St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-11-09
ENDLESS PUNISHMENT.
The Rev. Clay MacCauley Argues
Against the Doctrine.

said that he seldom asked attention 10 COLI
troversial theology. preferring TO preach
what he held to be true in positive, practical
forms. But direct negation has also a
place. and is. at times, advisable. He De-
Iieved the treatment of the subject he had
chosen is not without present Importance,
since it vet prevails in the largest part of
the teachings of the Christian church. The
doctrine, in fewest words, is this; Multi
tudes OF human souls. after this life, are to
be consigned by their Creator to torments
from which they shall never be delivered.
This dogma may be specifically modified
by the influences, scientific. moral and 9TH
erwiSe, now remoulding the religious lie OF
Christendom; its believers may, through
various theories, attempt to explain how
devil, eternal sin and endless pun
ishment can exist in the universe
of the God whom they think
of as infinite and eternal in being
and as all powerful, all wise and all loving
in character; they may accept the ancient
idea of physical torture in dread material
abyss. or may substitute for that the notion
of a hell in the soul alone through the mis-
cry of a ouiclened, remorseful conscience.
But. underneath this manifold surface,
thew are united in the assertion that multi
tudes OF human souls after death are to be
outside all divine favor or hope Of divine
favor; to endure suffering, either physical
or mental and nothing but suffering, and
that such suffering is to continue forever.
Mr.. MacCauley to show that he did not
misrepresent the facts then quoted from
various church confessions their utterances
upon the doctrine, from the creedS of the
Reformation to the basis of the Evangelical
alliance, but lately adopted for the churches
of Europe and America, and asked
Is THIS DOCTRINE TRUE?
Before giving his own answer the speaker
referred at length to a noticeable reaction
from the traditional faith, which he
said was now taking place i'll
parts of several orthodox bodies.
Relatively, this reaction is not yet very
widely extended, but in itself it has con-
siderable magnitude and force. In Europe,
England and in the northern part Of Amer
lea it is noticeable that there is an increas-
ing silence i'll the pulpits on this doctrine,
and where it is presented at all, marked
effort to modify and to idealize it. from the
shape in which, not long ago, it was uni
versalIy presented, especially in New Eng
land, in several parts of the orthodox COM
munion there, acceptance of the dogma is
no longer insisted upon as condition OF
ministerial or ecclesiastical fellowship.
And some will remember, how in the West
minister abbey England, a few years ago,
Canon Farrar, who is now in our country
delivering from city to city a splen-
did lecture upon Dante the chief
literary exponent of the belief of
medieval Christendom, in the eternal doom
of some human souls, declared in his official
place that the doctrine of future endless
punishments is no longer worthy of Chris
tan allegiance. Dean Stanley indorsed
his canOns utterances. and the canon re-
ceived, further, the sympathy of a large
part of the Anglican clergy.
But why do we reject this terrible doc
trine? Rather, first, why does any one
accept it? There is but one reason in its
support in any way worthy Of considera-
ton. 1t is claimed that the Bible teaches
it. Were it clear that the Bible does not
teach it every soul living under our civiliza-
ton would, | believe. feel that the worlds
horror had vanished. Is the dogma of
future endless punishment even in the
Bible? | do not assume to decide. Many
honest and otherwise orthodox thinkers,
however claiming to be able to decide,
earnestly declare that authority for the doc
trine
CANNOT BE FOUND
in the Scriptures, as they must now be in
terpreted. Here the speaker quoted freely
from Canon FarrarS memorable sermon.
Now, if it be true that the Bible does not
indorse the dogma, in no mind can there be
an unquestionable reason in its sup
port To me it is clear that man.
kind are now entering upon a stage
of development marked by such views of the
universe, as will soon make it certain to all
that God is not only absolutely sovereign in
His creation, but also not the moral infe-
riOr OF any of his creatures. Lord Bacon
said: ''It were better to have no opinion of
God than to have one that is unworthy of
Him." In the highest thought of the pres
ent man, the view of God transmitted
through the medieval and the reformed
churches is unworthy of Him. The old
doctrine of hell means the utter ruin of
myriads of mankind, and the eternal exist
ence of anything we can think of as bad
and horrible, and this in universe over
which, we say. there is an infinitely power
full and good God. But, if this doctrine is
true, one of two things necessarily follow,
so far as our reason can see; either God is
not all-powerful, or, if He is all powerful,
He is not as high in the moral scale as some
of the souls he has made. Infinitely bad
beings and qualities in the universe of an
infinitely powerful and good God? How
can these exist against his will? Or. if they
do exist against His will, where is His ON
impotence. However, if He is able
to destroy Satan, devils and
an eternal hell and does not
whence has come your and my protest
against the awful creed? God made us, as
well as the souls who are to sin forever
and to be forever damned. But we would
destroy the eternal sin and suffering, if we
could. How can the effect become superior
TO the cause, the creature nObler than the
c,eatOr? 1rrecOnciliable contradictions,
There is no possibility, use as much schol-
astic logic as we will, of harmonizing the
idea of an infinitely powerful and good God
and the thought of eternal badness and suf-
fering. The simple truth is, that the doc
trine of hell is the product of ideas which
originated in and were characteristic of a
time in human development, when man
had no such thought of the deity as he has
now reached. In vain has the human mind
attempted to combine
OLD SUPERSTITION
with growing faith. And no we must either
deny our belief in Gods absolute power and
moral perfection or in the traditional doe
trine which came into existence when God
was not worshipped and the undisputed
Lord of the universe. We do not hesitate
to give up the old dogma of terror. Of
course, the world-old facts of sin and suf-
fering remain to be accounted for. What
use there is for temporary sin and temper
airy suffering may be reasonably sought out.
But am sure that eternal sin can have no
place in Gods providence, and that endless
suffering, from the fact that it never ends,
is without purpose under the sovereignty of
perfect wisdom and love.
Next Sunday Mr.. MacCauley will con-
tinue his subject, showing what the real
hell is that man may suffer and should seek
to Shun.