Once more, ** Such a doctrine outrages all our feel-
" ings." True ; but that is no new thing. Criminals
are often outrageous under their sufferings, though, ac-
cording to the reason of sober men, they are not too
severe. The damned are outrageous enough, God
knows ! They are represented as gnashing their teeth
with rage. But if our feelings are to settle the contro*
versy, why does Mr. W. appeal to our reason ?



29

My reason leads me to the followiog reflections upon
the subject. Suppose a man to live in sin for << tbree-
*' score years and ten," and then to go into another
world. Since he continually abused his mercies in this
world, it is just that they should be diminished, if not
withheld in the next. , Among the chief of our mercies
we place our religious advantages : justice would there-
fore require a diminution of these. But if he went into
the other world more sinful than he came into this, and
if he there enjoyed fewer helps to virtue than when
here, it is not only possible, but extremely probable, if
not morally certain, that he would grow worse and
worse. But kis mercies might justly be diminished in
proportion to his abo^ of them. He might therefore
sip them all away, and so be for ever unholy : and since
we perceive that, by the constitution of nature, sin and
misery are inseparably connected together, he must, in
such a csSe, be eternally miserable.
