If parents rule by fear only, and use no motive but the rod, will not the children be more obedient than under a more benevolent and liberal parental government? Will not the obedience be more apparent ? Will there not be more display of it as much more, and on the same principle, as the religion of Partialists is more palpable than that of Universalists? But is obedience thus induced, acceptable to the parent? Is it from the heart, and as acceptable to the parent as if rendered from filial love? Every father and mother will answer, no,-a thousand times, no! So in relation to religion, and the external service of God.

دو

But we have an illustration in point. In the third chapter of the Book of Daniel, we find the history of the setting up, and the worship of the idol of the plain of Dura. When Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up the image, he sent forth this proclamation: "To you it is commanded, O people, nations, and languages, that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up. iii, 4, 5. Well, there was a "Revival of Religion" there! "All the people, the nations, and the languages fell down and worshipped the golden image ;" all but the three noble Hebrews. This revival was almost universal; "such as was never known from the beginning of the world to that time, and probably never shall be again, on earth. Now, what was the cause of all this? What motive induced so general a worship when commanded? The answer is found in the closing sentence of the royal edict: "And whoso falleth not down and worshippeth, shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning FIERY FURnace. Here was the motive, -fear, the fear of the "fiery furnace,"-Nebuchadnezzar's hell. It was sensible, too, and near by,— -nearer and more certain to be endured than the common Pagan or Orthodox hell, or the Romish_purgatory, or the Millerite's conflagration of the earth! Is it any wonder there was such a wonderful display of pious worship? It was not out of regard, or respect, or reverence, or love for the idol; for it was entitled to none; but from fear of the "furnace." Consequently, it was not heartfelt, and could not have been acceptable to the One Living and True God, even if rendered to him. I have no doubt God would as lief have men worship idols, or even the devil, with such worship, and from that motive, as himself. The heart of the worshipper would be the same in both cases ;-the display of obedience and religious service would be made merely to avoid the fur

nace, the hell. Such piety must be an abomination in the sight of God; for it is not, and cannot be, heartfelt.

Orthodox people are accustomed to say that Universalists are not religious; and that there would be no religion in the world if Universalism should prevail. Why? "Because," they say to us, "you believe in no devil and no hell." Thus they virtually admit that the devil and hell make them religious-those, I mean, of course, who make that assertion, saying that there would be no religion were Universalism to prevail, from the fact that it does not teach the doctrine of endless misery. But what is such piety worth in God's sight? He may thank the devil for it, not himself, or his love, or mercy, or kindness. It is the religion of fear, and, consequently, noisy, officious, and obtrusive, as well as cringing, time-serving, and heartless. There is no love in it; for "perfect love casteth out all such fear," is the teaching of an inspired apostle.

I have sometimes thought that the religion of fear is necessary for some people. God knows; and he is the Supreme Ruler, who permits some to have no other religion but that. If it is necessary for any, let THEM have it,-in God's name let them have it! Some do 66 say, If I were a Universalist, and believed in no endless hell, I could lie, steal, swear, murder, and do all manner of evil." Indeed! then they ought not to be allowed to be Universalists, if, at heart, they are as bad as that! God does harden and blind some men for their sins; sending "them strong delusion, that they may believe a lie, and be damned, who obey unrighteousness."

66

I have heard an anecdote illustrative of this thought. A Presbyterian preacher, in conversation with Rev. Russell Streeter, of Vermont, a somewhat eccentric Universalist minister, and ready at repartee,-made a remark similar to the one just referred to,-that if he were a Universalist, and did not believe in endless misery, he would lie, swear, get drunk,-take his fill of sin." "God knows it," replied Br. Streeter," and therefore he wont let you be a Universalist!"

Thus we admit the fact and account for it, that Partialists exhibit more of this kind of religion or piety than Universalists do. But the question comes up here, Are Partialists better people than Universalists ?-better citizens, neighbors, husbands, wives, parents, children ?-more moral, honest, just, merciful, truthful, charitable, kind, and pure? No; themselves being witnesses and judges. For it is admitted by them that we are a moral, honest people, etc., but have

no religion! Are Pagans really better than the Romanists, although more devotedly pious? No. Are Romanists really better Christians,-if Christians at all,—than Protestant Partialists, even though they are so much more religious? Perhaps not. Are any of them better than we are, aside from the piety that is the result of fear? No. This is not said egotistically or boastingly, but merely to express a wellknown and conceded fact.

66

Who were religious,-superlatively so, in Christ's time? The Saviour and his apostles? By no means. But the Pharisees, to whom Jesus said, "Hypocrites! publicans and harlots enter the kingdom of heaven before you ;"- ye pay tythe of mint, and anise, and cummin; but neglect justice, and mercy, and truth;"-"ye pray at the corners of the streets and in the synagogues, to be seen of men ;"ye are very religious, PIOUS; but ye cannot "" escape the damnation of hell!" In their godly sight, Jesus and his disciples were irreligious men,-very. So the Pagans called the early Christians atheists, sinners, and all opprobrious epithets; they were not religious in the sight of the heathen.

So also the Romanists bring similar charges against the Protestants; almost every charge that the Orthodox bring against us, and probably with the same truth, in relation to the same things. No doubt Papists are more pious than Protestants; but Pagan idolators and Mohammedans are more pious than they !-and these, and all of them, more pious than we are, with that kind of piety,-the religion of fear.

But what religion is heartfelt, and acceptable to our heavenly Father? Piety from that motive, is only worthy of the name? The apostle, "the beloved disciple," will answer: "We love God, because HE FIRST LOVED US." It is filial, trustful, grateful, confiding, hopeful, joyful, such as a child offers to a benevolent and just earthly father. Acceptable piety is not induced by the fear of a personal devil, or an immortal hell. Again, another apostle shall answer: "I beseech you, therefore, Brethren, by the MERCIES OF GOD," not by the fear of perdition, "that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Rom. xii, 1.

Reader, may such be our religion and our piety, and this the motive of it. May love to God and all men fill our hearts, and all the Christian virtues and graces adorn our lives.

THE VALUE OF DIVINE TRUTH.

BY REV. G. W. MONTGOMERY.

"Therefore, whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed."-1 Cor. XV, 11.

THIS statement was made by the apostle Paul to the members of the Corinthian Church. It unfolds the simple fact, that the doctrine of which he was treating in this incomparable chapter, whether presented to the Corinthians by himself or by his fellow-laborers, is the doctrine which they preached and which the Corinthian church received. Whatever the doctrine may be, yet it is evident that the apostle was not afraid of it, but believing it to be Christian truth, he openly preached it to the Corinthians for their reception and faith. He did not hide it under any pretence whatever, -he did not preach it by implication, but without regard to the fear or the favor of men, he presented it as the crowning excellency of divine revelation.

Now, a careful analysis of the chapter shows that the doctrine to which the apostle referred, is composed of the following points:-1. The resurrection of Christ. 2. The resurrection of every descendant from Adam. 3. The subjection of all the race to the reign of the Saviour. 4. The destruction of the last enemy, death. 5. The putting on of immortality by all souls. 6. The giving up of the Saviour's kingdom to God, that he may be all in all. These points compose the doctrine for which Paul contended; which he urged upon the Corinthian believers for their examination and faith; and which, according to his own declaration, he and his fellow-laborers preached. If this were not the fact, -if he had been afraid of the doctrine,—if he had been convinced that there was no necessity for preaching it, and that men should be left to find it how they could, or not find it at all, then it is evident that the fifteenth chapter of Corinthians never would have been written, nor would his other writings have been adorned with so many distinct statements of it. For it is not likely that he would have unfolded this doctrine so clearly in his epistles, which were to be read by millions of persons of all ages, if he had deemed it impolitic and improper to preach it by the words of his mouth. But,

having received it from the beloved Saviour, whose blood had sealed it as the choicest blessing from God, and being convinced that it is just what the world needed, he openly and manfully proclaimed the truth, and gave reasons why it should be received by men. Hence he said, "So we preach, and so ye believed." He thus affirmed, in these few words, that this doctrine was one of the most prominent points of his public ministry, and that the Corinthian church-members had received it as the strength of their faith,-for that portion of his epistle contained in the fifteenth chapter, is only a plain and simple re-statement of that which had already been preached to them.

These remarks seem to be called for, because there are those in every community, who, while they are convinced in their own minds of the truth of this doctrine, yet declare that it is neither necessary nor right to preach it,—that people are not fitted to hear it,-that it will be injurious to their morals, -that it must be kept secret,-that a simple system of morality must be preached, invested with a terror, which, even though not founded in truth, must be left for the disobedient to suppose.

The keen observer of the currents which flow through present society, can well see the moving causes which induce people to adopt these conclusions. Not the least among them is self-interest,-a cramped and fettered love for individual aggrandizement, which swallows up all sense of duty in reference to that which regards the moral and spiritual welfare of the race. A strong desire for popular applause, for the praise of shining as a fashionable star, for political honors, and the ardent hope of amassing wealth, frequently stifle independent, fervent love for truth and its advancement, and cause men to be silent in regard to it, for the simple reason that a public avowal of it will, in their judgment, lessen them in the eyes of certain cliques, whose members are considered rather better than the common mass of mankind. And this is but saying that they prefer to sacrifice the interest of truth for the sake of flimsy considerations, which add nothing to the true dignity of human nature nor to real happiness. Such individuals, neither believing nor liking the iron creeds of the day, and yet disliking to have the doctrine preached which they do believe, frequently. form themselves into societies, and, year after year, listen to a style of preaching, which, though it may advocate the most elevated views of morality, yet never breathes the least hint that Christianity has any distinguishing principles of