mitted, they prove too much-prove that every created being will be exempted from pain and misery. The history of the world, and the experience of every individual, contradict the fact. Evil, natural and moral, has been introduced into our world. For their impiety and violence the antediluvians were destroyed in its corruptions Sodom perished; and every descendant of Adam experiences a portion of sorrow and misery. The question is not whether God may not form a rational, moral being, whose every action shall be virtuous, and whose every moment of existence shall be happy? This is not doubted; but man is not this being. Grant that man was designed for happiness by his Makerthe question still arises, What is the happiness for which he is designed? It is happiness which will be conferred on him as the reward of the right use of his moral faculties. Man is made the subject of a moral government, laws are given him as the rule of his actions, and are enforced by suitable evidence and by solemn sanctions; and that obedience which flows from a teachable temper, from the love of truth, and from reverence to the authority of his God, prepares him for the happiness which is the end of his existence. Grant that man is a free, moral agent, and that the happiness for which he is designed is felicity, which results from the establishment of a pious and virtuous disposition-and it necessarily follows that the goodness of God is not pledged to confer happiness on the individual who abuses his moral liberty, corrupts his distinguishing faculties, and, by his vicious habits, disqualifies himself for that very happiness which is promised

as the reward of obedience. We may, I think, rest in the persuasion, that God, perfectly good and happy, would not give existence to intellectual, moral beings, when this existence must necessarily be miserable. But can it be inconsistent with the perfect goodness of Deity to bring into existence rational, moral, and free agents, to give them a field for the full display of their various faculties, to grant the necessary instruction, to provide them all needed assistance, and then to suspend his favours and their happiness on the condition of their maintaining their character as rational and moral beings, and by a wise and virtuous improvement of their talents, qualifying themselves for happiness of a rational, moral, and social nature; and withhold this reward from those who have neglected to prepare themselves for its enjoyment?

Perhaps it will be plead, that there seems to be but a shade of difference between the characters of those who stand in the lowest scale of acceptable virtue, and those who are rejected for the least degree of vice; and to suppose that God, in the issue of his government, will make the difference of immortal happiness and eternal death, in the final allotments of these characters, is to impeach his administrations with partiality and injustice. Can this impeachment be supported? In all the governments of this world, in all the publick institutions of human society, where certain privileges are proffered to all subjects and citizens on equitable conditions, and competent judges are appointed to decide on the qualifications of candidates-every applicant, who is found qualified, is invested with the proffer

ed privileges. And is there injustice or partiality in withholding these privileges from all who have failed of complying with the equitable condition, though there be but little to distinguish the individual who is the least defective in the requisite qualification from him who barely possesses it? The prize was proffered to all, it is conferred on all who are fitted to receive it; and no injury is done to those, who have neglected to improve the means of acquisition.

Suppose God places free, moral beings in a state of probation, promising to reward those, who, by a wise and virtuous life, fit themselves for the society of heaven, with immortal felicity, and denouncing extinction of being on all who should habitually abuse their powers-would there be partiality or injustice, or a want of benevolence, in carrying into execution the penalty against all who neglect to comply with the condition ?

In proof of the final happiness of all mankind, it has been urged "that all the evils that befal either body or mind in this state, have a tendency to improve one or both. Arguing from analogies taken from this state concerning that which is future, we ought to infer, that the evils of a future state will have the same tendency and final cause with those of the present life, viz. to meliorate and perfect our natures, and to prepare them for ultimate unlimited happiness."

To all reasonings of this nature it may be replied, that the analogy, as far as it can be applied, bears against the supposition of the final restoration of all men. The severest publick punishments of this

"Vice and

As

world rarely correct a vitiated mind. sin" are said to be, "in principle, disposition and habits, no less pernicious and fatal to the soul of man, than malignant disorders are to his corporeal frame. It deranges his mental and moral powers: it vitiates their soundness, and deadens their activity; and in its progress and prevalence tends to the death and destruction of the intelligent and immortal spirit. We may partly infer from the present effects of human degeneracy, what may be its probable consequences and issue in a future state. no present instruction or correction is sufficient to reclaim the licentious and profligate, and to recover them to penitence and virtue, it is possible, and indeed not very unlikely, that the more severe discipline of a future state of retribution may prove ineffectual to restrain rooted dispositions of vice, and to reform obstinate and imperious habits of sin, so that those who indulge them shall proceed from one stage of moral depravity to another, till they become altogether irreclaimable. As some bodily diseases advance from one stage of inveteracy to another, till they are absolutely irremediable, and must ultimately terminate in dissolution; so vice, considered as a growing and deadly disease of the mental constitution, may end in its fatal derange ment and final destruction. In such cases it seems to be inconsistent neither with justice nor benevolence, nor any known measure of the divine administration, to expunge characters of this kind from the book of life, and to consign the wicked, thus incapable of reformation, to utter annihilation."

But on the authority of scripture our opinion of the future condition of the wicked must be found. ed. What proof, then, do Universalists draw from revelation in support of their doctrine? They affirm that the whole representation of the bible is, that the mediation of Jesus Christ was adopted as a remedy for the apostacy; and the benefits of it are as extensive as were the effects of the fall. All men became subject to sin, misery and death by Adam's sin; and, by the efficacy of Christ's mediation, all men will ultimately be raised to life, to holiness, and to never-ending felicity. Numerous passages of the bible are selected as proofs of the truth of this statement. I can mention only a few of the more prominent, as examples. The 5th chapter to the Romans, from the 12th verse, is a principal passage." Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. But not as the offence so also is the free gift; for if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, bath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one, that sinned, so is the gift; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto jus tification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one, much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore, as by the offence of one, judgment came on all men to condemnation ; even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of