so minutely expressed, as to hinder a cordial fellowship among those, who may differ in opinions in regard to some nice and unessential points of doctrine. This may be viewed as a favorable circumstance; since it is just as visionary to expect a considerable number of free and inquiring minds to agree in every particular of belief, as it would be, to expect an equal number of men, to resemble each other exactly in every shade of complexion, figure of body, and habit of life.And what do you think, Sir, of this very brief summary of the much despised doctrine of Universal grace and happiness?

Inq. Why, really, Sir, I hardly know what to think, or say. I was not aware that Universalists, as a denomination, had any common profession of faith or bond of union, by which they would be generally recognized. One of the principal objections which had occurred to my mind, was, that your preachers stood aloof from each other, all over the country; each one having a creed peculiar to himself, as it were; so that it would be next to impossible for one, even of your age and experience, to embody the scattered fragments of the scheme, in a discourse of the whole evening. But it seems that the work is at hand, ready made. Are you quite certain that your brethren generally, ministers and laymen, will unite in this confession of faith?

Uni. Most certainly, I am; for I have never heard an intimation from any quarter, that these articles of belief ought to be abandoned. They give universal satisfaction to the Universalist public, so far as I have been informed on the subject. Those few who have once been with us, but hav

ing become dissatisfied with the Faith of the order, have either joined some other denomination, or invented some new creeds, or abandoned all creeds, as the case might be; have taken to themselves sectarian names, according to their liking. This is the undeniable privilege of all. No one has a right to complain. But I may say with confidence, that Universalists, as a denomination of Christians, will harmoniously rally around that Profession of Faith, which the fathers or founders of the order in America, published, by unanimous consent. And as it is my intention to defer d the general system of Universalism, rather than separate, speculative notions entertained by individuals, I shall expect you will arrange and propose your objections accordingly. I will not refuse, however, to lay before you, now and then, some of the different opinions which have obtained in regard to the meaning of certain passages of Scripture, and nice points of doctrine.

Inq. Well, Sir, the second article of your faith says, "We believe in One God, whose nature is Love.' And what Christian does not believe this? By what process of reasoning, then, do you make this part of your belief favor the final happiness of the whole human race?

Uni. We do it by the plainest process imaginable. The one Supreme Being, in whom we believe, is all-perfect, infinite, and immutable in the attributes and mode of his existence; the Creator, benefactor, and moral governor of all intelligent creatures. He alone is worthy of their supreme homage, love, and gratitude, having made them all for the most wise and benevo

lent purpose. Being perfect in all his designs and works, and incapable of any disappointment or frustration of purpose, the final destiny of each intelligent being will correspond with the benevolent intention of the all-glorious Creator. At one omniscient glance, so to speak, the Almighty saw all his works, from the smallest to the greatest, and from the beginning to the end. No event has ever transpired or ever can, which was not, from eternity, fully comprehended in the Divine Mind. As say the Scriptures, "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honor, and power; for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are, and were created." (Rev. iv. 11.)

In this all-comprehending, and all-sustaining Being, we live, and move, and have our whole existence. He is the Father of lights from whom cometh every good and every perfect gift. He is not only without variableness or even the shadow of turning, but "good unto all, and histender mercies are over all his works." (James i. 17; Ps. cxlv. 8.) Hence, we cannot avoid the conclusion, that the impartial benevolence of Deity, embraced, in the very design of creation, the ultimate well being of all rational intelligences. We can reverently address the Great and Good Being in whom we believe, in the words ascribed to Solomon; for, by whomsoever written, they are worthy of all acceptation."Thou hast mercy upon all; for thou canst do all things, and winkest at the sins of men, because they should amend. For thou lovest all

*See Ps. c; Num. xvi. 22; Isa. Ixiv. 8; Zech. ii, 1; Acts xvii. 24-28.

the things that are, and abhorrest nothing which thou hast made; for never wouldst thou have made any thing, if thou hadst hated it.”*

We cannot perceive any propriety, Sir, in the professions of our fellow-christians, who declare their assent to the scripture truth, that GoD IS LOVE, and yet maintain that a part of his offspring will be miserable eternally, and therefore, be infinite losers by their existence. If, under such circumstances, the gift of existence be an exhibition of infinite love, we should be glad to be informed how infinite hatred could be exhibited. It is not the nature of love to inflict injuries; it follows of course then, that if we are correct in worshipping "One God, whose nature is love," we may also safely infer, that he is gracious unto all,-orders all things in mercy-and will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

Finally, we might argue the salvation of the world from the very term GoD, which is pure Anglo-Saxon, and was, originally, synonymous with GOOD. It meant, "THE GOOD BEING, a fountain of infinite benevolence and benificence to all his creatures."

Inq. Your remarks confirm me in the opinion I have long entertained, that human reason was favorable to the doctrine of universal redemption and salvation. But as reason alone cannot settle the question, I will ask you to illustrate in few words, the next branch of the article under consideration, viz: "revealed in One Lord Jesus Christ, by One Holy Spirit of Grace." In

*Wis. of Sol. xi, 23, 24; also, see xii, 1, 2, 16; and xv, 1, 2.

this, you will of course, appeal wholly to the Scriptures for proof.

Uni. I shall appeal to the Scriptures, but no more than I have in the foregoing illustration. You seem to think, kind friend, that I rested my argument exclusively on human reason; whereas, if you will carefully and candidly review the subject, you will perceive that I barely employed sound reasoning and common sense, in reading, arranging, and applying scripture proofs. Your mistake is of the most innocent kind, arising wholly from the influence of education, or opinions early imbibed. However, not to dwell on errors of this description, I will come to the point at issue. Putting the two branches of the 2d article together, they read-Universalists "believe in One God, whose nature is Love; revealed in One Lord Jesus Christ, by One Holy Spirit of Grace." The sentiment is sublime, in the highest degree; and expressed in the most appropriate terms, save the very words of the Scriptures themselves. And you cannot fail to perceive, Sir, that we mean just what is declared and reiterated in the Bible, viz. that the Lord Jesus was sent as a manifestation of the Love of God, and as such was God manifested in the flesh; that is, revealed or made known. There is no partiality in this commendation of the Father's love. As their Creator, his intentions were benevolent in giving existence to all mankind; as a provident Governor, he is good to all, making his sun to rise on the good and the evil, and sending rain on the just and unjust; and, as the equal Father of the spirits of all flesh, God hath so loved the world as to send his Son Jesus Christ, for its re