433

ART. VIII.-1. Warnings and Consolations spoken in St. Barnabas Church, Pimlico. By the Rev. JAMES SKINNER. London: Mozley. 1857. (Eternal Punishment,' p. 146.)

2. Caroli Passaglia de Eternitate Poenarum deque Igne Inferno Commentarii. Ratisbonæ (1854): Manz.

3. Letters on the Evidences, &c. By OLINTHUS GREGORY, LL.D. Ninth Edition. London: 1857. Bohn. (Letter XXI: 'On Eternal Existence after Death.")

4. Etudes Philosophiques sur le Christianisme. Par AUGUSTE NICOLAS. 7ième Edit. Paris: Vaton. 1851. (De l'Enfer.' 2nde Partie; Chap. viii.)

5. Some Points of Christian Doctrine considered with Reference to certain Theories put forth by the Right Hon. Sir J. Stephen, K.C.B. LL.D. By WILLIAM BONNER HOPKINS, M.A. Fellow and Tutor of S. Catharine's Hall, Cambridge. Cambridge: Deighton. 1849.

6. Cartas a un Esceptico en Matiera de Religion. Por Don Jaime Balmes, Presbitero. Paris Libreria de Rosa y Bouret. 1853. (Carta iii.)

7. Eternal Life or Eternal Punishment. Penny Tracts. No. 15. Dublin Tract Repository. The Eternal Misery of Hell.' By Rev. JAMES SAURIN. Published by the American Tract Society. No. 277.

THERE is spreading over a portion of civilized Europe, as there has already spread over a portion of civilized America, a doctrine commonly entitled Universalism. The purport of this doctrine is, that all men will ultimately be saved. There appear, however, to be some persons in Great Britain who declare that they are not absolutely Universalists, although they agree with such in denying the Eternity of Future Punishment. On the degree of importance to be attached to this distinction, we shall have occasion to speak presently. But it will obviously cover the ground occupied by both these sections of thinkers, and by the numerous subdivisions existing among them, if we try once more to re-state some of the grounds on which that solemn and tremendous dogma rests. Such a task is not naturally an inviting one, nor ought any one

to undertake it, except under a most solemn call of duty. For their readers' sakes, as well as for their own, most surely ought such a subject to be treated, by those who undertake it, under the solemnity of the invocation Benedicat Benedictus.

The dogma which we have to consider is this, that there is a degree of hardness and impenitence of heart which is fraught with everlasting evil to those who wilfully persist in it; and that such obdurate sinners will ultimately be banished from the presence of God, and condemned to a state of misery that knows no end.

Upon the details of this fearful condition, neither the Church of England nor the Church Universal has presumed to utter any formal or authoritative decision. The reality and the eternity of the misery is affirmed authoritatively; the precise nature and qualities of the sufferings, and the nature and locality of the place where they are to be endured, are open questions-matters of opinion, not of faith.

We

Next to the consideration of the doctrine itself comes that of the persons for whom we are trying to write. A brief essay upon a single subject must necessarily involve assumptions upon many points. We hasten, therefore, to declare that these pages are not addressed to Atheists or to Deists, to Pantheists or Arians (much less Socinians), or even to those avowed Latitudinarians who consider that Holy Scripture is devoid of all definite meaning whatsoever. Such must look elsewhere for argumentation against their respective forms of error. base our present reasonings upon faith in the One God, the Trinity in Unity, infinitely powerful, wise, and good; upon faith in the Incarnation and Atonement of our Lord Jesus Christ; faith in the Scripture, as the impress of the mind of the Holy Spirit in all things requisite to salvation. In making this last-named assumption, we include very specially a belief in the existence of the Holy Angels, as also of those fallen and apostate ones who have Satan as their head and captain. And, further, we shall consider ourselves at liberty to assume the correctness of one principle of exegesis, which is always cheerfully conceded to interpreters of writings upon secular subjects; we mean the principle of explaining obscure and doubtful passages by the light of those which are distinct and

clear..

What we have to urge will be found, for the most part, to fall under one of the following heads:-I. The testimony of Holy Scripture. II. The dicta of commentators and theologians. III. The teaching of the heathen, and of others outside the pale of Christianity. IV. The grounds of objections

to the doctrine, and the probable causes of the temper which gives rise to those objections.

But before entering upon these various topics, we have to submit to the reader some reflections of a mixed and general character, which, although partially capable of being ranged under one or more of the above divisions, will be more fitly (and, we trust, more beneficially) introduced by themselves as preliminaries to the rest.

The first reflection which we would suggest to the earnest, thoughtful, prayerful consideration of the reader is the following. Here is a doctrine very terrible and overwhelming-a doctrine contrary to the hopes and imaginations of mankind, and, at the first glance, seemingly at variance with Christian ideas of the Divine mercy and benevolence. And yet, though it starts, so to speak, with all these disadvantages, we cannot point to any age, however remote, in which it can be said to have been unknown and untaught among the sons of men. It was known and believed in by God's ancient people; it was taught by Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Assyrians; it is openly proclaimed or implicitly assumed by many of the Greek and Roman writers, and among these by some of the wisest and most religious (even those who oppose it making large admissions, or else impugning in the same breath the very idea of a future existence at all); among avowed sceptics many have confessed their inability to rid themselves of it, most notably Diderot and Voltaire; it is not unheard of among savage tribes and remote islanders; it is taught in the Code of Manu, in the Puranas, and in the Koran; it is implied in the language of Isaiah and Ezekiel, of S. Paul and of S. John; and lastly, it is announced by our Blessed Lord Himself, in words so distinct, that their meaning can only be explained away by a criticism which would, in like manner, evacuate of all definite sense Revelation at large, and render the promise of eternal bliss to the redeemed equally vague and nugatory. On every occasion of its denial among Christians, that denial has met with instant rebuke; and in the present century, the sentiment (we believe a transitory sentiment) which runs counter to it in certain quarters, has evoked replies more profound and philosophic than those of any earlier age.

6

Now, we waive for the moment all consideration of that most solemn stamp of authority with which the above list was closed. We take our stand, for the present, on the ground of universality. That which all think, of that we affirm the existence,' says the Stagyrite. A point on which the sentiment of all men coincides, must of necessity be true,' repeats Cicero : Ὃ πᾶσι δοκεῖ, τουτ ̓ εἶναι φάμεν. de quo autem omnium

natura consentit, id verum esse necesse est.1 And here we find perhaps as close an approximation to universality and concurrence of sentiment as on any one article of belief whatever. The few exceptions, here and there, are just what we might anticipate-little more than illustrations of the principle that exceptions prove the rule. When, indeed, we consider how deep a personal interest we all have, as sinners, in denying the terrors of the Divine judgments, it is perhaps marvellous that the task has not been hitherto attempted more frequently and on a larger scale. But ignorant as we are of any doctrine to which the dictum of Aristotle and Cicero can be more strictly applicable, we must hold this consent to be a cogent proof, as of the Being of God and the endless bliss of Heaven, so likewise also of the unending misery of Hell.

We are writing for Christians; consequently, we need do no more than barely allude to the way in which the unbeliever attempts to rid himself of the oppression of this weight of testimony. It is all,' he says, 'priestcraft and kingcraft.' Truly strange priestcraft which has proved so successful in its conspiracy, that navigation has discovered no distant shore to which the fear of such dread destiny has not penetrated! Strange priestcraft which, even among many heathen, and certainly among Christians, denounces the worst forms of misery against unfaithful priests and teachers! And strange kingcraft, too, which has ever placed kings among the foremost and most conspicuous in the ranks of the reprobate! It is the great ruler Jehangir, who stands forward in Hindoo legends: it is a Sisyphus, a Tantalus, a Danaus, an Ixion, all kings or of royal race, who meet the eye as we gaze upon the poetic description of Tartarus. Religious heathen have ever, to their credit be it spoken, written upon this subject in the spirit of that striking passage in the Book of Wisdom, in which kings are warned that He who gave them sovereignty will try them with an especial rigour Horribly and speedily shall He come upon you, for a sharp judgment shall be to them that be in high places. For mercy will soon pardon the meanest, but mighty men shall be 'mightily tormented.' Nor are there wanting similar hints to priests which suggest ideas like those of S. Chrysostom, when he declared his conviction of the far greater risk encountered by the teachers than the taught-warnings approximating to that which occurs in the Liturgy of Malabar: From everlasting to 'everlasting: the Altar is fire in fire: fire surrounds it: let 'Priests beware of the terrible and tremendous fire, lest they 'fall into it and be burnt for ever.' No: if unbelievers wish

6

1 Aristot. Eth. Nicomach. Cic. de Nat. Deor., lib. i. cap. 17, § 44.

to preserve even the semblance of reasonableness, they must find some more plausible way of accounting for so vast a consensus than the worn and, in this case, most inapplicable dictum about the craft of priests and kings.1

Before passing onward to a second consideration, it is right to pause for a moment over the list of books which appears at the head of this article. There is scarcely one from which something may not be culled. Mr. Hopkins's reply to Sir J. Stephen is exceedingly well executed, the Spaniard Balmes is philosophic and suggestive, and Italy contributes valuable aid, especially in respect of Biblical criticism, in the short tractate by Father Passaglia. But the first and highest place must, in our judgment, be assigned to M. Nicolas. Nor is it a novel phenomenon in the history of the Church, that a layman should be peculiarly successful in the defence of revealed truth. To bring out into clear light a doctrine, which the Church has held implicitly, is the work of great doctors-a Leo, an Anselm, an Augustine. But in defending recognised truth, a layman has often the advantage of greater amount of intercourse with the world, and more extensive acquaintance with general literature, than his clerical contemporaries. Some of the best among the primitive apologists were laymen; as, for instance, S. Justin, Arnobius, and Lactantius.

It will readily be understood that, in making use of these works, we do not commit ourselves to more than the general approval of that part of them which concerns our present subject. For the sake of others who may wish to study the question still more deeply, we subjoin the names of some other books which we have not had an opportunity of consulting.2

1 See Wisdom, chap. vi. 1-9, and Mr. Neale's translations of Primitive Liturgies (London: Hayes, 1859), p. 151. The warning of Hesiod to corrupt judges (Barines), in his Works and Days' (lines 231-249), is very impressive. Cf. Plato passim, more especially the solemn apologue with which the Gorgias concludes. As regards priests, how much is implied in the single epithet attached to those whom Virgil places in Elysium with patriots, pious bards, and benefactors of their kind !—

6

Quique sacerdotes casti, dum vita manebat.' (Æn. vi. 661.)

2 An article on Eternal Condemnation, by Erbkam, in the Studien und Kritiken for 1838, is pronounced by Bishop Ellicott to be 'long, difficult, but in many points satisfactory' (Note C on Sermon IV. in the 'Destiny of the Creature'). Passaglia mentions with approbation; Lauzerand, Essai sur la doctrine du retablissement final, 1853; Dietelmair, De aπокαтασrdoe scripturariâ et fanaticâ, 1746; Winzer, De ȧTокатασтáσei in libris Nov. Test. propositá; Freundler, Réfutation de la doctrine du rétablissement final, Genève, 1850; J. L. Durand, Le progrès dans la vie future, 1851; Ed. Reuss Histoire de la Theologie Chrétienne au siècle apostolique, l. iv. p. 257 sqq.; et P. Goy in op., Revue de Theologie et de Philosophie Chrétienne, vol. vii. liv. vi. p. 370 sqq., Paris, 1853. ... There is, if we mistake not, a Cambridge Hulsean Prize Essay on the subject, by Mr. (now the Rev.) G. M. Gorham. The ability and character of the author may warrant us in assuming its value to exceed the average standard of such youthful performances.