of his being a beggar, affords no argument in his favor. Want and distress are always, indeed, a just appeal to our sympathy and compassion, whatever may have been the occasion of them: but they are not indubitable claims upon our good opinion of the character of the sufferers.

When beggars come to your gate or door, and relate their tale of misfortunes and woes, however you may be disposed to pity and relieve them, you do not think yourselves obliged, at once, to give them entire credit for extraordinary piety, or strict purity of character; and scarcely, sometimes, for undisguised honesty; for experience has taught you, that beggars are but too often base impostors.

I make these remarks, my brethren, the correctness of which, I am sure you will appreciate, that you may see, that our Saviour, in the parable, or statement under consideration, is not describing in the former case, a vicious character, nor in the latter, a religious one— for neither virtue nor vice, piety nor impiety, is declared or predicated of either of them. So that in this view, it would be most unreasonable to suppose that our Saviour is here pointing out, and placing in contrast, the fit subjects of heaven and hell-of happiness, and of torment, in a future state of being, as appears to have been generally understood, and which is the common orthodox opinion.

We have not yet entirely done noticing the short description given of Lazarus. We have noticed him as a beggar, lying at the gate of the rich man; and the account says, he was "full of sores." This circumstance, added to his destitute condition, rendered his situation truly a deplorable one. But since it determines nothing as to his moral or religious character, it

1

cannot designate him as a proper object, either of the divine approbation, or displeasure. For it is in reference to such dispensations of Providence, that the wise man says "all things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked, to the good, and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not; as is the good, so is the sinner, and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath." The pious and upright Job, was smitten by the Lord with "sore boils, from the sole of his foot unto his crown ;" and the treacherous Gehazi, the servant of Elijah, was smitten with an incurable leprosy. They were both covered with sores, though their moral and religious characters were very different.

I do not mean to express the opinion that Lazarus was not pious; I only say that his being a beggar, and full of sores, afford no proof that he was. But further, he desired to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table." This has sometimes been urged as an evidence of the beggar's humility—his patient resignation to his condition, and the elevation of his affections and hopes above the enjoyments and the prospects of this world; and that all he desired, was merely something to sustain life during the remainder of his earthly pilgrimage. However, the most that can be made of this part of the representation is, that it is a perfectly natural one. Beggars do not ask for the best that the house affords, but usually petition for some cast-off clothing, or some fragments, or leavings of the table, to supply their immediate and urgent ne

cessities. Lazarus.

And to this effect is the statement concerning He "desired to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table." And equally natural is

the circumstance, to which we have before advertedthat the "dogs came and licked his sores."

All these, apparently literal statements of facts, have, we doubt not, an important reference and meaning, beyond what would at first be suggested to a hasty reader, or a superficial examiner. We shall attend to them in due season; but here is not the place for it. We are now considering the passage, as though it contained a historical description of literal facts; embracing, not only the characters, and the condition of these two men, in this world, but their eternal destinies in a future state. We trust, however, as we proceed, it will appear, and be more and more evident, that such is not the meaning and scope of the passage.

But we have arrived at a very important crisis, in the history. A new and momentous exhibition opens before us, in which are displayed, in contrast, scenes and events of the most surprising nature, and of thrilling interest.

"And it came to pass-(says the account,) that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man, also died, and was buried." It would seem, according to the representation here given, as if they both died at once, or very nearly at the same time; at least, there is no account of any thing that occurred between the exit of the one, and of the other. But there is a very great difference in the statements of the immediately succeeding results. They must be noticed distinctly, and particularly.

There is no mention made of the immediate occasion or circumstances of the death of either of them ;— whether it was sudden and unexpected, or lingering disease had gradually wasted all the energies of life.

Nor is notice given of any difference in the state of their minds. It is not intimated that the one died in the triumphs of faith and hope, and joyful anticipation:that death approached him as a friendly messenger, inild and without a terror; and that his departure hence was resigned, serene and peaceful.

Nor is it noted of the other, that he died in agony and horror, and breathed his last, with a mind surcharged with guilt, and black despair.

Nothing of this kind is mentioned; and vague conjecture should not be allowed to supply the place of facts denied.

But they both were subjected to the common fate of mortals-they both died; which at once put a final period, alike to the enjoyments of the one, and to the sufferings of the other, in this world.

Here we must, for the present, leave them. For the time already occupied in this introductory lecture, admonishes me to bring it to a close; in the expectation of renewing the consideration of the important subject, the next Sunday evening.

Regarding the account contained in the passage, as an authentic statement of facts, and circumstances, we have examined and illustrated the condition and the characters of the two individuals, in every particular, so far as they are described or intimated in the record. And concerning both these persons, presented in this parable, or history, we make this general remark, before suggested, and which we wish may be kept in mind; namely, that neither of them is reprehended for any crime, nor commended for any excellence. As to their moral or religious character, the account is entirely silent.

Now this circumstance is, we think, a very strong objection to the commonly received opinion, that this passage describes the eternal condition of two individuals in another world, according to their conduct in this probationary state, (as it is called.) And equally unreasonable is it to suppose that it was intended to represent the different and eternal condition of the righteous, and of the wicked at large, in a future state, when there is not a word said about righteousness or wickedness, innocence, forgiveness, or guilt, in the whole account.

These considerations will, I think, lead you to entertain some doubts, as to the correctness of the exposition, which has been commonly given of this remarkable portion of the teachings of our Saviour, and the manner in which it has been applied. One part of the passage has been appealed to, as often perhaps, and with as much confidence, as any other in the bible, in proof of the most appalling doctrine that ever was taught that of the inconceivable and never-ending sufferings and torments of a large portion of our fellowbeings. If, on careful examination, it shall be found that this passage does not contain the doctrine, nor yield it any support, its claims to credit will be greatly weakened in your minds; and at which, I am sure you would all rejoice. I will not believe I cannot admit the unnatural supposition, that one of you really wishes that the doctrine of unending suffering and torture might be substantiated as true. A monster of depravity only, can possess or harbor such a disposition.

Concerning, then, the true meaning, and the just application of the subject which we have undertaken to illustrate, and in ascertaining which, your speaker may claim to feel equally interested with his audience, it is