ADVERTISEMENT. A REVIEW of the Controversy between Mr. Vidler and Mr. Fuller, on the doctrine of Universal Salvation, in Twelve Letters to a Universalist, being prepared for the press, it was judged a fit opportunity for gratifying the wishes of many of Mr. Fuller's friends, to reprint his Letters to Mr. Vidler on that subject. He was accordingly applied to, for his permission, and returned the following answer :-" Mr. Vidler in a letter to me, signified his intention to print the whole controversy. As he has now, I should think, had sufficient time to fulful his proposal, and has not done it, you are at liberty to publish that part of it which belongs to me." The reader is requested to notice, that the first of these Letters appeared in the Evangelical Magazine for September, 1795, and the seven following ones in the Universalist's Miscellany, between July 1799, and July 1800; and, that owing to this circumstance, the first Letter in the present series, was not numbered in that of the Universalist's Miscellany but what is there called the first, is here the second; and so on throughout. LETTERS TO MR. VIDLER, &c. LETTER I. EXPOSTULATIONS WITH MR. VIDLER, ON HIS HAVING EMBRACED THE DOCTRINE OF UNIVERSAL SALVATION. My Dear Friend, When you advan IT has afforded me some painful concern, to hear of your having embraced the scheme of Universal Salvation. were at K, you appeared, to me, to be of a speculative disposition. I have long thought such a turn of mind to be very tageous, or very dangerous: persons of this description either make great advances in truth, or fall into great errors. I cannot, in this Letter, enter deeply into the controversy; nor is there any necessity for it, as I am told, that Dr. Edwards' Answer to Dr. Chauncey is in your hands. I earnestly wish you may read that piece with care, impartiality, and openness to conviction. I think you ought to have read it before you advanced your change of sentiment; and I greatly wish you had: for, though I do not ques tion your openness to conviction, any more than that of any other person in your situation, yet I know something of what is in man : I know it it is a very rare thing when we have once openly disavowed a sentiment, to return to it, and openly avow it again. There are many instances of people, changing their principles, and there may have been instances of the other; but I do not recollect any. False shame, supported by mistaken pride, forms here a very pow erful temptation. The dread of being accused of versatility and indecision insensibly obtains such a dominion over the mind, as to blind it to one side of the argument, and to give efficacy to every thing hat looks like argument, or the shadow of an argument, on the other. It is certainly a very serious matter, that we do not err in our ministrations. Error in a minister may affect the eternal welfare of many. I hope I may presume upon the friendliness of your temper, while I expostulate with you upon the subject. I will not be tedious to you; but let me intreat you to consider the following things: First: Whether your change of sentiment has not arisen from an idea of endless punishment being, in itself, unjust. If it has, consider whether this does not arise from diminutive notions of the evil of sin: whether you be not too much infected by sin yourself, to be a proper judge of its demerit: (a company of criminals would be very improper judges of the equity and goodness of a law which condemns them :) whether you do not hold a principle, from which it will follow that millions will be finally happy, who will not be indebted to either the grace of God or the death of Christ, for their happiness; and, consequently, must have a heaven to themselves, not being able to join with those who ascribe theirs to God and the Lamb. For, if endless misery be unjust, exemption from it must be the sinner's right, and can never be attributed to mercy; neither could a mediator be needed to induce a righteous God to liberate the sinner, when he had suffered his full desert. In fine, consider whether you do not contradict your own experience. I think you have told me of your great distress of soul, arising from a consciousness of your deserving to be cast out of God's favour, and banished forever from his presence. Can you now say, that you did not deserve this? Do you not deserve it still? If you do why not others? Secondly: Consider whether the genius of the sentiment in question. be not opposite to that of every other sentiment in the Bible. The whole tenor of scripture saith to the righteous, it shall be well with him; and to the wicked, it shall be ill with him: but Universal Salvation saith, not only to the righteous, but to the wicked, it |