ment is the government of an infinite being, then it requires infinite motives. If the interests are the interests of an infinite God, those interests must be sustained by adequate or infinite laws. These laws, being infinite, must have infinite penalties. The good which God aims to secure, is the greatest possible. But the greatest possible good, is infinite good. The penalty of the law then must be the greatest possible. But the greatest possible evil, is infinite evil—therefore the penalty of his law must be infinite evil, or everlasting punishment. Did you ever hear a Universalist answer that argument? Never! When you urge upon them such everlasting truths, and they find themselves in the very grasp of God, they escape by saying "O, what a cruel thing is everlasting punishment!" Cruel, is it? Cruel for God to have a moral government? Cruel for him to have a government, of which the one that you live under and boast of, is only a faint type? Cruel for him to have infinite interests, and to protect those infinite interests by adequate laws? Cruel for God to promise to his obedient subjects the greatest possible good, and to threaten his disobedient subjects with the greatest possible evil? No wonder that the Universalists say that such a government is cruel. It is cruel to their system, and to their hopes.

TWENTY-SECOND REASON.

Our twenty-second reason for rejecting the doctrine of Universal Salvation, is, that their motives against crime decrease in power over the mind of the transgressor, as he advances in wickedness. They say the only punishment which the sinner receives, is the natural consequences of his conduct. Now there are some of these natural consequences of sin, which diminish in their power over the transgressor, as he advances in his career. We do not say that all the motives which are involved in the natural consequences of sin, decrease in power, as the sinner commits new acts of disobedience. We only say that some of these motives do-and those, too, upon which they lay the most stress, and those which all allow, too, should be most influential in restraining the sinner. But if we could find only one motive which should cease to be influential as the transgressor advanced in crime, it would prove fatal to their system. It would show that their system of divine government is defective.

But who does not know, that the more a man sins, the fewer compunctious visitings of conscience does he feel. The thief, who once stole a trifle, was troubled with powerful attacks of his conscience. But he stole again, and though what he stole was more valuable, his stings of conscience were not so keen. And, as he has advanced in

crime, this source of Universalist punishment has decreased in power-so that now he can break into his neighbour's store, and rob him of thousands, and not feel one-half so bad as he did when he began his career by stealing a penny from his mother's purse. The man who ascended that gallows, went there with a firmer step, a steadier nerve, a bolder front, than he did when he commenced his course of crime by robbing his master's money-drawer. That man, who is now bloated and putrid by intemperance, does not feel so much shame and remorse as he did when he first began to tipple, and tried to conceal his breath by some perfume. He does not care how his breath smells now. He can poison the whole air now by the presence of his putrid carcass, and little does he care who is offended. He can now sting the heart of his wife, and rob his children of peace, honour, and comfort, and yet remain as stupid, and brutish, and wicked, as hell. The man who has embraced some system of fatal error, once started back with horror from that system. Now he professes to believe in it, and to rest his soul upon it without alarm. When he first began to preach it, you could see a struggle going on in his bosom-his voice trembled -his guilty hands, as he stretched them to heaven in prayer, trembled there was a flush of guilt went and came upon his cheek-there was a misgiving about his whole appearance. When the pestilence raged, he was immensely troubled. When the storm arose, and the vivid lightning and awful thunder threatened to send him quick to hell, you

could see the cold sweat of fear roll from his pallid brow. But now, as he has advanced in crime, the contest with his feelings is not so great. His remorse of conscience is not so keen. His voice is not so tremulous, but bold, and sweet in its tones. The muscles of his face are as immoveable as granite, and he can go and stand on the verge of hell, and laugh at the thunders of damnation. This is Universalist punishment! A punishment which decreases in severity as crime increases! A punishment which defeats itself! The mental part of the punishment of Universalists, diminishes in fearfulness as the transgressor goes on in his course. No wonder they are fond of such kind of punishment. The transgressor will always admire a penalty which lessens in severity as his crimes increase in number and aggravation. But cannot every man see that such a system of law is defective? Is it not defective among men? And will the Universalist charge upon God a system which is so full of folly and absurdity?

TWENTY-THIRD REASON.

"We reject the doctrine of Universalism, because it stands opposed to the dictates of conscience, and the natural apprehensions of men. It is not to be denied, that there is something in the mind of man which forebodes the same punishment to the wicked in another world, that is denounced

against them in the Bible. Hence, in every age, and in every part of the world, men have generally believed, that in the future world the righteous will be rewarded, and the wicked punished. Some very few persons excepted, all men, according to an eminent historian, (Dr. Hartly,) whether Pagans, Jews, or Christians, have held the opinion, not only that the wicked are to be punished after death, but that their punishment is to be eternal. Now this general foreboding of future misery can be accounted for only in two ways. Either it has come down by tradition from an original revelation, and thus shows how revelation has been understood from the beginning; or else it arises from the very constitution of the human mind. If it arises from the constitution of the human mind, it is to be regarded as the voice of God speaking through the medium of conscience, and forewarning men of what awaits them in a future world. This foreboding of future punishment to the wicked, is presumptive evidence that the wicked will be punished. It is decisive evidence that Universalism is inconsistent with the views which men naturally have of their own deserts, and of the character of God." Every man bears around with him a tribunal, which in its decisions points forward to a state of future punishment. Every Universalist has a monitor within the solitudes of his own bosom, which speaks distinctly of damnation.