I.

ALIQUIS. At some distance, Sir, I thought it was you. You appear to be enjoying this fine walk.

NEMO. This is a favourite stroll of mine. Here one finds something like quietude. I am glad, nevertheless, to meet you in this still region.

ALIQUIS. What connection may there be between thinking of a person, and presently seeing him? This so frequently occurs that one might almost fancy thought caused the appearance. Without any expectation of our meeting, I was thinking of you before you came in sight. I should add, however, that for some days I have had you more or less in my mind, and have been wishing for an interview.

NEMO. I am quite pleased to see you here, for if we had not had the good fortune to meet, a long bracing walk like the one you have taken will be of service to you in many ways. But tell me in what way I have been occupying your thoughts?

ALIQUIS. I have been thinking of you in connection. with the last sermon or lecture I heard from you. The subject of that discourse has of late, I must own, had a great share of my attention. Shall I

be pardoned if I tell

you, I was so disappointed and disquieted with your views that I seriously contemplated writing you?

NEMO. Do let me know what you found so distasteful. Perhaps it was not so much the subject itself, as my mode of handling it.

ALIQUIS. To be candid, it was the subject itself, being what you described "The Endlessness of Future Punishment." For several reasons I had concluded this doctrine was not in your creed.

NEMO. You surprise me. Was there any portion that struck you as particularly objectionable?

ALIQUIS. I was disappointed with the topic of discourse, and with your representations of it, and in the introductory sentences resolved to pay but slight attention to what might follow.

NEMO. Perhaps the text disconcerted you, rather than my observations.

ALIQUIS. A little in that. A thousand passages might have been discoursed from without selecting one so mysterious and controversial. I venture to think that such subjects as your text suggested, are better omitted in pulpit ministrations.

NEMO. The words are given us by Christ, and may I not inquire, ought not His words to be discoursed from by professedly Christian teachers ? Have I not heard you in glowing language unfold a lofty admiration of His character, and declare Him to be the wisest, the holiest, and the most trustworthy of Instructors? I would not give to this solemn subject a greater prominence in pulpit teaching than it occupies in Holy Scripture, but to deny it, or discard it, I should regard as unfaithfulness to the Bible. Account for it as we may, it does make up a great portion of our Saviour's teaching, and is found with more or less distinctness in every portion of the Word of God.

ALIQUIS. Are you aware, Sir, of the contempt, (I might use a stronger word) with which this dogma of “Eternal Punishment" is regarded by the intelligent people of this age? "The doctrine of endless torments, if held, is not practically taught by the vast majority of the English clergy. How rarely in these modern days have our pulpits resounded with the detailed descriptions of future punishments, which abound in the writings of the seventeenth century! How rarely does any one, even of the strictest sect, venture to apply such descriptions to any one that he has personally known! And when we read the actual grounds on which the belief is rested by those who now put it forth as one of the essential articles of faith, we find that it reposes almost entirely on the doubtful interpretation, in a single passage, of , a single word, which in far the larger proportion of passages where it occurs in the Bible, cannot possibly bear the meaning commonly put upon it in this particular text*."

NEMO. I am aware of the opposition to this doctrine by what are called the freer spirits of our times, but your observations just now, quoted from a wellknown writer, are by no means a warrantable representation of this matter. It is true enough there is too much, in the professedly Christian teaching of the day, of a marked forgetfulness of the sterner side of the Divine character, and a well-nigh omission of the enforcement of the "severity" of God. This kind of teaching is not the counterpart of our blessed Redeemer's, nor that of His Apostles'. In the scenes of creation you will find beauty and terror; in the dispensations of Providence you will find judgment, as well as mercy; and in Revelation you are frequently apprised of the exercises of chastisement, and law, and power, as well as tenderness and love. Our modern teaching is, we fear, as you havè stated it,

*Dean Stanley's "Essays on Church and State," 1870. Essay iii., page 128.

one-sided, with no ruggedness, with no depth of warning, with no retributive justice. In these days the sinner is almost complimented, and the fullest apologies are offered for disobedience and crime. But you know the old proverb, "It is not all gold that glitters," and many who trifle with this weighty truth of Scripture, and are sarcastic and unbelieving, can give but a poor account of their conduct. Let me say with the utmost seriousness, that, in our day, as well as in all time preceding, the most masculine and furnished minds are compelled to believe in the endless duration of the punishment of the finally impenitent, from the weight of Biblical evidence. You will not think I am boasting when I aver, that Christian ministers who are faithful to their calling, do not live in ignorance of current literature, and are not unacquainted with the temper and scepticism of their age; but in fairness to them it should be mentioned, that so many objections to the word of God, and in particular to this awful doctrine, are known by them to be so frivolous, and only old foes in new faces, that they deem it unnecessary to be constantly referring to them.

ALIQUIS. I was hardly prepared for such a statement. To be honest I must confess to a notion, and I believe a very general one, that the ministerial teachers of Christianity know little of the phases of modern thought, of scientific discoveries, and the advanced and scholarly knowledge of Biblical facts and doctrines. It may appear presumptuous in me, but I should not hesitate to enter on a discussion with any one to prove, that this horrible dogma of the eternity of the punishment of the wicked is contradicted by human reason, by our highest knowledge of God, and by the obvious teaching of the Bible itself.

NEMO. Readily do I concede that this subject is one of stupendous awfulness. It is one that has

taxed the powers of the greatest and best of our race, and from earliest times down to our day has awakened the most anxious consideration. It is a subject that should be approached with the greatest calmness and purity of feeling, for while we look into this frightful abyss, we may well tremble to think that we ourselves stand on the precipice. Dogmatism and uncharitableness are strangely at variance with the solemnity of faith in the appalling reality of a Divine and endless wrath to come! Thoughtfully and respectfully would I say, however, you will find it extremely difficult to maintain the propriety of your strong declarations just uttered. We are several miles from Oxford, and in returning I shall have no objection to talk with you on this matter. I am not fond of what are called "discussions,” they are a little too ambitious and perilous for me, but we may have a free conversation, each striving for the attainment of truth, rather than victory.

ALIQUIS. It is kind of you, Sir, to speak in this way, and I will endeavour carefully to weigh your words.

NEMO. Let us at the outset understand each other. We shall be at liberty I hope to ask questions as we go along, so that our conversation may be honest and thorough as far as it goes. I do not marvel at your doubtfulness on this subject. You have told me it has of late been engaging your thoughts, and you may have become acquainted with some of the numerous and plausible attacks upon its truth and defenders. I repeat, attacks upon the defenders of this doctrine, as well as upon the doctrine itself. For, with few exceptions, the adverse publications of our time aim more at the ridicule and reprehension of the teachers of this solemn truth, than attempt a reverent and searching examination of the foundations on which it rests. You will allow me to say further,