The morning star and Catholic messenger., 1878-02-03
Mr.. Lloyd's Sermon.


preached q sermon on "Eternai Punish
ment" on which We commented editoriaiiy,
thinks that our remarks did not do him
justice, and in this connection sends rs the
following communication
tNKw ORLEANS, Jan. 80, 1873.
Editor Morning Star,
Dear Sir My attention has been called
to an editorial in your paper on ''A gree
Bible.n Now If o man takes the trouble to
inform himself accurately concerning my
views have no objection to his prononnc-
ing them hereticai and damniug ii that be
his conviction. honor him for straight
forward and honest performance OF what be
considers TO be his duty. But then the
right to criticize my views involves, as 1t
seems to me, the duty Of finding out what
they really are. In the only criticism you
mept1 literally and "iife" fguratively.
Now the passage referred to Is an argunsen-
t,t,a ad hominem. The point made is that
If DR.. Palmer takes ''life" literally he ought
to take "death," the antithesis of life, liter
ally, and that in that case he wouid have
the annihilation of the wicked instead of
their eternal punishment. In the very next
paragraph I gave my own view, viz that
neither s'life" nor death" is to be taken
literally, but that both together, the re-
ward of a mans good deeds and the pun
ishment of his bad deeds, make up every
mans lot. / explained that in a very
definite seuss befieved-ih eHdlees pnnish=
mept. ga mans lost opportu mites are lost
forever, and because of them the man is
forecer less sympathetic, less Intellectual,
lees holy than he might have been, and 80,
in q very definite and easily comprehended
sense ia punished forever" / SIMPLY tried
to prove that while the past cannot be
wiped out, every man, whether in this or
any other werld, may, if he chooses, make
better use of the future that God desires
the repentance, the reformation, OF every
one of His creatures, and that, with His
infinite resources, and eternity at His COM
can accomplish all that He desires. Be kind
enough to make the correction and oblige,
yours respectfully, w. j. LLOYD.
We should be unwilling to feel that Mr..
Lloyd, or any other gentleman, rested,
however erroneously, under the impression
that we had misconstrued him and were
not willing to correct the error; therefore
we insert his expostulation in full, as above.
Still We cannot see what correction is to be
made. Mr.. Lloyd says that DR.. Palmer
took the word "life" literally and that he
himself was simply pointing out the logical
consequence of that position. But we
cannot agree with Mr.. Lloyd on that point.
In the passage quoted by him from DR..
Palmer's sermon, the Doctor did not, we
are confident, understand the word literally,
but as fgurative equivalent for the word
"Heaven." The distinction is very per-
ceptible. For instance ;, according to the
Catholic faith, infants dying without bap-
tism cannot go to Heaven they cannot 60
to He'll either, being guiltless of actual sin;
therefore they are relegated to an existence
happy and immortal, but not Heaven, not
glorifed by the visible presence of God.
Such souls, then, have eternal life in the
literal sense, that is existence, but not in
the sense meant by Dr.. Palmer.
AS to Mr.. Lloyds individual views in
regard to the character of future ex-
istence, we think that q correction is as
little due as on the other point, if his ser
mon was correctly reported. In fact we
clipped out and inserted his own language,
the following being part of it:
We believe that, sooner or later, every one
| Of Gods intelligent creatures will become O
| loving, obedient child.
| When that "soouer or later" shall have
finally come to pass will not that be an end
of the punishment that the reconciled souls
had been in the meantime suffering7 Mr.
Lloyd says no; even after full reconcilia
tion there will still be during all eternity
a loss of some higher stage of happiness
and glory that might have been achieved
This loss itself will be an eternal punish
ment.
Here, again, We are unable to agree will
our correspondent. He uses the wori
punishment" in an entirely arbitrary
sense. Punishment does not mean th1
absence ofreward, but the reverse ofreward
If a man earn only Eve dollars when ht
might have earned ten, no one would con
slider him punished by receiving the fiv'
only. No man is "punished" by not re
ceiving what he has not earned. 1t is
mere absence Of reward. We cannot
therefore, think that We misrepresentet
Mr.. Lloyd in saying, as we did, that h
preached Ha pospel in which people ar