702 Argument from Scripture for Universal Restoration. distinguished and sealed the commencement of Christianity. Yet highly favoured as they were, they looked forward to the resurrection of the dead as their final and best deliverance. 1 Corinthians xv. 24-28, Mr. F. thought so decisive of the question, as to render elucidation unnecessary, its language being scarcely explicable on any other principle. Upon a repeated perusal of this passage, I am constrained to say that it does not appear to teach any thing like the doctrine of final restoration. The whole of the Apostle's reasonings and predictions throughout the chapter relate to the resurrection of the dead. It is quite a gratuitous assumption, that "the end," in ver. 24, signifies something beyond the resurrection and judgment. Nor can it be granted, for the end of Christ's mediatorial government is when the last enemy death is destroyed, ver. 26, that is when all the dead are raised to die no more; then shall he deliver up the kingdom to the Father, and himself be subject like the rest of his brethren, to that arrangement which infinite wisdom may appoint to follow the present dispensation. The Scriptures seem uniformly to speak of the general judgment of mankind, as the last act of Christ's administration of the moral government of the world. And as the Christian Scriptures only speak of things belonging to the Christian dispensation, all beyond is left at present involved in impenetrable mystery. Philippians ii. 10, 11, is another text quoted as a prediction of the glorious restoration of all men from sin and punishment, by their being brought to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, &c. The whole passage in its connection is a declaration of the glory conferred upon Jesus Christ in reward of his humility and obedience unto death. This reward as we learn from many other passages consists in his being invested with authority over all men, and made their final judge, to reward or punish every one according to their deeds. Every knee therefore will bow to him, and every tongue 'confess that he is Lord, in that day when even the wicked must answer for themselves at his righteous tribunal. This text therefore does not necessarily imply any thing beyond. Some passages were mentioned as auxiliary evidences of the truth of the doctrine, though not insisted upon as predictions of the fact. Such as Ephes. i. 10, " That in the dispen sation of the fulness of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, &c." But as it is well known that "the fulness of times" is a phrase used by Paul to signify the time of Christ's first coming into the world, (see Gal. iv. 4,) I do not see that any thing more is meant in the highly figurative passage in question, than that during the gospel dispensation the distinction of Jew and Gentile should be done away in religious matters, and Christ be the one head of one great body of believers, as is afterwards insisted on. 1 Timothy ii. 4, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." I think Macknight has shewn, that the original word here translated "will," has the force of the verb command, as also in ver. 8, "I will (command) that men pray every where, &c." God in sending his gospel to the nations, "commandeth all men every where to repent," Acts xvii. 30, which is the same as commanding them "to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth." It seems therefore unwarrantable to extend the signification of this passage to a future state of being. I do not know whether the next text was adduced by Mr. F. or not, for I only write from recollection-but I have heard it mentioned by others and therefore notice it here. 1 Timothy iv. 10, "The Saviour of all men, specially of those who believe." The Apostle is speaking, as the connexion shews, of the dangers and hardships he was exposed to in preaching the gospel; and he says he trusted in the protection of the living God who is the Saviour (or Preserver) of all men, but particularly so of sincere and active Christians who devote themselves to his glory. But what has this to do with the universal hap piness of mankind? If any other passages were produced they have escaped my memory; but upon a review of these, I would ask any impartial person, whether here is any thing like a prediction of that sublime and astonishing scene, the brilliancy of which overpowers the imagination of him who most confidently expects it, and fills the believer On Mr. Hume's Argument against Miracles. of it with rapture in contemplation of an whole universe filled with life, happiness and love? I am not one of those who think the news too good to be true. I have already expressed my belief that as a deduction from premises already admitted, concerning the Divine perfections and government, the doctrine is a highly rational one, and what every enlightened reasoner must feel disposed to receive. But I am afraid we go too far when we presume to ascribe this doctrine to Jesus Christ or his Apostles. They certainly predicted some events in terms sufficiently distinct and clear, such as the resurrection and a future judgment, e.g. “God hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained." "The trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be raised incorruptible." And it was just as easy for them to have said, the wicked shall be severely punished for a while, but shall afterwards be brought to repentance and be saved, if they had been appointed to reveal any thing upon this subject. Finally, Sir, it appears that the New Testament is completely silent on this subject, which some of our brethren seem so anxious to make a part of Christian belief; and when we reflect on what has been the consequence in former ages, of admitting various additions to the primitive doctrine, merely because they seemed to be deducible from certain texts illunderstood, or to result from prineiples already established, or were supported by the authority of eminent namies, Unitarians cannot be too careful how they enlarge their creed. A certain class of the orthodox consider their preachers inspired, and every thing uttered from the pulpit has the force of Divine truth; it is with them the word of God. But as Unitarian preachers make no such elaim, it will be the indelible disgrace of their hearers, if they have no better reason for their belief, than that such are the opinions of their teachers. I am, Sir, Your's, &c. R. L. SIR. Dec. 3, 1816. AGREE with excellent Coryour I respondent, Mr. Cogan, in your last Number, (p. 644,) that Mr. 703 Hume's argument against miracles 704 On Doctrinal Preaching-On Building Unitarian Chapels. moral discourse. The epithet dry is so frequently applied to morality, that I wish to know what there is in it to justify or occasion its being so called. I think it must meet some morbid quality in the mind which receives it with disgust; to such a mind, how very dry and disgusting must be our Saviour's Sermon on the Mount, as that is entirely composed of moral precepts. Were these precepts reduced to practice, it would so improve the mental taste and moral constitution, that what is now dry and disgusting would be received even with a zest that happy union would then take place between faith and works which constitutes the religion of Christ. I think it to be impossible for any man to read of the miracles of the second and third centuries of the Christian æra, without being more inclined to disbelieve the miracles than to believe the testimony. But why? From a lurking suspicion, of which the improbability of such miracles is the foundation. He begins to question the testimony, and to bring forward certain general reasons against its credibility, such as that it was then the interest of many that such miracles be believed, and that men's minds were then prepared to receive easy proof of miracles. But these are only general and indeed very flimsy reasons, by which to impeach the veracity, or observation, of multitudes of religious men, who were ready to suffer death for religion, and many of whom did suffer death. If we make thus free with human testimony at this distance of time, when the circumstances are to us most imperfectly known, where are we to stop? I fully agree with Mr. Cogan, that the degree of testimony is to determine the particular question concerning any miracles, and I am quite sure that testimony may be such as to establish any fact, be it miraculous or otherwise. As the human mind is constituted, rarity passes for improbability, and one miraculous fact being established, the conceived improbability of others is diminished, until their frequent occurrence takes away all sense of improbability from the mind, and their proof becomes as easy as that of any other fact. In the abstract, therefore, there is nothing in Mr. Hume's argument. ment, yet it is one which will ever carry with it an imposing air of reason. If these remarks procure us a few more lines from Mr. Cogan, your readers will be pleased! YOUR A. B. C. SIR, Bristol, Nov. 25, 1816. YOUR valuable Miscellany frequently contains hints to ministers for their improvement in the mode of conducting their pulpit exercises. In your Repository of last month (p. 584), J. B. recommends it to Unitarian ministers to preach statedly once a fortnight upon a doctrinal or controversial subject those who invite their friends to this treat, would not then be pained by their disappointment and disgust at hearing in its stead a dry, That Unitarian ministers should occasionally preach doctrinal sermons, and defend their opinions against their opponents, is useful and necessary; but while so many preachers are depreciating morality (and the relish with which this is received their crowded audiences declare), it behoves the former rather to increase than to abate their exertions in that important part of their Master's work, the enforcing the precepts of the gospel. Who are they whom the Scriptures dignify by the appellation of his peculiar people? those who are zealous of good works. I would recommend it to J. B. when he invites his friends to a controversial entertainment at a Unitarian chapel, to warn them of the possibility of their meeting with only moral fare, which though less palatable, may, if it does not meet a disposition to indigestion, afford solid and wholesome nourish I SIR, A. Dec. 3, 1816. WISH our friends at Edinburgh all possible success in their plan of raising a fund for a new chapel, and shall be happy to contribute my mite to so desirable an object. I think, however, they would do well, in the first instance, to imitate the conduct of their brethren at York, Thorne, &c.— see what they can raise among themselves, and then lay their case before the public. There seems no mode of supporting the great cause of Unitarianism so free from objection, as that of giving encouragement to the building and rebuilding of chapels, where circumstances render such measures prudent. Let us therefore hope, that as chapels Some Observations on the Sermons of Missionaries. are called for, they will receive prompt as well as general support. The Unitarians are a wealthy body; and if, on every such occasion, a small number only of those who are able would immediately subscribe, each, his guinea, a most important object would be easily obtained. Your's respectfully, A CONSTANT READER. Some Observations on the Sermons of Missionaries. Translated from the Spanish of P. Feyjoo, a Monk and Public Writer to the King of Spain, in the last Century. I (Concluded from p. 639.) FIND I have imperceptibly assumed the style of the pulpit, no where more superfluous than in a letter addressed to a preacher: all I intended was simply to propose the subject, leaving to you, who are so well accustomed to the ministry, to chuse the means of persuasion. You may perhaps apprehend, that by not denouncing the threats of God's anger against sin ners, your sermons will be but of little use. It is this fear that in reality induces so many zealous missionaries to insist so frequently on the torments and horrors of hell. I shall not deny the utility of these images if properly introduced: however, the sentiment of love to God has not only a superior value and dignity far excelling any incentive derived from fear, (as I before hinted), but it should also be considered that the impressions made by love on the soul are more lasting than those of fear. The reason is that love being sweet, gentle and pleasing, the heart finds itself at ease, and far from repelling, opens to receive and cherish it : fear on the contrary, is severe, violent and disagreeable, the heart therefore rejects it as much as possible. Love allures, fear oppresses; love is enjoyed, fear is suffered; love being always an act of the will, is likewise often the object of it, that is, the will loves with another act of reflected love: but fear is invariably an irksome guest wherever it gains admission, and is received much in the same manner as we grant a lodging to an enemy who forces us to open the door sword in hand; we accordingly apply all our power to expel the invader, and frequently succeed. The pernicious and horrible doctrines of various unbelievers, spring from this principle; they either deny 703 the existence of God, or strip the soul of its immortality. All the errors of these misguided men proceed from con templating the Deity as an inexorable judge rather than a merciful Father; and to shake off the dread inspired by this idea, they use every effort to delude themselves into the belief, either that there is no God to punish them, or that all they have to apprehend is some slight and temporary chastisement, for example, some worldly misfortune. But what do they gain by this persuasion? they are exactly in the situation of a criminal, who, flying from justice, flings himself down a precipice, and to avoid a probable punishment, embraces certain death: they seek to avoid Divine justice by the most tremendous of all precipices, that of impiety: yet even those who deny the existence of God, when they would dethrone the awful Judge who will pronounce sentence on their iniquity, do not so much flatter themselves that they can fly from Divine justice, as that Divine justice will fly from them. Other unbelievers who assert the soul to be mortal, think by this means to escape from God and eternal misery: one party seek to annihilate the Deity, the other to annihilate themselves, hoping their souls will perish when their bodies return to dust. Both schemes are impious, but the first is much more horrible and more palpably false: it is therefore probable that the supporters of this opinion have been fewer in number, because all nature proclaims the existence of its Maker in so loud a tone, that it seems impossible any intellectual deafness can be so great as to resist its impression. The majority of infidels giving up this cause as desperate, have ranged themselves with the second party: freed alike from the hopes and fear of a future life, they feel at liberty to enjoy the present, and give a loose to all their disorderly passions. But there is as much inadvertence as impiety in this attempt to escape from God. If the terror of Divine justice impels them to shun it, (and I acknowledge they are right to fly from its punishments, what criminal but would do the same?) yes, let them fly from justice but not from God. How is this possible? To avoid justice they must fly from the judge. Every human tribunal has a limited jurisdiction; the culprit may escape to another province, or he may 706 Some Observations on the Sermons of Missionaries. retreat from one kingdom to another; but if God is omnipresent and omnipotent, whither can we flee from his vengeance? This is not what I mean when I allow we may fly from Divine justice; I am sensible it is impossible to escape from God: where then can we take refuge? where, but in Divine mercy? If in a certain sense this may be deemed escaping from God, it is to shelter ourselves from the terrors of our judge under the protection of our Father; to appeal from the God of terror to the God of pity, from the God of vengeance to the God of mercy. I infer from all that has been said, that the principal or only end that the evangelical orator ought to have in view, is to instil the love of God into the hearts of his hearers. It may indeed be in general proper to attain this end by motives of fear. "Timor Dei initium dilectionis ejus," says the sacred text in Ecclesiasticus,-The fear of God is a preparatory disposition to love him. The greater number of commentators indeed explain this to mean filial fear; but it may with propriety be extended to servile fear also, when the latter conducts to love, as I have already endeavoured to shew. Suppose now the first object of a missionary sermon should be to alarm the auditors by a description of the intenseness and eternal duration of future punishments; terror being once raised in every bosom, it ought to be intimated that the only way to escape this fearful and boundless abyss of misery and torment, is an humble application to Divine mercy to shield us from Divine justice. The better to impress the minds of the congregation, the preacher may represent on one hand the awful tribunal of offended Deity surrounded by the ministers of his avenging wrath, and on the other a throne of grace on which is seated a compassionate and forgiving God, who opens wide his arms to embrace all who will have recourse to his mercy-that benignant Being whom the greatest of the apostolic preachers defines as the Father of mercies and God of all consolation. Oh! what a spacious, what a beautiful field is here displayed to the preacher on which to exert his zeal and eloquence. The latter indeed is superfluous: let him but use the energetic phrases, the appropriate similes, or rather the animated images of Holy Scripture, especially the New Testament; for in comparison of their power to affect the mind, the eloquence of Demosthenes or Cicero on other subjects is but unmeaning words. In one place we meet with a shepherd so solicitous for the preservation of his flock, that he seeks the lost sheep over hills and mountains, climbing steeps and treading on thorns, and having found it, he places it on his shoulders to secure it from the attacks of the wild beasts. In another we behold a kind and tender father highly insulted and offended by his son, who, after having forsaken him and spent all his wealth in riot and dissipation, when forced by necessity he returns home, he is embraced and received by his forgiving parent with every demonstration of affection. Who is this Father but the Redeemer of the world, the Sovereign Lord of heaven and earth? who the strayed sheep, the prodigal son? but the man who abandons Jerusalem for Babylon, the deserter from the noble army of the just to the infamous squadron of the wicked. Notwithstanding he has outraged and offended his God, let but the sinner have recourse to his clemency; all he demands is an humble and contrite heart. Let him only confess, "Father I have sinned against heaven and before thee, and I am no more worthy to be called thy son," this alone is requisite to obtain forgiveness. The Saviour of the world has assured us of it by the pen of the Evangelist (Luke xv). It is plain the mercy of God must be infinite towards sinners, since nothing less could make him receive the criminal with caresses, who had evinced his hatred by insult and disobedience. Do earthly monarchs thus admit to their favour a vassal who has not only been ungrateful but rebellious? No, their clemency is as limited as their existence is finite; the mercy of God is boundless, because his being is infinite. By these and similar representations, the minds of the auditors may be clevated above the servile dread of punishment to confidence in the Divine mercy; and one step is alone wanting to lead them to that height of love we are desirous they should attain. The gradation is natural and easy; for man being convinced that God is supremely merciful and full of loving-kindness, therefore infinitely amiable; that his forbearance is so great that even after |