lows; "Who also hath made us able ministers of the new-testament, not of the letter, but of the spirit; for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses, for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done away; how shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious, had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious."

We see, by the Apostle's reasoning, that the law dispensation, being a ministration of death, "was to be done away, and succeeded with the ministration of righteousness; but that these dispensations are opposed to each other is not allowed by any scripture argument.

This doctrine, that the law is not against the promises of God, which we find abundantly proved from the scriptures which have been noticed, is a doctrine which is plainly taught in the economy of divine providence and in the most essential government embraced in human concerns; I mean the government and economy of a family. In the divine providence, God has promised (and he fulfils his word) that there shall be summer and winter, seed time and harvest. These blessings do not depend on men, men depend on them; man's labor does not call them forth, but they call men to their work; and accordingly as they labor and wisely improve their advantages, they are rewarded. If they neglect the duties of the season, they are re,

-compensed with want. In a family government and economy, there are many favors bestowed on children, that in the nature of things, cannot depend on the obedience of those who receive them. How many favors does parental love bestow on infancy, favors essential to life, long before the subjects are capable of knowing on whom they depend for support? And in the last will and testament of parental provision, how many valuable legacies are bestowed on children, to which they had no other claim but heirship? But all these blessings which are entirely independent of the conduct of chil dren, have no power to prevent the reasonable exercise of a proper discipline during that period in which the offspring are subjects of such an economy. And on the other hand, it is as plainly seen, that this discipline has no power to oppose the interest which the child holds by heirship; but then one seems to establish the other; for that relation which gives the right to administer discipline, holds also the right of heirship.

From the several points of doctrine, which we have endeavored to support, the following inferenses may be drawn.

1st. There is, according to the scriptures, in the moral government of our heavenly Father, a wisely concerted discipline, by which the faults of men are duly noticed and faithfully and compassionately chastised. But it is not consistent with the design of this dispensation to extend correction or punishment for sin, so as, in any way, to deprive, even the sinner, of the everlasting inheritance which belongs to the sons of God.

The opinion, therefore, that the law of God demands the everlasting, or eternal punishment of sinners is, by no means a scripture doctrine; for surely such a doctrine would prove that the law was

against the promises. Such a law, in the room of being a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, would be an unmerciful tyrant, like Pharoah, who held the people of God in bondage, and refused to let them go. This divine law and discipline of our heavenly Father admonishes us to take heed to our ways. Hereby we are advised, commanded, admonished, rebuked, warned, threatened; and in case of obstinate disobedience, and continuance in sin, we are severely punished. But let us always remember that the chastisements of our heavenly Father are for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness.

2d. We may infer from the doctrine we have maintained, that the sense of what St. Peter said to the Jews is equally true respecting all men ; “ Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, and in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." Those to whom St. Peter spake these words, were those who delivered up Jesus and denied him in the presence of Pilate; they were those who denied the holy One and the just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto them, and killed the Prince of life. cc These," Peter said, "were the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers." Now as the promise of the covenant was to "all the kindreds of the earth, and as the testimony of the prophets was equally extensive, we conclude that all the families, all the nations, and all the kindreds of the earth" are the children of the prophetic testimony, and of the covenant of promise. The blessing promised was also mentioned by this Apostle as bas been noticed; "Unto you first, God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities..

Let us conclude with the Apostle's exhortation; Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."

No. 4.

LECTURE SERMON,

DELIVERED AT THE

SECOND UNIVERSALIST MEETING, IN BOSTON, SEPTEMBER 13, 1818.

BY HOSEA BALLOU, PASTOR.

Published Semi-Monthly, by Henry Bowen, Devonshire-street.

1. JOHN, iv. 16.

"God is love."

In the infinite variety of all important subjects to which the rich treasures of divine revelation call our most serious and engaged attention, this, expressed in our text, is unquestionably entitled to the highest rank. However the thoughtless and profane may treat the Supreme Disposer of all things, however triflingly the name of the Most High may be handed round by polluted lips, one moment's serious attention to the impropriety of such communication is sufficient to convince the reasonable mind, that GoD is a subject infinitely too great to be introduced into trifling conversa tion, and infinitely too good to be mentioned by profane lips. But notwithstanding the impropriety and evil, of which mention has been made, are great and heinous, they bear but a scant comparison with the impropriety and evil of representing the great Father of our spirits as a character which would be dishonorable to man, who is but a worm of the dust.