotional and religious habits of
men, and often suddenly. The evidence of conver
sion to Universalism is seen in their change of charac
ter in this respect, in the violation of the Sabbath,
and in refiising to attend raeeting, and to support the
preacher. In no one thing, perhaps, is the downward
practical tendency so clearly, seen as in this point. A
Christian becoraes cold and careless. He neglects
secret prayer; then prayer at the family altar is
omitted ; then social prayer ; then comes an absence
from public worship a part of the day ; then follows
an occasional attendance upon Universalist preach
ing ; then excoraraunication ; then an open profession
of Universalisra.
On the other hand, when a Universalist has serious
impressions, or begins to raake religion a personal
matter, he abandons his system. He has no longer
need of a cloak. It is an argument of no mean
power against Universalism, that nearly every Chris
tian has examined its claims, and rejected it.
A person is impressed with the necessity of pre
paring to meet God. He is attached to his sins, but
he does not wish to perish. He finds two theories in
the comraunity. The one tells hira that the great
purpose of this life is to fit raen for the next, and
that, without holiness, no raan can see the Lord.
The other teaches hira that the present life has no
connection with the future, and that all that raen

260 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
suffer for sin they suffer in this world. Suppose he
reads the following, taken from the "Trurapet: ". —
" Our confidence is in God. Sin is misery ; it is
hell ; it is punishment. But God can cleanse the
foulest heart ; he can raake the vflest clean. Though
our sin is as scarlet, he will make it white as snow ;
and though it be like crimson, it shall be like wool.
So saith the Word. Neither death nor sin can have
any dominion beyond the resurrection. God hath
promised it. We depend on him. All live unto
God. 'The lamp holds, out to hnvn' forever, in his
presence ; and we rejoice in believing he will do all
THINGS WELL."
This is what the man wants to believe. But why
does he not trust it ? He dares not. For, unless he
denies the truths of the Bible, he feels and knows
that such sentiments are false. And, though his lusts
plead for them, and his sins urge him to take shelter
beneath them, conscience gives him no rest till he
escapes entirely frora this refuge of lies. Far from
creating devout habits in the impious, Universalism
breaks up those previously formed under the influence
of an opposite belief.
I have often been struck with the change in the
characters of men, when converted to Universalism.
Before their conversion, they had a family altar;
afterwards, it was thrown down. Before, they would
devote the Sabbath to religious worship ; afterwards,
to business, recreation, or pleasure. Before, they
were liberal in supporting not only the public wor
ship of God, but the benevolent institutions of the
church ; afterwards, the sraallest sum was given with

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 261
extreme reluctance. I was once instrumental in per
suading a young raan to embrace my system. He was
an artist by profession. He had been religiously edu
cated, was very moral, a strict observer of the Sabbath,
and punctual in his attendance upon pubUc worship. I
had great difficulty in reraoving the many objections
he urged against Universalism. At length he was sat
isfied to rest his hopes of heaven upon that foundation.
In less than six mouths from the hour in which he
embraced it, his moral sense was so impaired, that he
used to work upon the Sabbath.
2. It is positively licentious in its Tendency.
It must be so, from the very nature of its doctrines.
It destroys human accountability, makes sin no eviii
in the sight of God, and reraoves all fear of retributian
in the world to corae. It makes sin to be all the pun
ishment raen can suffer for their sins, and the v;iolaitiion
of God's law the penalty for the violation. This may
very well be illustrated by the following anecdote
frora the "Life of Garrick:" —
" The lecture upon the non-credenda of the free
thinkers was repeated so often, [at Mr. Mallet's table,]
that the inferior domestics became soon as able dis
putants as the heads of the family. The fellow who
waited at table, being thoroughly convinced that for
any of his misdeeds he should have no account to
make, was resolved to profit by the doctrine, and made
off with raany things of value, particularly the
plate. Luckily, he was so closely pursued, that he
was brought back with his prey to his raastei's house,
who exarained hira before some select friends. At

262 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
first the man was suflen, and would answer no ques
tion put to hira ; but, being urged to give a reason for
his infamous behavior, he rpsolutely said, ' Sir, I had
heard you so often talk of the impossibility of a future
state, and that after death there was no reward for
virtue or punishment for vice, that I was tempted to
commit the robbery.' ' Well ; but, you rascal,' replied
Mallet, 'had you no fear of the gallows ?' ' Sir,' said
the fellow, looking sternly at his master, ' what is that
to you, if I had a raind to venture that ? You had
reraoved ray greatest terror ; why should I fear the
less?'" On the Universalist plan, punishraent is no curse ;
no exhibition of God's anger against sin; no token
that God is displeased with evil. It is no raore so than
the rain, the sunlight, or the dew. All the warnings
and threatenings are deceptive ; for, on the ground of
Universalisra, they are nothing but displays of God's
love. As well might you call a hospital " a prison,"
and threaten the sick that they shall be sent there
to be punished, meaning nothing by your alarming
threats, but that they shall be healed.
Suppose Congress should erect a vast hospital for
all those who are wounded in brawls, or diseased from
vice and crime. Let thera endow it with great liber
ality, and throw open its doors to all the nation.
Having done this, let thera forbid rioting, drunkenness,
and every vice ; but, at the sarae tirae, announce that
all who disobey shall be sent at once into this hos
pital, to be punished by being healed. Let it be
proclaimed, " Poor men ! their sickness is punishment
enough ; they are justly entitled to be cured, and re-

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 263
stored to society." Would such an establishment be
favorable to public purity, or public morals ? If not,
then neither can the teachings of Universalism, in
respect to the manner of God's dealing with sin.
Common observation must convince any man that
the profane, the interaperate, the licentious, love this
doctrine. They call it their own. They support it ;
they defend it. All such feel that they are not horae-
less. The general impression is, that such men will
be zealous defenders of the blessed doctrine. When
I was a settled Universalist preacher, all such bowed
to me as their spiritual guide. When a man died of
the delirium tremens, was hanged, or drowned by his
own act, I was called, as a raatter of course, to attend
the funeral.
The class of persons usually collected together to
hear a preacher of Universalism, is proof of its iraraoral
tendency. They come not together to be made bet
ter. They seek not the restraints of religion and the
sanctions of God's word. They have thrown them
off, and corae to Universalism to be strengthened in
their course, and encouraged in their evil way.
Go where it is a novelty, and announce the preach
ing of Universalism. Into what places will the intel
ligence carry sadness? Into the bar-room, the dram
shop, or the garaing-room ? Who will be raade sad ?
The deist, the Sabbath-breaker, the intemperate, the
adulterer? Will not these rather, with scarcely an
exception, rejoice in the intelligence, and mostly make
up the audience ? They will be assisted, perhaps, by
young men and boys ; and especially by those who have
once been awakened, but have again relapsed into sin.

264 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
This is a notorious fact And why should it not be
so ? The Bible says that " the unrighteous shall not
inherit the kingdom of God." It designates drunkards
in a special manner as a class which shall not be
saved. A drunkard does not wish to be lost. Neither
is he willing to become a sober raan. Why should he
not love a doctrine which teaches hira that his sin
shall not exclude him from heaven ?
The Bible says to the sinner, " Thou shalt surely
die." He will not change his course of Ufe. Must he
not wish success to a cause which assures him that
he may live and die in sin, and yet be saved ?
Men unfaithful in their conjugal relations, who read
that all such will have their part in the second death,
must find great comfort in learning from Universalists
that the Bible really means that all such are destined
to heaven.
Young raen and boys whose feet go down to death,
and whose steps take hold on hell, must delight to be
taught that for these sins God will not bring them
into judgment.
I have repeatedly had my congregation follow me,
upon the Sabbath, frora the bar-roora to the place of
meeting, and then back again to the tavern. In the
stage-coach, I have been extremely mortified, when
defending^ Universalisra, to have a profane, drinking,
dissolute-looking person signify to rae that he thought
my airgument conclusive, and that he agreed with rae
exactly. The exchange of significant glances araong
the passengers was any thing but pleasant to my
feelings. A clergyman who was settled in the western part

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 265
of the state of New York, who has since renounced
Universalisra, related to rae the following, as a leaf
frora the book of his experience : —
Riding one day, he was overtaken by a storra, and
corapelled to take refuge in the first house that he
saw. It proved to be a small tavern. The bar-room
was crowded, and the usual amount of swearing, gam
ing, and drinking, was going on. He seated himself
by the fire to dry his clothes. He was soon recog
nized by one who had "had the pleasure to hear him
preach." A conversation began, and Universalism was
defended to the satisfaction of all parties. Immedi
ately in front of the minister sat a man who gave him
undivided attention. He was a large man, bloated
with interaperance, with a look indicating sottishness
and an acquaintance with vice. At the close of the
argument, he brought his hands together, exclaiming,
"Good! Landlord, bring us another horn." The ef
fect of that scene never left the preacher, till he left
Universalism. Similar facts have been noticed by others. I find
in the Boston " Traveller" of September 2d, 1836, the
following paragraph. It stands at the close of a letter
from Bennington, Vermont.
" SpeEiking on temperance, calls to raind a fact I
had yesterday, too good to be lost. A Universalist
minister, not far from here, held a meeting in North
Adams, a few Sabbaths since, and had quite a large
audience to hear him. The next day, he returned,
and declared he was never so much ashamed during
the whole course of his rainistry. He said that, just
at the close of the service, a drUnken, ragged, profligate
23

266 FRUITS or universalism.
character came reeling up to the desk, and, grasping
his hand, exclairaed, 'Friend, I am real glad to see
you. The cause has been declining for years, and I
have been wishing some one would corae and preach
it to us. You are a good fellow.' No wonder the
divine was glad to get away, and was asharaed of
his proselytes."
All persons who look at the results have the same
opinion of its moral tendency. It bears the same
fruit in all places.
Extract of a letter frora a raissionary of the Massa
chusetts Missionary Society, dated Septeraber 1, 1837,
to the secretary : —
" I have been struck, since I have been here, v/ith
the unblushing arrogance of Universalism, as it is here
denominated. There is in it no raeekness, no for
bearance, and nothing like the spirit of soleran, serious
inquiry. The raost exemplary friends of this religion
I raeet with, are fond of such a politico-style of talk
on the subject as proceeds frora all lips in the bar-
roora, the grog-shop, and other scenes of vulgarity.
The lovers of Universalism, so far as I have become
acquainted with, them, manifest a singular relish for
the discussion of the most sacred things in unbecom
ing situations and circurastances, while, in the solemn
place of retirement, the subject of religion, with them,
seeras equally dry and uninteresting. They do not
in all instances avoid private conversation on this
subject, but then it is reraarkable how readily all
seriousness evaporates from their discourse, as soon as
it is exposed to the air, or the hearing of their jovial
associates. Those who, in the affairs of the world,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 267
are of regular habits, and who are esteeraed moral
men, do evidently take a more lively interest in a
bar-roora defence of their faith than in the regular
observance of public worship, even when conducted
by men of their own sentiments.
"But nothing affords a better illustration of the
arrogance of Universalisra, than the readiness with
which the raost unlettered believers of this creed
question any version of the Scriptures except such
as is sanctioned by the 'Trumpet.' I have, in sorae
instances, been forced to smile at the disgusting ped
antry, that would, by way of anticipation, disarm me
of the advantage of having spent a few years within
the walls of a college. Ere I had dreamed of al
luding to Greek or Hebrew in the srautty cell of
raine undaunted host, he has gratuitously given rae
the definition of 'Sheol,' 'Hades,' 'Tartarus,' and
' Gehenna ! '
" If ever I raet with a priest-ridden people out of
the ' Mother Church of Rorae,' I have found thera
araongst the constant readers of the ' Trumpet ; ' and
my raind is fully irapressed with the idea, that no
class of professed friends to the Bible in New Eng
land, would so soon yield to the jurisdiction of the
pope, as the lower ranks of Universalists. The raore
intelligent class, embracing the managers, the spokes
men, and disputants, profess to read the Bible, and
are ready to appeal to it as the standard of truth.
Yet a short conversation with almost any of this class
brings out the secret fact, that, after all, they consider
the Bible as a book raerely of good advice ; while the
more thoughtless and ignorant are often not ashamed

268 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
to acknowledge that ' the " Trumpet " contains enough
of the Bible for them.' "
Rev. J. M. Peck, general agent of the Baptist Publi
cation Society, thus writes in the Christian Watch
man, August 5, 1842 : — " Passing along the streets
of Louisville, Kentucky, last December, my attention^
was arrested by a singuleu: congruity of signs over a
store. Imraediately above the door, in large letters,
was the significant word Grocery, which, in westem
parlance, raeans a retail whisky shop ; and, on anothei
board projecting from the- corner of the sarae estab-
lishraent, in conspicuous letters, I read, 'Universalist
Books for sale here.' "
In " Zion's Herald," Deceraber 8, 1836, I find the
following: —
" Some few years ago, the Universedists obtained
possession of a church, in a town on the banks of the
Q,uinnebaug, in the county of Worcester. They
formed their society, and hired their minister. Sab
bath after Sabbath, they would repair to the church,
to hear frora their Balaam the tidings of great joy.
But they were not content, — and we could hardly
expect it of raen constantly in hell. True, they did
not ask for Lazarus to dip his finger in water, and cool
their parched tongues ; — they took a course the rich
man never thought of ; — but they did send one of
their number to the retailer's, and procured a quantum
sufficit of ardent spirits. They deposited it in an old
school-house near by, and, every Sabbath noon, thith
er they repaired to guzzle down their alcohol ; and
thus they realized, probably, their only spiritual
benefit. These acted in consistency with the first

FRUITS OF universalis. -u. 269
duty, to raake the best of the world while they
staid in it."
" This may certify, to whora it raay corae, that,
some years since, the Universalists alternately occu
pied a meeting-house in the town of Southbridge,
Worcester county, Massachusetts. At that time I heard
it stated, by one of those who attended said meeting,
himself a Universalist, that he, with several other per
sons, who attended said meeting, had, for their accom
modation, spirituous liquor kept in a chest, deposited in
an old house formerly a school-house, to which place
they did repair on Sunday noons. Of the truth of the
above I have no reason to doubt ; and have never
since heard any thing stated, by any person, that it
was not so.
" The above certificate is given at the request of
Mr. Tracy. John M'Kinstry.
" Southbridge, Dec. 23, 1835."
I knew a similar case in Stafford, Connecticut.
The tavern was near the Universalist meeting-house.
At noon, a great part of the congregation usually
adjourned to the tavern. They went into the hall,
however, and not into the bar-room. It was ascer
tained, in a short tirae, that, by an agreeraent with the
landlord, a decanter of spirit was placed in the closet
of the hall. All who chose had access to it, drank,
and laid their raoney on the shelf The wife of the
landlord, one Sabbath morning, removed the decanter.
The indignation of his custoraers was unbounded.
They appealed to the owner of. the house, who was
23*

270 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
also the chief man in the Universalist society. He
advised the landlord to satisfy their thirst, adding, as a
reason, that, if he did not, their " society would all be
broken up."
In the year 1839, I was invited to preach in the
town of Lee, New Harapshire. The Sabbath was very
pleasant, and a great concourse of people attended raeet
ing. At the close of the raorning service, we all went
to the tavern. During the interraissioh, the bar-room
was full, and the incessant sound of the toddy-stick
announced to me that the waiter was constantly em
ployed. The weather being warm, and the doors all
open, I could hear the discussion of the merits of the
sermon, and the commendations, mingled with oaths,
which they ' bestowed upon the preacher. All were
not thus eraployed. Some were trading horses ; some
betting on the relative speed of their animals, and
threatening to test the raatter when meeting should be
done. At the close of the meeting, a scene occurred
that I cannot represent. It seeraed like the breaking
up of sorae military review. So much cursing and
swearing, rude and vulgar jesting, horse-racing and
running, that my pen can do little towards describing
it. I turned from the whole spectacle sick at heart ;
ashamed, mortified, and alarraed, that I was the preacher
of a doctrine which called such a collection and such
characters together. I resolved to do no raore to
sustain such a gathering. Nor were ray feehngs
soothed by a knowledge of the fact, that the landlord
had contributed largely to defray the expenses of my
visit. And he was ready to do the same thing again
whenever I woilld visit the place; It was the best
day he had seen for a year.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 271
In Epping, New Harapshire, when the Universalists
were about to build a meeting-house, they could not
agree upon a location. The reason was, that two of
the principal men kept tavern in different parts of the
town. Each was determined that the building should
stand near his own tavern, in order to receive the
Sunday custora. When it was decided in favor of one
of them, the other was offended, withdrew all support
from the society, and, the last I knew of him, had
never entered the meeting-house.
3. Formation and Character of Universalist
Societies.
Universalist societies are not composed of the sober
and intelligent part of the community; much less of
the moral and religious. In them you may find many
amiable raen, who would have been so had they been
deists or atheists. At the spread of Universalisra, the
sober part of society, which sustains the institutions
of morality and religion, is made sad. Societies thus
formed are gathered, not by religious principle, but out
of a spirit of opposition ; not to build up righteousness,
but to pull down Orthodoxy. They embrace the dis
solute, the profane, the irreligious. , They contain no
abiding religious principle. The doctrines embraced
by thera do not produce love to God and love for
religious things. They do not proraote that desire to
worship God, which prorapts raen to make any sacri
fice to sustain it.
In Universalist societies, therefore, there is no sta
bility. Universalists are constantly boasting of the
number of societies formed among them. The public.

272 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
not knowing how the matter is managed, is deceived
by such statements. It is supposed that these socie
ties are formed for religious purposes, and maintain an
existence ; and such repeated organization, it is feared,
will fill the land. Were Universalists to publish, in
like manner, the names of all the societies that run
wholly down, or sink into a state of suspended anima
tion, the public would be undeceived.
Many are formed to day and die to-morrow. They
are composed of discordant materials which cannot
long hold together. One society is organized, because
there is a revival of religion in the town ; another,
because the use of a church for a lecture has been
refused ; another, to keep women and children away
from religious influence. Preaching is sustained
awhile, till the flt of zeal has passed off; and then
the whole attempt is abandoned. In New England
alone, more than one hundred Universalist societies
have run down since 1830. Sorae few of thera I
shall refer to in another place.
The prosperity of Universalism is measured by a
very different standard frora that which raarked the
prosperity of the gospel. At the day of Pentecost the
gospel was triumphant, not because thousands heard
it preached, but because three thousand were con
victed, converted, and saved. In Corinth, the truth
was glorified, not because Paul obtained a hearing,
but frora the fact that the profane, the adulterer, the
blaspheraer, repented, and were washed in the narae
of the Lord Jesus Christ. So is it, at the present
day, with the increase of the gospel. In all evangeli
cal churches, the evidence of the prosperity of truth

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 273
is seen in the reforraation of bad men, and in the
increased spiritual improvement of good men.
Not so with Universalism. It is considered as pros
perous, because it is preached in a new place ; or
because numbers hear a particular sermon, and al]
who hear are set down as believers. Profaneness
does not cease at its approach. Licentiousness is
not stayed. Sabbath-breaking is not abandoned. Nor
does solemnity, seriousness, or a favorable change in
moral character, mark its progress. These fruits are
not expected. In the absence of all good moral
results, Universalism may stfll be triumphant in the
opinion of its friends.
The character of these societies is so graphically
described by one of the sect, that I will allow him to
speak for them. Hosea Ballou, 2d, says, " Here is
a [Universalist] society that has perhaps gathered in
a considerable nuraber of raembers, whose ability in
worldly means is equal to that of any society in the
town. Indeed, they soraetiraes congratulate them
selves on their strength over a feebler society of
another faith, which nevertheless manages to support
constant preaching. They, on the other hand, feci that
they cannot afford to settle a pastor nor indeed, to pro
cure the ministration of the gospel more than a part of
the year, — perhaps through the warm season, possibly
but half of the tirae even then, or only occasionally.
But when they do have preaching, the thing is done up
in the earthquake style. Notice is published all abroad,
and when the day arrives, in corae the wagons and
carriages, horsemen and footmen, from a dozen miles

274 FRUITS or universalism.
around, and fill the church to overflowing. Many a
glance is cast forth at the smaller neighboring congre
gation, — it is a wonderful triumph ; they have beaten
their' neighbors twofold, and this was what they
meant to do. The matter is talked of ; perhaps they
get it published ; and then — their church is shut again,
till they can gather excitabflity enough for another
convulsion fit, or rather tfll the apparatus is ready
for galvanizing the dead body once more. Hor
rible mockery of life ! Would that such societies
could see (but the dead cannot see) what they are
doing. They are saying, in the face of all the world,
Our religion is but a farce ; there is no vital principle
in it, that it can live on regularly frora day to day, and
frora week to week ; but the shock once over, it lies
raotionless as before. And the world understands
all this ; the moral sense of coramunity revolts at it.
* * * There are societies abroad in the country,
which arose only to bring reproach on the cause,
and whose worthless carcasses yet reraain but half-
buried, a festering corruption on the face of our land,
preaching against us with a condemning voice, that
not argument, but thorough-going repentance alone,
can silence." (Expositor, vol. iii. p. 83, 84.)
This is a most accurate description, given, not by an
enemy, but by a friend ; not from report, but from
actual knowledge ; and by one, who, in company with
myself, has assisted in galvanizing many a society
of this description. There are scores of them in the
country. And yet these claim to be Christian societies,
such as Christ came frora heaven to set up. Reli
gion is the salt of the earth ; and the establishraent of a

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 275
Christian society is designed to -reform raen, and pro
mote public virtue, as well as save the soul. But how
many societies, such as Mr. Ballou has described,
would it require to promote righteousness, and create
a healthy moral atraosphere ? societies corapared to
a corrupting carcass, putrid, festering, filling the air
with disease and death ? societies whose worship is
corapared to the ghastly effects of galvanism upon a
dead body? Would it be well for our country, for
the institutions of religion, and for the morals of the
rising generation, if such societies were to increase till
every town should feel the baneful influence of an
"earthquake" raeeting, or be pervaded by the pes
tilential atraosphere of a "festering corruption"?
And yet such societies do exist. The raost casual
observer raust be aware of the dreadful moral influence
which they put forth ; and the lively description of
them given above by a leader of the sect, so far
from exciting a smfle, should raake us weep. We
ought to weep that God is so dishonored, that Christ
is so rauch blaspheraed, that such fatal influences are
eraployed to ruin souls, that our children have such
temptations and delusions to insnare thera and lead
thera down to death.
4. Style of Preaching that is popular among
Universalists.
The great end of Universalist preacning is to prove
that all raen will be saved, to show that the doctrines
of the Orthodox are absurd, and that no retribution is
to be found in the future world. As long as a rain
ister attends to this, all will go Avell. The declaration

276 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
that all men will be saved raust be raade in every
sermon. There is so rauch in the Bible, in reason
' and conscience, which teaches the contrary, that an
arguraent does not retain its hold raore than a week.
It must be repeated again and again. And then it
does not satisfy the mind.
But let a rainister preach plainly and frequently
against profanity, drunkenness, gaming, or any of the
alarming sins of the day, and he will at once be
reproved. No society, that I ever knew, will bear
such preaching. Indeed, to have soraething to talk
about, men will endure a serraon once in a while
rebuking their sins. But this must not be repeated
too often. Universalists give their minister to under
stand distinctly that they do not come together for
that purpose. They are united to put down Ortho
doxy ; and as for hearing their preacher often rebuke and
reprove them, they are not disposed to it. They can
hear enough of such preaching at Orthodox meetings.
During the latter part of my rainistry as a Univer
salist, I was frequently censured, with oaths, because
I did not preach Universalisra enough ; but enforced
too rauch the practical duties of life. In Salera, I
once preached upon righteousness and temperance.,
Some of my principal men came to rae, and threat
ened to nail Up their pews, if I meddled with that
subject again. Had I added " judgraent to corae," I
dare not anticipate what the result would have been.
Many confirraed Universalists are afraid of the
influence of Universalism upon their families. Many
will not bring up their children under its preaching.
• Parents, when they send their chfldren away to school,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 277
in a town in which there is a Universalist society,
often order them to attend another raeeting. And I
am acquainted with farailies, in Boston, Salem, Hart
ford, and many other places, which have left Univer
salist meetings on account of their children. They
profess still to be firm believers in the salvation of all,
but, when asked why they do not hear the doctrine
preached, will reply, " Our children are old enough
to understand, and we prefer to have thera under a
different influence ; " thus presenting the singular
fact, that they are willing to trust their endless des
tiny on a foundation insufficient to secure the teraporal
welfare of their children.
Universalist congregations seldora increase. They
raay retain an existence for years. But after they
have reached a certain height, they begin to wane.
They start with zeal, and perhaps erect a house of
worship. Then their downward march begins ; and
in this is seen the tendency of their doctrine. It
reraoves restraint, loosens the bonds of raoral obliga
tion, and takes away the raotives for attending public
worship. Miany, in a little tirae, learn out all that is
taught. They become convinced that no one will
be lost, and that was all they wished to know. Con
vinced of this, they leave the meeting, and spend the
Sabbath in doing their own pleasure. The congre
gation of Universalists is thus continually changing.
If new raembers corae in, they only take the place of
those, who, under the influence of the doctrine, have
learned the folly of all preaching, and have come to
the opinion that many better methods have been
devised of spending the Sabbath, than attending
24

278 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
meeting, even though it be to hear the threatenings
of the Bible explained away. Indeed, the ministry
of Universalism soon relieves men from all trouble in
relation to the right interpretation of the Bible, as
it prepares the proselyte to reject that holy book as
a fable. Nor does my experience differ from that of others.
All who have testified upon this subject have ex
pressed the same views. This I shall show before I
close this lecture, both by the testimony of preachers
who have renounced Universalisra, and of others who
still advocate it.
5. Universalism, has no benevolent and liberalizing
Tendency.
Universalists boast of the good raoral influence of
their faith. We have proved it to be positively de
raoralizing. They claim for it a philanthropy and a
benevolence not found in any system but theirs.
The history of its influence will show how well
founded this boasting is.
The believers in Universalisra deny that God has
affixed to his law the penalty of eternal death. They
call this a cruel doctrine, — partial and contracting in
its effect upon the mind. But no one can deny that
those who believe in this sentiment have been pioneers
in every benevolent work. Their faith has prompted
thera to deeds of benevolence to such an extent, that
a good cause can hardly be found which they have
not originated, and not one which they have not
helped to sustain.
But what has Universalism done? Nothing.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 279
What benevolent plan has it originated, to amelio
rate the condition of raen, or promote the interests of
our race ? What generous, noble, catholic enterprise
tells of its liberality and benevolence? Not one.
Which of the benevolent institutions, so peculiar to
our age, has it ever aided ? Not one. What has it
done for the heathen ? Nothing. Universalists have
constantly ridiculed the exertions of those who are
engaged in sending or carrying the gospel to the
heathen. Neither have they, as a sect, contributed
one cent towards the distribution of the Bible among
the destitute.
As to the formation of Sabbath schools; Bible
classes, as well as temperance societies, they, at
the commencement of these enterprises, presented a
united and incessant opposition. And this only
ceased when opposition became odious to all. Af
ter these institutions had won their way to popular
favor, and nothing could resist their influence, then
the sect, in some measure, adopted these plans, or fell
in with the prevailing taste. But this was done alto
gether in selfrdefence.
This is illustrated in the history of the teraperance
cause. Frora few sources has this reforra raet with
so violent opposition as from the Universalist denorai
nation. When this work began, the Universalist
ministers preached against it, and the cause was op
posed with great virulence in their periodicals. Some
few favored the reformation ; but they were corapelled
to he silent, or only allowed to speak at teraperance
conventions. Those who would advocate teraperance
in their pulpits, were dismissed.

280 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
The fact that many of the Universalist preachers
now appear to be the friends of temperance, does not
change the fact in relation to what they forraerly did.
It was well understood, araong them, that policy re
quired them to enlist in the temperance cause. By so
doing, they could associate somewhat with rainisters
of the gospel, be recognized as such before the world,
and, what was more iraportant than all, they would
gain admittance into Orthodox pulpits. Thege were
the reasons assigned, by the advocates of Universalism,
when I was among thera, for their efforts in behalf
of temperance.
Universalists have done comparatively nothing in
favor of education. This is a great, a national object.
Next to religion, it has clairas upon us all. The Pu
ritans had hardly obtained a, shelter for themselves,
after they landed upon the frozen shores of New
England, before they raade provision for the advance-
raent of education. They laid the foundation of
their social structure so deep, that it still stands,
blessing us, and ready to bless generations to come.
Universalisra has existed for half a century. Its
friends say it has extended more rapidly than any
other sentiment. What, then, has it done for educa
tion ? I will do Universalism no injustice. I will let
its advocates speak to this point. H. Ballou, 2d,
says, —
" The present is emphatically an age of popular
education. Already has great progress been made in
this respect, and a system of measures is coming into
operation, that promises to elevate the coraraunity to
a far higher degree of culture and intelligence than it

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 281
has ever attained. Who are the leaders in this enter
prise ; ourselves or others ? Who are traversing our
country, frora state to state, from town to town, rous
ing the public mind to the subject, and caUing forth
its energies in the work ? We fear that we should be
found, on inquiry, to have taken but little active
part in the moveraent, and to have yielded to it,
rather than to have carried it forward. Again : the
sects around us, the Presbyterians, Congregation
alists, Episcopalians, Baptists, and lastly the Meth
odists, are entering with all their spirit into the
higher departraents of education. Their high schools
are established in all our large towns ; academies are
rising up under their patronage on every hand ; their
colleges, with liberal donations, are raultiplying over
the country. It needs but little philosophy to perceive
what raust be the influence of these measures, extend
ing as they do, in their ramifications, through the
whole mass of society. To think of measuring the
amount of their effects merely by the number of
scholars in the several institutions, would be like esti
mating the quantity of light in an illuminated hall, by
the solid contents of flame on the lamps. In both
cases, the influence- is abroad on all the face of the
scene, in every nook and corner. To these schools go
our young men and women in a constant succession,
there to be imbued with new sentiments and tastes ;
and from these schools, in retum, come our teachers,
our lecturers, writers, the living host of minds that
bear sway in every department of life and thought.
What have we done towards providing for the de
mands that grow out of this state of things ? In
24*

282 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
New York," we have, indeed, an institution under our
patronage, that bids fair to become, ere long, a bona
fide college — thanks to the hfe-devoted exertions of
a brother whom no apathy could discourage. In New.
England, we have passed votes, starved two acade-
raies to death, and apotheosized another into a univer
sity, and so sent it up to its horae in the clouds. In
the farther part of Maine, however, we have a high
school, which appears to be doing well ; also, an acad-
eray or two in Ohio, and — this is all."
The history of this school in New York — the
"Clinton Liberal Institute," "which bids fair to be
come, ere long, a bona fide college " — I have already
given. This is the only school that Universalists
have in any degree sustained. And the note of alarm
from its friends, recently sounded, indicates that
-symptoms of decline already appear in this institu
tion. So much, and no more, Universalists them
selves being witnesses, have they done for education
since they have existed as a denomination. I need
not stop one moment, to convince you that the condi
tion of education, as well as of every thing good,
"Would have been most deplorable, had Universal
ists settled New England, instead of our Puritan
fathers. It is of no avail to say that the sect is young.
It has existed long enough to begin to be benevo
lent. Other sects have begun their benevolent deeds
with the very commencement of their denominational
existence. The Moravians began their apparently
hopeless mission araong the rude and benighted Green-
landers, before they nurabered, as a denoraination, two

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 283
hundred persons., If Universalism were a'benevolent
system, seeking the good of raan, not ten years would
have passed away without having in operation one
systeraatic scherae of benevolence, intended to benefit
our race and world.
Nor is it any excuse to say that Universalists like
not the measures of the benevolent societies of the
day; for they have the ability to strike out a path
of their own.
But the truth is, the doctrine of this sect deals a
death-blow at all benevolent plans. ..It teaches that
this earth is just what God intended it should be.
Man cannot change its character, if he would. And
if God is well pleased with the world as it is, why
should Universalists wish to change it ?
6. It dries up Hwman Affection.
So far from creating love and good-will to raen,
Universalisra breathes nothing but bitter hostility and
hatred to all who differ frora its coraraunion. The
organs of the sect have long been noted for their
scurrility and abuse of all good men. The manner
in which -they speak of the benevolent operations of
the day, the raissionary and philanthropic movements
of the age, is too familiar to require repetition.
Their blasphemous opposition and ridicule of revivals
of religion speak the temper of their minds. So
powerful is the hatred which Universalism inspires
for evangelical religion, that it has destreyed natural
affection, and made the parent like the ostrich, who
is "hardened against her young as if they were not
hers." I have at hand many proofs of this assertion.

284 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
One or two cases I will present. The first I select
frora " Zion's Watchman," August 10, 1836.
" Barbarity. While on a visit to Norwich, Con
necticut, a few weeks since, we found a young lady
at the house of a friend, frora whom we received the
following account of the treatment which she had
received frora her own father ; and, frora what we
learned frora others, we believe no one who knows
this young lady doubts, in the least, the truth of
her statements.
, " Her name js  . She is raotherless, and is
about twenty- three years of age. Sorae tirae in the
course of the last year, she commenced attending the
Methodist church in the place, and was hopefully con
verted to God. As soon as her father ascertained that
she had connected- herself with the Methodist church,
he comraenced abusing her with profane language, and
afterwards threatened to kill her.
" After she had stood out her time of probation, and
had been admitted into full connection with the
church, her father, as soon as he learned the fact,
went into her chamber, and threatened her with in
stant death, if she did not dissolve her oonnection
with the Methodist church forthwith. He stamped
upon the floor, and swore in a most violent rage.
" Having on a pair of thick boots, he then com
menced kicking her ; and once he hit her in the side,
the severe effects of which she has felt now more than
four months. He next took his cane, and commenced
beating her upon the back and head. With his cane
he struck her twelve times, and the raarks of the blows
were seen upon her body two months afterwards.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 285
" This itian has since been heard to say that he
would kfll his daughter, if he could find her. When
he attends any raeeting, he goes to the Universalist."
Another is the case of a lady in Portsraouth, New
Hampshire. The facts I gathered from her own lips.
She becarae interested in religion, and, in opposition to
the wish of her father, left the Universalist raeeting,
and attended the Orthodox. When she was about to
make a profession of religion, her father forbade her
doing so. He threatened to disown her, and turn her
from his house, if she did not retract. She went for
ward in the path of duty, and was banished frora her
father's- house on that account. She has a brother
who is a Universalist preacher. And when last I saw
her, she was in exile frora horae, bearing the indigna
tion of her father because she loved the Savior.
Another instance fell under my observation in
Salera, Massachusetts. A raember of my congregation,
who was a zealous Universalist, resolved that all his
children should be brought up in that faith. One of
his children, a daughter, intelligent and affectionate,
became a Christian. She had, without the knowledge
of her father, attended religious meetings, and obtained
hope in Christ. She resolved to make a public pro
fession of religion. She announced her feelings and
determination to her father, and wished his consent.
He became enraged, and gave his refusal in words of
profaneness and cursing. He forbade her proceeding
any farther, threatening her with banishment frora his
house, and with his curse, which should follow her
to her grave.
Her situation was a trying one. She was young,

286 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
— but sixteen years old. She had always loved her
father, and she loved him stfll. Her father's house
was all the home she knew, and she feared his anger,
and dreaded his curse. But all that she loved on
earth was placed on the one hand, and her duty and
Savior were placed on the other. She hesitated not
one raoraent. She resolved to do her duty, and leave
the consequences to her God.
The sun of that Sabbath, which shone upon her
baptism and her public profession of the Savior, had
not withdrawn his light before, true to his dreadful
vow, that father turned his defenceless daughter from
her home, houseless and destitute, into the street, with
his curse ringing in her ears. With a heavy heart,
she sought the residence of a Christian friend, whose
roof afforded her shelter from the tempest — the anger
of her unnatural father.
Years passed away, and still her father refused to
see her. He passed her in the street without noticing
her, and her visits to the home of her youth were by
stealth, in the absence of her father, to weep upon the
neck of her mother.
Sickness at length subdued his hard heart. Sup
posing himself to be near his end, he sent for his
daughter. She flew to his bedside, and devoted her
self to his wants. She wiped away the clammy
darapness of disease frora his brow, spoke to him in
soothing tones, uttering no complaints, and treating
hira as if he had been one of the tenderest of parents.
Her father recovered. But never, from the hour that
daughter united with the church up to the present

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 287
time, has he allowed her to eat with him at the table.
Universalism destroys natural affection.
Can any thing be raore plain than that it is destmc
tive to all benevolent and philanthropic efforts ? If it
were not ruinous to the soul, it should be rejected as
an enemy to the best and highest interests of our race.
7. Ministers who have renounced Universalism, have
all testified to its immoral Tendency.
When a rainister erabraces their sentiraents, the
fact is announced in capitals in the Universalist period
icals. When one renounces Universalism, but little
is generally said of it. No system has lost so many
merabers. No sect, in so short a time, has lost so
many advocates. All these have left it on the ground
of its licentious and iraraoral influence.
Paul Dean, of Boston, was colleague "with Mr. Mur
ray ; and after Mr. Murray's death, was pastor of the
First Universalist Society. He was known for many
years as one of the raost able defenders of Universalism
in this country. All the reputation, and standing with
the public, which the Universalist ministry have in
Boston and its vicinity, they owe to Mr. Dean. In
1828, Mr. Dean left the Universalist denomination, on
account of the iramoral tendency of its doctrine. Uni
versalists have ever since followed him with unrelent
ing persecution, because he left thera, and spoke open
ly of the evfl tendency of their faith. In conversation
with Mr. Dean, I found his experience to agree with
ray own ; only he, having been longer in the rain
istry, had seen and heard more. Lewis C. Todd, a
preacher in Westem New York, renounced Universal-

288 FRUITS OF universalism.
ism. He published his experience of the raoral
tendency of Universalisra. He declared that it " led
to infidelity ; gave no support to virtue ; but, on
the contrary, led to a careless and irreligious Hfe."
He raakes the following statement : " All that I have
said of the general effects of the doctrine, has been
acknowledged by many candid and honest Universal
ists. Even Paul Dean, of Boston, wrote me that my
statements in relation to the doctrine were correct, and
that many of the eastern preachers of the doctrine
were becoming convinced of it."
Charles Hudson was for many ye?rs a preacher of
Universalism. His narae appears in the "Modern
History of Universalisra " as a Universalist preacher.
The moral tendency of the doctrine drove him from its
rainistry. The following is his testiraony as to the
character of the systera he onc^ defended. I will only
add that Mr. Hudson is now a member of Congress.
" I have already in some degree called your atten
tion to the nature and moral tendency of that scheme
of divinity which is so earnestly pressed upon your
consideration. I will not at present enlarge upon this
subject, but will invite your attention to the practical
tendency of that scheme upon society. But here I do
not intend to touch upon the raoral character of indi
viduals. I shall look at societies and bodies of raen.
If the representations we have already given of the
doctrine be true, we should conclude that it would not
build up devout and permanent societies. And how
is the fact in this case ? We see from the ultra papers
that scores of societies have arisen annually in New
England for the last ten years. And what is the

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 289
present standing of these societies? I cannot speak
conceming thera all frora personal knowledge. But,
having had a personal knowledge of the situation, the
rise and fall of raany, I can speak with confidence ;
and what I shall state is known to all who have any
knowledge of the subject. I say then that more than
three fourths oi the societies which have arisen within
the last ten years, have already perished.' I do not
mean that they have entirely ceased to be, but that
they have relaxed their efforts, and' now almost a total
indifference prevails. Take this as ah example : A
society is formed in a certain town, and fifty or sixty
male merabers corae forward and linite with the
society. Let these men be araply sufficient in worldly
means to eraploy a preacher one half of the tirae with
a fair salary, without taking upon theraselves a burden
greater than what is borne by the great raass of the
people. Now, what is the subsequent history of such
a society ? For the first year they raay have preaching
one third of the tirae, for the second year a quarter,
for the third one sixth, and in four or five years they
have no preaching at all. Or perhaps they may have
a day or two in a year, if a person happens to' come
along and offer his services. Now, this is a fair rep
resentation of at least nine tenths of the Universalist
societies which have been formed for the last ten years.
Some of them may have been a little more prosperous,
and others have fallen as much below the example given.
I could name scores of societies as examples. Take
the country societies as they exist at the present time,
and it would require the joint effort, such as they
would be disposed to make, of ten or a dozen societies,
25

290 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
to give one preacher constant employ. A much less
number might eraploy a man for a single year ; but
take five years together, and it would require ten
societies. I do not say that this is all that they are
able to do, but I say that it is all that they do do,
or wfll do.
" Now, a question naturally arises as to the cause of
failure. The friends of modern Universalisra tell us,
with great assurance, that no cause progresses so fast.
This in one sense is trae, and it is equally trae that
no cause dwindles so fast. There is not a sect in the
land, of the sarae nurabers and ability, that does so
little. Three fourths of the societies are destitute of a
preacher, and take no active raeans to obtain one.
Societies rise like Jonah's gourd, and like that frafl
plant they wither away. And how is this ? To what
cause raust we ascribe this decline in almost every
society? This has sometimes been ascribed to the
want of preachers ; but the truth has always been that
they have had as many preachers as could obtain sup
port. This falling off cannot be ascribed to the opera
tion of any of our laws, for the laws have operated as
favorably to them as to others. It cannot be ascribed
to the fact that the doctrine was new and unpopular,
for this would always operate the most powerfully at
first ; and if raen would break the fetters of popularity,
and form themselves into a society, they would not be
deterred from pursuing this subject from motives of
popularity. " To what cause, then, is this failure to be ascribed?
We say, to the natural tendency of the doctrine. That
we may see this tendency, let us give a specimen. A

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 291
society is forraed, and a preacher is employed for a
day. He coramences his labors or exercises. His
attack upon the Orthodox begins and ends the dis
course. It is delivered with that kind of temerity
which would make a moderate raan shudder ; but this
passes for great talents with many. His discourse is
filled with low wit and severity, which excite laugh
ter in the assembly. The service closes ; and what is
the irapression that is left upon the asserably ? They
are highly gratified, for the most part, and are eager to
engage the preacher again. But what is the moral
irapression ? It is raanifestly bad. Every low and
unprincipled raan will extol it, and sorae will express
their approbation with an oath. ' He is a smart man,'
says one. ' He gave it to the Orthodox good,' says
another. ' He's no hypocrite,' says a third. ' He
expressed my opinion exactly,' says an infidel. ' He
don't hold to making a fuss and whining about reli
gion.' Such remarks will be raade by the hearers, and
you can judge of the raoral effect. The preacher
comes again, and pursues the same course with the
same effect."
The reception which a preacher will meet who
pursues an opposite course, — talks to men about
their duty, and "raaintains that men raust be saved
by faith and repentance, — that they are accountable
beings, and will be dealt with according to their char
acters," — Mr. Hudson thus describes : —
" He uses no wit, excites no laughter, and labors to
make his hearers virtuous and devout. "But how
is this received by the assembly ? Why, it produces
more frowns than smiles. 'I had rather hear the

292 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
Orthodox,' says one. 'He has no independence,'
says another. 'I want to hear a man come to the
point,' says a third. The deist scolds, the disso
lute swears, and multitudes tell the comraittee that
they have had enough of him. Now, brethren, as
fanciful as the reprobation is, that is a fair represen
tation of what frequently takes place. But what is
the subsequent history of this society ? They have a
preacher of their own liking occasionally, but, in a
yeai- or two, they care but little about any preaching.
They think and judge correctly from what they have
heard, that preaching does but little good ; and that
the Bible is like a fiddle, — it can be made to play
any tune. I allow that there are sorae exceptions to
this representation. I can say with pleasure that there
are sorae individuals whose feelings are hurt by such
preaching, and who wish to hear soraething that is
sober and practical ; but such persons are generally a
rainority, and they have to give way to the more
noisy part of the society. This society in a few
years dies away ; they raay retain their legal exist
ence, but this is about all.
" You are now able to answer these questions, why
their societies are no raore perraanent. In the first
place, they are composed, in a great degree, of men
who have no religious feelings ; and many of them
have no faith in divine revelation, and, instead of
improving, they generally grow worse. As far as my
observation has extended, — and it has not been very
limited, having visited scores of societies, — it is my
firm opinion that raore than two thirds of the males
who are warmly attached to the doctrine of no future

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 293
retribution, are not believers in the essential facts of
divine revelation. I have also been present at con
ventions, and heard discourses preached on ordination
occasions, too, which were clearly of an irreligious
tendency — discourses which excited raore levity than
piety, and went raore directly to subvert than to build
up religious institutions. And these discourses came
from those who were gray with age, — who were held
up as a model for others ! These statements are pain
ful, but are nevertheless trae. Now, is it surprising
that religious societies should wither and die under
such preaching ? "
The following persons left the rainistry of Univer
salism at the same time, and have views sirailar to
those expressed by Mr. Hudson : — Edward Turner, —
one of the oldest preachers in the order, — P. R. Rus
sell, N. Wright, E. M. Stone, Seth Chandler, David
Pickering, Adin Ballou, Lyman Maynard, George
Bradburn, and William Morse. All but two of these
men are numbered araong the preachers of Univer
salisra in the " Modern History."
Araong others who have renounced the rainistry of
Universalisra within the last nine years, and who
have united in their testiraony as to its bad raoral
tendency, I record the following naraes : — O. A.
Bronson, A. St. Clair, Stephen Cutler, J. Banfield,
J. S. Thorapson, A. C. Arnold, L. C. Todd, C. Palraer,
Mr. Tracy, G. Dean, W. Jackson, E. N. Harris, W.
H. Taylor, J. W. Hoskins, F. Mace, N. Chapin, W.
Whittaker, and S. Turner.
In relation to each of these raen, I should be
pleased to raake some remarks; but my limits con
fine me to a few cases.
25*

294 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
E. N. Harris was pastor of the Baptist church in
Maiden. He erabraced Universalism ; and for a sea
son was very zealous. His counsellor was Mr. Ban-
field, of Medford, through whose influence Mr. Harris
was raade a Universalist. Mr. Harris became the
preacher to one of the Universalist congregations
in Boston. His friend, Mr. Banfield, who led him
into Universalism, renounced his fa.ith. Mr. Harris,
soon after, followed his example.
Rev. Adin Ballou was raany years a zealous and
popular Universalist preacher. He has given to the
world the following as the resiflt of his experience in
the ministry of Universalism : —
" As to the style of my preaching, it had insensibly
become remotely imitative of that which distinguished
the leading Universalists. Although irony, satire, and
witticism, were never pleasing to me, and therefore
not indulged in my discourses, yet in other respects I
¦w^ent too far. In following the example of those who
use their text by way of accoraraodation to sraite at
the prevailing sects, I have since thought I soraetiraes
erred. Those preachers who ha!d become most ac
ceptable to the laity, distinguished themselves by
often selecting texts, which, with an ingenious treat
ment, would enable thera to cast the severest reflec
tions upon their opponents with the best grace. If I
fell into this practice, it was only to a brief extent, for
which I can plead no other excuse, than that it was a
fashion of ray associates, and therefore difficult wholly
to avoid. Otherwise, I retained so rauch of my early
religious feeling, that my discourses were in a good
degree characterized by seriousness, moral sentiment,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 295
and raoderation; so that, not unfrequently, strangers
and opposers would retire from the meeting with the
remark that I did not preach like a Universalist.
" Up to this tirae, I had persuaded rayself that ray
preaching, and that of ray brethren, exerted, or tended
to exert, a salutary influence upon the raoral condition
of society, and believed that, when fully proved in its
effects, it would vindicate itself against all reproach.
I knew well that sorae, who pretended to propagate
Universalism, were too rough and vulgar to do any
great good either for their own cause or any other,
(and such I could have wished might remain silent;)
but, as the clergy generally promised better things,
for such I accordingly hoped. Henceforth, however,
I perceived so rauch bitterness indulged, so rauch
labor bestowed to show that the Bible teaches no fu
ture judgraent or retribution, so rauch ridicule of
the religion of professing Christians, and so rauch
smart witticism, even in the preaching of those who
were thought raost erainent, that I began seriously to
doubt whereuiito things would grow. Close, raoral,
practical, and evangelical preaching seemed to be going
out of date ; and when occasionally I strack into a
vein of it, I found that it was evidently unwelcome
to those ears which were so much delighted with a
different style and subject. This troubled me ex
ceedingly, and was an evil which I knew not how
to remedy. I leamed that to declaira against the
superstition, bigotry, hypocrisy, and fanaticisra, of the
various religious sects, entertained a certain class of
people very agreeably, yet without ever producing the

296 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
effect to reform them of a single vice. In con
templating the faults and follies of their neighbors,
as described by an ingenious speaker, those people
would evince the highest gratification ; but the cer
tain result I observed always to be, a growing disrelish
of all serious religion, and a forgetfulness of their own
sinfulness in denouncing that of others. I looked to
my elders in the rainistry, — those who had it in their
power to give tone to the taste and feelings of the
laity; but I soon eiscertained that they were as far
frora the raark at which I was airaing, as any of the
people. Gradually entering into their secrets, I began
to discover some doctrines, practices, and feelings, not
altogether consistent with the good opinion I had
formed of their moral and intellectual worth. I found
them disposed to think lightly of that kind of preach
ing called moral. They would speak of it as a sort
of weakly, insipid, tiresome repetition, calculated to
reflect no great honor upon the preacher, and to do
no essential good to the hearer. It would do well
enough for those whose gifts fitted them for nothing
higher ; but doctrine, and exposure of the errors of
the church, should be meiinly attended to, by all who
wished to attain celebrity.
" Family devotion, asking blessings, and returning
thanks at table, &c. (fcc, they considered well enough
for those who thought proper to observe thera, but, on
the whole, as idle ceremonies, which could be benefi
cial neither to God nor man. With regard to a future
state of existence, raany of thera disbelieved that man
kind will in that state possess any consciousness of
having previously existed in the present. Some of

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.

297

thera also privately confessed their disbelief in the
existence of angelic beings of a higher nature than
huraan. These and other sirailar skepticisras, which
frora tirae to tirae leaked out, occasioned rauch bitter
anxiety for the issue."
Sidney Turner graduated at the Bangor Theologi
cal School. To the grief of his friends, he became
a Universalist. His conversion was hailed with rap
ture by the Universalists. His learning, his piety,
his honesty, his independence, all were the subjects
of high comraendation. Mr. Turner settled in Bruns
wick, Maine, and then, for the first time, learned what
was the practical tendency of Universalisra. He was
appalled at the sight. After continuing in the minis
try about three years, he renounced the doctrine pub
licly, and is doing what he can to undo his labors in
the ministry of death.
The manner in which Mr. Turner was received
into the ranks of Universalists may be learned from
the following article frora the " Trurapet : " —
" Rev. Sidney Turner, the late Convert. — This
gentleraan is the clergyman in Maine who has recently
renounced the false notions of Orthodox partialism,
and erabraced, in full, the doctrine of Universalism.
Mr. Turner was a regular-bred Orthodox clergyraan.
He pursued an entire course of studies at the theologi
cal seminary in Bangor, Maine, and was one of the
beneficiaries of the American Education Society. Af
ter this, he was settled over an Orthodox society in
Maine, who highly prized his labors, until they
learned that he was a Universalist.
" We cannot help remarking, in this connection, that

298 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
the converts which Universalists gain from the ranks
of the partialists are a very different kind of converts
from those which are made by the dread of endless
damnation, at protracted meetings, and in false revi
vals. Universalism commends itself to men of sense,
learning, kindness of heart, and honesty. We would
give raore for the conversion of such a raan, than a
hundred such converts as are made at camp meetings,
protracted meetings, and meetings of that character.
The strength of Universalists is in the raoral power
of their doctrine ; and, by that power, they will, ere
long, win over thousands of the very best of their
opponents, to join with them in their labors for the
emancipation of the human mind frora sin, guflt, and
error. So let it be."
The following is Mr. Turner's renunciation : —
" Renunciation of Universalism,. — It is well known,
to a large portion of the religious public, that, some
three years ago, the writer publicly announced his
belief of the doctrine of universal salvation, and, for
two years, preached as pastor of the Universalist
society in Brunswick. A year and a half ago, my
confidence in the truth of the doctrine was so much
weakened, and my convictions of the lamentable
prevalence of error and irreligion in the denomina
tion of Universalists were so deepened, that I was
constrained to abandon ray public station, and with
draw wholly ray fellowship frora Universalists. But
it was not till very recently that I was led to take the
stand which I now take. Owing to various influ
ences, — raost of all, as I have no doubt, through the
bUnding influence of the arch deceiver, — I still clung

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 299
to the impression that we were not wholly without
grounds of hope that God would eventually save all
mankind. I blamed my Universalist brethren for
being confident that all would be saved, and blamed,
in about the same degree, ray Orthodox brethren for
their confident belief that sorae would be forever lost.
During a few weeks past, with unusual opportunity
for reflection and prayer, and for the counsels and
prayers of ray Christian friends, I have been enabled,
by the overruling power and goodness of God, to see
and abandon my remaining error and criminality, and
to once more take ray stand with those that I forsook
and opposed, and with thera to pray and labor fdt the
upbuilding of God's kingdora' in the earth. I now
publicly declare ray entire renunciation of every forra
and species of Universalism, and my unqualified and
unwavering belief that some, and a very large num
ber, of the huraan race will never be saved. I sin
cerely regret that I ever admitted those doubts and
queries that laid the foundation for that superstructure
of error that was reared in ray raind. Had I raore
carefully and seriously watched and prayed to be
guarded from every species of temptation, those
doubts and queries would never have been suffered
to remain and do the work they did. I lament my
own blindness, haste, and perverseness, in deciding,
when and as I did, to cut rayself off from my Chris
tian brethren, and connect myself with those whom I,
at the time, knew to be, generally, far from the way
of the true followers of Christ. I ara astonished to
see how I, for so long a tirae, blinded ray eyes to evi
dent facts in the state of things among Universalists ;

300 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
how I smothered my convictions, and yielded to the
current of error and ungodliness. I have grieved and
saddened the heart of raany a Christian friend. I
have imboldened many a prayerless, irreligious person
to continue in the neglect of his soul's salvation.
Trae, I preached upon the indispensable necessity of
a change of heart ; but all I said was neutralized by
the insidious workings of that poisonous leaven which
is in the very nature of Universalism.
"I thank God that he has, at last, opened my eyes
to see where I have been, and what I have done ; I
thank my Christian friends for their prayers in my
behalf; and it is ray prayer that, for their tears of
sorrow at my defection and departure from the truth,
they may now have hearts of joy at my return.
" I would to God that I might be able, in some way,
by my pen or tongue, or by both, to fully undo what
I have done ; to convince some, that are now clinging
to Universalism, that it is a dangerous and ruinous
delusion ; and to warn all, who are in danger of com
ing under its influence, to beware of it, as they value
the salvation of their souls.
" I cheerfully submit this coraraunication of my
views and feelings to the public, in the belief that
every truly Christian heart will be gladdened by
learning that another has been recovered from the
snare of the devil, who was led captive by him at
his wfll, (2 Tim. ii. 26,) and in the hope that some
other, yet in the same snare, will, ere long, see his
error, be recovered from it, and testify to the truth as
it is in Jesus. Sidney Turner.
"Portland, March 7, 1842."

fruits of UNIVERSALISM. 301
N. Chapin, a preacher in the Methodist connection,
became a Universalist. He renounced it, as he states
in a letter to me, because of its bad moral tendency.
Very few men have been converted from another
faith to Universalisra,, and begun to preach it, who
were not struck with the looseness of conduct and
principle that prevails among its preachers. Usually
they are glad to return to the place from which they
came out. Of the thirty-two- preachers, whose names
are. recorded in this lecture as. having renounced Uni
versalism; twenty-five of that number left the
MINISTRY OF ANOTHER FAITH, EMBRACED UNIVERSALISM,
BECAME FAMILIAR WITH ITS DREADFUL MORAL. TEN
DENCY, AND, APPALLED WITH THE SIGHT, HAVE RE
NOUNCED THE DOCTRINE.
8. Concessions of Universalist Ministers prove all
that has been said as to the moral Results of
Universalism,.
The question has been frequently put. to me. Cam
Universalist preachers be ignorant of such results
as attend their preaching ? I answer. They are not
ignorant of them. None are satisfied with the ten
dency of Universalism. The evil tendency of it they
confess, to each other. And I have it ini my power to
sustain all that I have said of the moral results of Uni
versalism, by the testimony of men who are now in its
ministry. My experience is the experience of ail who
have had any thing to do with that destructive error.
When I had confidence in the system, the confes
sion of its advocates made me unhappy. They would
speak of the conduct of Universalists, and the practi-
26

302 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
cal tendericy of Universalism, in terms that made me
tremble.
~ If the question is proposed whether men who are
acquainted with such results can be sincere in a rain
istry that produces them, I can only reply that each
one can judge for himself I have known men to
preach Universalism when they had serious doubts
of its truth.
In 1825, a preacher received a call to settle over
the Universalist society in Salem, Massachusetts.
He accepted it. The day was appointed for his
installation. The night before the installation, he
signified to the officers of the society that he could
not be settled the next day, for he had strong doubts
about the tmth of Universalism, and stronger doubts
about the propriety of preaching it, supposing it to be
true. The announcement of this state of raind on
the part of the pastor elect, threw the comraittee into
great alarm. They knew not what to do. At length
they prevailed upon the preacher to waive his doubts,
and be installed. He was installed, and preached
Universalism to the society for the space of two years.
One of the raost popular preachers of Universalism
in Massachusetts has confessed publicly that he did
not believe that Universalisra was taught in the
Bible. He preached it because it was proved by
other testimony. And yet this man takes a text from
the Bible, and, when defending his faith, quotes pas
sages of Scripture in its support.
Indeed, it is quite coraraon to hear ministers, when
together, debate the relevancy of proofs taken from
the Bible, and the sophistical character of arguments
offered in defence of Universalism.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 303
Mr. George Richards, forraerly settled in Ports
mouth, New Hampshire, and one of the early ad
vocates of Universalisra in this country, was often
deeply distressed on account of the tendency of his
faith. On one occasion, while he resided in Ports
mouth, he wrote a letter to some of the principal raen
in his society, making them acquainted with his feel
ings. He told thera that he was a raiserable man, and
that he had often deceived them. He had kept back
a part of the truth. He had misapplied Scripture.
He had not given thera the true meaning of the Bible,
but had " handled the Word of God deceitfully." The
scriptures which he applied to Universalisra he knew
did not teach that sentiraent, and he was a most
wretched being. The letter was read by persons not
belonging to Mr. Richards's society, and at the time
produced a deep sensation. His friends came around
him, and induced him to stifle his convictions, and
quench the Spirit of God. He did so, and his end was
what raight have been expected. He coraraitted sui
cide in the city of Philadelphia, a short tirae afterward.
A gentleraan of standing in the Universalist society
in Hartford, Connecticut, found in* the Bible difficul
ties which he was unable to explain in harmony
with his faith. He had confidence in Universalism,
and in the ability of his rainister to defend it and
settle hira firmly on his long-cherished system. He
called upon Mr. Moore, his rainister, and said to hira,
"I have found in the Bible objections to Universalism.
I cannot remove them ; and I wish you to assist me."
The difficulties were then stated. Mr. Moore confessed
that he could not remove them, and told his parish-

304 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
ioner that there were many things in the Bible which
he could not explain in harmony with Universalism.
Surprised and confoimded at such a confession from
one whom he had supposed to be satisfied with the
doctrine which he preached, and honest in preach
ing it, the gentleman asked Mr. Moore how he could
preach Universalism, and quote the Bible to sustain
it, if he was troubled with such doubts as he had
expressed. Mr. Moore replied, " I think a great many
things can be said in favor of Universalism." The
gentleman turned away, convinced that his rainister
was not honest in his preaching. He renounced his
faith, and has since confessed Christ before raen.
In 1839, I had a long interview with Walter Bal
four. At that time, my raind was troubled with
doubts and difficulties upon Universalism, and ray
purpose was to obtain relief. He confessed that the
practical tendency was not what he had expected to
see when he embraced Universalisra; that the cause
could not prosper, unless the sect changed their course,
and both clergy and layraen becarae more religious.
He said that his attempts to produce a better state of
things had brougnt him under suspicion, and he had
suffered much frora it, so that now he could rarely
obtain a Sabbath's preaching. He acknowledged that
Universalisra was notoriously on the wane, especially
in Westem New York ; and, finally, that he regretted
that he had published a book upon Universalism.
Mr. Balfour has published in substance the sarae thing.
He has written one article upon the raoral results of
his faith for which he has received more censure than
praise. In it he says, " Whether Universalism shaU

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 305
go on prospering as it has done, depends, in a good
degree, on Universalists themselves. Unless they give
heed to their ways, and follow God's directions, as
given in the Bible, they need not expect increasing
prosperity," As a reason why many Universalists
refuse to attend Universalist meetings, he says, " It
will be time enough to blame them when churches
are established, and a relish for personal piety and
devotion becomes coraraon among us. The many
merely nominal Universalists, in some places, must
give a revolting view of Universalisra to many sensi
ble, piously-minded people. They judge of the whole
by the specimen before them, and conclude we are
only disguised infidels," [a just judgment.] " The
rich profane swearer, drunkard, and semi-infidel,"
are leaders in Universalist societies. Of thera Mr.
Balfour says, "It is seeing such, in sorae cases, the
leaders and raanagers in our societies, which raakes
Universalism a hissing and a by-word in some places,
and prevents many persons frora uniting with us."
"I raay add another fact, which raakes the heart of
raany Universalists sad. They see nuraerous Univer
salist societies formed, and meeting-houses built ; but
what is the result ? After a few years, sorae [raany ?]
raeeting-houses are sold or shut up. In sorae others,
they have only occasional preaching ; and sorae so
cieties, after a lingering consuraption, die, and the
place which once knew thera knows thera no more.
Like ropes of sand, they have fallen to pieces, and
hardly a fragment reraains." (Expos, ii. 32 — 36.)
I have spoken, in another place, of the regard and
respect which Universalists entertain for their preach-
26*

306 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
ers. They treat them as hired men, who work for
money, either of whora would change their situation
to benefit themselves in a pecuniary point of view.
On this subject Mr. Balfour thus speaks : " Will men
enter into the ministry equal to the increased demand
for them, as in times past? We must doubt this,
unless a radical change takes place. Few men of
talents, unless mere loiterers, will seriously engage in
the work, until they see more love and zeal, among
Universalists, to provide for them and their families.
They see many of their present preachers spending
their time and strength in the work, in poverty and
comparative misery, and die in debt, with a wife and
family to mourn their loss." " They drag out, for a
year or two, a miserable existence as preachers in a
place, leave it, probably, in debt, hoping to find some
place where Universalists have raore coraraon sense,
if not raore of true Christianity, araong them." " Un
til this sharaeful evil is removed, let us be raore
isparing of our boasting about the rapid spread of
¦Universalism." " Let the preachers' love and zeal for
the cause of Universalism be what you please, they
:must get discouraged, in seeing so little evidence of its
¦fruits in their hearers." "They look on him [the
preacher] as a hired man by the day or year, and, like
children tired of an old plaything, dismiss hira. They
hire another, and are soon tired of their new rattle,
and he is again disraissed for another, perhaps not so
good as the two former." "I am surprised that
ANY preacher CONTINUES IN THE MINISTRY."
Mr. Balfour has published many Universalist books.
Of his labor in this department he thus speaks : " Pew,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 307
if any, among Universalists, have published more
books of this kind than myself" " So far from my
publications being a profit to me, they have only been
a bill of expense, and much perplexity, in addition
to all ray labor in writing them, so much so, that I
have been tempted TO CURSE THE DAY I EVER
PUBLISHED A BOOK." Hc adds, "lam heart-sick of
it ; and to be told that ray books have contributed
MUCH TO THE RAPID SPREAD OF UnIVERSALISM, HAS
no tendency to remove this kind of sickness."
(Univ. Union, iv. 306, 307.)
A dreadful experience ! We learn frora it the truth,
that the great motive to labor among Universalists is
to make money. Mr. B. has raade none ; hence he is
" tempted to curse the day that he ever published a
book." He has no confidence in the good tendency
of his faith. " The rapid spread of Universalism,"
through his labors, "has no tendency to remove that
heart-sickness," created by the fact that his books " have
only been a bill of expense," while some Universalists
have got his " books, and either from want of hon
esty, or carelessness, have forgotten to pay for them."
Compare this confession and experience with that
of Paul. Mr. Balfour will not pretend that his sacri
fices have been as great to build up Universalism,
as were Paul's to preach and defend the gospel of
Christ. How would Paul have appeared, had he writ
ten to Timothy, that, after all he had done, preached,
aud written, he had not raade a dollar by being a
Christian ? that his writings had " only been a bifl of
expense," "so rauch so that" he had "been terapted
to curse the day that he had taken up his pen in de-

308 FRUITS of universalism.
fence of the gospel " ? that he was "heart-sick of
it, [ofhis work,] and to be told that" his labors had
"contributed rauch to the rapid spread" of the gospel
" had no tendency to reraove this sickness " ? Would
not his narae have been handed down to posterity
stamped with infaray? Could raore be said to show
that the doctrine which Paul preached and Universal
ism are as different as truth and error, evil and good,
the theology of heaven erad the religion of hell? Of
the benevolence of Universalism need more be said ?
And of the evil moral tendency have the eneraies of
Universalism said as much as this confession of Mr.
Balfour contains ?
Mr. Thomas Whittemore says, " The morals of the
Universalist would, and must,~in the very nature of
things, be purer than the raorals of those operated
upon by different opinions, were it not that he makes
his religion too much a thing of theory and too
little a thing of practice. This is the fault of
many Universalists." (Guide to Univ. 28'^.) That
is, Universalisra would be a purer system if its moral
results were of a different character !
The following graphic description of a Universalist
congregation, by the same pen, will at once be rec
ognized : —
" When he [the preacher] goes to conduct the ser
vices of public worship, he sees about half as many
people as there are pews, scattered over the house,
sorae below, and some in the gaUery ; no singers, so
that the joyful part they perform must be omitted.
He begins with a prayer, but there is no feeling; he
knows not what to say ; he labors through it and it

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 309
seems to every one, a dull, long, and unsuitable one.
He announces his text, and endeavors to preach, but
it is lifeless preaching after all. His congregation
have fixed themselves iu a situation to suffer the least
torture ; if in sumraer, they sleep and nod ; if in win
ter, they bury theraselves in their cloaks, and go into
a torpid state." (Guide, 307.)
Mr. Whittemore asserts that "publicans and harlots
rejoiced to find their cause espoused by the Great
Teacher sent from God. His doctrine raet and sat
isfied their desires." He adds, "We learn from
this, what class of people it is, among whom at
the present day, the doctrine of the impartial
Savior [Universalism] shall flourish in its pu
rity." (Notes, 195.) Publicans and harlots love Uni
versalisra ; it meets their desires ; among them, at the
present day, it flourishes in its purity ! Has any op
ponent of Universalism said more ?
H. Ballou, 2d. I have in another place presented
the testimony of Mr. B. in relation to the character of
many Universalist societies, at whose conduct "the
moral sense of the community revolts." I cite hira
further in illustration of this subject. He allows that
in many societies religious principle is not to be
found, but the " prevailing spirit was opposition." As
a consequence of this state of things, he says, " Many
who were of no religion themselves would fall into
our ranks from no better principle than hostility to
the doctrines and practices of the prevailing denoraina
tions. They hated them with all their hearts. They
would join whatever body was most successful agdinst
them. They saw we were making rapid progress;

310 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
they liked the warfare well and were loud in their
cheering." In respect to the nuraber of churches, he also says,
" Now, it is an orainous fact, that in a very large
proportion of our societies, probably in more than two
thirds of our eight or nine -hundred, there are no
churches, no associations of the kind whatsoever ! We
have a deep and increasing presentiment that there
must be a thorough change of this state of things,
and that churches, or something tantamount, (why
shun the name?) raust be introduced in all cases
where we forra a society, or that its prosperity will
not be permanent. At any rate, we cannot conceive
of general neglect, without the most disastrous ten
dencies. " With respect to the coraraunion of the Lord's sup
per, we may be told that it is questionable whether
this institution was intended as an absolute ordinance,
that is, as perpetually and universally obligatory by
force of a positive command. We think so too. We
have doubts of the existence of ordinances in Chris
tianity ; we mean in the usual technical sense of the
term." Concerning the neglect of the religious culture of
children, the following confession is raade : —
" One of the great faults that raai-ked the course of
our measures, till recently, and which may still exist in
some parts of the country, was an almost total neglect
of the religious education of our children."
The following extract, containing a description of
the lax moral discipline araong Universalists, and the
'character of the rainistry and the converts to Univer-

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 311
salism, will confirm much that I have said in this
lecture : — .
" We have now finished what we had to offer with
respect to the purely religious concerns of our denorai
nation ; unless we place under this head a few reraarks
on the iraportance of a stricter inquiry into the raoral
character and habitual deportment of those who apply
for our fellowship as ministers of the gospel. Perhaps
we should also say, — the necessity of a stricter dis
cipline ; for we have known one or two cases even
in which preachers, conderaned on trial for notorious
immorality, and disfellowshipped by our conventions
in one state, have been received in another state, with
out the least token of repentance. These instances,
however, are so shameful an outrage of all propriety,
that the bare mention is the severest admonition that
words can inflict. Exceptions — raonstrous exceptions
as they are, they still are symptoms of some general
laxity of discipline. But, passing these by, — pru
dence as well as duty seeras to require that no preacher
should be received into our fellowship without the
most indubitable proof of his moral integrity ; and
by this we mean soraething more than a negative, or
the absence of the grosser vices. We want preachers,
it is true; but why should we be in haste to lay
hands on any raan ? If he is vain and flighty, if he
plunges now into the gospel, and straightway over
head into politics, or is crafty and treacherous, or a
swaggerer, that knows aU things and understands
nothing, or a time-server, mad with the itch for pres
ent popularity, &c. &c., he will, in all likelihood, prove
a curse to our societies, if we send him forth ; and the

312 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
more iraposing his tafeat, the raore deeply will boilrh
they and ourselves rue the sanction we gave to betray
them. We ha-V© had a few tolerably plain lessons
from experience on this point ; may they be sanctified
to us! Great cireuraspection, too, should be used in
receiving- ministersi from, other denominations. We are
apt to be too eager to secure audi proclaira our con"
qiiests of thisikind. There are cases, unquestionably,
in which the reason of one^s leaving another seat, is
the very reason why we ought to beware of him'."
Those who are familiar with the. boastings of Uni
versalist ministers, the readiness with which men, ig
norant of English grammar, will talk about Sheol,
Gehenna, Aioia, &.c., and the rapidity with which they
win repeal the. names of the; Christian fathers whom
they never read, wfll be interested to learn, the secret
of this knowledge. Mr-. Ballou says,—
"Now,, it has sometimes; been said, that as a body
we are a. very reading people, more soi than other
seats in general. Is this boast well fo;unded? True,
we; read a great many papers, religious and poKticall ;
we read) perhaps the 'Expositor,' and other' fiagitive
publications. Does this raake us a readitrng people, in
tte important; sense of the phrase?
" Much hasi been said on the importance of raising
the standard of intellectual and literaaiy qualificatioias
among our ministers. We wish to offer a few remarks
on this topic. To; us it seeras that the first efficient
step towards so desirable an object, is,, for the minis
ters frankly to eome down, before our denomination,
to their real level In this; respect, by discarding, every
one of us, all affectation of attainments that we do not

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 313
actually possess : a raortifying task for many, and per
haps for the writer hiraself! but indispensable, whether
we value our reputation araong judges, or regard the
cause of iraproveraent. It is one of the absurdest
things to iraagine that we can set up a standard of
real excellence, so long as we suffer a fictitious one,
the raere show of one, to be maintained with impu
nity. Down, then, with all pretence ; away with all
Latin, Greek, and Hebrew parade, by such as are
unacquainted with those languages. Expose, lash all
affectation of literary research. When a Balfour gives
us an ' Inquiry ' concerning Sheol, let us not forthwith
go to quoting Campbell, Jahn, &c., as our own origi
nal authorities, while we merely take thera frora the
'Inquiry.' When a Paige publishes ' Selections frora
Commentators,' let us not use it for the purpose of
referring familiarly to fifty or a hundred coraraentaries
that we have never seen. When we write, let us
not take, frora other authors, whole paragraphs of
references, unsorted, and sorae of thera in languages
unknown to us."
The condition of the world, should Universalisra
ever be the prevalent religion, is graphically set forth
in the following supposition. A raan who can raake
such a supposition cannot pray very earnestly for the
spread of his faith.
" Suppose that our denoraination should continue
to grow as now for twenty years to come, and at the
end of this period become the most nuraerous and
wealthy sect in our country, having possession of the
largest parishes in all the towns, and thus erabracing
the greater part of the population. But, suppose, at
27

314 FRUITS OF* UNIVERSALISM.
the sarae tirae, that its prevailing character shall then
be that of laxity of principle, indifference, neglect of
improvement ; that the people shall not generally
attend public worship so well as under the former
doctrines ; that though they may indeed argue about
religion, and have a host of proof-texts at their
tongues^ end, to battle the small remnant of Orthodox,
dcjC., with, yet they shall evidently feel but little of
its spiritual influence, and even believe but very
faintly ; that society shall have lost its tone — the
present zeal for culture, general knowledge, and sci
ence, be gone — the institutions of learning perished
in our hands; that men shall feel that they know
about enough already ; and that life shall be mainly
to eat, drink, rant about politics, manage business,
argue, and sleep. Suppose all this, ^- and our success
would be our everlasting shEune. The experiment
Would alienate from us every heart attached to the
interests of humanity. In such a state of things, let
there be but a single sect in existence, — no raatter
how small or obscure, — that should be iri earnest
with regard to religion and intellectual improvement,
and it would be like a blazing torch falling into com
bustibles ; the flimsy, wide-spread structure we had
i"eared of pretence, frivolity, and shallow-mindedness,
would pass away in smoke and ashes, and its memory
be an abhorrence to future ages. We might argue
still ; but the known reality would plead Eigainst us iu
the moral feeling of eVery man, and disprove even
demonstration itself" (Expos, vol. iii. pp. 77 — 105.)
Lemuel Willis, ray predecessor in Salem, spoke
Openly of the immoral tendency of ultra-Universalism.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 315
To the religious people of that city he was in the
habit of saying that he thought the Universalism of
Mr. Ballou, Balfour, and Whitteraore, to be raore
baneful than Kneelandism, [atheism ;] and he would
sooner advocate the latter than the former. And yet
then, and now, he countenanced that Universalisra,
exchanged with its advocates, and fellowshipped thera
in all things.
A Universalist preacher, who stands at the head
of the denomination, was settled seventeen years in
the vicinity of Boston. He had under his charge
the largest ¦ and best Universalist society. He was
very sick, and supposed to be in a consumption.
He told rae that the moral condition of his society
and the moral results of his preaching raade hira
sick, and almost carried him to his grave. He
felt that he had done no good ; that his ministry
had been the source of rauch evil, besides wasting
the long period of tirae that he had been settled.
Nearly every raan who was in the society when he
was settled died during his ministry. And nearly
every one that died, was an atheist, a deist, or a
DRUNKARD. He could not remain. He left his charge,
and settled over a small congregation, resolved to
change his style of preaching, expecting to see a
different result. Vain hope, while Universalism is
preached !
When I related this circurastance in my lectures, as
I delivered them, Universalists first pronounced this
,a falsehood, and then said that I referred to Rox
bury, and that the minister was H. Ballou, 2d. But
how does it happen that they have found a place, if

316 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
no such event transpired? They add that Mr. Ballou
authorizes thera to deny it. Would it not be well for
hira to wait till I narae hira ? But what does he
deny ? Why not get his denial in his own hemd ?
why not let him speak for himself? Universalists
have not yet asked me for the pleice, nor the minister
to whom I refer ; but with one voice have they re
ferred it to Roxbury. Now, if such things as those
mentioned never took place in Roxbury, and never
resulted from the rainistry of Mr. BaUou, then has
neither any thing to do with them. But if the
contrary, then must each make the raost of the case.
Let the gentleman to whom I do refer, deny the cor
rectness of ray stateraent, and I have it in my power
to prove it true.
Mr. Ackley Eicknowledges that raen " profess to
believe in the glad tidings of a world's salvation, and
at the same time spend the Sabbath at the tavern, the
grog-shop, or in other places of wickedness ; " that
to them "the Sabbath is a weariness instead of de
light — the holy sanctuary a prison-house — the Bible
a dead letter." ( Univ, Union, iv. 162.)
Mr. Rayner, of Troy, says, ( Univ. Union, April,
1837,) "But it is said that Universalism is a very
licentious doctrine, and that all sorts of vicious
characters embrace it, and are found in its ranks.
Here, my brethren, to a certain extent, we must
plead guilty, or at least, acknowledge our misfortune.
Among the professors of the principles of Universal
isra, there cu:e indeed some unworthy characters; men
of corrupt minds, and vicious tempers and habits."
He then adds, "Universalists of Troy, aweike! arise!

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 317
shake yourselves from your lethargy — ah, and from
other things, worse than a lethargy."
Mr. L. C. Browne says, " A Universalist formerly,
in the judgment of the world, was a good-humored,
swearing, laughing, joking, Bible-neglecting, Sabbath-
disregarding, accomraodating, neighborly sort of a be
ing, that had owned and lost Ballou on the Atoneraent,
heard three Universalist sermons, and had argued all
the Orthodox out of all the bar-rooms in town."
(Univ. Union, iv. 166.)
And Mr. Browne will not dare dispute the correct
ness of this judgment of the world as to what a
Universalist was supposed to be. And the world
is still corapetent to judge of the character of Uni
versalists of the present day. Their judgraent will be
as correct now as forraerly. Universalists thus allow
what was once the character of their associates.
From the, nature of the case, it must always be the
same. " Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the
leopard his spots ? " A corrupt tree cannot bring
forth good fruit. " Wherefore by their fruits ye shall
know them."
Mr. Clarke, settled for two years in Calais, Maine,
left his society because the results of his preaching
were manifestly iraraoral. InfideUty and licentious
ness were the prevailing sins. He could not stera the
torrent. He would not increase it. He therefore left
the place.
Dunbar B. Harris, a Universalist preacher, confessed,
in a stage-coach, to a nuraber of gentleraen of unques
tionable veracity, that my statements in relation to the
moral results of his faith were true. , He said he
27*

318 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
had heard my lecture upon the moral tendency of
Universalisra, and he knew the facts to be as I rep
resented. He said the Universalist rainistry all knew
thera to be true, and he was glad they were exposed ;
for they ought to be.
A few raonths ago, I raet with a Universalist minis
ter. He said to me, " Mr- S., you have told the truth
about us. I know it is true, what you have stated."
"Why, then," I asked, "do you not leave such a
rainistry ? " He replied, " I cannot resist the force of
the Universalist arguraent. I cannot believe Ortho
doxy, though I trerable at the practical tendency of
my faith." "Why, then," I inquired, "do you not
lift up your voice against these crying sins ? Why not
speak, and bear testimony to the results of your
faith ? " "I dare not do it," was the answer. " I
should be sacrificed at once, and my family woifld
suffer." Such is the feeling in many minds.
The long-continued and violent assault upon my
self was designed as much to influence the dissatisfied
in their own borders, as to ruin rae. Araong the
Universalist rainistry, there are raany persons dissatis
fied at the raored results of Universalisra, who fear to
make an open complaint. And having had sorae
soleran lessons read to thera by those of independent
minds, Universalists wish to make an example of me,
to deter others.
Indeed, it is not in my power to record all that
Universalist rainisters have confessed in relation to the
tendency of their faith. Much is too indelicate to be
written. And on this account the raost dreadful fea
ture of the practical tendency of this system raust be
unwritten.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 319
Universalists have pointed to Gloucester, Massachu
setts, as a town in which the practical results of their
faith appear. When any one calls Universalisra an
immoral system, they say, "Look to Gloucester; there
our faith was first planted ; and by its results there we
will be judged."
I ara very happy to bear testimony to the excellent
moral and amiable character of many who call them
selves Universalists in Gloucester. But neai-ly all of
them forraed their habits under a different influence ;
and others would have been as amiable if they had
never embraced Universalism.
But, notwithstanding this, if I wished to prove the
tendency of Universalism to be all that I have de
scribed it, I know 6i no place in New England that I
would so soon select in proof of my statements as
Gloucester. Charles Spear, who was settled over the
society at Sandy Bay, a part of Gloucester, made to rae,
frequently, the most mournful confessions of the charac
ter of those who composed his society. Intemperance,
profanity. Sabbath-breaking, licentiousness, abounded.
And he informed rae, in the presence of witnesses, that
so dissolute were the people,that no person thought of
being married till one of the parties was compelled to
be. Nearly all the marriages he celebrated, he said,
were of this description.

UNIVERSALISM CONTAINS THE ELEMENTS OF ITS
OWN RUIN.
Its principles of interpretation destroy it. They
deny future bliss, destroy the dwelling-place of the

320 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
righteous in the coraing world, and blot out not only
future life, but even the existence of God.
Societies formed have no religious principle, Op
position is their uniting bond, and hostility to religion
their rallying cry. Many societies are thus created :
A nuraber of men unite and form a Universalist so
ciety. A subscription paper is' circulated and raoney
raised to sustain preaching. The fact that a society
has been formed is announced in a Universalist paper,
accompanied with the remark, that "the cause is in the
highest state of prosperity " in that place. The raoney
raised is "preached out," and the society suspends
animation. Again it starts, and again the prosperity
of Universalism in that place is announced to the pub
lic ; and then again it pauses. At length it gathers
energy enough to build a house. The prosperity of
the cause is coraplete in that place, and the society
dies with the exertion. There are scores of societies
in the country whose history is thus given. They
raeet for opposition ; and well does Mr. Ballou say of
thera, " And even they, grown weary in time of see
ing the same battles fought over and over, will grad
ually desert, unless new objects of attack be sought
out, one after another, until every thing, sacred as
well as profane, true as well as false, has been refuted ;
and then, dissolution must come, for there is no more
to do."
A minister settled over a Universalist congregation
learns that he has a motley asserablage to please.
Araong thera he finds rauch speculation, little piety,
and no prayers. Many will be found who hate the
Orthodox with a perfect hatred, but few who have

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 321
any fixed religious principle. These will be hearty in
any raeasure that will put down superstition, as they
call religion ; who attend raeeting when they please,
and give their rainister to understand, if reproved, that
they are not priest-ridden. Many zealous Universal
ists soon learn out, and lose all interest in the services,
or abandon the raeeting altogether.
The late pastor of the Callowhill Street Universalist
Society thus confirras ray stateraents : — "The house
in which 1 preach accoraraodates two or three different
congregations, not indeed at the sarae tirae. But the
number of people who frequently attend is sufficient
to constitute two or three congregations, if all could
be induced to attend constantly. Some attend say
once in four weeks, some once in twelve, sorae once
or twice a year, and some when a celebrated brother
visits us. Who can preach under the conviction that •
those who hear will not come again within four or
six weeks ? Yet under such discouraging circura
stances do Universalist ministers have to discourse in
Philadelphia." Again he says, "After an existence of
sixteen years, our society is not what its friends desire.
Our places of worship were as well filled ten years
ago as now ; those they deemed their right-hand men
have deserted from their ranks, or abandoned their
posts in the citadel of truth, for the barbarous habit of
spending their Sundays in rambling for recreation, or
lounging and loitering for ease." ( Univ. Union, iv.
342.) So is it every where.
A writer in the " Trurapet " says, " In PhUadelphia,
as is generally known, the cause of Universalism has
long been stationary — or rather, it has made no per-

322 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
ceptible progress ; it has, meanwhfle, been blessed with
able, and active, and highly esteemed ministers — Brs.
A. C. Thomas and S. W. Fuller, with two handsome
and capacious meeting-houses also, in pleasant and
central situations. Yet, withal, it has remained about
where it was many years ago."

UNIVERSALISM LEADS TO SUICIDE.
Its doctrines, when they have a practical influence
upon the heart, must lead to self-destruction. They
make it unnecessary and unwise for us to keep an
existence which is so full of woe, and which is the
only barrier to perfect and endless felicity. It must
be folly and madness to continue in this life of disap-
, pointment and misery, when, by a self-inflicted death,
a man may "end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to."
Remove firom men the dread of soraething after
death, and no one would
"bear the -vrhips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes ;
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin."
But if it be a true doctrine, as Universalisra main
tains, that there can be no flls beyond death, that
the soul arises up from the midst of the deepest

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 323
degradation, of sins of the blackest dye, into infinite
happiness, then self-destruction must be a duty. By
it we ascend instantly frora the condition of a down
trodden, suffering, sinful mortal, to that of a glorious,
exalted, iramortal spirit.
Many have acted on these principles. A few cases
I will mention.
A man in the city of Utica, New York, becarae
weary of life, and resolved to end it. He said he
thought God did not wish to have hira live any
longer on earth, he made him so miserable ; and he
purchased a quantity of laudanum with which to take
his life. He swallowed the poison, but medical aid
was at hand, and his plans were defeated.
Soon after this, he married; but his domestic re
lations were not happy. He resolved now to leave
the world. He purchased two pistols, picked the
flints, and loaded them with care. He then sent for
his minister, the Universalist preacher in Utica, to visit
him. The' preacher came, bringing an associate with
him. To his minister he said, " Where shall I go
when I die ? " " To heaven, " was the reply. " Have
I any thing to fear beyond death ? " " Nothing," was
the response. " So I believe. I ara tired of this
world, and mean to seek a better." He laid his hands
upon his pistols, and, as he raised them, his spiritual
guides took the alarra. " Stop," cried one of them,
"stop; there maybe a heU, after all." The desperate
man gave hira a look of withering indignation, and
exclaimed, " You do not believe the doctrine you
preach. You are a deceiver. But I believe that all
men will be happy at death. I wiU convince you

324 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
that I thus believe." He raised both pistols to his
head ; they flashed in the pan, and immediately he was
secured. Before they parted, he informed his spiritual
guides that he had done with thera ; that now he had
an opportunity to judge of their sincerity.
Universalists have never denied the facts stated
above. They atterapt to traduce the character of
the man. But they dare not deny the statement.
My authority is an elder in the Presbyterian church,
a raan well known to the religious world. He was
present in the session of the church in Utica, and
heard the individual make the stateraent I have
recorded. Cyrus C. Crawford, of Plyraouth, New Hamp
shire, an intelligent and respected young man, during
the last winter, was drawn away by temptation, and
involved in the crime of passing counterfeit money.
He was soon arrested and iraprisoned, and while
awaiting his trial he coraraitted suicide. Before this
last act of violence, he wrote a letter of coflsolation to
his mother.
" In that letter he said to his mother, in substance,
' / have concluded that the best way to get out of this
scrape, is to leave this world of trouble. It is ap
pointed to man once to die, and he may as well die
when life becomes a burden to him.' He expressed
an unwavering confidence, that a feio moments would
introduce him to a world where there will be no
trouble. And surely, if we grant his premises, we
must admit his conclusion. If Universalism be true,
he must have been foolish indeed to have lived and
endured the ignominv that awaited hira. Who would

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 325
not have preferred a raansion in heaven, to a berth in
the state prison?" He was an ardent lover of the
"Trumpet," and its contents nerved hinl for the fatal
deed. No one will say that young Crawford did not
die full in the faith.
Jonathan Cilley, who was killed by Mr. Graves, of
Kentucky, in a duel, was in conversation with a pious
lady in Washington the night before he was diot.
He confessed that, with the religious views that the
lady entertained, he should be deterred from fighting
the duel. But, as a Universalist, he had nothing to
feaf ; ff he shot his antagonist, the world would justify
him; but if he was killed, his soul would imme
diately ascend to heaven. I have already alluded to
Mr. Richards, of Philadelphia, who coraraitted suicide.
Mr. Basset, <>f Dedham, should also be raentioned.
Both of these raen were popular preachers of Unir
versalism. We have thus proved that Universalism tends to
self-destruction ; and the reason that so few, corapara-
tively, coramit suicide, is found in the fact that there
are very few confirraed Universalists in the world.
UNIVERSALISM IS ON THE WANE.
To read a Universalist periodical, one would sup
pose that Universalisra was overrunning the country
with gigantic strides, and that all the ministers of
other denorainations were turning to their faith. But
when one looks at the matter as it is, the reverse is
found to be the fact. The habit of boasting into
which Universalists have faUen is notorious. But
28

326 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
little reliance can be placed upon statements found in
their periodicals, in respect to the prosperity of their
cause ; and I have conversed with Universalists who
depend upon Universalist papers for their information,
who did not know that any Universalist society had
run down, or that any preacher, except myself, had
renounced Universalisra.
But take any place in which Universalisra has
existed six years, and draw a circle around it of ten
miles, and you will find Universalisra to be less flour
ishing than at its comraenceraent.
Let rae begin at Boston. There are now in the
city proper three Universalist raeeting-houses. There
was that nuraber ^^eew years ago. Has Universalism
increased even with the increase of population ? Am
I told that a new house in Warren Street was erect
ed two Or three years ago? True. And the Third
Universalist Society, about the sarae time, was trans
ferred to another denoraination, and took with it the
most elegant house of worship the Universalists have
ever erected. About the same time, the Purchase
Street Universalist Society ran down, its rainister
renounced Universalisra, and its place of worship was
transferred to the infidels. When the Warren Street
Universalists' house was built, a raarble slab was placed
in front, inforraing the passer-by that it was the Fifth
Universalist raeeting-house. But there was no Third
Universalist raeeting-house in Boston at that time,
and has been none since. Was not this intended to
deceive ? Does it not deceive ? Was there not an
unwillingness to have the true condition of Univer
salism in Boston known ? This is but a single illus-

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 327
tration of the fact that from Universalists themselves
you cannot learn the real prosperity of their cause.
At the present time, Universalists have three raeeting-
houses in the city of Boston, and a small one, with a
feeble society, in South Boston ; and this is the amount
of Universalist organization in the head-quarters of
Universalisra, after an existence of forty-nine years.
In 1810, the Universalists had as raany churches in
Boston as the Orthodox Congregationalists. Now, the
Orthodox, in the city proper, have twelve churches,
besides churches at South and East Boston. The
preachers of Universalisra raake their deluded fol
lowers believe that Orthodoxy is running down, and
Universalisra is sweeping all before it ; while the
truth is, that Universalists had as many places of
worship in the city proper fifteen years ago, as they
have this day.
But there is one feature in the present aspect of
Universalisra in Boston that will be interesting to the
friends of truth. I have already stated that Hosea
Ballou is the father of modern Universalism. Mr.
Ballou was installed over the Second Universalist
Society in Boston in Deceraber, 1817. His system
was not fully developed till after that period. A
quarter of a centiuy has passed away since ultra-Uni
versalism was formed. Its author is now reaping the
harvest he has sowed. Not only has the society
dwindled on his hands till its dissolution was threat
ened, but it has deliberately, and we believe forever,
against Mr. Ballou's most strenuous efforts, ejected
ultror Universalism from its birthplace.
In opposition to Mr. Ballou's wishes, a colleague has

328 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
been chosen by the society. The gentleman chosen
is not an ultra-Universalist. He is not a meraber of
the denoraination of Universalists. He is a Unita
rian. His election was opposed by Mr. BaUou and
his friends on that ground. He was chosen by a
large raajority. And virtually the Second Univer
salist meeting-house has passed out of the hands of
the Universalist denomination. Mr. Ballou and his
friends are prepariUg to leave the place in which he
has preached so long, and begin again to build up
ultra- Universalism. And when the enterprise is com
menced, it will be trumpeted abroad that Universalism
is so prosperous in Boston, that another society
has been forraed ! So much flourishes Universalism
in Boston.
No man acquainted with Universalism will pretend
that it is on the increase in the vicinity of Boston.
In some places new societies are formed, but these
do not keep the number whole. Not as raany have
been forraed within six years as have suspended
ptpaching. So far frora keeping up with the increase
of population, in alraost all the older societies there
are raanifestations of decline. In raany places, while
other churches are enlarged to keep up with the in
crease of population, Universalists contract their houses
to meet the wants of their congregations.
Take Cambridgeport as an illustration. The Uni
versalist raeeting-house was built raore than twenty
years ago. Thoraas Whittemore was for many years
pastor of the society. He still resides in that place,
and throws the influence of his "Trurapet" and his
wealth in favor of Universalism. At the time of his

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 329
settlement, Cambridgeport was asmaU place. There
were in it a sraall Unitarian and a , feeble Baptist
church. The Baptists have enlarged their house two or
three times. The Orthodox Congregationalists have
buflt a house which they have once enlarged. And
recently, for want of room, the church have set off a
new body. But the Universalist society has always
been small. Under Mr. Whitteraore it nearly ran out.
And to accommodate the house to the congregation, a
floor has been thrown across the gallery, and the
upper part is used for the place of raeeting. Mr.
Whittemore gives the following account of this
alteration : —
" In the sumraer of 1839, the Universalist society
in Carabridgeport proceeded to alter their meeting
house. The principal object -v^as to provide a vestry
for the use of the Sunday school. The house hav
ing very high posts, so that there was a distance of
nearly thirty feet from the floor to the ceiling, a new
floor was laid on a level with the original gallery, on
which were placed eighty-six pews, besides the
singing gallery. The old house had ninety pews on
the lower floor, so that the reader will see that the
present arrangements will accomraodate about the
same nuraber of people as could have been accom
modated on the lower floor of the forraer arrangeraent.
To be sure, we have lost the old galleries, which the
society never needed until lately ; but such has been
its late increase, we now stand rauch in need of
them. The house was altered to gain the lower
part for a vestry, and to modernize and beautify it,
28*

330 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
the which cost three thousand dollars. The same
alteration in principle has beeii made in Park Street
and Essex Street meeting-houses, (both Orthodox,) in
this city, and many of the old high meeting^'houses in
the country." In this stateraent are several errors.
1. " The Universalist society in Canibridgeport "
did not alter their raeeting-house ; they w^ere unable
to do it. To save the cause firora Utter ruin, Mr.
Whittetnore and several persons secured the house,
and made the alterations, agreeing simply to afford
the Universalist society a place of worship. The
Universalist society do not own the place of meeting ;
they have no right there, other than that which they
secure by hiring a pew by the year. Mr. W. and his
associates can call whora they please to preach, pay
Mill what they please, and, after the expenses of the
society are ^aid, they can do what they please with the
surplus. 2. " The ipresent arrangeraents will " not " accom
modate about the sarae nuraber of people." Eighty-
six pe#s will not hold as raany as ninety, especially
TVhen they are sraaller ones. And then a large gal
lery has been reraoved, which would hold a third as
many as the floor of the house.
3. "*I'he same altetatioh in principle has" not
" been made in Park Street and Essex Street church
es " in Boston. Those churcheis contain each more
pews on the floOr than before the alteration ; and, in
each case, the galleries have not only been retained,
but enlarged.
T'^veUty years ago, Cambridgeport cohtained not
one half its present number of inhabitants. Then

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 331
the Universalists owned their house of worship.
Their society is still feeble. Their house has
passed out of their hands. And, though they have
secured to them a place of meeting, it is but two
thirds the size of the house they occupied twenty
years ago, when the town contained not one half
its present population. Is this an evidence of the
triumphs of Universalism in this place ?
But this is only a sample. In raany other places
the sarae alteration has been raade, to accommodate
the congregation. And, in raany towns, Universalists
have wrested houses of worship and funds frora other
sects, and, when the oppressed society have, at great
sacrifice and toil, secured another place of worship,
the Universalists have closed theirs, and suspended
their raeetings ; thus presenting the raotive which
prompted them to action.
It would not be possible for me to present a history
of the Universalist societies which have run down in
this country, without swelling my lectures to an un
warranted size. To show that Universalism is really
on the wane, I present a sraall araount of the proof I
have at hand.
In Oxford, Massachusetts, one of the oldest Univer
salist societies was forraed. It was large, and owned
a large raeeting-house. The society ran down entire
ly, some years ago, and the meeting-house was sold
to the Methodists. In Boston, the Third Univer
salist Society, with their place of worship, has
been transferred to the Unitarians; and the Pur
chase Street Society was transferred to the infidels.
In Nantucket, the Universalist society ran down, and

332 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
their raeeting-house weis converted into a lyceum.
In Pawtucket, the Universalists had a large and ele
gant meeting-house. They flourished for a time,
then faded, and their meeting-house was sold to the
Baptists. After a death of sorae years, Universalism
has started again, and a very sraall house has been
erected. But, without any allusion to the existence
and failure of the first society, the public are informed
that Universalism is spreading very rapidly in Paw
tucket, and the erection of this sraall house is adduced
in proof of it. In Woburn, Massachusetts, the soci
ety has expired, and its .place of raeeting sold for a
town house. In Milford, the society is nearly extinct.
Its raeeting-house is opened to atheists, and used
for draraatic and coraic exhibitions when desired.
Though once one of the strong societies of Universal
ists, it is now nearly or quite dead. In Taunton, the
Universalists had a settled preacher and a large house.
The society is extinct, the rainister gone, and the
house sold to the Orthodox. The editor of the
" Trumpet " makes the following lamentation over
this place : —
" Taunton, Ma,ssachusetts. Our spiritual Zion in
Taunton has been, for a few years, in a sad condition.
The purchase of the old raeeting-house proved to be
a very unfortunate raeasure ; the friends of our
cause were at last obliged to abandon it ; and they
have been disconsolate and affiicted ; they have hung
their harps upon the willows."
In Dorchester, Saugus, Western, Topsfield, Ran
dolph, East Bridgewater, societies have been formed,
preaching sustained for a season, and then the socie-

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 333
ties have expired. So, also, in Manchester, Amesbury,
East Bradford, Westrainster, and Barnardston. Rev.
Parsons Cooke says, in relation to Ware, Massachu
setts, "When we first went to that place, [Ware,]
neariy a raajority of the parish, then just formed,
were Universalists. And, during the ten years we
were on the ground, we had the satisfaction to see the
DISSOLUTION OF TWO SUCCESSIVE ORGANIZATIONS of a
Universalist society, in spite of the personal efforts
of the trumpeter himself, who occasionally made the
journey of seventy railes, to raise the wind, and carry
back trumpet-tongued reports of the wonders he
was doing." In many other places in Massachusetts,
too nuraerous to recite, Universalist societies have
been formed with a flourish of trumpets, lived
for a season, and then expired.
The same is true of Connecticut. Since the year
1830, societies have been formed in the following
places ; and, as we announce them, we will raention
their present condition : —
In New Haven, two societies have been formed
since the time we have mentioned, and three minis
ters regularly settled. The ministers have all de
parted, and both of the societies nurabered among the
things that were. In Woodbridge, a society was
formed, and regular preaching secured. Here, also,
the end is come. Norwalk and Monroe have
shared the same fate. Newtown, Southbury, and
Cheshire, were visited, for a season, with the light
of Universalism; but that light has now become
darkness. In Tolland, a Universalist society was
regularly organized, — in Ellington, in Glastonbury,

334 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
in Wolcottvflle, in Granby, in Soraers, in Warehouse
Point, in Woodstock, in Southington, and Meriden.
In each of these places, the services of a Universal
ist rainister were secured, a portion of the time.
But aU are hushed in that repose which knows no
awakening. In Barkharastead, a house was built ; and, at the
dedication, the services of Mr. BaUou, of Boston, were
secured, at great expense ; a rainister was settled. The
society has since run down, and the house is closed.
In Granby, a Universalist society was forraed, the
old Baptist raeeting-house obtained, and a- minister
settled. The minister, raany yeais since, reraoved,
and the society is not.
In New London, a society was forraed under
auspicious circurastances. A rainister was settled,
and all Universalists thought that the cause was per
manently established in New London. But, in an
hour when it was least expected, the cause expired,
and, like the baseless fabric of a vision, has left not a
wreck behind.
Time would fail me to speak of CoUinsville, Man
chester, and Durham, — of Union and West Stafford,
— of Thompson, Sharon, and Fairfield, and many
other places, in which Universalists may now stand,
and contemplate what Gamaliel meant, when he said,
" If this work be of men, it will come to nought."
The same history, substantially, may be given of
the Universalist societies in New York, Maine, and
New Hampshire.
In all parts of New Hampshire raay be seen houses
buUt by Universalists, and closed, or sold to other

FRUITS OP UNIVERSALISM. 335
denorainations. The sarae is trae of the state of
Maine. And all admit the astonishing decrease of
Universalism in the state of New York. The Uni
versalist periodicals have, for sorae tirae, been dis
cussing the cause, thus adraitting the fact. In the
Magazine and Advocate, June 12, 1841, S. R. Smith,
one of the leading Universalist preachers in New
York, publishes a long article, assigning the reasons
forthe decline of Universalism. In it, he says, "It
is generally conceded that Universalism is really and
constantly on the decline, or, at least, in a low and
languishing condition, in all that region." He regrets
that these representations have been made, because
they "make the inactive and languishing sink still
lower under the weight of public opinion."
Mr. Grosh says, (Mag. v. 86,) "The societies of
Universalists in this region are, many of thera, desti
tute of stated preaching — and many of thera seldora
enjoy even occasional preaching. This need not be,
unless they love to have it so. If these societies will
raise a fund for the support of preaching, and inform
us of their capabilities, we can occasionally send thera
a supply — perhaps a stated supply."
The editors of Universalist papers who published
the fact that Universalism was on the decline, were
censured for so doing. One Of them thus defends
himself : —
" Universalism in Western New York. — Some dis
satisfaction exists among some of our good brethren
in the section through which I travelled lately, in
regard to various articles published in this paper,
representing the cause there as in a declining state.
\

336 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
Not knowing what was the state of affairs there some
time ago, my observations did not enable rae to judge
whether any decline existed or not. The place?
languid now, may always have been languid — thos*
where our friends are numerous and active,, may now
be less so than formerly. I can only say, that in
many places a want of energy does exist, as well
as in this region, and that there are too many who
are professed Universalists, who manifest it not by
any action, not even by attendance on public worship
in their neighborhoods. Some whole societies, that
might have preaching statedly, as well as not, have
none even occasionally, except at the expense of the
preacher ! These things exist there, as well as here,
though it gives an honest and -warm-hearted Univer
salist the heartache to mention them." (Mag. and
Adv. July 5, 1838.)
I cannot leave this description of Universalism in
Western New York, without allowing one of its ad
vocates to speak of the raanner in which those socie
ties -which reraain, support their rainisters. The fol
lowing is from the pen of L. C. Brown, and published
in the Univ. Union, April, 1837.
A Week, from the Diary of a Country Clergy
man, — ' ' Monday morning. Arose, much fatigued with
the labors of the day previous, having travelled fifteen
mfles in the morning, preached three discourses, and
retumed home at evening. Found my family out of
wood, meat and flour. Went to I^r. Johnson's, three
miles, for wood ; but found he could bring none tUl
sleighing. Went to Br. Thompson's for meat. He

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 337
said every pound of pork he had to spare would bring
him the cash — gave me a beUy piece, at a shiUing a
pound, and said it must go on his subscription. Re
turned home at sunset. Went in the evening to the
miU for flour — purchased a barrel at eleven dollars,
promising to pay at the end of next quartef .
"Tuesday. Wife sick, in consequence of cold
house and no wood — hired girl, a Methodist, gone to
camp-meeting. Spent the day in nursing wife and
taking care of children. Toward evening, Br. Robin
son brought a load of green beech limbs, and ordered
a dollar credited on his subscription.
" Wednesday. Called to attend a funeral, at two
o'clock, P. M. Ran till noon in search of a convey
ance. Procured a horse of Br. Wilson, a carriage
of Br. Jilson, and wagon of Br. Sirapson. Rode
twelve miles over hubs — preached in a bamj the
house being too small to acComraodate — received the
thanks of the faraily and a bushel of apples — rode
home in the rain, and paid ten shillings for convey
ance. Called at the post-office, — raet Owen Gibbon,
the infidel, who rallied rae about priestcraft, and a
priest-ridden people, and gave sorae hints respecting
the indolence and luxury of the clergy, ' living upon
the fat of the land,' &c.
" Thursday. Sick of a cold, from yesterday's ex-
posiue — went to bed, after breakfast, and took a
boneset sodorific.
"Friday. Rose much better — did up moming
chores, and took up Bible to look out texts for Sun
day. Interrupted by a friend who called to request
my attendance at a wedding in the evening ten miles
29

338 FRUITS or universalism.
I
distant. Put down book, and went again to seek con
veyance — procured the same as on Wednesday at the
sarae price. Went to wedding — raarried parties —
received a five, franc piece frora the hand of grooms
man, with the compliments of groom, and returned in
the dark and through a snow-storm.
" Saturday. Cut wood all the forenoon, to last over
Sunday. Br. Todd called to labor me for not visiting
raore in ray societies. Looked out texts sifter dinner,
and started at two o'clock, for S., eighteen miles
off, to spend the Sabbath, and prepared sermons
on the way.
" Sunday. Day stormy. ' Preached three discourses
to thin audiences, in three different neighborhoods —
went to bed with a severe headache, resolving to
travel westward in the spring, in search of a
location. Apollos."
To this should be appended the following from
the Magazine and Advocate: —
A. A. Davis seiys, " On the 19th I visited the
Shakers at Union ViUage, and found Rev. A. Car
der (who was formerly a Universalist preacher) among
those, dressed out in Shaker uniform, with a straight
coat, and broad-brimraed hat. I inquired of him
whether he believed, as he used to, in the salvation
of all raen. He said he did. I inquired the cause of
his joining the Shakers : He said, that among them,
he could have three good meals regularly every day,
" Now, let no one laugh because the aforesaid Rev.
A. Carder had a little respect for his stomach. Men
cannot live on the wind ; and, as preachers are made

FRUITS OF UNIVteRSALISM. 339
of flesh and blood, they must have something to
eat." I have already said that Universalisra cannot live
at the south ; not for want of raaterial out of which
to form societies, but for want of quickening principle
in Universalisra to corabine these elements into the
forms of an efficient life. Irreligious raen at the
south wish no cloak ; and the idea that the Bible
countenances Universalism is too absurd for men
who reflect to entertain one moment.
Great efforts have been made to establish Univer
salist societies at the south, but with little success.
At Baltimore, for a tirae, Universalisra seeraed to
flourish. An expensive house was built, and it was
triuraphantly asserted that the doctrine was perraa-
nently established there. But in a short tirae, the
house was sold under the hammer ; and Universalism
has a name in Baltimore, but this is all.
At Charleston, South Carolina, and Richmond, Vir
ginia, Universalists have an organization, and perhaps
in two or three places besides. But in all of them,
the societies are feeble and expiring.
Such is Universalism in America.
UNIVERSALISM IN EUROPE.
Let us now turn to Europe, the land of its birth, and
learn the prosperity of Universalisra across the Atlantic.
Universalists, as a distinct denoraination, began with
James Relly, in England, who, before his avowal of
faith in the salvation of all raen, was a raember of
Mr. Whitefield's Connection. It was by attending the
preaching of this man, that John Murray was converted

340 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
to Universalism. The influence that Mr. Relly must
have exerted in England, may be learned from the
following description of his congregation and place of
worship, given by Mr. Murray : —
" Mr. Relly had changed his place of worship, and
we were astonished to observe a striking proof of the
falsehood of those reports, which had reached us ; no
coaches thronged the street, nor surrounded the door
of this raeeting-house ; there was no vestige of
grandeur, either within or without. The house had
forraerly been occupied by duakers; there were no
seats, save a few benches; and the pulpit was framed
of a few rough boards, over which no plane had ever
passed. The audience corresponded with the house ;
they did not appear very religious ; that is, they were
not melancholy ; and I therefore suspected they had
not much piety." (Life of Murray, 137.)
But whatever of a denorainational character Univer
salisra may have had in England, for that it is indebt
ed to Elhanan Winchester, of America. He was
settled in Philadelphia. " His society in Philadelphia
prospered under his ministry for about six years;
when, in the earlier part of 1787, the congregation
was, one Sabbath, struck with surprise to hear him
announce that, having long' felt it his duty to visit
England, he had now determined to take his passage
thither immediately. It was in vain for his friends to
entreat or to expostulate ; and though perhaps offended
at the suddenness of his departure, they inade such
provision for his voyage as the tirae would permit.
In forty-eight hours after he had given them notice,
he sailed, with his wife, in a vessel bound to Lon
don." (Mod. Hist. 284.)

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 341
In 1788, Mr. Winchester preached in London with
very great success. Crowds attended his ministry,
and the largest place his friends could procure would
not accomraodate all who carae to hear. " He frequent
ly visited Chathara, Birrainghara, Wisbeach, and E;ieet,
a place in Lincolnshire, and preached in neariy aU the
meeting-houses of the General Baptists in the county
of Kent. Several dissenting preachers openly pro
fessed the doctrine of universal restoration ; and sorae
who discountenanced it, patnonized hira, as he retained
many of the notions, and considerable of the language,
of the lower sects." (Mod. Hist. 287.)
So great was his success that the friends of virtue
and religion were alarmed. None doubted but Uni
versalisra was to be the prevEuling heresy of the land.
What the result would have been had Mr. Winchester
remained in England, no one can predict. He relieved
those -wrho feared the result of his labors, and put an
end to the spread of Universalisra in England, in the
following manner : — " Mr. Winchester was in the
height of his infltience, when, on the 1st of May, 1794,
Iris friends were alarraed by word frora his wife, that
he was raissing, and that she feared sorae evfl had
befallen him. The next raorning, advertiseraents
were inserted in the papers, and a search raade, with
no success. A number of his friends asserabled at his
house to condole with Mrs. Winchester, when one of
them received a letter from Winchester hiraself, re-
vealing, as the cause of his flight, a long series of intol
erable abuse from the desperate temper of his own
wife, which had at length put his life in dangler, and
driven him wounded from home. This letter was
29*

342 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
read in Mrs. Winchester's hearing, who, after some
prevarication, confessed the feicts aUeged." (Mod.
Hist. 287.)
Such was the beginning of the denominational
existence of Universalism in England; such the
character of its founder ; and before his death, ten or
twelve societies were forraed in England. A half a
century has passed away, and what now is the condi
tion of Universalism in that country ? Let Universal
ists answer. Mr. Sawyer says, —
" We regret that we have it not in our power to
give a cheering account of the condition of our Uni
versalist societies in Great Britain ; but, within the
last twenty or thirty years, they seera to have been
far flora prosperous. The greater part of those in
England have been raerged in the Unitarians, and are
therefore reckoned with them. Such are Mr. Win
chester's society in London, the two societies in
Portsmouth, the one in Plymouth, and one in Fareham.
Of Mr. Relly's old society in London, we have heard
and known nothing since 1820. It has probably be
come quite extinct, or is so dwindled away as to be
scarcely deserving of notice. The societies at Bish-
opstone, Shaftesbury, Westbury, and Whitehaven,
were always small bodies ; and, since the reraovEil of
Mr. Williara Upjohn, who, it is said, weis their princi
pal speaker, and who carae to the United States in
1829 or 1830, they have been raostly without a pastor,
and have, without doubt, much declined. But of
their actual condition at this moment we have no,
definite information. We know, indeed, of but one
FLOURISHING SOCIETY IN ENGLAND AT THE PRESENT

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM, 343
TIME, — that of Liverpool, under the charge of the
Rev. David Thom. In Scotland, Universalists, con
sidered as a distinct sect, are scarcely raore prosperous
than in England. They have generally adhered to
that forra of Universalism, which, with some raore or
less raodifications, prevailed in England and America
forty or fifty years ago. It embraces the doctrine of
the suprerae divinity of Jesus Christ, the popular doc
trine of the atoneraent, and others of a kindred nature.
" Such is the external and internal condition of
Universalism in Great Britain at the present time.
What are its prospects for the future ? We cannot
withhold the expression of our sincere conviction,
that the existing forms of Universalism there are des
tined to raeet with but indifferent success. Our hopes,
derived frora this source, are far frora sanguine. As
Universalists now exist and believe in Great Britain,
we do not flatter ourselves with the expectation of
much progress." ' (Expos. May, 1840.)
The araount of organized Universalisra in Europe
is this : At Liverpool there is a society, which Uni
versalists call flourishing. But the rainister of that
society does not regard the cause as quite so flourishing.
To a Universalist in New York, in a letter bearing
date March 30, 1836, he writes, " You cannot conceive
the need which we [Universalists] have on this side
of the Atlantic of being cheered on. A few stragglers,
amounting in all to some hundreds, is the sum of all
our niimbers." In Scotland there ar* three small
congregations, numbering less than one hundred souls
each. But these are Trinitarians, and raake the doc
trine of the Trinity the test of feUowship. 7Aey do not

344 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
recognize the Universalists of this country as Christ
tians. In truth, there is no Universalism in Europe, such as
is thus called in America. The system of American
Universalism has not a single defender in Europe.
No interest is felt upon the subject. The Univer
salists in this country cannot secure any respect or at
tention frora the believers in the salvation of all raen
in Europe, when their real sentiraents are known.
Prof. Tholuck, of Gerraany, was at one time claimed
by the Universalists as one of their nuraber. Mr. T.
J. Sawyer, of New York, wrote to Prof T. upon the
subject, and received a very courteous reply. Imbol
dened by this civility, Mr. Sawyer wrote again. An
American divine weis at the house of the professor at
this time, and made him acquainted with the views
of Mr. S. and his associates. Prof. Tholuck was as
tounded. He supposed the Universalists differed from
the evangelical coraraunity only in the duration of
future punishment. But when he found Universalism
to be distinguished from infidelity only by a professed
belief in the Bible, denying all its doctrines, and agree
ing with infidelity in all but one point, he declined
all further correspondence.
Some tirae after this, Mr. Sawyer proposed a visit to
Germany. He wrote to a German divine in relation
to the reception he would probably receive. He was
informed, in reply, that all the pulpits in Germany
would be closSd against him.
Great joy was expressed, when it was announced in
this country that Mrs. Sherwood, of England, had be
come a Universalist. A box, containing a copy of

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 345
each of their principal publications, was sent to this
lady by some American Universalists, which, however,
much to their mortification, was returned unopened.
Mr. C. F. Lefevre, of New York, proposed a visit
to Europe. A Universalist paper thus announces his
intentions : —
" We are permitted to state, for the information of
the friends of our cause generally, that Br. C. F. Le
fevre, pastor of the Third Universalist Society in this
city, has determined on devoting some six or eight
months to a tour in Europe. A desire to visit once
more his connections there, together with the earnest
solicitations of a friend, who is about visiting Europe,
has primarily led to this determination. Not the least
object, however, which Br. Lefevre has in view, is, to see
and learn raore of our cause in that region. It is his
design to travel, preaching the kingdom, and proclaim
ing the unsearchable riches of Christ, wherever it can
conveniently be effected. The Lord willing, he hopes
to be able to lift his voice in defence of God's univer
sal and efficient grace, in London, in Paris, in St. Pe
tersburg, and if possible, in Rome." (Univ. Union.)
Mr. Lefevrq records his success in a letter written
after his return. He was introduced to a Unitarian
clergyraan, who invited hira to preach in his pulpit.
Mr. Lefevre adds, —
"He officiates in a sraall chapel at Newington,
adjoining London; and I accepted the invitation.
The day was very unfavorable, and the congrega
tion did not exceed thirty people ; if it had been
very fair, I should have probably had twenty raore.
This was the only time I officiated during my res-

346 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
idence in Europe; it was the only opportunity that
was afforded me. The Unitarians in England are
all Universalists, but they know not that name, nor
any one that bears it. When the Unitsirian clergy
from the United States have visited England, their
services have been in rauch demand, for they have
been heard of by the reading community; whereas
the Universalists are unknown. There were plenty
of inquiries about Channing, Dewey, (fcc. ; but Ballou,
Balfour, &c., were names unknown. There has been
a correspondence between American and English Uni
tarians, which has served to unite them ; but the
Universalists have had none, by the same distinctive
appellation as themselves, with whom they could have
epistolary intercourse. Again, I discovered a lurking
prejudice against us, derived from American Unita
rians. Whitman's friendly ' Letters ' are not unknown,
either in word or spirit. I have made these reraarks
with no unfriendly feelings towards the English Uni
tarians ; but it may serve to solve a question which
wfll arise in the minds of your readers, how it hap
pened that I was so little engaged in my profession
during ray abode in London.
" I inquired, fi-ora such sources as I thought most
likely to obtain information, about Relly, Murray, and
Winchester. Of the two forraer, I never raet any one
that had heard any thing, while most reading people
were familiar with the name of the latter. During
the last week of my residence in London, I received
a letter from a Mr. Thom, of Liverpool, who has been
preaching Universalisra to his congregation. He sent
rae a very pressing invitation to come and see him,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 347
and preach the word; but I had made such engage
ments that it was not convenient for me to comply
with his request. I very rauch regretted that circura
stances prevented the only chance afforded rae of
meeting a brother in the faith, and thus closed every
avenue to ray ministerial labors." (Univ. Union,
November, 1836.)
Such is Universalisra in the land of its birth. The
names of its founders have perished, though they have
not been dead fifty years. American Universalism
exists in no part of Europe. The naraes of its de
fenders are unknown. A popular preacher settled over
one of the raost iraportant Universalist societies in the
metropolis of Araerica, goes to Europe, " to lift up his
voice in defence of God's universal and efficient grace,
in London, in Paris, in St. Petersburg, and if possi
ble, in Rorae." He goes out as the organ of the Uni
versalist denoraination, being appointed by the Gen
eral Convention of Universalists as a delegate to visit
the liberal churches in Europe, and open corre
spondence with thera. He preaches once ; that is all ;
and then, by courtesy, to a congregation of thirty per
sons ; and, under the most favorable circurastances, the
number might have been swelled to fifty ! ! !
Bear in mind the boasting of Universalists about
their success, their increase, and their prospects ; and
then compare it with their success in Europe since
1788. Compare the boasted success and increase of Uni
versalisra with the rapid and unparalleled spread of
Methodisra. The Methodist denoraination is no older
than the denomination of Universalists. Wesley and

348 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
Murray were contemporaries. The Methodist church
numbers raore professed Christians than any Christian
sect in existence. A place can hardly be found upon
the globe where the gospel has been carried, in which
a Methodist altar does not stand. Upon the churches
of this denomination the sun never sets. In Europe,
the Methodists number their ministers by thousands
and their churches by tens of thousands. Universal
isra h£is run the sarae length of tirae, and now num
bers one society in England, and three feeble societies
in Scotland, who do not allow American Universalists
to be Christians. Four feeble societies in all Europe,
after an existence of fifty years, are all that Universal
ism has to boast of. How evident is it that Univer
salism contains the elements of its own ruin ! that
it is on the wane !
When I reflect that the names of evangelical min
isters who were contemporary with the founders of
Universalism, are still fresh in the raeraories and
affections of all good men ; that those who have
turned many to righteousness, cera be traced back,
through all siges of the church, to the tirae of the
Savior, and even back to Enoch ; and then, when I
know that the naraes of the authors , of Universalism
have already perished, though a half of a century
has not passed since their works of darkness were
begun, — I am irapressed with the prediction of the
Word of God, " The righteous shall be in everlasting
reraerabrance; " " The raemory of the just is blessed ;
but the narae of the wicked shall rot." (Ps. cxii.
6. Prov, X, 7.)
My work atterapted in this lecture is now finished.

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 349
I have by no raeans exhausted ray subject. But I
have said enough to exhibit the dreadful moral ten
dency of Universalism. The picture is an awful one.
But, Universalists being judges, it is too true. I trera
ble, as I review this subject, to think that once I was
employed in extending this baneful influence. I am
astounded and overwhelmed when I think of that
display of sovereign grace that snatched me from
such soul-destroying work. The wealth of the uni
verse would offer no inducement for rae to retum to
it, or lift a finger to forge or fasten the chains of Satan
upon iraraortal souls. To give up Universalism cost
me almost ray life. So fatal is this error, so wither
ing its tendency ! It has brought down upon me an
almost unparalleled persecution. But if this is the
price that I raust pay for lifting up ray voice, expos
ing error, and warning my fellow-raen, be it so. God
give rae grace to meet all in a becoming spirit I Like
Paul, I preached error. Like him, I have repented.
Like him, in some humble manner, may I be fitted to
preach the faith which once I destroyed I
CONCLUSION.
AU candid minds must allow that Universalism
may be false. The best of our race find in the
Bible a different doctrine ; and this class comprises
the great mass of professing Christians in the entire
world. The hazard those run who trust this delusion,
is very great. Nearly the whole Christian world,
the faith of nations, the Word of God, the voice
of- conscience, speak of a judgment after death, and
30

350 FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM.
bid all prepare for it before this probation closes. If
this is truly so, and any neglect this preparation, the
consequences will be awfully fatal. It wfll be a sui
cidal act ; and as rauch raore fatal than the rash act
that ends this life as eternity is more moraentous than
tirae. It will be a raistake of such raagnitude, that
eternity will not be long enough to enable thera to
correct the error.
On the other hand, a few unlettered raen stand up,
Eifter the religion of Christ has been established for
eighteen centuries, and deny these truths. They
teach that the conduct of this life can have no effect
upon the destiny of men in the next ; that men have
nothing to fear beyond the grave ; that, live or die as
they may, all will be well in eternity.
Suppose all this be true, and you disbelieve it ; wiU
it harm you? Suppose you fear God, are devout
and holy ; will this exclude you from heaven ? By
no means. But suppose Universalism be false, and,
unwashed, unholy, unprepared, you are called to
judgment ; will that delusion save you from eating
the fruits of your doings ?
No one has any fears for a righteous raan. All
Edlow that he is safe, corae what will. Forra that
character, and aU wiU be well. Make Christ your
portion, and Universalism, if true, will not harm you.
If false, it will not. And the question at issue be
tween Universalists and others is not in respect to the
future condition of the good. There can be no dis
pute on that point. All believe that they will be
blessed. But Universalism teaches that it will be as
well with the wicked. Here is the difference. While,

FRUITS OF UNIVERSALISM. 351
then, you have every thing to gain by rejecting Uni
versalism, and every thing to lose by trusting it, can
any one be so unwise as to erabrace it, and thus lose
his own soul ?
But it has no good practical result to offer. It can
do no good. Its influence is evil, and wholly evil.
It has no claim upon men that deism cannot present.
It has less. Deism has all the sanctions to proraote
virtue that this world offers. And Universalism has
no more. Deism goes beyond this life. It not only
has that natural fear of death, but also that dread of
something after death, that raakes the worst of raen
" Rather bear the ills they have
Than fly to others that they know not of."
Universalisra removes all this. It assures raen that
there is nothmg to dread after death ; and that any
soul who can have faith enough to cut the slender
thread of life, Avill step, at once, beyond the reach of
sorrow and suffering, forever, into perfect happiness.
And we have seen its real raoral influence. We
need no argument to teach us what it must do. We
can look and see what its results really are. By its
influence men walk not in the fear of God. It carries
no joy to the drunkard's horae. It sets up no altar at
the infidel's fireside. It makes no prayerless heart
pious and devout. It has no benevolent influence,
but has opposed every good work ; and good men
do not need it to make them happy. When evil men
trust it, they do so because it strengthens " the hands
of the wicked, that he should not return from his
wicked way, by promising hira life."

352 FRUITS or universalism.
Can this be the gospel? Would it be well with the
institutions of our country if Universalisra should pre
vail ? Must not a system that holds out such views of
God, of providence, and of eternity, be dreadfully licen
tious? Can a rational, immortal man peril his safety
upon a foundation that raust fafl in the day of trisd?
An hour is at hand — and to sorae of us it raay be
very near — when these questions must be answered;
an hour in which deception can no longer be prac
tised; in which earth's vanities wfll assume their
true worth, and the fascinations of life no longer allure
or charm ; in which all of us wfll " discern between
the righteous and the wicked, between him that
serveth God and hira that serveth hira not."
Aged men, are you prepared for that hour ? Where
wfll your trust be, when your sun sets in darkness,
perhaps in blood? Ye strong and vigorous, where
wfll be your strength, when vigor ceases, and your
Maker calls ? Ye young, ye vain, ye gay, — lovers of
pleasure more than of God, — who will hold you, who
will guide you, when your feet stumble upon the dark
raountains ?
O, raake not lies your refuge. Under falsehood
seek not to hide yourself. There is a way of peace,
a highway of safety and salvation. Let rae entreat
you to embrace it. Before you again lie down to
slumber, resolve to be a Christian ; and let the earliest
breeze of a coraing raorn waft heavenward your sighs
of penitence, and carry up to the throne of light the
joyful news that Satan has lost a victira, and Christ
gained a subject, in the repentance and conversion
of a sinner.

LECTURE VII.
ARGUMENT AGAINST UNIVERSALISM, DRAWN FROM
FUTURE JUDGMENT.
2 COR. V. 10.
FOR WE MUST ALL APPEAR BEFORE THE JUDGMENT-SEAT OF CHRIST.
No reflecting man expects to live always in this
world. The wise and good of past ages have gone
down to the tomb. The present generation are
moving onward to that house appointed for all the
living, as fast as time's rapid current can bear thera
on. In ourselves we feel, and in our race we see, the
marks of decay. In our gayest moments, we think
of death ; and, in those hours allotted to pleasure, the
evidences of our mortality arise before us, and, like
the armless hand which the king bf Babylon saw,
they almost petrify us with terror.
That raen are hastening to judgraent, as well as to
death, — that all rational brings raust give an account,
at the bar of God, for the deeds done in the body, be
they good or be they bad, — that all the actions and
intentions of men will affect their future condition, —
is a truth upon which are based all the doctrines of
revelation, and all their sanctions. To deny it, is not
only to deny divine truth, but also to remove all that
now makes the gospel of Christ the power of God
unto salvation. 30*

354 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
The rejection of the doctrine of future judgment
is the reffige sought out by those who would hush
the voice of conscience, that they raay serve sin
rather than obfey Godi ^o establish this doctrine,
is to sweep away the refuge of lies.
Universalisra denies future judgraent ; it teaches
that the judginent is liraited to this world, and
that all which raen need fear, is found in this life.
It assures all who listen to its teaching, that the tes
timony of the Bible, in respect to coraing judgment,
is either ht. "Oriental figurie, or has teference to the
destruction of Jerusalem. Every argument eraployed
tb huild up future judgraent, is an arguraent against
Universalisra. 'i'o 'establish it, is to overthrow Uni
versalisra, and present, in vivid colors, the danger of
trusting its teachiilg. And the clesign oif this lecture
is, to present an argument against Universalism,
DRAWN FROM FUTURE JUDGMENT. May Hc, whoSe
Spirit alone can make the word fruitful, so guide
ray heart and yours, that the truth raay be com
mended to every conscience in the sight of God !
fiy future judgment, I raean not only the act of
judging the world at the last day, but the results of
that judgraent, — the doora of the ungodly, their pun
ishment, and their changeless destiny. I mean, by
the term, all that the Bible teaches by its representa
tions of future punishraent, — bf "the resurrection
of daranation," " the resurrection of the unjust," cf
^'casting the wicked into hell," of "going away
into everlasting punishment." Inthis lecture, I shall
use these terms interchangeably ; ibr so are they
used in the Bible.

FtJTURE JUDGMENT. 355
I. REASON DEMANDS A FUTURE JUDGMENT.
1. On no other ground can the dealings of God to
man be vindicated. The Bible pronounces God to be
just and good. This does not fully appear in this
life ; and it never wfll be exhibited in the history of
man, if there is no life but this in which a just retri
bution can take place.
Much in this life is dark, very dark. Hence many
begin a course of error, by denying future retriburion,
and end in absolute atheism. In this world, there is
a strange mixture of discord and crirae. The haughfy
triumph, and oppression is seated in authority. The
groans of the orphan arise ; the cry of the widow and
the fatherless is heard. The innocent suffer, because
the wicked have arisen to power by fraud and vio
lence. The good are oppressed, while profligates and
tyrants riot in wealth and abundance. Meritorious
characters pine in indigence, while the irapious and
the vfle heap up wealth, and tread the paths otf dis
tinction. Generous actions are unrewarded, crimes
are unpunished, and the most abandoned are often
raised to stations of dignity and power.
Men of piety suffer for conscience' sake, borne up by
the belief that their reward is on high. The most
amiable and useful are cut down in the midst of their
usefulness, while the wicked are left in this world to
be still longer a burden and a curse. The affectionate
husband, the inteUigent son, the pious daughter, the
useful raember of society, are cut off in the very
beginning of their usefulness; whfle those distin
guished for unamialile and hurtful traits of character

356 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
are spared. Indeed, the whole existence of man,
apart from another life, is inexplicable, if the ex
perience of the present life is to have no effect here
after. If all are to start again upon the sarae level,
however they may have lived here, why live here at
all ? Why all the pains and distresses incident to the
present constitution of our being ? Why live, and go
through the various perils from birth to death, if no
purpose is answered by it ? On the theory of Uni
versalism, this state of existence is utterly irrecon
cilable with the justice and benevolence of God. It
has led many to deny the divine goodness, and even
to doubt the existence of God.
2. Without a judgraent to corae, there can be
neither equity nor impartial rule in the divine gov
emment. We behold in this life what Universalists
say cannot exist in the next, in harmony with the
divine attributes, — a great difference in the charac
ters of men, as well as in their circurastances and
privileges. All do not share equally in wealth and
distinction ; all are not equally exerapt firom misfor- .
tune, affliction, and death ; nor do all enjoy an equal
amount of social, moral, and religious advantages.
This difference is not based upon merit; for the
good do not always prosper ; the wicked are not
distinguished for adversity and trouble : it is raore fre
quently the reverse. To be rich, honored, or prosper
ous, raen do not feel that they must fear God. Almost
all the national, social, and intellectual advantages we
enjoy, are independent of raoral character.
As in the time of the monarch David, so now, the
wicked prosper; "there are no bands in their death; "

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 357
" they are not in trouble as other raen, neither are they
.plagued;" " their eyes stands outwith fatness, they
have raore than heart can wish." (Ps, Ixxin. 3 — 5.)
Where, then, is the justice of God ? where is his
hatred of sin ? where his love for holiness and good
ness ? Can equity, can irapartial goodness, be con
stituent principles in the divine governraent if there
be no world in which sin is adequately punished, and
virtue and holiness /ewarded ?
In this life God raakes a distinction between raen,
as to their circurastances and privileges. He does not
in this world treat all raen alike. The ungodly, the
reckless, the abandoned, are oftentiraes the raost fa
vored. How, then, can it be proved that God is a holy
God, that he prefers obedience to transgression, and
goodness to depravity ? Not by what appears in this
life ; for here, the good are oppressed, the righteous
are afilicted, and the irapious and the abandoned
prosper. Suppose a sovereign should announce hiraself to be
just and good; afiirm that he desired the obedience
and the happiness of all his subjects ; suppose he
should declare that the only passport to his favor
would be obedience to his law and submission to his
will ; and yet should load with honor, and advance
to posts of distinction, all who rebelled against him,
and neglect or afflict all who attempted to do his
will. Who would not feel that either he was not
what he professed to be, or else that another day
must exhibit his justice and goodness, and explain his
present inexplicable conduct ?
No reasonable raan can behold the providence of

358 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
God here, and separate the conduct of raen in this life
frora the retributions of eternity, without feeling that
God can be neither holy, just, nor good. AU raust feel
that equity and impartial dealing cannot belong to the
governraent of God, unless there is a state of eternal
retribution beyond the grave.
It is in vain to argue that the present is a state
of perfect retribution, and that all the consequences
of huraan action are bounded by Jirae. It is not so.
There are two considerations which demonstrate that
men are not, and cannot be, rewarded in this world
according to their deeds.
1. On Universalist grounds, the end of punishment
is not answered in this life. On this theory, men are
punished to reforra them, not for the good of others;
not to magnify the law, but to promote their own
good. The amount of punishment which the sinner
deserves, and which he will receive, according to this
theory, is the amount necessary to reform him. This,
if Universalism be true, is rewarding men " according
to their works." Does all discipline in this life have
the proposed effect ? Are all the vicious reformed ?
By no means. Men are more frequently made worse
by their troubles. They grow harder under the
rod ; they die in irapenitence. Then they are not
sufficiently punished. They are not in this life
rewarded according to their works, for they are not
made better. Punishment must, then, exist in the
next world, else men will nowhere be adequately
punished. 2. As God has constituted us, the present cannot
be a life of perfect retribution, because the results

FUTURE JL'DfiMENT. 359
of huraan actions cease not with the life of the actor.
They ran on after his death. Men often do raore
good or evfl after their death than whfle they lived.
Howard's conduct influences raore men now than
when he lived. He has been the author of more good
since his death, than he accomplished during his Iffe.
No prison is reared, no hospital built, no institution
for the unfortunate of our race planned, over which
the spirit of Howard does not preside. He lays the
foundation and brings forth the topstone.
Who does not know that Paul still preaches the
gospel of Christ ? He preaches to raore souls, in more
climes, in raore languages, than he could reach while
he lived. More souls every year are converted to God
through his labors since his death, than were saved by
his instruraentality during his whole life.
Paul's rainistry was a short one. He was often
imprisoned and scourged; the malice of his enemies
paralyzed his usefulness and cut short his personal
efforts in the cause of truth. But since his death,
thousands have proclaimed his words, and countless
thousands have believed to the saving of the soul.
How, then, could Howard or Paul have been rewarded
in this life according to their works, seeing they have
done more good since their death than they could
possibly do whfle they lived ? Paul discourses to us
m the text of the judgment-seat of Christ ; and so wiU
he preach till time shall be no more.
Take another class of men. Look at those who are
appropriately naraed "the scourges of our race." Did
Catiline's example have no influence after his death ?
Did all the events of which Bonaparte was the author.

360 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
and all the causes of which he laid the train, cease to
do injury when he died ? Yoltaire, Bolingbroke, and
Thoraas Paine, have done raore injury to our race
since their death than they were capable of doing
while they lived. They corrupt raore youth, destroy
raore good principles, and ruin raore souls, than they
ever , did while alive. Where, then, can these men
be rewarded according to their works? Not in this
life ; for they were dead before the large part of the
evil of which they were the authors was developed.
Actions are good or bad according to their effect,
not according to the length of a man's life, or the
tiine he occupied in committing them. As, then,
the araount of good or evil done cannot be estiraated
till the results cease, and as thesp run on soraetiraes
ages after the actor is dead, how can raen here
be rewarded according to their deeds ? How can
the account be fairly settled, tUl the amount is fully
known ?
This is strikingly iUustrated in the history of Bo
lingbroke. His most pernicious books were not pub
lished till after his death. He left in his will a sura
of money to defray the expenses of printing his works,
and it was expended according to his direction. His
labors did not begin to exert their dreadful influence
upon our race till their author had left this mortal
state. How could he be rewarded for his deeds in
this life, seeing he was cold in death before they
really took effect ? Reason, then, no less than revela
tion, deraands a future judgment. So taught the
apostle ; and when before Felix he spoke " concerning
the faith in Christ," " he reasoned of judgment to

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 361
11. CONSCIENCE POINTS TO A JUDGMENT TO COME.
The universarbehef of men in the retributions of
another life, shows that conscience gives a uniform
lesson on this subject. No man feels safe. To ev
ery raind there is "a certain fearful looking for of
judgraent." It is seen in the tendency of our race
to dwell upon the dark side of every event, and to in
terpret every strange and raysterious occurrence as an
omen of evil, or a token of divine anger. Men know
something of their own wickedness. They know
they are not punished as rauch as they deserve, and
they are fearful that God is about to bring thera to
judgment. A fine iUustration of this is found in the^book of
Daniel. " Belshazzar, the king, raade a great feast
to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the
thousand." To insult the God of the Hebrews, he
" coraraanded to bring the golden and silver vessels
which his father Nebuchadnezzar had taken out of
the temple which was in Jerusalera ; " vessels conse
crated to the service of the Lord of Hosts. The king
and his companions " drank wine, and praised the
gods of gold and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood,
and of stone. In the same hour carae forth the
fingers of a raan's hand, and wrote upon the plaster
of the waU." No one knew the nature of the
writing, nor could the wise raen of the city read it.
Yet, when the king saw the part of the hand that
wrote, his countenance changed, and his knees sraote
one against another. But why this agitation and
alarm? Why not regard this mysterious inscription
31

362 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
as an oraen of good ? Why not fill up the vessels of
God's house, and drink deeper? Why not call for
music, for the song, and the dance ? Why not point
to the inscription, and, with exultation, exclaim, " See,
the gods have accepted the offerings of this night of
revelry, and are well pleased. They have thus sig
nified their pleasure. Yonder stands the sentence
which promises long life to your king, and prosperity
to his kingdom."
Not so thought that irapious monarch. He could
not read the writing, but he well knew it boded no
good to him or his kingdom. Conscience told that
wicked king that the God whom he had insulted was
about to take vengeance upon hira, and call him to
judgment. And, when Daniel gave the interpreta
tion of the hand-writing, he did but confirm what
conscience had already made known.
III. TESTIMONY OF THE BIBLE.
That all men raust stand before the judgment-seat
of Christ, is a truth not written in one or two isolated
paissages in the Bible. It runs through the entire
Scriptures, and makes the basis of all the instructions
and sanctions of the divine Word. By it, good men
were urged to duty, and evil men were held in awe.
Patriarchs and prophets desired to obtain the resurrec
tion of the just. Apostles labored, that they might
give up their account with. joy, and not with grief
And the spotless Son of God was influenced by con
siderations drawn frora the future life, when, "for the
joy that was set before him," he " endured the cross,

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 363
despising the sharae," so that he raight " sit down at
the right hand of the throne of God."
The testiraony of the Bible, upon the subject under
consideration, is so abundant, that I can do nothing
more, in this lecture, than select a few of the many
proofs upon this point. And, in making this selec
tion, I shall present those which have influenced my
own mind. For raany years, I was an unbeliever in
the doctrine of future judgraent. But I was com
pelled to admit it, because it was sustained by an
amount of evidence which I could not withstand. I
have thought that it would subserve the cause of
truth, should I present sorae of that evidence in this
lecture. 1. The Destruction of the Old World by Water is a
Proof of future Judgment.
The reason for the destruction of the old world is
thus given : " And God saw that the wickedness' of
man was great in the earth, and that every iraagina
tion of the thoughts of his heart was only evil con
tinually.  And the Lord said, I will destroy
man, whom I have created, from the face of the
earth." (Gen. vi. 5, 7.) The antedfluvians were
destroyed frora the face of the earth, for their entire
depravity. They did evil, and only evil, continuaUy.
One of two things, then, raust be true. This
guilty people were taken away, as a warning to raen,
as a token of God's displeasure at sin, and were re
served, in the future world, unto the judgment of the
great day, to be punished, or they were received im
mediately into glory, their destruction being their

364 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
only punishraent, and their death releeising them from
sin and suffering.
If the first be true, then the fact cited is proof of
a judgment to corae ; if the second, then the Bible
elsewhere deceives us. It. teaches that the pure in
heart, only, shall see God, and that without holiness
no raan shall see the Lord. But the truth is, holiness
and purity are not essential to salvation. Depravity,
utter and entire, is the one thing needful. But for
this, the old world would not so soon have been glo
rified. This hastened the day of their redemption,
and raade it coraplete. And, for want of it, the ser
vants of God were left behind, and, for a season, at
least, were shut out frora glory.
The true reason why all the huraan faraily are not
forever beyond the reach of sorrow and suffering, is
not that they have not done the will of God, have
not laid up treasures in heaven, are not yet holy and
good, (but because they are not yet as wicked as were
the people of the old world. They are not yet suffi
ciently depraved to deprive them of an existence in
this world, and introduce them into heaven. When
any man or nation becomes so corrupt and depraved,
that God will not allow hira to live on earth, then he
will be a candidate for endless felicity, and raay hour
ly look for the raandate which shall take hira up to
that holy place, where all is purity and bliss.
But the book of inspiration is authority for the
assertion that the destruction of the old world is a
proof of future judgraent.
St. Peter, in his Second Epistle, alludes to the
unbelief of the scoffer, who, walking after his own

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 365
lust, denies the coming of the Lord, because "all
things continue as they were frora the beginning of
the creation." He establishes the fact that, by the
word of God, the old world was destroyed. He then
adds, " But the heavens and the earth which are now,
by the sarae word are kept in store, reserved unto fire,
against the day of judgraent and perdition of ungodly
men." (2 Pet. iii. 7.) On this passage, I reraark, —
1. Here is an acknowfledged judgment alluded to
— the drowning of the old world by the word of
God. 2. It points to another destruction — a destruction
in another world, in the day of judgment, by another
agent. The first was by water ; the last is to be
by fire.
3. This judgment is appointed for "the perdition
of ungodly raen." No raatter when they lived,
whether before or after the flood. No raatter by
what raeans they were taken out of the world. All
the ungodly wiU, in the day of judgraent, be pun
ished. When the heavens and earth are consumed.
4. Not only the heavens and earth are kept in
store, held in their place by the Almighty arm, tfll
the day of judgraent, but ungodly raen are also re
served unto that day to be punished. They are not
now punished, but "-reserved unto the day of judgraent
to be punished." (u. 9.) And the sweeping away of
the old world by the flood was an adraonition to the
ungodly, because that guilty race were stfll reserved
unto the punishments of the great day.
Universalists attempt to evade the fearful teachings
of this passage, by referring it to the destraction of
31*

366 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
Jerusalem ! Poor Jerusalem, no wonder thou art trod
den under foot, when so rauch is laid upon thee !
But look at the absurdity of this application. This
was written to Gentile Christians who lived upon the
borders of the Black Sea, nearly one thousand mfles
from the city of Jemsalem. They were not Jews^
and had no interest in that city; aud whether it stood,
or were destroyed, was a subject of no personal con
cern to thera. To call upon thera to repent, to
warn thera of danger, to talk about fhe perdition
of ungodly raen, because Jerusalem was about to be
destroyed, would be as absurd as for me to call upon
Universalists to renounce their errors, because there is
war in China, and a prospect that soon Canton would
be in the hands of the British admiral.
5. We have the geological fact that the earth
contains the elements of its own ruin, even that
mentioned by the apostle, — its destraction by fire.
Apart from the doctrine of central heat, we all
iknow that-the atmosphere which surr»unds this globe
¦contains the principle of flame. And, if it were not
connected with another ingredient, instantly one im
mense sheet of flame would envelop the universe.
The Almighty can separate these principles at any
;moraent. His word is all that binds thera together.
Let hira speak, and it is done. Let hira. do this, and,
as Peter announces, the eleraents will melt with fer
vent heat, and be dissolved. The universal blaze,
extending over sea and land, would raore than realize
the awful, the startling descriptions of that fearful
hour, which are recorded in the Bible.
The sarae inspired pen which records the destruc-

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 367
tion of the old world, and foretells the doora of the
earth which now is, together with the perdition of
ungodly men, also inforras us that scoffers would
arise, cavilling at past judgraents, and raocking at
those which are to come. How strikingly is this
prediction fulfilled by the preaching of the Univer
salists of our day !
2. The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is a
Proof of future Punishment.
God turned the cities of Sodom and Goraorrah in
to ashes, because of their unparalleled depravity. If
Universalism be true, it was no judgment. It was the
greatest blessing ever conferred upon any people. It
wiped out in a raoraent all their criraes, cleansed thera
frora all irapurity, and took thera frora a world of woe,
and introduced thera into perfect bliss. Enoch was
translated, because he pleased God. The guilty Sod
omites, on the theory of Universalism, shared the sarae
distinguished favor for an opposite reason. How, too,
can we explain the conduct of Abrahara, — 'his earn
est, impassioned, long-continued entreaty that Sodom
might be spared, if he believed that the threatened
doora would convey thera into glory ? If such things
did not attend their destruction, then Universalisra is
false ; and the punishraent of Sodom is proof of future
retribution. The Savior makes an appUcation of this judgment
to the eternal worid. "Verily I say unto you. It
shall be more tolerable for Sodora and Gomorrah in
the day of judgraent, than for that city." (Mark vi.
11.) In this passage, Jesus announces that the doom

368 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
of Sodom is not yet complete. For in the day of
judgraent, "it shall be raore tolerable," not appear to
be. In what sense is this true, if Sodom and Gomor
rah received all their punishment thousands of years
before this prediction was uttered ?
Peter thus refers to it : " turning the cities of
Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, conderaned them
with an overthrow, raaking thera an ensample unto
those that after should live ungodly." (2 Pet. ii. 6.)
If God made thera an ensample to those who after
should live ungodly, then all the ungodly will be
punished, as were the people of Sodom. But this is
not true in this life. No other city was ever destroyed
by fire and brimstone out of heaven. No other people
was thus removed frora earth. And no ungodly raan
fears that, if he do not repent, fire and brirastone frora
God out of heaven will consurae him. If, then,
Sodom and Gomorrah are not exposed to a punish
ment which all irapenitent raen wfll share, then it is
not true that God has made them " an ensaraple unto
those that after should live ungodly."
But Jude teaches us that, in coraraon with the
angels who kept not their first estate, but who are
"reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto
the judgment of the great day," " Sodom and Go
morrah" "are set forth for an example, suffering the
vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 6, 7.) Their fate
after death, their present suffering, and "the judg
ment of the great day," that awaits them, make them
an example. They are a warning to the ungodly;
for all who live and die in sin must share their con
demnation.

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 369
3. The Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead
is Proof of a future Judgment.
Daniel says, "And raany of thera that sleep in the
dust of the earth shall awake, sorae to everlasting life,
and some to shame and everlasting contempt." Christ
says, ''Marvel not at this; for the hour is coraing, in
the which all that are in their graves shall hear his
voice, and shall come forth, they that have done
good, unto the resurrection of life, and they that
have done evil, unto the resurrection of daranation."
He also proraises his faithful disciples that they shall
be "recorapensed at the resurrection of the just."
Paul, before Felix, avows his faith in the " resurrec
tion of the dead, both of the just and the unjust."
And it was in this connection that Felix trembled as
the apostle "reasoned of judgment to come." When
the persecuted Christians took joyfully the spoiling of
their goods, they did so because they knew that they
had 'fin heaven a better and an enduring substance."
"Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance,
that they raight obtain a better resurrection." We
read of " the resurrection of the dead, and the eternal
judgment ; " and of the first resurrection, of which the
blessed and the holy wfll partake, and by which they
will escape the second death.
A man who reads these and sirailar testiraonies, and
then denies a future judgraent, is prepared to say, —
if he has not already so said in his heart, — " There
is no God."

370 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
4. Death, as a Penalty for Sin, is another Proof of
future Judgment.
When God threatened Adara with death in the day
of transgression, he understood all that his Maker
expressed by that word. When Moses recorded this
penaltyi many years after it was announced, he
used a word which, to his nation, conveyed the di
vine meaning. To die included all that the Jews
expressed by that terra when Moses wrote. And we
all know that it included both the raisery of the
present and the future life — both the misery of the
body and of the soul. As an illustration, turn to
Ezek. xxxiii. 11: "As I live, saith the Lord God, I
have no pleasure in the death of the wicked ; but
that the wicked turn from his way and live ; turn
ye, turn ye, from your evfl ways ; for why will ye
die, O house of Israel ? "
Here the wicked are assured that, though God has
no pleasure in their death, yet if they do not turn,
they wfll die. The threatened death is not yet in
flicted upon thera-; " Why will ye die ?" They can
escape it, if they will tum frora their way ; " Turn
ye; turn ye." But if they do not turn, they raustdie.
There are but three deaths — teraporal, spiritual, and
eternal. One of these raust be the threatened penalty
of God's law. Is it natural death ? Will the wicked
escape this, if they forsake their wicked way ? By no
means; all must die, the evil and the good; those
who fear God, and those who rebel against him. Nat
ural death cannot be what raen are threatened with

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 371
if they do not tum, as turning from their wicked way
would not save them from it. It cannot be spiritual
death; for the wicked were already spirituaUy dead;
else why are they called upon to turn ? That they
were spiritually dead, was their crirae. For this they
were to be punished. And the Almighty promises the
wicked raan that, if he will turn frora his wickedness,
"he shall not die." But this cannot be true of either
natural or spiritual death ; for all die the death of
the body; and if a man sin but one hour, and then
turn from the sin, he cannot escape spiritual death ;
for just as long as he sins, just so long is he spirituaUy
dead. Only eternal death could have been threat
ened — the death of the soul in the world of woe, after
the death of the body. Temporal death is the : death
of the body ; eternal death is the death of the soul.
5. The common Language of the Savior may be
cited as Proof of future Judgment.
I have in another place alluded to the fact that
future punishraent was the common faith of the gen
eration to which the Savior preached. If he was a
believer in this doctrine, he would confirra thera in
their faith as to future retribution. AU the instrac-
tion in relation to the future which the Son of God
gave, raust have been intended to sanction their views,
and through them to teach all nations to fly "from the
wrath to come." All candid and reasonable rainds
so understand him. " Lay up for yourselves treasures
in heaven." " For it is profitable for thee, that one
of thy merabers should perish, and not that thy whole
body should be cast into heU." " But he that shaU

372 FUTURE JUDGMENT.
blaspherae against the Holy Ghost hath never forgive
ness, but is in danger of eternal daranation." " Fear
not thera which kill the body, but are not able to kill
the soul ; but rather fear hira which is able to destroy
both soul and body in hell." "For what is a man
profited if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his
own soul?" "These shall go away into everlasting
punishment." What effect would such instruction
have upon a people to whora these points were already
matters of faith ? Christ did not atterapt to prove
these doctrines, any more than he did the truth of
God's existence and perfections. The people to whom
he spoke already believed thera. He siraply rerainded
thera of these great and solemn doctrines, and urged
thera to repentance in view of the soleran sanctions of
eternity. We find no labored argument in the Bible
to prove any of the leading doctrines of the gospel.
Revelation is based upon thera, and it would not have
been given had not these doctrines been true.
Would the people who heard the Savior preach
have leamed that their views of future punishment
were erroneous ? Would they have been converted to
Universalisra by such teaching? Would they have
felt that their treasures were already laid up in
heaven? that there was no hell to be cast into?
that there was no unpardonable sin ? no eternal dam
nation ? but that all would be forgiven? Would they
have learned from his language that there was no
danger of being cast into hell, soul and body? and
that, therefore, it is absurd to /ear God? or that a man
cannot lose his soul? and that there is no eternal
punishment ? Could such opinions prevail through the

FUTUI E JUDGMENT. 373
preaching of Jesus? Would they now spread, if men
should hear nothing but the discourses of Christ ?
The sarae truth is inculcated in texts like these :
" Ye shall die in your sins ; whither I go ye cannot
come." But what great punishment would there be
in dying in sin, if no evfls attended such a death
in the iramortal world ? Millions have thus died.
Millions raore would do so, did they not fear ex
clusion frora heaven. Such exclusion is plainly
expressed in the words " whither I go ye cannot
come." Christ went to heaven, to be seated at the
right hand of God. Where will those be who die
in sin ? Surely not in heaven !
All the warnings and all the promises of Christ and
the apostles had reference to the judgraent. " But of
that day and hour knoweth no man." "It shall be
more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in
the day of judgment than for that city." "Many
shall say to rae in that day. Lord, Lord, have we not
prophesied in thy name ? " " They watch for your
souls as they that must give an account ; that they
may do it with joy, and not with grief" But why
watch, if there is no account to be rendered up?
Why fear, if all is well ? What occasion is there for
grief? "Henceforth there is laid up for rae a crown
of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge,
shall give me at that day, and not to rae only, but to
all them also that love his appearing." But is there
no day of judgraent, in which the righteous Judge
shall thus bestow a crown of life ? Wfll aU receive
it, though it is proraised oriy to those who love his
appearing ? 32

374 FUTURE JWDGMENT.
6. The Text and Connection is another Proof of
future Judgment.
2 Cor. V. 1 — 11 : " For we know that if our fearthly
house of this tabemacle were dissolved, we have a
building of Gtod, a house not raade with hands, eternal
in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desir
ing to be clothed upon with our house which is from
heaven ; if so be that being clothed we shall not be
found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do
groan, being burdened ; not for that we would be
unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be
swallowed up of life. Now, he that hath wrought us
for thfe self-same thing is God, who also hath given
unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Therefore we are
always confident, knowitig that, 'whilst we are at
home in the body, we are absent from the Lord :
(for we walk by faith, not by sight:) we are con
fident, I say, and willing rather to be absent frora the
body, and to be present with the Lord. Wherefore
we labor, that, whether pi:esent or absent, we raay be
accepted of him. For we must all appear before the
judgment-seat of Christ ; that every one raay receive
fhe things done in his body, according to that he hath
done, whether it be gOod or bad. Knowing, therefore,
the terror of the Lord, we persuade men ; but we are
made manifest unto God ; and I trust also are made
manifest in your consciences."
The reference of these words to eternity cannot be
disputed. Paul affirms that the body is to be de
stroyed. And for the soul he has much anxiety.
' Wherefore we labor, that, whether present [with the

FUTURE JUDGMENT. 375
Lord] or absent [from the body,] we may be accepted
with him." (v. 8.) His anxiety and fear, which in
duced him to labor constantly, that he might stand
accepted with God, arose from the consideration of this
fact, that "we must all appear before the judgment-
seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things
done in the body, according to that he hath done,
whether it be good or bad. Knowing, therefore, the
terror ofthe Lord, we persuade raen." (10, 11.)
The apostle assures us that he lived, labored, and
preached, in view of future judgraent. His aira was
to secure the favor of his Lord, and stand accepted in
the day of terror and of judgraent. Was there nothing
to fear, — no danger, if unfaithful, of his being a cast
away ? Then was Paul a deceiver. But if he is true,
how false, how fatal is Universalism I
7. The Conduct of holy Men of Old was regulated
by Faith in a future Judgment.
"Abrahara, when he was called to go out into a
place which he should after receive for an inherit
ance, obeyed.  For he looked for a city which had
foundations, whose BuUder and Maker is God."
Moses, when he trarapled upon the honors of Egypt,
released himself from royal favor, and chose "rather
to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to
enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season," was influenced
by the retributions of eternity. " For he had respect
unto the recorapense of reward."
David's last thoughts are associated with the day of
judgraent. His dying advice to his son is worthy of
being inscribed upon the heart of every young man :

376 PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS.
" And thou, Solomon, my son, know thou the God of
thy fathers, and serve him with a perfect heart, and
with a willing mind. — ¦¦ — If thou seek him, he wiU be
found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast
thee off forever."
To the day of judgraent the Savior referred, in
frequent and tender, but fearfully plain and even
terrific terms. Equally faithful and equally plain were
the apostles. The Athenians, when first the gospel
was preached to them, heard of that "day in the which
God would judge the world in righteousness." And
as Paul reasoned of judgment to corae, Felix trem
bled, and quaked in the presence of his prisoner.
In view of all this testimony, raiuit not that be the
raost irapious trifling imaginable, which can profess
respect for and belief in the Bible, while it sets aside
such instruction ? Must not the, blood of souls be
found upon such teaching? Must not the destruc
tion of those who thus wrest the Bible, and deceive
and ruin their race, be deep and awful indeed?
8. Practical Reflections.
To die is a solemn thing. To look for the last
tirae upon the golden sun and the beauteous creation,
to exchange the sad farewell with all we love, to be
cold as clay, is a fearful event to anticipate. Yet it
raust corae to all. No countenance is so radiant with
health and beauty, as to escape the grasp of death.
The strongest pulsations wiU cease, and the most
elastic step will falter, when death - approaches. He
will touch our frames with his icy finger, and all will
be cold as raarble.

PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS. 377
But much more solemn is it to think of the judg
ment that follows death ; to look forward to that hour
in which we all shaU stand before the judgment-seat of
Christ — stand in the presence of our Judge, to whom
all things are open and manifest, who cannot err, and
from whora no one can escape.
The judgment of the great day will be equitable :
it wfll be a righteous judgment. In it, men wfll be
rewarded according to the deeds done in the body.
The condemned will acknowledge the righteousness
of the decision. And in that day the righteous Judge
shall give a crown of righteousness " unto all that love
his appearing." But unto all others he wiU say, "De
part ; I know you not."
From this decision there will be no appeal. No
error will be found in the proceedings. No passion
will sway the Judge, and prevent justice. But in the
face of an assembled universe, in the presence of God,
of Christ, of angels, of the spirits of just men made
perfect, the judgraent wfll proceed ; and raen will be
rewarded according to their works. He who wept
over Jerusalem* when he pronounced its doom, wfll
judge the world ; he will do it in the same spirit of
tenderness. Universalists, unable to raeet the arguraents by
which the doctrine of future judgraent is sustained,
atterapt to divert the mind from this soleran truth by
mocking at the idea ; or so caricaturing the subject,
that disgust may arise in the mind, and thus men be
prevented from receiving the truth. They represent
us as teaching that God is a stern and cruel being, sit-
32*

378 PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS.
ting upon his throne with his sword drawn, panting
for a victira, and impatient for the hour when he may
strike the fatal blow.
Be not deceived. God does not desire the death of
the sinner. He has no pleasure in it. The gift of his
only Son, the suffering and death of that Divine Being,
the descent of the Holy Ghost, and the perpetuation of
the gospel, with the day and raeans of grace, all prove
that God is " not wiUing that any should perish, but
that all should corae to repentance."
During the struggle for independence, when this
nation was involved in war with Britain, the Ameri
can army was stationed on the banks of the Hudson
River. Beyond the lines of the army, a young raan
was taken by sorae Araerican soldiers, and carried into
the presence of the coraraander-in-chief He was
presuraed to be a spy. As such he was tried, con
deraned, and sentenced to be hung. I scarcely need
say that I refer to Major Andre. When the capture
and conderanation of Andre were known, they excited
universal coraraiseration. He was so young and ac
complished, so noble ^.nd brave, that all pitied, all de
sired that he might escape his ignorainious sentence.
Petition after petition w^as sent to Washington, pray
ing hira to spare Andre, to review the proceedings, or
to interpose his pardoning power. These petitions
came frora the best of our countrymen, — from those
who would have given their hearts' blood, if the
cause of American freedora had required it. The
staff of the coramander-in-chief, the officers of the
army, united in the same request. But all this

PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS. 379
effort was in vain. Washington was uiflexible. He
swept these petitions aside, signed the death-warrant,
and Andre was executed.
The point to which I wish to call your attention is
this : Was Washington hard of heart ? Was he alone
unmoved, when all the country were interested?
When every bosom syrapathized, and every eye
wept, was his heart th6 only one that was hard,
his eye the only one that refused to weep ? Sitting
alone, reviewing the petitions of his countrymen, did
he say, " These men wish to take from me my vic
tim. I have long sought for one. My appetite' shall
be satisfied. Andre shall die." No ; such a foul stain
does not rest upon the character of Washington.
He wished not the death of Andre ; and he would
have saved him, if he could have done it consistently
with his high sense of duty. No heart bled raore
than his at the untiraely fate of that noble officer.
And the death-warrant, read to Andre upon the scaf
fold, was wet with the tears of Washington, He
wept as he signed it. He pitied, but he could not
save. As a raan, he would have pardoned ; but, as a
judge, — as one to whora was coraraitted the great
interests of American freedom, t— he could not.
There was treason in the camp. No one knew
where it began, or where it would end. An exam
ple must be made, and Andre must be executed.
So is it with the Judge of the universe. " Have I
any pleasure in your death ? " is his tender language
to the sinner. " Turn ye, turn ye, for why wfll ye
die ? " is his affecting inquiry. But, if the sinner
will not abandon his way; if he will not turn and

380 PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS.
live ; if he persist in disobe5dng God, and will go, un
washed and unprepared, to the judgment, i — then
upon his own head his blood wUl be found.
O, what a day will that be, in which the trump of
the archangel shall suraraon a world to judgment!
when the great congregation of the dead "shall
awake, some to everlasting life, and sorae to shame
and everlasting contempt " ! when " all that are in
their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth " to a resurrection of life or damnation ! when
the sea shall give up its dead ! when those who have
slept where ocean's bed is deepest, — who have gone
down to their watery tomb araid the roar of the bil
lows and the fury of the storra, — when all, aU shaU
stand before God I What then will the things of
tirae and sense be worth? Bitterly, most bitterly,
will many mourn over opportunities wasted and time
misspent. " That day of wrath, that dreadful day,
When heaven and earth shall pass away,
What power shall be the sinner's stay ?
How shall he meet that dreadful day ?
" When, shrivelling like a parched scroll,
The flaming heavens together roll ;
And louder yet, and yet more dread,
Swells the high trump that wakes the dead ; —
"O! on that day, that wrathful day,
When man to judgment wakes ftom clay.
Be thou, O Christ, the sinner's stay,
Though heaven and earth shall pass away ! "
Truly, " it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands

PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS. 381
of the living God." I am awed by the consideration
of this momentous subject. I tremble while I write,
and ara assured that for rae there is no safety but at
the foot of the cross, where, in accents of humble
faith and hope, I can say, —
" Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in thee."
Nor is there safety in any other refuge. O, ye
dying sons of raen I will you refuse this refuge, and
seek one that will leave you shelterless in the day of
terapest and storm ? Will you deride this theme ?
Will you mock at coraing danger ? Must the awful
realities of the day of judgment burst upon you,
before you will open your eyes to impending ruin ?
Shall the character and the fate of the scoffer be
yours? Will you be deceived by the siren song of
peace? Shall those, whose business it is to raake
merchandise of souls, lead you down to death?
When the Eternal God pleads with you not to die ;
when this whole life is given you to prepare to meet
your God ; when the Holy Spirit, the voice of con
science, and the word of God, warn you to flee from
the wrath to come, — will you allow the enemy of
souls, through the delusion of Universalism, to carry
you captive to perdition? "If sinners entice thee,
consent thou not." O, delay not that preparation,
without which you cannot stand in the judgment!
Believe God, and be saved forever. And when we,
with an assembled universe, shall stand before the bar
of God, may our names be found written in the

382 PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS.
Lamb's book of life ! And, when the full chorus shall
go up from the redeemed, may your voice and mine
blend with that mighty, that blood-washed throng, in
their ascriptions of praise to the Lamb of Calvary,
the Redeemer and the Judge of men !

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS

IN RZLATION TO

UNIVERSALISTS AND UNIVERSALISM.

GAL vi. 7.
BE HOT DECEirEb.

Respected Friends :
If you have prayerfully considered the examina
tion of Universalism, and the exhibition of its moral
tendency, which have been laid before you in these
lectures, you need no additional proof to convince you
that it is a raost pernicious error. You will admit
that its claims, as a religious system, are unfounded ;
that it is supported only by assumption, by sophistry,
and by a violent wresting and palpable perversion of
the Word of God. It is a delusion of the most dan
gerous kind ; and he who trusts it is in danger of
doing an irreparable injury to his own soul.
Universalism is in the midst of you ; and you raust
meet it. Your sons and your daughters are exposed
to its seductions ; and you raust protect them. What,
then, is your duty in respect to this delusion ? Will
you indulge me in a few suggestions on this subject ?
I offer thera frora the conviction that, if heeded, they
will guide you in the path of duty.

384 address to christians.
1. Be not deceived in respect to the doctrines
OF Universalism.
You are in danger from this source. Many inteUi
gent persons are not aware that raodern Universalisra,
in any respect, differs from the system of Murray.
And it is one of the great efforts of Universalist
teachers to deceive in this respect. They will talk
of "father Murray" and "father Mitchell," as though
they held to the opinions of those men. Humanita
rians as they are, they wfll talk of the divinity of the
Savior. Revilers of experimental religion, they will
talk about the new birth. And the terms faith, re
pentance, and holiness, they use without attaching any
meaning to them. An acquaintance with the peculiar
doctrines of Universalism as they now are, is essential
to an enlightened opposition to this error.
2. Be not deceived with the assurance that
Universalists are becoming more religious.
Within a few raonths, the practice of these raen
seeras to have undergone a change. They have, all
at once, in words, becorae friends of religion, of revi
vals, and of prayer meetings. In some places, it is
said, they have anxious seats, and invite persons to
corae forward for prayers. In sorae of our secular
papers I have seen it stated that several persons were
baptized by a Universalist rainister, and joined a Uni
versalist church. We have already seen what a pro
fession of Universalisra araounts to. It involves no
raoral change. None is required as a condition of
church raerabership; none is expected. Should all
the raembers of a Universalist congregation join the

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS. 385
church, it would not increase the strength of the
body. And as to baptisra, Universalists having no
principle in the raatter, they wiU imraerse, or sprinkle,
or do neither, as the case raay deraand.
Do you ask how I explain this change in the
practice of Universalists, and the adoption of customs
which they have so long and so violently opposed ?
I reply that the history of SanbaUat the Horonite
answers the question.
When Neheraiah visited Jerusalem, to repair the
city, and thus take away its reproach, the enemies
of Israel were " grieved exceedingly that there was
come a man to seek the welfare of the children of
Israel." A large and iraposing force of enemies to
the rebuilding of the city came upon this servant of
God, to prevent the work. Sanballat, their leader,
denied the right of Nehemiah to rebuild, and accused
him of a design to rebel against the king. Neheraiah
produced the authority of the king. Sanballat next
tried to check the work by ridicule ; but in vain. He
next attempted to attain the desired end by violence,
and gathered his forces together for battle. But the
prophet was prepared even for this. Nor was the
work delayed one hour. As a last resort, stratagem
was eraployed. Sanballat professed to take a great
interest in the work in which Nehemiah was engaged.
The prophet had mistaken his raoveraents entirely.
He was not opposed to the rebuflding of Jerusalera.
He was very glad the good work was going on, and
most earnestly wished to take part in the holy enter
prise. He invited Neheraiah to leave his work for a
short time, and come down to hold with him a friend-
33

386 ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS.
ly interview. But the prophet knew the man. " I
am doing a great work, and cannot come down,"
was the conclusive reply. (Neh. iv. — ^vi.)
At the commencement of their organized career,
Universalists opposed the doctrines and customs of
Christians, on the ground that they werfe not sanc
tioned by God. Little notice was taken of their
statements, and it was found convenient to change
the mode of attack. Ridicule was next tried. Their
pulpits and papers abounded with caricatures of reli
gion, with low jests about the habits of ministers,
with ridicule of the convictions of the sinner, the
work of the Holy Spirit, and the conference and
prayer meetings. But still the work went on. Then
carae opposition. This has been the almost incessant
work of the Universalist ministry for the past twenty
years. No one who has glanced at their periodicals
need be told of this. They challenge every body to
a discussion, and if a minister preaches a sermon to
his own people upon judgment, or eternity, he will
probably have inflicted upon him a letter from some
Universalist teacher, calling him to an account.
But all has done little towards checking the increase
of Orthodoxy. Denying the truth of its doctrines, rid
iculing its customs and its labors, assailing its sacred
truths by scoffing and misrepresentation, — aU have
failed to answer the end in view. "What do we?"
is the language of these men. " One thing remains to
be done. Let us be like the Orthodox. We will
have revivals, prayer raeetings, and baptisras. We
will avouch that our opposition was raisun derstood.
We will invite Christians to help us, to come down

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS. 387
and raeet us, assuring thera that Christian union is a
most delightful thing." Christians, be not deceived.
Remember Sanballat and his craft. Remeraber also
the words of Paul, "Now as Jannes and Jambres
withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth."
(2 Tim. iii. 8.)
3. Be noqb deceived by attempts to get you into
A Universalist meeting.
Great efforts are made to get religious persons into
a Universalist congregation. It gives a sort of respec
tabiUty to the thing. The presence of such a person,
in such a place, is at once known, and told of with
great satisfaction. It is an inducement for others to
do likewise.
A Christian cannot attend a Universalist meeting
without violating the positive commands of God. We
read, " Blessed is the raan that walketh not in the
counsel of the ungodly, nor sitteth in the seat of the
scornful," (Ps. i. 1.) If such a one is blessed, the
man who does sit in the seat of the scornful is cursed.
The beloved disciple says, "If there corae any unto
you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into
your house, neither bid him God speed ; for he that
biddeth hira God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."
(2 John 10, 11.) Enter a Universalist raeeting, and
you do receive the preacher. You do, in fact, bid him
God speed, and become a partaker of his evil deeds.
You owe it to yourselves, to your race, and to the
truth, that you keep from every place in which Uni
versalisra is advocated. Avoid thera as the seats of
the scornful, as the way that le^-ds to hell.

388 ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS.
Universalist preachers frequently hold out induce-
raents to the community to enter their places of meet
ing. They are to explain a difficult text, preach upon
some novel topic, or have sorae exhibition or display.
Be not deceived. Let no inducement lead you into
temptation. You cannot, before going to a Univer
salist raeeting, retire to your closet, and, in sincerity,
pray, " Lead us not into teraptation."
Nor can you assign any reason 'which will justify
your hearing a Universalist preach. You have friends,
you say, who attend such a raeeting, and who offer
to go with you, if you wiU attend, a part of the time,
with them.. Would you attend a theatre, upon con
dition that a friend would, the next evening, attend a
prayer meeting with you ? Would you go into the
abodes of crirae upon such a condition ? Why not,
if the reasoning be sound ? Make no such bargains.
If you have friends who attend Universalist preach
ing, admonish them ; but, if they persist in that
course, let thera walk the way of death alone.
Is your candor appealed to, to hear both sides ? Be
not deceived. What is the question Universalism
wishes you to consider ? Simply whether their faith
is supported by the Bible or not. For the answer to
this question, to what must you go? to the Bible, or
the Universalist meeting ? If a man should assert
that the Bible sustains Morraonisra or atheism, would
you feel called upon to hear him support his blas
phemies, or would you " search the Scriptures," to see
whether his claims were well founded ?
Suppose a raan were to assert that there was no
penalty against the crime of raurder, assure the com-

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS. 389
munity that the general impression, that death was the
penalty, rested upon ignorance or prejudice, and invite
"the candid and the liberal " to hear him defend his
opinions. Who would listen to his ravings? AU
would feel that the avowal of such opinions was an
impeachraent of their coraraon sense. Who would
believe that an enlightened community, with the
statute-book in their hands, needed a public lecture
to teach thera what it contained ? If the comraunity
wish to know what the Bible teaches with respect
to the destiny of our race, they raust "search the
Scriptures," not attend the rainistry of raen whose
employment it is to "handle the word of God de
ceitfully." Let me illustrate this point. A mariner approaches
the coast of Norway. Upon his chart is laid down
a whirlpool of surpassing power. Its latitude and
longitude are minutely described. Sorae one on
board the vessel suggests to the officer that he has
no faith in the existence of that whirlpool ; that God
made the sea, as well as the land ; that he is infinitely
good, and would not place such a dangerous and use
less gulf in the highway of nations. The unbeliever
invites the officer to be liberal, and visit the whirlpool ;
to be candid, and take one sweep around the outer
circumference. Would the invitation be accepted ?
We are on a voyage. The Bible is our chart ; and
it points out fearful dangers. Universalism has no
faith in the existence of these dangers. It urges all,
who listen to its voice, to ride upon the whirlpool.
'My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not."
33*

390 address to christians.
4. Be not deceived by the remark that a dis
cussion OF Universalism advances that delusion.
This impression Universalists attempt to leave on
the public mind. They are in raptures, at least in
words, with the idea of a public discussion. But
nothing do they really dread more. They confess
that the prejudice against their system, in the cora
raunity, arises from the public discussion of this sub
ject. A. C. Thomas, who is as fond of this debate
as any other man in the Universalist denomination,
has publicly acknowledged that discussion has 'done
great injury to Universalism.
I would raake a wide distinction between a discus
sion of Universalisra, and a debate, with a Universalist
preacher, upon the truth of Universalism. This last,
though repeatedly challenged, I have always declined.
I have done so for several reasons. In a' public de
bate, I must allow that my faith may be false, and
Universalism -may be true — a thing I do not allow. I
cannot countenance the advocacy of Universalism,
which I must do, if. I debate the subject. I do not
need to be convinced of the error of Universalism ;
and I want all the time that I can coraraand, to con
vince others that it is false and dangerous. And then,
no respectable man would condescend to employ the
means and the language which Universalists eraploy
in debate.
But the discussion of Universalism is a different
matter. No preacher can be faithful to the souls
of men, who has not exposed this error in a kind,
but faithful, spirit. Bring out its sophistry, its im-

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS. 391
piety, its dreadful moral results, and lay them before
the people. You cannot tell the amount of good that
will result from the effort.
This course has never been adopted without great
good. In Baltimore, Rev. Dr. Breckenridge gave to
the people of that city an expose of Universalism.
During the process, the Universalists professed great
joy at the fact that Universalisra was opposed by such
a mind. They predicted great good frora the discus
sion. Mark the result in the alraost total extinction
of Universalism in Baltimore. What has kept that
delusion from gaining ground in Philadelphia, New
York, Albany, New Haven, and Hartford ? I reply,
faithful watchraen, who have kept the coraraunity
acquainted with the real position, character, and ten
dency, of Universalisra.
I have shown, in another place, that Universalisra
is astonishingly on the wane in Western New York.
In no part of the country was it so prosperous a few
years ago ; in no section did the sect boast of such
triuraphs ; and yet in no part of our land was it so
publicly and faithfully opposed. The result is seen in
its rapid decline, a decline which Universalists allow.
On the other hand, find a place in which the doctrine
prevails, and you find one in which, without oppo
sition, it has been allowed to lead raen captive at will.
Make raen farafliar with the system, let them know
what it is, and to what it tends, and aU sober,
moral men would fly frora it as from the deadly
fangs of the serpent, or the blighting breath of the
sirocco.

392 address to christians.
5. Upon no occasion recognize the claims of
THE teachers OF UnIVERSALISM TO THE CHARACTER
OF GOSPEL MINISTERS.
Universalist preachers desire nothing so rauch as to
be recognized as Christian ministers by the religious
comraunity. This is one great raotive of their labors
in the teraperance cause. At funerals, arrangements
are sometimes made to oblige an Orthodox minister to
meet a Universalist. Of all occasions in the w^orld on
which to associate with an advocate of Universalism,
a funeral would seem to be the very last. Standing in
the presence of God, upon the very threshold of eter
nity, on a business that the living will lay to heart, if
they will lay any thing there, — it is no place to coun
tenance an error which may be stained with the blood
of the soul that has just left the very body about to
be consigned to the grave. I beseech ray brethren in
the rainistry not thus to sanction the clairas of raen
who are doing such infinite raischief to the souls
of their fellow-creatures.
Do you ask. What is to be done in cases in which
farailies are divided ? in cases in which you do not
wish to wound the feelings of friends ? I reply. The
path of duty is a plain one. Say frankly that Univer
salisra is not Christianity, that its advocates are not
Christian rainisters, and that those who are buried by
thera have not a Christian burial. If any prefer to
employ such men; they have a right to do so. But
you cannot sanction the proceeding. Refuse to do so
frora principle in one instance, and you wfll cease to
be annoyed. If it be unpleasant to wound the feel-

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS. 393
ings of those you love, it ought to be far raore
unpleasant to ruin their souls.
The character of false teachers is rainutely de
scribed in the Bible, and the duty of all, in relation
to thera, is plainly set forth. This character, with
out a single alteration, is descriptive of Universalist
preachers. The duty of all, in respect to thera, is
clearly expressed.
6. Be not DECEIVED BY THE ASSURANCE THAT
Universalist books contain nothing of a secta
rian CHARACTER.
Araong the raeans eraployed at the present day to
spread Universalism, the circulation of books, with
the assurance that they contain nothing that is secta
rian, is conspicuous. The Universalists have published
some two or three books upon the evidences of Chris
tianity, which are offered to the world as books free
firom sectarianism. But the basis of each is, that
the Bible contains no doctrines that the deist ought
to reject. The whole argument is based upon the
doctrines of Universalism, and the rejection of the
doctrines of Christ.
A work in Lowell is published under this title:
"LoweU Offering, a Repository of Original Articles,
written by Females actively employed in the MiUs.
Every thing of a sectarian character is rigidly ex
cluded." And yet the work was projected by a Universalist
minister, and conducted by him and his Universalist
associates. It has always been under a Universalist
influence, and with the exception of not openly ad-

394 ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS.
vocating the doctrine, it is a Universalist periodical.
And recently the conductor of the " Offering " has,
through the "Trumpet," made the following call upon
Universalists for support : " Sectarian hostility has been
recently aroused against the 'Offering,' on the score
of ray religious sentiments. I now feel at liberty to
ask the cooperation of my friends, and other liberal
persons, in support of the undertaking." "Every
thing of a sectarian character rigidly excluded" from
a Universalist periodical!
Sraall story-books are offered to our children, and
recoraraended to the public attention, though written
by Universalist women. Books are sent out, that first
were preached to Universalist congregations, and
published in Universalist papers, and yet hold forth
the assurance that they contain nothing sectarian,
though filled with Universalism.
Charles Spear has recently published, a Universalist
book, called "Names and Titles of Christ." It strikes
at the foundation of all that Orthodox people regard
as Christianity. He has been employed for weeks in
visiting Orthodox faraflies, and palraing upon thera
the book, as a religious book, using the word as it
would be understood by them. Many purchased the
book, and found out the trick too late to save their
raoney. Araong the annuals of the past and present year,
is one called the " Rose of Sheuron." It is a Univer
salist book, edited by a person connected with a
Universalist journal. It is filled alraost exclusively
with the productions of Universalist ministers. Uni
versalism is as ruinous to the souls of men, gilded

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS. 395
over, and presented in red raorocco, as when standing
forth in its oWn repulsive garb, in the colurans of the
"Trurapet." CONCLUSION.
I now close ray labor, and take leave of this sub
ject. My present position is not one of ray choosing.
Providence has called me to a post that I dare not
desert. Neither frora habit nor inclination ara I a
controversialist. I ara fond of retireraent and of peace.
Universalists have labored to leave the irapression that
I ara actuated by malice, and that on every occasion I
attack them. It is not so. The sermons which I
preach upon the Sabbath, have nothing in thera rela
ting to Universalisra ; and from thera no raan would
know that I ever had any raore to do with Universal
isra, than any other preacher of the gospel.
But while so rauch can be said upon this subject ;
while so many are groping for the light among Uni
versalists, and need a friendly hand ; while so raany
facts, all tending to throw light upon the dreadful
moral tendency of Universalisra, were in ray posses
sion, — I should be recreant to the interest of truth,
ungrateful to that God whose Spirit has raost gra
ciously led rae away frora that awful delusion to
which I was so blindly attached, and unfaithful to
the souls of raen, did I keep sflence.
Universalists have betrayed their consciousness of
being unable to raeet the facts and arguraents in these
lectures, by their violent assaults upon ray character.
In the prosecution of ray labors, I have not only been

396 ADDRESS TO CHRISTIANS.
called to meet calurany and persecution, but my pub
lic services have been disturbed, and my ;person ex
posed, by the violence of wicked raen. I have
been repeatedly interrupted, when preaching, by
Universalist rainisters. But God has been ray
shield and ray defence.
Universalists may attempt to divert public attention
frora the raerits of their system by the cry of persecu
tion. But it will not avail them. They have chal
lenged investigation, and called the religious world
dishonest, because they let their doctrine alone. I
have only responded to their call. They may charge
me with misrepresenting their faith and their argu
raents. But my labor will speak for itself. And to
deny the truth of my remarks in relation to the raoral
results of their faith, will be unwise. The raore
severe and startling exhibitions of the fruits of Univer
salisra ARE FROM THE PENS OF THOSE WHO ARE STILL
ENGAGED IN THE ADVOCACY OF THAT DOCTRINE.
May God bless this effort to expose error, to stay
the progress of crime, and to recover those "out of
the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him
at his wiU" !

3 9002 08844 0996