probation*) under all the world's pernicious influences, with the addition of the malign and deadly one of the great Tempter and Destroyer, to confirm and augment the inherent depravity, on their speedy passage to everlasting woe, -I repeat, I am, without pretending to any extraordinary depth of feeling, amazed to conceive what they contrive to do with their sensibility, and in what manner they maintain a firm assurance of the Divine goodness and justice. Yet I see numbers of these good men preserving, apparently without great effort, a tone of equanimity, sometimes excited

*Mr. Foster has here advanced within the awful shadow of a subject which seems to have partially obscured his perception of the ultimate ground of moral responsibility. There is reason to believe that the divine standard of man's accountability is a scale of all but unlimited graduation. While, therefore, it would be absurd to suppose that "the men of Sodom and Gomorrah" will be judged by the same scale as the men of "Capernaum," would it not be almost as absurd to infer that, on that account, they will be judged by no scale whatever? "They who have sinned without (a written) law, shall be judged without law." Destitute of a written law, they are still within the jurisdiction of natural law. Of this class let the most uncivilized tribe be selected; still its members will be found to be held answerable to, and by, each other. Of this tribe let the last wandering survivor be taken; and it will be found that he is still, in many respects, a law unto himself." The elements of responsibility are within him. His moral constitution, not his external advantages, renders him amenable to law. He is a man, and therefore he will be judged. He is a man whose moral nature has been exposed to the most debasing and depraving influences, and therefore he will be judged accordingly.

It may not be irrelevant to add, first, that as, among such portions of the human race, the period of intellectual infancy lasts much longer than it does among more cultivated classes, there is high probability for concluding that the state of accountability is not reached till a comparatively advanced period of youth. Secondly, it may be worth consideration whether, while we shall be reckoned with as to how much we have advanced in holiness considering our advantages, there may not be many who will be reckoned with as to how little they have retrograded in evil considering their disad vantages. I would not for a moment be supposed to contravene the everlasting principle that "without holiness no man shall see the Lord." But, believing that there is a class of cases in which a struggle is maintained against moral determination, which, though unsuccessful in the best sense, involves a greater amount of resistance to evil than is made by some who yet advance in excellence, it is to be supposed that such resistance will be taken into the account, however unavailing it may be in the highest respect. And, thirdly, is not the doctrine of future punishment rendered gratuitously startling, when viewed in relation to the classes described by Mr. Foster, by the too positive, equalizing, and objective views generally entertained respecting the place of punishment. In opposition to Scrip

to hilarity, while every where closely surrounded by creatures whom, as not being the subjects of Divine grace, they deliberately regard as the destined victims of eternal fire; and must regard as if created on purpose, that by passing a few fleeting sinful moments here, they might be prepared for it.

I meet with a few intelligent and pious men who join in the disbelief; and suspect, that unavowedly, many others are repelled into strong doubt, at the least, by the infinite horror of the tenet.

Here again I am reminded how the missionary advocates make of all this just a charge against the church—the religious section, -as having been in effect owing to them; as if they had a certain power and responsibility, and had it now, to reverse substantially this awful destiny. But the supreme Sovereign's scheme and economy for the race was formed in no dependence on what the more privileged section might attempt, or not attempt, for them; formed indeed in a perfect foresight of what would not be attempted. How plain is it, that the case has its reason and its mystery in something far deeper than any consideration of what they might have done, and neglected to do. How self-evident the proposition, that if the sovereign Arbiter had INTENDED the salvation of the race, it must have been accomplished.

I really know not what apology to devise for this long intrusion on you, if you will not accept it as an excuse to say, I had no intention or expectation it should be any thing like half as long; and that I am sorry for not having the faculty or art of saying what I want to be at in a few words. I can, however, say, in words few and most explicit,

ture, the too general impression is, that there will be the same punishment for all the lost. And this, indeed, would follow necessarily, if, as it is too commonly supposed, the punishment depends almost entirely on the place, and if there is one place for all. But this would be to confound all gradations of evil character; and so far to make a mockery of that future judgment which is supposed to be designed to distinguish between them. I do not believe, indeed, that "the mind will be its own place" literally; that is, that there will be no objective. But I do believe that every man will "go to his own place," and that his place will be the exact counterpart of his moral character. So that while some will be "beaten with many stripes," we believe that for the minimum of uilt there will be a minimum of punishment. J. H.

that I deprecate causing you the trouble of making any kind of reply, however brief. I need not say that I am nobody for any thing like controversial discussion. If your candour will just excuse this transient incursion across the path of your studies, it is all that is requested by, my dear sir, yours, with high respect, cordial regard, and all good wishes,

J. FOSTER.

CCXXV. TO MR. JOHN FOSTER.

Bourton, October 1, 1842. DEAR NEPHEW, I am glad you have such advantages for attendance on the means of grace, and though some of you prefer one place and sect, and some another, I have no doubt you agree in the main thing, and preserve family peace.

Three of you, it seems, are come into family cares and duties. I wish that wisdom and resolution may be given you to act worthily in that situation, and I wish that your families may rise up to be a blessing to you and good and happy in themselves. You have great need to pray for the Divine blessing on the parents and the children. I am sometimes willing to hope that the thousands of petitions offered to God by my pious parents, and your grandfather, and mother, for the welfare of us, their descendants, may even thus long afterwards be of some avail, with their God and ours. But our own prayers for ourselves and our children must continually ascend to him, pleading in the name and merits of our Lord and Saviour.

It often comes into my thoughts how much good, of the highest kind, would have been obtained if I had been as constantly earnest as I ought to have been in that most profitable of all exercises. At the age of every one of us there is room to mend in this important matter; and I hope and pray that we may not neglect it.

Give my kind respects to your mother, whom I congratulate on having been so highly favoured in point of health, and on having such worthy children around her.

To William also I would express all friendly good wishes for his welfare in all respects, and the same you will yourself accept from your old uncle, whom you have never seen, and who has never seen you, nor probably will in this world, and whose name is like your own,

JOHN FOSTER.

CCXXVI. TO THE REV. THOMAS GRINFIELD, M.a.

December 22, 1842.

Before submitting the few slight notices of your preface, let me be allowed to apologize for what I am afraid was a great rudeness in my matter of putting Mr. "out of court."

The case is, that I have no patience with the outcries raised by clergymen in, about, against their own church; their multiform dissensions; their mutual accusations and protestations; the insubordination and remonstrances of the inferiors against the consecrated authorities in high places, &c. One is provoked to say, Shame on you;-why do you not strive with the utmost care to hush up your subject of disturbance, and maintain at least the appearance of a dignified union and conformity, according to the declared object of your institution, and under the sanction of its most venerable order? Have you not a grand standard of faith and discipline sacredly preserved, unaltered from generation to generation; appointed for the express purpose of maintaining inviolate the Christian doctrine and practical institutions, to which, in its most comprehensive applica tion, you all solemnly engage your assent and fidelity? I must in mere decency believe it is not a Jesuitical juggle, but a carefully explicit formula of doctrines and prescriptions; and also I must in decency believe that you have signed your adhesion intelligently and honestly. Is it not most scandalous then, that you should be seen as a body, all in confusion; section in conflict with section; your rule of faith interpreted in every arbitrary mode, with mutual accusations of perverting it; and with loud complaints from some of you of twenty things wrong in either

the constitution or the administration of the church? Pray try to come, if possible, to such an understanding among yourselves, that you may no longer stand before the nation in a condition which, taken in conjunction with your solemn pledge to conformity, must expose you to opprobrium. We dissenters having no standard of conformity, having no high prelatical authorities over us, may sectarianize and fight as much as we please; but for you, under the solemn obligations you have taken upon you, to exhibit yourselves in such lawless commotion-is not to be tolerated. You should either maintain the peace of the church, or come out of it; for as to altering it to the mind of any one, or any sect of you, that would be an idle dream.

It was under the habit of such kind of feelings, that I was indisposed to hear the remonstrant lamentation of good Mr. More than enough of this.

In the department of Christian morality, I think many of those who are distinguished as evangelical preachers greatly and culpably deficient. They rarely, if ever, take some one topic of moral duty, as-honesty, veracity, impartiality, Christian temper, forgiveness of injuries, temperance (in any of its branches), the improvement of time, and investigate specifically its principle, rules, discriminations, adaptations. There is none of the casuistry found in many of the old divines. Such discussions would have cost far more labour of thought than dwelling and expatiating on the general evangelical doctrines; but would have been eminently useful; and it is very necessary, in order to set people's judgments and consciences to rights. It is partly in consequence of this neglect (very general, I believe) that many religious kind of people have unfixed and ill-defined apprehensions of moral discriminations. Hall told Anderson that in former years he had often insisted on subjects of this order:* I know not whence the ill-judged alteration, during his resi

"Be not afraid of devoting whole sermons to particular parts of moral conduct and religious duties. It is impossible to give right views of them, unless you dissect characters, and describe particular virtues and vices. The fruits of the flesh' and 'the fruits of the Spirit' must be distinctly pointed out. To preach against sin in general, without descending to particulars, may lead many to complain of the evil of their hearts, while at the same time, they are awfully inattentive to the evil of their conduct." HALL'S Charge to the Rev. J. K. Hall, Works, iv. 483.