render of the will in merely yielding to the laws of nature. It must feel itself in the grasp of a will, free, conscious, and intelligent like itself, and too just to be censured, too strong to be resisted. A man may yield to the ocean, an earthquake, or a storm; but he can submit, with a submission which stands related to penitence and love, only to a personal ruler, and prompted by a personal discipline. Is it less obvious that no sensibility can be won by the cold hand and passionless voice of natural law? Is the heart of man touched with tender gratitude in the enjoyment of the sweet sunlight, the balmy air, the rich landscape, the luscious fruits which nature yields, when it does not recognize them as the gifts of a personal God? No more can the mere discipline of nature's impersonal laws soften and melt, and win the prodigal heart back to its father's house and arms!

The operation of these principles, it is manifest, is not restricted to the individual offender. Society is made up of individuals. The forces necessary to reform one, are essential to the welfare of the whole. Others beside the sinner look upon the scene; and something like the same impressions are made at second hand, as immediately. The action in each individual soul is transmitted also, through the influence of character when formed. In every view, secure the man and you secure society. For the sake, then, both of society and of the individual offender, as well as from the demands of justice, the punishment of sin must be, and be recognized as, a penal and governmental infliction, in distinction from a mere result, according to natural law. And here we close the consideration of the mode of punishment. It should doubtless be chiefly spiritual; and it must be such as to show the avenging hand of an offended sovereign behind it.

We approach the question of Degree.

A leading element in this problem must of course be the degree of guilt. And who can estimate this? Many circumstanes, all will at once perceive, enter directly into the account. The measure of natural faculties bestowed upon the sinner; the intelligence which he has obtained; the opportunities which he has enjoyed or neglected in doing so; the tempta

tions by which he was assailed; the deliberation and consciousness with which he acted, &c. But though all can perceive the bearing of these, who shall measure the precise degree in which they affect the result? Nothing short of a mind that could penetrate every secret, of human being, and of nature, would be sufficient.

But there is one element in the case which especially ought never to be forgotten;-the position, character, and authority of Him against whom the sin has been committed. To sin against official rank and authority,-against the highest worth and loveliness of character,-against the most sacred ties of gratitude for favors conferred,-against the warmest, deepest love of a fathomless heart, that of a father perhaps, how unspeakably does this surpass in guilt the same crime committed under other and more equal relations! What, then, must be the guilt of sin against GOD; who combines every possible title to reverence, love, gratitude, and obedience, in a degree elsewhere to all human imagination unknown! No other obligations are equal to those which we owe to Him; none surpassing them could be conceived. Yet we sin against Him consciously, deeply, persistently; and that, too, notwithstanding the most moving overtures on his part toward pardon and reconciliation; and all intensified, illustrated and proved, as no language can express, in the cross of Christ! The bearing of these most momentous considerations, upon the question of human guilt, and its appropriate punishment, ought not to be overlooked on account of their familiarity.

It has been held by minds of great penetration and power, that since the authority against which sin is committed is infinite in weight and sacredness, the appropriate penalty of sin can be nothing less than infinite: and also that a perfect moral governor must manifest the highest possible regard for his law, which can only be done by inflicting the highest possible penalty upon its transgressor. Although not for ourselves satisfied of the validity of either of these considerations, as reaching the full conclusion, it is impossible to overlook the immense importance, in their bearing upon the question, of the facts which have suggested these reasonings. God is

infinite in his character, position, usefulness to the universe, claims upon us for favors conferred, and in every conceivable element which could add sacredness to our duty toward Him. Yet we have sinned against Him in the deepest sense;-in a sense so deep, that many of the profoundest observers, looking at the evident facts in the case, have felt compelled, in order to account for them, to conclude that our very nature, as inherited, and before all action, is itself sinful! And here, again, let not dissent from the theory thus stated, blind our eyes to the terrible facts, which, legitimately or otherwise, have furnished its occasion. Certainly as a perfect moral governor, with all the untold interests of a universe hanging upon his scepter, God is bound to show a weight of regard for his holy law, in which all those inconceivable interests are bound up; and of consequent disapprobation of sin, at which even holy beings occupying less responsible positions might naturally stand aghast!

So far as the welfare of society is concerned, which the last consideration naturally suggests, the degree of appropriate infliction will be determined by the amount of injury threatened by sin to the universe. If this is radical, reaching to the very core of the soul, vital as life itself, poisoning the very fountains of intellectual and moral being; if it is from its nature incurable by any ordinary means, but, on the contrary, tends constantly and powerfully to increase and reduplicate itself; if its spreading roots already reach to every organ and vein of nature, so that "the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together; and if what is now seen is but a faint foreshadowing of woes insufferable and inconceivable, gathering like despair over the future horizon of the whole universe, and for eternity; how do these facts bear upon the question of the degree of punishment which might properly be inflicted to restrain the evil! And here again we may observe, that though all can see the bearing of the considerations named, no finite mind can trace out and measure it; nor define precisely its results when entering as an element into the problem before us.

And, on the whole, in the light of these and other thoughts

which might here find a place, we ask, who shall presume to assign limits to the Degree of punishment which a Holy God may be compelled to inflict upon the sinner?

It remains to consider the question of the Duration of Punishment.

And here, as in reference to the degree, let us be reminded of those terrible fundamental necessities of the case, whose iron bonds not even the omnipotence of the Deity himself can escape. While every Divine attribute would forbid the continuance of penalty one moment longer than would be necessary to accomplish its purpose, it would be equally and forever impossible that it should cease one moment before that point. The interests of society must be guarded, and justice must be satisfied; and whatever duration of punishment may be necessary to this end will be inflicted; whether it be for the term of man's earthly life, or the life of the race, or for a thousand cycles of centuries, or for all eternity. It is idle to affirm that a merciful God could never inflict eternal pain; unless, indeed, it is intended merely to assert that a less enduring penalty must be amply sufficient to satisfy the true ends of punishment. But if this is meant, then let the appropriate terms be used to express it. And if any man is authorized to say it, let him say it and prove it; and let him define precisely the limit of duration, since he seems to know that it cannot go beyond a certain time, let him say how far it can go. But if he hesitates to assert positively on this point, let him not trifle with the question, by saying in effect what he dares not say in words.

But to the argument. This much must certainly be admitted; that punishment will continue so long as sin is persisted in. If sin lives forever, its penalty can never cease. The first question then is, How long will sin endure?

What a question to ask of one who has never passed the gates of death to see the scenes which they hide from mortal eyes, who has never seen one who has visited that future world, who might inform him respecting it,-who cannot pretend to the gift of prophecy, or omniscient knowledge. How is he to determine how long his fellow sinner will continue to sin? Can he foretell as it respects the present life, how his neighbors

will conduct to-morrow? Can he see into the heart of one of them, even at the present moment, not to say for all coming eternity? We know that every man is a sinner now; he has been so from his earliest childhood; he goes out of the world a sinner. Who can assure us that, in the world beyond, his character will undergo a change? Show us the solid ground for such a hope? For any judgment short of actual knowledge upon the subject, the question is one of the mutual relations of Divine Sovereignty and human Free Agency, involving the most complete sounding and diagnosis of all the depths and recesses of those powers. Is it said that sinners will repent in a future life? How can we know that? Can we see far enough into the human will, to foresee its action for years and ages? Dare we trust that God will secure the desired result? Who has told us that God can do it? Do we know enough of the relation of Divine power to human freedom, to say how far the former can extend its control over the latter without destroying it? No sound philosophy will assert such a claim. But to destroy the will for the sake of putting an end to sin, would be the same thing in principle as not to have created it, in order that sin might not come into existence. And since God has not done the latter, how can we be sure that he will do the former? Let it but be distinctly understood, that in order to settle these questions we must fathom the whole depth of that "problem of ages," which every philosopher and theologian who has lived has struggled with, and in a measure in vain; and who will now presume to build on a foundation so uncertain, a theory to be trusted on the most momentous of all themes, a theme involving the soul and eternity! And should it still be urged, that God would even bring the life of the sinner to an end, rather than see him suffer eternal pain, it may be answered, this also is beyond our knowledge. We cannot trace the effect of such a measure upon the universe, nor determine whether a holy God could consistently adopt it.

Moreover, there are considerations tending powerfully, fearfully, to show that a sinner, confirmed by long habit and the rejection of mercy in sin, may, and probably does pass beyond the reach of hope, and seal his covenant with despair forever.