An Examination of the Doctrine of Future Retribution: On the Principles of Morals, Analogy and ...

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Dedication

From nnmerous considerations, which have made a deep and lasting impression on his mind, the author of this work is induced, most respectfully and affectionately, to inscribe it to the Second Uniyersalist Society in Boston, to which it has been his happiness, for many years, to minister.

H. Ballou

Boston, March 30th, 1834.

Preface

A PART of what is contained in the following work has been before published in the Universalist Expositor. But as that work never had a very extensive circulation, the author had a desire of bringing his views on the subject treated on, more extensively before the public, and that in a treatise by itself; by which means it might be more likely to become a subject of general consideration and investigation.

The whole, as it is now embodied, will make the reader pretty well acquainted with the views of the iauthor, on the general subject, and the principles on which he founds them.

If the views maintained in the following essay

are any more in accordance with truth, than

those doctrines which oppose them, there is every

good reason for laying them before the public,

which can be required for so doing. We cannot

allow that truth ought not to be advanced if it

conflict with long established opinions, and tend 1# to give offence to pious persons, who have long been established in the popular doctrines of the day. If we consent to such argument, we thereby pass censure on that Divine Teacher, who warned his disciples to beware of the doctrines of the Scribes and Pharisees ; and not only do we thereby charge him with fault, but justify his revilers and persecutors. In so doing we should take the position occupied by those, in our Saviour's time, who shut up the kingdom of heaven against men ; and who would neither enter themselves, nor suffer others so to do.

If the master spirits who led in the reformation, in the sixteenth century, had yielded to the fear of giving offence to a church which was imbued with error and corruption, the moral darkness which characterized that age might have continued a protracted night; and the benign light, which has made such salutary advances, might have been excluded from the Christian world.

Whatever may be said to justify Galileo for abjuring the Copernican system, when his life WB.^ menaced, the same could not be urged in jextenuation of the impropriety of withholding important truth from society, in times which are not disgraced with offices of inquisition.

Should the reader object to the foregoing remarks, as giving any countenance to the publishing of doctrine so erroneous as he may believe is maintained in the following pages, he is reminded that such an objection constitutes himself as odious an inquisition as ever was nourished in the bosom of popery. The times in which we live, and the happy government which guarantees and defends the right of every individual in community, not only justify the honest confession of our religious sentiments, but call on us to discharge such a duty. In addition to this call, a paramount one is recognized from truth itself. To this call the writer of the following essay has been conscientiously devoted for more than forty years ; and he has endeavored faithfully to discharge the duties which it embraced, notwithstanding the many painful conflicts through which *hey have carried him. Not that he would boast •of having advanced nothing but truth ; for experience has often enforced on his mind the truth of the maxim, that " to err is human." But such experience has been useful ; as by exposing his mistakes to the investigation of stronger and more enlightened minds, they have been corrected. One consolation he has constantly enjoyed, in reflecting that his mistakes were errors of the head, never of the heart. It has always remained his fixed resolution, to keep a mind open to conviction ; always active in investigating religious truth ; constantly ready to profess and hold forth any opinion when convinced of its truth however unpopular, and however opposed by divines, by the schools, or by his dearest friends. This course has led him to give up many religious tenets, which were taught him in his youth, and not a few which were embraced by the denomination to which he has from his youth belonged. Pursuing this course, he early renounced the doctrine of endless punishment ; the doctrine of the trinit}' ; that of native depravity ; that of the imputation of sin and of righteousness ; that of the vicarious sufferings of Christ; and nearly eighteen years ago, the doctrine of punishment in the future state. It has been his lot to meet with much opposition on most of these points, from various denominations, and not the least strenuous from those of the denomination with which he has been happy to hold connexion. For the painful travail endured from all this opposition, he has been abundantly compensated by seeing the rapid advance of the doctrines which he has embraced, and endeavored to advocate.

T

The object of the writer of the following pages is to place his views, respecting the doctrine of a future stale of retribution, before the public, and to preserve his arguments on that subject; that when the lime shall come, as he believes it will, when people in general will number the tenet of future punishment among those corruptions of Christianity, which will then be abandoned, it may be known that the writer disbelieved it in his day, and also that the arguments with which he opposed it may then be known.

Universalists now take a pleasure in looking back and tracing, from Origen down to our time, the progress of the doctrine which embraces the salvation of all men ; and so they will doubtless continue to do in future ages.

Some may query whether a proper regard to the opinions and feelings of honest, faithful and affectionate brethren, who believe in the doctrine of future retribution, but yet earnestly contend for final restoration, would not incline the writer to be silent on iKe subject, and not to come out with this publication. To this inquiry, it is replied, that such brethren, with their many commendable qualities, are warmly cherished in the affections of the writer's heart, nor are they the less regarded because they do not adopt his opinions. And he feels confident that such brethren will entertain no suspicions of his want of respect for them. They will not fail to consider that the views of the writer, on the subject of retribution, are not so wide from theirs, as theirs are from the views of those authors whom ihey quote as authority in support of future retribution. They would doubtless sooner embrace the opinion of no future sin and misery, than defend the doctrine maintained by that good man, exemplary Christian, and faithful minister, Elhanan Winchester, who supposed that the wicked, in the life to come, will suffer for ages and ages, inconceivable torment in literal fire and brimstone. Such torment is now denied by our doctors, who maintain endless punishment, and rejected also by those who believe in a state of discipline hereafter which shall end in an entire reformation. Such brethren will also cordially respond to the assurance that the writer of the following work will never withhold a sincere fellowship from a faithful brother, because he disagrees with him on the doctrine of divine retribution.

It is very possible that some, who have a strong desire that nothing should be done, which should tend, in the least, to endanger the harmony and cordial fellowship of Universalists, may think that prudence would at least plead for a delay, and suggest the propriety of deferring this puhli- Cation to some future time, when it might give less offence. Such may be assured that their good wishes for the harmony and fellowship of our order, are duly respected; but they cannot be ignorant of the faci that the doctrine of a future state of punishment has been disbelieved, by ministering brethren of our order, for many years, and that much has been published with a view to disprove that doctrine ; and, moreover, that now said doctrine is generally disbelieved by Universalists of our connexion ; and yet much harmony prevails, and our fellowship remains, and is warmly cherished between brethren whose opinions disagree on the subject of this doctrine. The writer would further remark, that both age and infirmity admonish him that what he feels it his duty to do, he ought not to delay ; and he cannot believe that any of his brethren can feel, in the least, wounded because iheir aged brother should finish his labors in accordance with the dictates of his own understanding. It is a happy circumstance, that in the denomination of Universalists, no one feels bound to defend and support the particular opinions of another, any further than he is himself convinced of their truth and importance. Our platform of faith is general, and allows individuals an extensive latitude to think freely, investigate minutely, and to adopt what particular views best comport with the honest convictions of the mind, and fearlessly to avow and defend the same.

As the writer of the following pages has, from the commencement of his studies and ministry, asserted, enjoyed, and improved his right to think freely, and to embrace or reject the opinions of others, as the force of evidence appeared to direct, so he wishes to continue to do, the little remainder of his days of labor. And he would assure his brethren, that he has always felt it his duty to accord the same right to others ; and this he hopes to continue tP do in future.

Feeling an unabated desire for the advancement of divine truth, and the pure religion of the Saviour, he cannot willingly withhold from contributing, what he hujnbly hopes, may have a tendency to this desired end.

The Author.

March ^th, 1834.

DOCTRINE

OF

FUTURE RETRIBUTION.

Chapter I. Retribution Considered In Connexion With The Moral Nature Of Man

pBOPOsiTiON. By a careful and studied reference to the moral constitution ofmany and the laios by which the human mind is governed, it is ascertained that true religion has no need of a belief in a future state of reioards and punishments for its esiabUshment and prosperity among men.

The moral tendency of doctrine, hav-

, ^ '' Examinatma

mg now extensively engaged the atten- of the question

tion of theorists, is fast advancing its **"*

interest in the minds of people generally ; and

divines of different denominations are, therefore,

desirous of recommending their respective tenets

to the consideration and acceptance of the public,

by inducing a belief that they are justly entitled

to a preference above all others, on account of

their evident tendency to moral virtue.

This state of things ought not to be considered 2 as undesiraW'' for it will eventually lead to most salutary consequences. In fact, it shows, most evidently, that moral virtue is held in such high estimation, that it is worthy of being made the umpire, to whose decision contending theologians must submit their respective theories. This must be a subject of congratulation to every lover of moral virtue ; for here he sees all, who are engaged in disputes about their varying and conflicting creeds, paying a voluntary homage to what he so warmly loves, and to which his heart is sincerely devoted. It is true that the good, of which we here speak, must be found mixed with some evil, as are all other favorable things and circumstances, enjoyed in this world. There will be found in the many pleas which are, and will be offered by partisans in favor of their respective, darling tenets, some unkind insinuations, some uncandid representations, some violent thrusts, which will indicate a greater love of party than of truth and morals. But after all, the balance will be favorable ; truth will be sifted and better understood ; and though the evil may be bitter, like- the bud, it will soon give way to fruit which will be desirable. It would be expecting too much of men, so imperfect as we know the leaders of the different denominations are, to think they will always treat each other as they would be willing to be treated, or refer to each other with that respect which they love to have shown to themselves. Though it is pleasant and agreeable to hope for such a state of religion, as will make all its votaries love each other as they love themselves; we must not forget that the due exercise of charity for man, even in the present state of things, is a virtue which is entitled to precedence above all others. Let this virtue be as extensively exercised as the calls for it occur, and let the controversy go on till the legitimate relation between the doctrine of divine truth and those sound and wholesome morals, which are its natural fruits, shall be clearly understood. Truth will then shine in unborrowed lustre, and virtue attract by its native beauty and moral worth. The two theories of doctrine, which „ ,

Two doctnnea

at present seem most to call the atten- which arrett puution of the public to a candid investi- '<^ •"«""<>•»• gation of their respective merits, on those grounds which we have before noticed, are distinguished, the one by depending on a belief in a future state of rewards and punishment, to guard us against the practice of vice, and to induce us to obey the precepts of religion and morality; the other, by teaching that all the reward we ought to expect, for a faithful discharge of our duty to God and our fellow-creatures, is found in the enjoyments which are necessarily connected wiA religion and duty, in the present stale, where our obedi-

16 EXAMINATION OP THE DOCTRINE

ence is practised ; and that all the retrihutions for wrong-doing, in the present world, are the infelicities which cannot be separated from the vices, which bring them upon us. The former directs us to look beyond the grave for the rewards of our virtues, and for the punishments of our vices ; the latter teaches us to expect both these in the present world. The statement here made of the two theories, and of their respective marks of distinction, is thought to be sufficiently definite, as the subject is pretty well understood by people in general.

Our object in the present disquisition is to. try, in 1 candid manner, the claims of these two theories, not only in reference to their moral influence, but also with regard to some other arguments which are urged by their respective supporters, in their defence.

It has long been believed and taught amTuro™ ty the learned doctors of the Christian

argument irom j

the fear, and church, that mau beinff so constituted

hopes of men.

as to be persuaded by the two principles of hope and fear, our Creator has seen fit to promise us a reward, in the future state, for the faithful performance of our duty in this ; and that he has threatened us with punishment, in the future state, both for our neglect of obedience to his requiremetits, and for those acts in which we vioxate them. Thus it is contended that reason and

OF FUTURE RETEIBUTION. 17

experience teach the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, as analogous with our moral constitution. The advocates of this view of the general question are confident that if the hope of future reward was removed, and the fear of future punishment done away, religion and virtue would no longer attract man's attention, nor aught remain to restrain him from indulging himself in all the vices and abominations which are forbidden.

That those views and arguments said ar^menu should be satisfactory to people who "•"•"•**• are taught them from childhood, need not excite our wonder ; nor need we, for a moment, withhold our charity from those teachers who are now engaged in defending them. These teachers were, from their infant days, taught those opinions. Nor is it at all difficult to account for all the zeal which seems to animate those who are making every possible exertion to keep those sentiments in credit, and to prevent the prevalence of the opposite doctrine. On general principles we are perfectly safe in supposing those to be honest and sincere, who are thus employed, and that they have the good of mankind in view.

But, notwithstanding we feel bound to respect the honest and sincere, and to treat their doctrines and arguments with candor, it seems, in every view of th ^subject, a reasonable duty to examine

2* carefully, not only the premises on which doctrines are predicated, but also the legitimacy of inferences which are drawn from them.

As to the fact, that man is influenced and persuaded by the opposite principles of hope and fear, it seems reasonable that it be allowed. It seems very evident that we always act with a hope to gain some benefit, and thereby to avoid some evil ; but does it necessarily follow that the benefit which we hope to gain must be in a future state, and that the evil we hope to avoid must be there too ? This is directly denied by those whose views we are now examining. They say, if the fear of future punishment were removed, and the hope of future reward taken away, there would be nothing to induce us to be religious and moral, nor anything to prevent us from running into the practice of every vice and abomination. Then surely we could act without being incited by considerations of a future state. It would be no easier for us to commit sin without a motive, than to practise virtue without a motive. But where lies the expected benefit, which induces the vicious to sin ? Does it present itself to the imagination in a future state ? No one will pretend this. Then it must be given up, at once, that in order to induce men to act it is necessary to place the object to be obtained in a future world. The candid reader will now^ee, that the doctrine we are examining is unsound; for it depends on the supposition, that as we act from hope and fear, the good hoped for, and the evil dreaded, must both be in a future state.

If, in order further to maintain the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, its advocate should say, that ahhough men may be induced to sin, and may become as active in so doing as possible, without the expectation of any good in the future state, yet without such expectation they cannot be persuaded to become religious and moral, he is called on to find out and assign the reason.

We have now arrived at a spot where we should do well to pause and duly consider. All the professed friends of religion and moral virtue will allow that the wicked are too active in committing sin, that they run too greedily in pursuit of forbidden indulgences; but none of them suppose that these wicked thus act in expectation of obtaining any good in a future state. Where, then, do the wicked expect to receive the enjoyment which they are pursuing ? In this present state, to be sure.

Reader, be cautious ! If the wicked Thefreat

_ • n r truih lo be

are mduced to commit all manner of uught. iniquity, and to practise every forbidden abomination, by no expectation of any enjoyment but in this life, can there be any other reason assigned why they do not forsake the ways of impiety and vice, and become religious and moral, than because religion and morality do not promise them so much happiness and enjoyment, in the present world, as does the course they are now in ? No one will or can doubt on this subject. Then let us ask, whether the view which the wicked have of religion and morality is a right one ? To this question all will answer in the negative. We are then ready for a general and a safe conclusion. There is no necessity of promising a reward in a future state for the practice of duty in the present. All that is wanting for this purpose is to understand and to be persuaded that righteousness brings an ample reward, in the present life.

This conclusion is abundantly justified by the fact, that in room of obtaining the good which the wicked promise themselves in the paths of vice, they always meet with that degree of trouble and infelicity which constitutes a just recompense for their disobedience to the commands of God, and the dictates of conscience.

Danger In our investigatiou of the force of °pi"-u«^in^ motive to induce the wicked to push for-

""• ward in wrong- doing, we must not neglect to notice the counteracting power which is overcome by it (according to common opinion). It is a fact, with which all are acquainted, that nearly all the vicious have been educated in the

OFyFUTURE RETRIBUTION. 21

belief of a future state of rewards and punishments ; yet notmthstanding the apprehensions which they have entertained, that by the practice of the vices in which they indulged their passions, they were exposing themselves to inconceivable miseries hereafter ; the expectation of enjoyment in the present state, has carried them on in the strong current of sin, which has broken down every barrier, and furnished conclusive proof that no motive is so sure of inducing to action, as the expectation of immediate happiness.

In view of these facts, who will wonder that in these times there should be some engao-ed in laboring to convince men that present happiness can be obtained by being faithful in the discharge of our duty to God, to our fellow-creatures, and to ourselves, by doing justly, loving mercy, and by walking humbly, and by no other means ; and that however flattering sin may appear, and however strongly our blind, fleshly passions may tempt us from duty, moral death, condemnation, and misery will be the immediate and sure recompense for unlawful indulgence ?

We maintain that this view, and all Thew

▼lewt the facts which we can find connected Tumrn^** with it, are in accordance with the experience. laws of the human mind, and will be found to agree with universal experience. By these views we arrive at the desideratum long sought for, the reason why the promises of complete bliss, in the future world, and the threaten! ngs of most dire torments, have not accomplished the design for which they were so vehemently urged on the people. Yes, we here discover the reason why such doctrines have not been able to restrain their most zealous believers from the very sins, for which they believed these threatenings would be executed on those who practised them. Deceive ourselves as much as we mav, whenever truth appears we find ourselves in pursuit of happiness, in the present world ; and if we are vicious, it is in consequence of an erroneous expectation of obtaining it by wicked means ; and if we are pious and virtuous, it is because we love to be so, and find ourselves richly rewarded in keeping the divine commands, and in obedience to the dictates of conscience.

-. . . . We would not be understood to

The inconsistencj

ofihe suppose that the divine light, which shows us these invaluable truths, has never shined in the understandings of our divines, who so much depend on future rewards and punishments to support religion and virtue; for they frequently discover this light, and cominunicate it to the public. But they do not appear to enjoy its steady rays, nor do they conform their doctrine to its directions. If we ask them what constitutes true religion, they tell us it is the love of God in the heart. If we ask them • what constitutes genuine morality, they will tell us that it is the natural fruit of true religion. Ask them whether we can either love God, or practise morality, by being induced by the hope of future rewards, or the fear of future punishments, and they will answer in the negative, with great assurance. But by the force of tradition, and by the influence of habit, together with some other causes, they will continue to advocate the notion that religion and morality would quit our world, if the hopes and fears of future rewards and punishments were not kept up, and caused to act on the mind.

We have a remarkable instance ju.t.entiment8of Proof the foregoing inconsistency in f"«>r smart. Professor Stuart's Letter to Dr. Channing. He says, — *^ Religion, all true religion^ is a voluntary offering on the part of man to his Creator, A forced creed is no creed. Belief from its own nature and the very constitution of the human mind, must he free, spontaneous, induced hyargU" Tnent, not compelled by fear or by threats. All professed belief of this latter kind, is utterly unworthy of the name. It is an object of ahhor^ rence to God, and of loathing to men,"

After reading the above quotation, nuffroM incoMi*. and after duly considering the un- **""'^- questionable truth of everything there stated, who could reasonably expect to find the learned professor endeavoring to induce the human mind to search for religion, and the true faith of the gospel, by urging the terrors of future misery ? Yet we find him, in the same Letter, holding the following terrific language : — "^ an immortal beings I look forward to the time when myself and all around, me are to enter on the * recompense of reward,^ a final eternal one. If I am serious in my religious views ; if I am well persuaded that they are true, and this, after repeated, protracted, and patient examination ; then I must he utterly destitute even of the spirit of common humanity, if I do 7iot desire others to participate with me in this persuasion. Were it a matter pertaining merely to their temporal interests, most of my fellow-beings would pronounce me destitute of humanity, in case I should not warn those around me to escape from it. But O the never dyi?ig soul ! The awful tribuTial of * eternal judgment ! ' * The fearfulness of falling into the hands of the living God, who is a consuming fire / ' If I believe that there are unequivocal declarations in Crod^s word {as I truly do) in respect to these tremendous subjects ; if I believe that the impenitent are surely exposed to endless misery ; that those who reject the Saviour as he is offered in the gospel, * shall not see life, but that the lorath of God will abide on themf can I, as a Tnan of any pretensions to benevolence, refrain from telling all this to others, from urging it upon them, and from

OF FUTUKE HETRIBUTION. 25

warning them of the danger in which I sincerely believe them to be ? "

It seems impossible to arrange two paragraphs so as to exhibit contradiction more plainly than is manifested by the two above quoted from the learned professor. In the first, he assures us that a religion, or a professed belief induced by fear or byHhreats, is an " object of abhorrence to God, and of loathing to men." In the last he presents us with the wrath of God and eternal misery, as the fruit of his benevolence. He holds up the Saviour, in one hand, and makes an offer of him for our acceptance; in the other, he presents the wrath of God and eternal misery ; if we receive the Saviour, we escape this eternal misery ; but if not, then this misery surely awaits us. These are the terms on which a Saviour is offered by a divine who tells us that our profession of the Saviour, compelled by fears or threats, is an object of abhorrence to God, and of loathing to men ! Thus he would endeavor to set up and establish the very thing which God abhors, and which men loathe !

There is no man so entirely igno- Rea«,M whj «• rant of the laws of the human mind, ■*'°"''* ^*'» °*^ as to suppose that we can be induced to love our Creator, either by a promised reward, or by threatened torment ; and yet these motives are constantly urged on the people for this very pur-

26 EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTBINE

pose ; and the arguments we are examining, m defence of a future state of rewards and punishments, contend that religion and morality depend on them.

If our Creator is worthy of the love and devotion of his rational offspring, a fact which none will deny, it must be on account of his real goodness to them ; and if his requirements are wortljy of our careful observance, which none will question, it must be because the keeping of them is enjoyment to us. With these simple, self-evident propositions in clear view, why should we have recourse to hereafter rewards and punishments to incite us to love God and to keep his commandments?- To induce us to love God, nothing is necessary but to make us acquainted with his real character ; and to persuade us to keep the divine commands, no argument need be used but to show us the interest we have in obedience.