HAVING become sufficiently established in in my doubts of the truth and utility of the universalian doctrine, as a a system, I now think it my duty to lay my dissent before the publick.

That this important change in my sentiments and feelings may be the better understood, I shall give a partial or brief history of the operations of my mind. Passing over the reflections of early life, suffice it to say, that I became a preacher of universal salvation; and was ordained as such in Fairfield, Herkimer co. N. Y. about eight years ago." I believed the doctrine true, and thought, that in proportion as it was propagated, mankind would become good and happy. I preached in different parts far and near; and itinerated over an extensive region of country, suffering the excesses of heat and cold, and the pitiless peltings of stormy skies, and muddy roads. No danger or effort did I consider too great that was possible; for I believe, for a number of years, I should often have rejoiced in the martyr's privilege of attesting my faith. Some years since, however, I occasionally reflected that, although the doctrine

The universalist paper of New-York, as well as Rev. S. R. Smith, universalist preacher of Clinton, (N. Y.) interpret this to mean, that I commenced preaching only eight years ago, when in fact, I commenced preaching in the very region where the Renunciation was made, more than twelve years ago. For years, I preached universal salvation, without asking for any ecclesiastical connexion with universalists; but my meaning was as I said in the Renunciation, that I became a preacher of the doctrine; (but I conceived it of no importance when) and was ordained as such about eight years ago. Mr. Smith was at the ordination; and I should have supposed he might have understood me as I said, ordained, and not commenced preaching. The little hungry Fish, which tried to nibble something from the Renunciation, at Jamestown, immediately after its appearance, did not so much as bite at that point, although it knew that I had preached in that place more than twelve years ago. Yo; D to kaktus{ set des

had spread much faster than I had anticipated, it did not seem to produce the effects I had expected. This gradually cooled my ardour and diminished my zeal, so that for some years I cared but little, whether I preached or not. In this state of mind, believing universalism to be the true sense of the Bible when rightly construed; and being unable to see any considerable good resulting from the system, I was much incline to doubt divino revelation.* I could not go entirely into infidelity, nor feel much confidence in revelation. At length I heard of the bewitching fascinations of the infidelity of New-York; and read most of the eloquent effusions of that woman, who prostituted the splendid gifts, which heaven gave to honour and adorn her sex, to the execrable business of sapping the foundations of social order, and overturning the fair fabrick of female honour and happiness, and pouring corruption deep and boundless over all the sacred demarcations that distinguish mankind from brutes.

At first, my mind was awfully contaminated with her sweeping and centru bun bien ben had to aAK ZE ruinous principles. But upon more deliberate reflection, I saw the vortex into which such principles must inevitably draw mankind. I saw it would be in the moral world like putting out the sun and moon and every star in the natural, 'barely because men had eyes of their own to see with. Such was my state of mind two years ago. I saw the necessity of religion, but (still had only a cold,

* Editors, &c. thought they had a great advantage of me, because I was honest enough to own, that I had

doubt divine revelation. Such inclination at times, inclined to

to doubt was not willingly cherished and entertained Now if the editors will risk their reputation with their brethren, and their interest with their subscribers, by declaring, upon were never inthe common acceptation of the plined to doubt divine revelation we thee, that they phrase; and if they will take as much pains in their papers, and devote as much room, to expose the faults of infidels, to impeach their motives, vilify and burlesque their actions, &c, as they have those of professed friends of christianity, for ond year, I shall doubt not the evident change in the moral complexion of their paper *** but more than three-fourths of their subscribers would discontinue !

dark, and inefficient faith in any. At times I was extremely unhappy, so much so as almost to wish for death.* The conversion of Dr. Stedman, of Mayville, has been a subject with me of much reflection. I knew his former business

*Universalist editors have attempted to prove from this paragraph, that I was an atheist for two years or more previous to my Renunciation. They wish to make this out, because they have always pretended that no universalist ever changed his views. Although hundreds who were once considered universalists-who professed to be, and were as much so to all appearance as any body, have been known to renounce the scheme, yet it is at once declared that they never were universalists. There can be no doubt, if Hozea Ballou, the very father of modern universalism, were to renounce his sentiments on this point, the whole phalanx of universalist editors would make it out clearly that he never was a universalist. Many there are, who have been heard to say "Mr. * Todd is the best universalist preacher I ever heard. He proves his doctrine by such clear and convincing arguments. He does not blackguard so much as some of them. And he preaches so much practice as well as doctrine, that nobody can find any fault, with many of his discourses." And now the same persons have been heard to say, "Mr. Todd never was a real universalist. He never understood the doctrine. I always knew he was dishonest, though I used to stand up for him," &c. Others say, "he was so destitute of the true principles of universalism, it is no wonder his writings and preaching should do no good." The same persons say again, his writings stand as a bulwark around universalism which he can never overthrow." Dr. Danforth of Laona, wrote me thus, the universalists of this county have long flattered themselves, that they had one, who was able to defend their cause against all opposition! But now how fallen! How has the mighty: fallen" &c. It is a great pity any body should fall; but from the account universalists give of themselves, I should think them the last people in the world to trample upon one because he had been so unfortunate as to fall. Many other wild, contradictory, and absurd things have been said; and all in consequence of one man's opinion on one question! I had no idea before of the vast importance that could be attached to my ideas! I find my words are watched; and my most trifling expressions-even some that I never make, are reported to universalist editors for publication.—/ Nay, if I happen to spit, it is published! (See note page 74.)

I did not say in the Renunciation that I had been an atheist. The infidels of New-York were atheists or nearly so; but the question whether there be a God was not the principal question discussed in their writings. They generally wrote on political and philo-... sophical principles; and their discussions were such as tended to draw the mind from the religion of the Bible-to weaken our faith, and embitter our feelings toward the teachers of piety. So far, "my mind was contaminated with her ruinous principles," but I never got so far as to be an atheist. One would suppose, by their being so sure that I was an atheist, that they considered athe

was very lucrative, and I persuaded myself that he had become externally religious for the sake of still increasing his pecuniary business. For he was such a strong and enlightened infidel that I was persuaded nothing but God could really convert him to christianity, and I doubted whether God would interpose for any such purpose. But, last summer when I found that same man had abandoned all his lucrative business, and gone into the world to preach

that he had left wealth and affluence and all earthly comforts behind him-when I reflected that he had been avaricious and worldly and skeptical as any other man; and that he was now liberal and kind, and his whole soul now devoted to religion, and was even willing to be a methodist; all this satisfied me that he was indeed converted by the invisible agency of the Holy Spirit. This, together with some other things not necessary to be named, made.. some peculiarly serious impressions upon my mind. I began to look with renewed and deeper attention upon the system of universalism as I professed it. I had seen it rise and spread in all directions. At first I knew of only two or three advocates of the system, now there were hundreds. Thousands were becoming its friends, and I thought it indicated an ultimate triumph over all other systems. So its friends generally seem to believe.

1

This often induced me to look forward to futurè generations, and contemplate them and their condition as thoughTM they were to be my children. Something would seem to ask, "what will be their social, moral, and religious state? Are the effects of the doctrine now (so far as they are visible to observation from the multitude that profess it) such as to promise any substantial and lasting good to future

I never

ism a common failing in the fraternity. Be that as it may, was an atheist, and never professed to be; and do not recollect that I ever had a doubt of the existence of a Supreme Being in my life. Theoretical atheism I consider proof of mental aberration. I think it the result of an intense effort to comprehend what is incomprehensible.

Are men

ages, when it comes to be ultimately universal ? more apt to be honest, benevolent, social, kind, humble, tolerant, and pious, in consequence of being converted to universalism? Are such abandoned and black-hearted wretches, as love to trample in scorn upon every thing sacred, made to tremble and stand abashed by this doctrine? Are the wicked reformed or restrained by its powerful influence?" Such like questions often crowded upon my mind with such affecting and overwhelming energy, that I looked around with deep solicitude to see its good effects. I began earnestly to review the course generally pursued by universalists, with a view to judge of the common effects of the doctrine. I ardently desired to see the boasted good, which I and others had ascribed to it. But the more 1 looked the more I must confess I discovered a moral waste.*

* Moral waste here might seem to convey a different idea from that intended. My meaning (as may be seen from other parts of the Renunciation,) was not that universalists were immoral; but that however moral they might be, I had no evidence that universalism made them so. Men might be moral, and yet believe the moon to be a great cheese! But that would not prove the doctrine, that the moon is a great cheese, tends to promote morality. The plain sense of the words is, that I could see no moral good whatever in the effects of the doctrine; though I might find many good people who believed it. Is it not known, that men may be moral, although they believe many things that have no moral effect on them whatever? I have known many moral men become universalists and continue moral. And I have known many very immoral persons, who had no principles or religion, who had neglected the subject, till their attention became aroused to universalism. They have believed, but not reformed! When persons of good morality continne so after embracing universalism, it is reasonable to conclude, that habit or other things produce the good effect. But let universalism be preached to vicious and immoral persons in all the forms that it admits of-though they may easily be made to believe it, their habits will not alter in consequence of being convinced.I never did know a vicious person reformed and made better by becoming a universalist. And from good authority, I shall show in this book, that universalism has done no more good in other hands than in mine. To my own knowledge, and that of the community, universalism, in places where "our venerable Br. Stacy" has laboured for two or three years past, has reformed not the drinking, the gambling, the profane or the vicious, in the least. The editors have poured out their vials of "charity" upon me like torrents for persecuting universalists, calling them immoral, &c. in the Renunciation. But where do they find it? I challenge the whole corps of