the destiny of the human race. That would be too narrow a view of it. By a natural and necessary reaction, it touches the government of God, under which this destiny is wrought out; and, by a still wider influence, reflects directly upon the Divine character itself. We cannot separate the law from its operation, nor the worker from his work. It is the ultimate issue that determines and crowns every enterprise. Be it high or low, good or evil, great or small, the end will exhibit its true character, and display the wisdom or folly, the weakness or power, the benevolence or the malevolence, of him who originated and carried it through to its termination.

Our question, then, relates directly to the extent of the salvation which is by Jesus Christ. In this respect it cannot fail to attract every one who takes any interest in his own welfare, or indeed in the Christian religion itself. But it relates, as I have just said, to the Divine government also, and to the character of God. Whatever may be its decision, it affects alike all these great questions, and is to throw a new light over the divine works and the economy of God's love, or is to mantle the moral universe in a deeper gloom.

It will be my business in this controversy to show that, in the end, all human souls shall, by the grace of God in Christ Jesus, be saved from sin, and be made holy and happythat the spiritual harmony between God and his moral creation, which sin had disturbed, shall be restored and perfected that "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father;" so that all souls, being subjected to Christ, he shall himself become subject to the Father, "that God may be all in all."

In opposition to this christian and cheering view of the result of the Divine government, two positions may be

taken; the milder one, becoming rather popular of late, which assumes that those persistently wicked, those who shall, up to a certain time, not have repented and been saved, shall be annihilated, and become absolutely extinct, as though they had never been-and the harsher one, which alleges that the wicked shall be kept in existence,-indeed, through all eternity,-but banished from heaven and from God, excluded from all opportunity of repentance or improvement, and subjected to all the tortures and miseries of hell forever!

This latter view, being the common one, and one held by the denomination to which my brother here is attached, is, I presume, the position which he will assume, and from which the doctrine that it is my happiness to believe and preach, will, in all probability, be assailed. There is one thing in which I doubt not we are all agreed, viz.: that the wicked must either be reformed and saved, or they must be annihilated, or, finally, that they must be forever unhappy. .Which of these is to be their fate?

I shall maintain and endeavor to show, that the final salvation of the whole human race is the doctrine of the Bible, properly interpreted, as it is the doctrine of enlightened reason, and as it stands in harmony with all our best feelings, wishes, and prayers.

In making this appear, I shall, in the first place, show that this is the end which God contemplated and proposed to himself in the creation of men. God, I conceive, must have had some purpose- men always have. You all remember the argument of Dr. Paley to prove the Divine Benevolence. He says:

"In creating the world,' God either proposed the happiness of his creatures, or their misery, or he was unconcerned and indifferent about both. The multiplied instances of design every where around us, prove that he was not

indifferent, and their general tendency to make his creatures happy, show that he must be good."

I will change the statement somewhat, confining it to the human race. God, I assume, must have had some object in view in creating man. It must have been either, first, to make them all ultimately miserable-or, secondly, to make a part of them miserable and a part happy-or, lastly, to make them all happy.

The Scriptures teach us that there is a God, the Creator of heaven and earth, the Maker of man, and his governor and king. They teach us that God is infinitely good, “good unto all, and his tender mercies are over all his works that he is infinitely wise, knowing all things, and foreseeing all things, "even the end from the beginning "-and, finally, that he is Almighty, so that whatever he willeth, that he doeth, and there is none that can stay his hand.

Now in creating a world of moral, and as we believe, immortal, intelligences, with such capacities as man enjoys, what should be the object of the Divine Being? What end would he propose to himself? What purpose could he have? The bible tells us that "for his own pleasure they were created." But what could that pleasure be, other than something that was in harmony with his infinite wisdom and goodness? In other words, did God create human beings for the purpose of annihilating them after they had finished the feverish dream of this life? Or did he create them for the infinitely worse purpose of casting them into a hell, and torturing them there through all eternity? Would a God of infinite wisdom propose such an end as either of these? Could a God of infinite goodness engage in such a work? On the contrary, I believe that he created all men for the great end of being conformed to his own image, of growing more and more into his likeness, of becoming holy and happy, and shining at last around his throne, like stars in the firmament forever.

I am well aware that this view of the Divine purpose is sometimes expressly, and often indirectly, denied. Our Calvinistic Churches teach positively, that God created some men and angels on purpose to damn them everlastingly. Calvin himself tells us that some of the human race were born to the destiny of hell-fire. This terrible doctrine runs through all creeds and Confessions of Faith belonging to that school. It was inculcated by its great author, St. Augustine. It was re-asserted by his Reformer disciple Calvin. It was clearly taught by the Council of Dort, by the Westminster Assembly of Divines, in the Old Saybrook Platform in the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, and everywhere, indeed, where Calvinism exists in its purity.

Yet our Presbyterian friends, by an inconsistency peculiar to error, in their Catechism utter a noble and glorious truth quite contradictory of their whole system. To the question "What is the chief end of man?-[i. e., obviously, what is the great purpose of his creation ?]—the reply is,— "The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever." Now to glorify and enjoy God forever, is something quite apart from being consigned to an eternal hell. It is, on the contrary, precisely what I believe God made man for. It is an end worthy of a God of infinite perfection, of a God who is good unto all; and nothing short of it is so.

The Scriptures teach us that when God had finished his creative work, among which man stood pre-eminent, he saw and proclaimed it to be " very good." It was such a universe, peopled with such beings, such natures and destinies as pleased his infinite wisdom and goodness. He thus saw the end from the beginning. The purpose was good, the plan he adopted was good, the issue was good and certain. It was all "very good."

That great

"chief end of man," God has never lost sight

of. Through the long track of ages, it has ever stood out in the clear sunlight of his own truth before him, and steadily and surely has he been pursuing it amidst all his conflicts with evil, and under every dispensation of his government. Too often, alas! have the dust and turmoil of life, the low, selfish aims, the ignorance and brutality of man, shut this great end out from mortal vision, and made the world dark again. But to the enlightened and believing soul, the holy Scriptures open a vista once more to that ultimate goal of human existence, and point it forward to a time when God's plan shall be perfected, and his great purpose accomplished in the salvation of the whole human family.

But the scheme which God in his infinite wisdom and goodness saw fit to adopt was a moral one; and morality in a finite being, implies the possibility of sin. If I cannot disobey God, my obedience is constrained and necessary, and without merit. If it is not possible for me to do wrong, there is no worth or worthiness in my doing right. God made me a moral being, and hence made me capable of sin. God would have me love him and serve him, but he would have me do it freely, that he might say to me, "Well done, good and faithful servant; enter into the joys of thy Lord."

God is responsible, if I may use such an expression, for making me moral, for creating me with capacities for virtue, for exposing me, if you will, to the possibility of sinning. Beyond this his responsibility does not extend. That I have sinned, is an act of my own, and for that act I am justly held to a righteous account. Hence a moral government, laws, rewards and punishments, and every thing that belongs to a state of probation and discipline.

But what I wish you particularly to observe, is, that the establishment of a moral government, does not at all interfere with the great end which God proposed in the creation