UNIVERSAL SALVATION EXAMINED. CHAPTER I. IN WHICH THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF DR. CHAUNCY'S SYSTEM CONCERNING FUTURE PUNISHMENT ARE POINTED OUT AND COMPARED WITH EACH OTHER. SECTION I. In which the fundamental principles, etc. are pointed out, etc. BEFORE we enter into the consideration of the particular arguments of Dr. Chauncy, it may be proper to give some account of the fundamental principles of his system. Beside the doctrine of the salvation of all men, to establish which is the design of his whole book; there are several other doctrines, which may be considered as fundamental to his system. He does not deny all future punishment of the wicked; but allows that they will be punished according to their demerits, or according to strict justice. Thus he allows that "many men will be miserable in the next state of existence, in proportion to the moral depravity they have contracted in this. There is no room for debate here."* "They must be unavoidably miserable in proportion to the number and greatness of their vices."t "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord; i. e. if men continue the servants of sin, the wages they shall receive, before the gift through Christ is conferred on them, will be the second death."‡ If some men suffer that punishment which is the wages of sin, they doubtless suffer all which they deserve. No man deserves more than his wages. "In the collective sense, they will be tormented for ages of ages; though some of them only should be tormented through the whole of that period; the rest variously as to time, in proportion to their deserts."S "There shall be a difference in the punishment of wicked men, according to the difference there has been in the nature and number of their evil * Page 9. † p. 10. + p. 90. § p. 307. deeds."* He speaks of the wicked as liable "to positive torments awfully great in degree, and long in continuance, in proportion to the number and greatness of their crimes." "The pardonableness of all other sins and blasphemies," [except that against the Holy Ghost] "lies in this, its being possible for men, to escape the torments of hell, though they should have been guilty of those sins. Accordingly the unpardonableness of the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, must consist in the reverse of the pardonableness of other sins-in the impossibility of their escaping the torments of hell, who are chargeable with this sin. This now being the meaning of the unpardonableness of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, it is quite easy to perceive, that even these blasphemers, notwithstanding the unpardonableness of the sin they have committed, may finally be saved-For if they are not saved till after they have passed through these torments, they have never been forgiven-The divine law has taken its course; nor has any intervening pardon prevented the full execution of the threatened penalty on them. Forgiveness, strictly and literally speaking, has not been granted them." "This kind of sinners being absolutely excluded from the privilege of forgiveness, must, as has been said, suffer the torments of another world, before they can be saved."> In these passages concerning the blasphemers of the Holy Ghost, the author plainly supposes, that not only those of that character, but all who suffer the torments of hell are finally saved without forgiveness, having satisfied by their own sufferings the utmost demands of strict justice. He who is delivered from further punishment in consequence of having suffered a punishment however great in degree and long in duration, but not equal to that, to which he is liable by strict justice, is the subject of forgiveness. Just so much punishment is forgiven him, as is lacking to make the punishment, which he hath suffered, equal to that, to which he is liable by strict justice. Now our author, in the passages just quoted, supposes that both the blasphemers of the Holy Ghost and all others who pass through the torments of hell, are finally delivered, not in consequence of a punishment inferior in degree or duration, to that which may be inflicted on them, according to strict justice; as in that case they would be the subjects of forgiveness; but in consequence of that punishment, which is according to strict justice, and therefore they are delivered without forgiveness. He says, "The pardonableness of all other sins, lies in the possibility, that those who have been * Page 320. † p. 350, 351. + p. 335, etc. § p. 340. guilty of them, should escape the torments of hell." Those therefore who actually pass through the torments of hell receive no forgiveness; but are liberated on the footing of strict justice. If pardonableness, or which is the same, a possibility of pardon consist in a possibility of escaping the torments of hell; then actual pardon consists in an actual escape from those torments. Of course they who do not escape them, but pass through them, receive no pardon. Again; the only observation made by Dr. C. to show, that the blasphemers of the Holy Ghost are not forgiven; or the only respect in which he asserts, that they are not forgiven, is, that they pass through the torments of hell. But as this holds good with regard to all the damned, it equally proves, that none of them are forgiven; and that the divine law takes its course on them all; and that no intervening pardon will ever prevent the full execution of the threatened penalty on them. Now if the divine law take its course on the damned, and the penalty threatened in the law, be fully executed on them, they are undoubtedly punished according to their demerits, or according to strict justice; and if after all, they be liberated from punishment, they are liberated not in the way of forgiveness, nor on the footing of grace or favor; but on the footing of strict justice. But if this conclusion concerning all the damned be denied ; yet as the blasphemers of the Holy Ghost are some of mankind, some of mankind at least, if not all the damned, will be saved on the footing of strict justice, and without forgiveness. The same observations for substance, may be made on the other quotations above. If the damned suffer "a misery in proportion to the number and greatness of their vices;" if "they receive the wages of sin;" if they be "tormented variously as to time, in proportion to their deserts;" and "according to the difference there has been in the nature and number of their evil deeds;" if they suffer "positive torments awfully great in degree and long in continuance, in proportion to the number and greatness of their crimes;" they are punished to the utmost extent of justice. To punish them any further would be excessive, injurious and oppressive. To exempt them from punishment, is so far from an act of grace or favor, that it is an act called for by the most rigorous justice. By these quotations, and by the observations on them, it appears, that our author holds, that the damned suffer a punishment properly and strictly vindictive, and vindictive to the highest degree, and to the utmost extent to which vengeance in any just government can proceed. Indeed speaking of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, he plainly asserts a vindictive punishment both of those cities, and of the damned; he says,* that "the destruction of those cities" was "for a public example of the divine vengeance to after ages. And the fire of hell is doubtless called everlasting for the like reason;" i. e. because it will last, till it shall have accomplished the design of heaven in the destruction of the damned, for a public example of the divine vengeance. In his Five Dissertations, p. 110, he speaks of the labor, sorrow and death which men suffer in this world, as "testimonies of God's vengeance-as judgments on his part, and real evils on theirs." By vindictive punishment is meant, that which is sufficient to support and vindicate the authority of the divine law, or which is sufficient to satisfy the justice of God. But no advocate for vindictive punishment ever supposed, that to vindicate the authority of the law and to satisfy the justice of God, a greater punishment is necessary, than is according to justice or according to the desert, or the nature and number of the sins, the vices, the crimes of the person punished; or that to those ends, a greater punishment is necessary, than is inflicted, when "the divine law takes its course;" or than is implied "in the full execution of the threatened penalty." A punishment greater than that which answers those descriptions, would be so far from satisfying justice, that it would be positively unjust; it would be so far from supporting the authority of the divine law, that it would bring it into contempt by violating it. If that positive torment, which in degree and continuance is according to the desert and the nature and number of the evil deeds of the sinner, be not sufficient to satisfy the justice of God, I wish to be informed what would satisfy it. But Dr. C. himself holds, that the punishment which satisfies the justice of God, is vindictive and opposed to that which is disciplinary and medicinal: "If the next state is a state of punishment not intended for the cure of the patients themselves, but to satisfy the justice of God, and give warning to others; it is impossible all men should be finally saved." So that I am perfectly agreed with Dr. C. in his idea of a vindictive punishment, and whether he do not hold such punishment in the utmost extent, I appeal to every candid reader, who shall have perused the forecited quotations, or the pages from which they are taken. Yet Dr. C. is a great enemy to vindictive punishment, and it is a fundamental principle of his book, that the future punishment of the wicked is disciplinary and intended for the good, the repentance and reformation of the patients, and not to satisfy the justice of God. This appears from the quotation just now made from page 11th; and by innumerable other passages, some of which I shall now recite. "The wicked shall be sent to a place of weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth; not to continue there always, but till the rebellion of their hearts is subdued, and they are wrought upon to become the willing and obedient subjects of God."* "For ages of ages, the wicked shall be miserable as a mean to destroy the enmity of their hearts and make them God's willing and obedient people."† "The rest [the wicked]' shall have their portion in the place of blackness of darkness, as a suitable and necessary discipline, in order to their being reduced under moral subjection to Christ."‡ "The other [the wicked]' shall be banished to dwell in unspeakable torment, till they repent of their folly, and yield themselves up to God as his obedient servants." He "considers the many dispensations," through which he supposes the wicked will pass," as variously adapted for the discipline of stubborn and rebellious creatures."|| "Is it not far more reasonable to suppose, that the miseries of the other world are a proper discipline, in order to accomplish the end" of the recovery of the damned, "than that they should be final and vindictive only."¶ "The consideration of hell as a purging fire, is that only, which can make the matter sit easy on one's mind."** With approbation he quotes from Mr. Hartley these words: "The doctrine of purgatory, as now taught by the Papists, seems to be a corruption of a genuine doctrine held by the ancient fathers, concerning a purifying fire." He considers the misery of hell as "intended for the good of the patients themselves;"-for "their benefit ;"$$ as "a discipline by which is to be effected the personal good of wicked men." He says, "The reason why the wicked suffer the torments of the next state, is that they might be made the willing people of God."¶¶ As this is his idea of the nature and end of the future punishment of the wicked, he often rejects with abhorrence the idea, that they are to be punished for any other end exclusive of their own personal good. What he says in p. 325, implies, that unless we believe, that the future punishment of the wicked is intended for their personal good, we must believe that "the character of God, as the Father of mercies, and the God of pity, is limited to this world only;" that he is not the "same good Being in the other world that he is in this ;" and that on that supposition, "we § p. 224. # p. 325. * Page 220. ¶p. 322. I p. 328, † p. 221. ‡ p. 221. ** p. 324. ¶¶p. 343. ff p. 324. 2 p. 309. §§ p. 326, |