DISCOURSE II. 1 John iv. 8. GOD IS LOVE. My beloved Friends! The candour with which you received a discourse lately delivered to you, introductory to an intended series of discourses on the design and duration of future punishment, would have encouraged me to proceed immediately to the investigation of the subject, agreeably to my proposed plan, if it had not occurred to me, that it may not be without its advantage, previously to take notice of an objection which I had reserved for another place. Wishing you you not only to see with me the strength of those arguments which the Scripture affords in favour of the doctrine of Universal Restitution, but to feel with me the propriety and indeed the absolute necessity, if I wish to discharge my duty, of giving them all the publicity in my power, I will here, instead of in the place originally designed for it, introduce and endeavour to obviate the objection. It may be said, As the doctrine of the Eternity of hell-torments is the doctrine generally received respecting future punishment; may it not be attended with danger, considering the present state of the world, to convince those who stand in need of every influential motive to the practice of virtue, that there is no foundation for it in reason or scripture? In other words, may it not be said, Where is the advantage or necessity of preaching on the subject? In In this objection the truth of the doctrine of Universal Restitution is not denied. If it be acknowledged that it is true, I ask no more. It cannot for a moment be imagined, that the God of Truth should require us to support his government by a falsehood, or even by concealing the truth. He must be better acquainted than we are with the springs of action in the human breast, and must stand in no need of our prudence to alter or modify the sanctions of his law. Our duty can only be to explain and enforce these sanctions. But to avoid all suspicion of rashness or precipitation; before we proceed one step further, let us avail ourselves of all the information we can collect from reason, observation, and scripture, respecting the consequences of the freeest discussion of this subject. It is a maxim in jurisprudence, con firmed by the experience of all ages, that crimes are more effectually prevented by the CERTAINTY than by the SEVERITY of punishment. It is not the greatness of the Degree of the punishment threatened which operates as a motive to deter men from the commission of crimes, but the conviction of the indissoluble connexion between the crime and the punishment, and the absolute certainty that if they commit the one they must endure the other. The severity of laws (an observation which I fear applies to the Criminal Code of this country) hinders their execution, destroys their effect, and leads to their violation, by encouraging the hopes of impunity. In the present case, the supposed punishment being infinite, and consequently not admitting of those gradations in itself, and those gradations in guilt, which in the nature of things must exist, is so disproportioned to the offence, and so indiscriminately enforced, that the the sinner, instead of living in the habitual fear of it—instead of ever applying it to himself—will be naturally looking about for means of escaping it. And the human mind is fertile in resources of this kind. Almost every absurd doctrine, which Superstition or Enthusiasm has imposed upon the world as a doctrine of the Gospel, is a scheme for averting what is called-no such passion exists in that Being whose nature is Love the divine wrath. In these cir cumstances, mankind are not influenced by the dread of future punishment at all. That which is supposed to be denounced in Scripture, is applied by the sinner, not to himself but to others; and instead of operating as a motive to deter him from the commission of sin, it is employed only as an instrument of uncharitableness; while at the same time the real punishment denounced in the Gospel, which is efficacious in its nature, and wants only to be applied to produce |