"In the year 1839, I was invited to preach in the town of Lee, New Hampshire. The Sabbath was very pleasant, and a great concourse of people attended meeting. At the close of the morning service, we all went to the tavern. During the intermission, the bar-room was full, and the incessant sound of the toddy-stick announced to me that the waiter was constantly employed. The weather being warm, and the doors all open, I could hear the discussion of the merits of the sermon, and the commendations, mingled with oaths, which they bestowed upon the preacher. All were not thus employed. Some were trading horses; some betting on the relative speed of their animals, and threatening to test the matter when meeting should be done. At the close of the meeting, a scene occurred that I cannot represent. It seemed like the breaking up of some military review. So much cursing and swearing, rude and vulgar jesting, horse-racing and running, that my pen can do little towards describing it. I turned from the whole spectacle sick at heart; ashamed, mortified, and alarmed, that I was the preacher of a doctrine which called such a collection and such characters together." p. 270.

"I have repeatedly had my congregation follow me, upon the Sabbath, from the bar-room to the place of meeting, and then back again to the tavern. In the stage-coach, I have been extremely mortified, when defending Universalism, to have a profane, drinking, dissolute looking person signify to me that he thought my argument conclusive, and that he agreed with me exactly." p. 264.

"Common observation must convince any man that the profane, the intemperate, the licentious, love this doctrine. They call it their own. They support it; they defend it." "When I was a settled Universalist preacher, all such bowed to me as their spiritual guide.

When a man died of the delirium tremens, was hanged or drowned by his own act, I was called, as a matter of course, to attend the funeral." p. 263.

The object for which Universalists hear the preaching of their system, evinces both their character and the character of their system. Says our author: "The great purpose of those who unite in Universalist societies, is not to make themselves better, and to throw around themselves new restraints; not that men may be reformed, converted, and made holy; but to put down orthodoxy. If a minister, in place of

preaching against religion, preaches against the sins of his people, he is at once censured as having traveled out of the record.'" p. 62.

"The great end of Universalist preaching is to prove that all men will be saved,

to show that the doctrines of the orthodox are absurd, and that no retribution is to be found in the future world. As long as a minister attends to this, all will go well."

"But let a minister preach plainly and frequently against profanity, drunkenness, gaming, or any of the alarming sins of the day, and he will at once be reproved. No society, that I ever knew, will bear such preaching." "Universalists give their ministers to understand distinctly that they do not come together for that purpose. They are united to put down orthodoxy; and as for hearing their preacher often rebuke and reprove them, they are not disposed to it. They can hear enough of such preaching at orthodox meetings.

"During the latter part of my ministry as a Universalist, I was frequently censured, with oaths, because I did not preach Universalism enough; but enforced too much the practical duties of life. In Salem, I once preached upon righteousness and temperance. Some of my principal men came to me, and threatened to nail up their pews, if I meddled with that subject again. Had I added 'judgment to come, I dare not anticipate what the result would have been." pp. 275, 276.

So manifest is the demoralizing influence of Universalism, that many confirmed Universalists fear to have it exercised on their families. Mr. Smith tells us that he is acquainted with parents, who are professedly firm believers in Universalism, who have left its meetings on this account, and give this reason for it, saying,-"Our children are old enough to understand, and we prefer to have them under a different influence." This reminds us of a remark of a distinguished Unitarian, who, when asked why he sent his sons to an orthodox school, replied

"Orthodoxy is very good for boys." Strange that men will trust their own eternal well-being on a foundation on which they fear to rest even the temporal welfare of their children.

He mentions several cases in which men have acted according to this reasoning-reasoning entirely conclusive, from Universalist premiOf these we will mention but one, and that partly because it is

ses.

for other reasons notorious.

"Jonathan Cilley, who was killed by Mr. Graves, of Kentucky, in a duel, was in conversation with a pious lady in Washington the night before he was shot. He confessed that, with the religious views that the lady entertained, he should be deterred from fighting the duel. But, as a Universalist, he had nothing to fear; if he shot his antagonist, the world would justify him; but if he was killed, his soul would immediately ascend to heaven." p. 325.

To this case we may add another of recent occurrence. J. C. Colt, the late murderer and suicide, evidently held the same opinions as to eternal retribution. In one of his letters written while in prison, we find the poor and common sophistry of Universalists, that "a finite sin cannot receive an infinite punish ment.'

"The reason," Mr. Smith adds, "that so few, comparatively, commit suicide, is found in the fact that there are very few confirmed Universalists in the world."

Our author does not leave his testimony as to the moral results of Universalism, to stand alone. He confirms his own by that of a large number, who, like him, have left the ministry of that system, on account of its demoralizing effects. He mentions the names of thirtytwo, whose cases have come to his knowledge. Among these are O. A. Brownson, who has passed from the lowest point of any thing called

religion, in an ascending series, and through several gradations, almost to orthodoxy; Adin Ballou, and Charles Hudson, now a member of Congress from Worcester County, Mass., whose testimony, especially that of the two latter, as quoted by our author, is very full and emphatic, and accords well with his own.

Additional confirmation of his own testimony, as to the moral results of the system which he has renounced, Mr. Smith gives, by adducing the concessions of those who still continue in the ministry of Universalism. Of these we will quote only one.

"A Universalist preacher, who stands at the head of the denomination, was settled seventeen years in the vicinity of Boston. He had under his charge the largest and best Universalist society. He was very sick, and supposed to be in a consumption. He told me that the moral condition of his society, and the moral results of his preaching made him sick, and almost carried him to his grave. He felt that he had done no good; that his ministry had been the source of much evil, besides wasting the long period of time that he had been settled. Nearly every man who was in the society when he was settled, died during his ministry. And nearly every one that died, was AN ATHEIST, A DEIST, OR A DRUNKARD. could not remain. He left his charge, and settled over a small congregation, resolved to change his style of preaching, expecting to see a different result. Vain hope, while Universalism is preached!" p. 315.

He

It is cheering to the friends of truth to be informed, as they are by Mr. Smith, that "Universalism in this country is on the wane." We occasionally hear from the organs of Universalism boastful accounts of the rapid spread of their system, and of the formation of great numbers of new societies. But by these statements, as we are told by our author, the community is greatly deceived. True, many new societies are formed; but most of them die, and die in infancy. And the Universalist papers, while they tell us how many new societies have been organized, do not tell us how

many, during the same period, have come to an untimely end. They keep a record of ecclesiastical births, but not of ecclesiastical deaths.

"Many," says Mr. S., " are formed today and die to-morrow. They are composed of discordant materials which cannot long hold together. One society is organized, because there is a revival of religion in the town; another, because because the use of a church for a lecture has been refused; another, to keep women and children away from religious influPreaching is sustained awhile, till the fit of zeal has passed off; and then the whole attempt is abandoned. In New England alone, more than one hundred Universalist societies have run down since 1830." p. 272.

ence.

"The character of these societies is so graphically described by one of the sect, that I will allow him to speak for them. Hosea Ballou, 2d, says, 'Here is a [Universalist] society that has perhaps gathered in a considerable number of members, whose ability in worldly means is equal to that of any society in the town. Indeed, they sometimes congratulate themselves on their strength over a feebler society of another faith, which nevertheless manages to support constant preach ing. They, on the other hand, feel that they cannot afford to settle a pastor, nor indeed to procure the ministration of the gospel more than a part of the year-perhaps through the warm season, possibly but half of the time even then, or only occasionally. But when they do have preaching, the thing is done up in the earthquake style. Notice is published all abroad, and when the day arrives, in come the wagons and carriages, horsemen and footmen, from a dozen miles around, and fill the church to overflowing Many a glance is cast forth at the smaller neighboring congregation—it is a wonderful triumph; they have beaten their neighbors twofold, and this was what they meant to do. The matter is talked of; perhaps they get it published; and then-their church is shut again, till they can gather excitability enough for another convulsion fit, or rather till the apparatus is ready for galvanizing the dead body once more.'

"This is a most accurate description, given, not by an enemy, but by a friend; not from report, but from actual knowledge; and by one, who, in company with myself, has assisted in galvanizing many a society of this description." pp. 273, 274.

"Take any place in which Universalism has existed six years, and draw a cir

cle around it of ten miles, and you will find Universalism to be less flourishing than at its commencement." p. 326.

For the particulars which constitute the proof of the truth of this statement, we have not room. We must refer the reader who wishes to see them, to Mr. Smith's book. Such is the sinking condition of Universalism in America: while in Europe, the land of its birth, where it began with James Relly, in England, in the time of Whitefield, it has hardly an organized existence. In Liverpool there is a society consisting, says its minister, of "a few stragglers, amounting in all to some hundreds." "In Scotland there are three small congregations, numbering less than one hundred souls each. But these are Trinitarians, and make the doctrine of the Trinity the test of fellowship. They do not recognize the Universalists of this country as Christians." Universalists in this country have made many attempts to cultivate the acquaintance and gain the fellowship of those in Europe, whom they have supposed to be of the same faith with themselves. But these attempts have resulted only in mortification. They wrote to Professor Tholuck. He replied once, and then, having ascertained their belief and character, declined all farther correspondence. A box containing a copy of each of their principal publications, sent to Mrs. Sherwood by some American Universalists, who thought they had reason to hope for fellowship with her, was returned unopened. Mr. C. J. Lefevre, a popular preacher of a Universalist society in the city of New York, went as delegate to "the liberal churches in Europe," by appointment of the General Convention of Universalists, with the high expectation of "lifting up his voice in defense of God's universal and efficient grace in London, in Paris, in St. Petersburg, and if pos sible, in Rome." He was invited by a Unitarian clergyman near London, to preach to a congregation of thirty persons! "This," he says,

"was the only time I officiated during my residence in Europe. It was the only opportunity that was afforded me."

"In truth," says Mr. S., "there is no Universalism in Europe, such as is thus called in America. THE SYSTEM OF AMERICAN UNIVERSALISM HAS NOT A SINGLE DEFENDER IN EUROPE." p. 344.

In reading this work of Mr. Smith, we have been pleased with the illustration which it furnishes, of the truth, that God brings good out of evil. By his experience in the ministry of a destructive error, he has been peculiarly qualified for the exposure and refutation of that error. While engaged in proclaiming a system which heals slightly the hurt of conscience, which says "to every one who walketh after the imagination of his own heart, no evil shall come upon you," he has seen more extensively and thoroughly than he otherwise could, the baneful influence and appalling results of that system, and thus gained possession of a weapon against it, which can neither be parried nor resisted; and this weapon, thus placed in his hand by the ministry of error, God by his grace has turned to the destruction of error. Winning over to his service one of the servants of Satan, he leads him on in an irresistible attack upon those strong holds of Satan, the weak points of which he had learned while employed in their defense. One of the very priests of the temple of impiety, he uses as an instrument to expose its corruption.

We may learn also from this work a lesson of charity, in judging of those who are in great error. It teaches us what we have believed hardly possible-that a Universalist minister may be in a sense honest in his work.

Let us not be misunderstood. We say in a sense honest. We by no means agree with those who talk of the innocence of errorists. We do not believe that God so constiVol. I.

7

He

tutes men, that they necessarily do all that evil which results from error on practical subjects. We think that man is able and bound to believe the truth. We are confident that all false principles and opinions, on practical subjects, are criminal. If man does evil, he is guilty somewhere. If he does wrong, thinking that he is right, his guilt is at the point where he formed his wrong opinion. God has given us faculties capable of doing good and avoiding evil, and if we do evil, we, at some point, abuse those faculties either by misuse or neglect. In the more enlarged meaning of the terms therefore, a man cannot be honest or conscientious, in a course of evil or injurious conduct. He cannot be honest or conscientious clear through, in all that goes to make up that course of conducthonest both in his action, and in forming the opinions and principles which led to that action. It is a libel on our Creator to say so. has made us capable of doing the right and shunning the wrong, and that at all times. If we do wrong or evil, thinking that we do right, then we thought wrong; then we formed a wrong opinion on a practical subject, and whether we formed it yesterday, or twenty years since, we did it criminally. At that point, we knowingly neglected, perverted, or resisted light, and truth, and evidence. At that point, conscience condemned us. And for our wilful ignorance, or prejudice, or obstinacy, or hatred of truth, at that point-for this, when we appear at God's tribunal, we must be speechless. We may say, moreover, that he, who has formed false opinions and principles which lead him to a course of evil conduct, cannot have an entirely sound conscience. There is ever in his conscience a hollow spot, a misgiving, which, should he regard its indications, would lead him to the truth. When we say then, that a Univer

salist minister may be honest in a sense, we do not mean thoroughly honest-honest in the formation, as well as practice of his principles. We mean simply, that while preach ing Universalism, he may really think that Universalism is true. This, as we before said, we have been slow to believe; so palpable a contradiction to the Bible is that system.

66

Mr. Smith testifies that he really believed Universalism to be true, and began to preach it with enthusiasm, thinking that it would accomplish good results. Early instruction, the counsel of father and kindred and acquaintance, led him to hate orthodoxy, and embrace the error of universal salvation. The growth of wrong principles, thus early implanted in his mind, was favored by circumstances; and he became an earnest and public advocate of these principles, verily thinking that they were true; just as Paul "verily thought" that he ought to do many things contrary to Jesus of Nazareth." We can even believe, that those who have received their early instruction in orthodox communities and families, may, sometimes, honestly in the sense explained, enter on the ministry of Universalism, led thither by following out logically to their results, the philosophy and traditions of men, which have often been mingled with orthodox expositions of the commandments and truths of God. This evidently was the case with Relly, the father of Universalism in England, who made out his scheme by uniting the plain doctrine of the Scriptures, that Christ died for all men, with commercial views of the atonement-with the idea, that the atonement pays the debt of all for whom it is made. This was the case with Murray, who, with his Antinomian views, could not justify the ways of God to men, except by the doctrine of universal restoration. Believing,

that for an act committed not by themselves, but by their common progenitor, all mankind were placed under condemnation, he felt pressed to find, as he thought he did find in the Bible, the doctrine, that the whole race were united to Christ, and made partakers of the rewards of a full obedience rendered by him for all. Denying man's free-will, and believing that all his actions are such as they are by irresistible ne cessity, he felt pressed to admit, that those who perish thus by sins which are inevitable, would in some way be rescued by him who placed them in so hard a condition. Believing, that God in his perfect benevolence desires the salvation of all men, and that by sheer power he can sanctify all, he felt bound in logic to adopt the doctrine of the final salvation of all. So it was to a great extent with Winchester, who, like Murray and Relly, seems to have been honest in his opinions. Thus doubtless it has been with many others. So prone are men to make the Bible mean what they think it ought to mean, what they think it must mean, in order to be vindicated. Mr. Smith tells us, that of the thirty two ministers whom he mentions as having renounced Universalism, shocked by its moral results, twenty five entered the ministry of that system from the ministry of another faith.

We would not however, intimate that any large proportion of Universalist ministers are honest, even in the sense above explained. Facts oblige us to adopt the conclusion, that many of them preach error, knowing it to be error, and thus for gain destroy souls for whom Christ died. Still, the fact that any among them are honest, should teach us candor and charity in judging of all errorists. For if a preacher of Universalism may be honest in any sense in his error, who may not?

But we would add, and the experience of our author and his ac