without any nice discrimination of its several degrees or of those of its enjoyment which seem rather vague. For the summum bonum or best for any creature is not the best for the best, but the best that such creature is capable of, whether it be much or little.

God being infinite, good must be infinite likewise, as his proper characteristic: and God being also the ONLY infinite, must be the only subject of good without limitation, since the limitation of good is the commencement of evil. Whereupon our Saviour observes, "There is none good but One, that is, God" (Mat. xix. 17). And yet we talk not only of good, as if it had bounds, but also of that Infinite Being, who is all goodness, as if He was contained within them. We do this as often as we talk of God in heaven; if we talk thus without considering the latter expression as synonymous with goodness, and goodness as infinite. For it is evident enough, how the natural and immediate sphere of every characteristic of a person, whether it be good or evil, must be the person in whom it appears; and it may also be evident how the sphere of the person, whether he be good or evil, will be the good or evil in which he exists: that is, the characteristic in the person, and the person in the characteristic ; as St. John, speaking of two other cognate spheres in one, similarly observes, v. g., " He that keepeth his commandments abideth in him; and he, in him" (John I. iii. 24): and as our Saviour intimates in his petition to the Father for his church or selection, "That they all may be one: as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one" (John xvii. 21, 22, 23).

So far forward as this indeed, it seems to be agreed, v.g., that at present the same general sphere contains both sorts of characteristics, that is, both good and evil, with the subjects of both, or the whole Kingdom of God incarnate; which has the earth for its present habitation, and

all the habitations upon earth. It is also understood and taken for granted by some, that hereafter the two opposite characters, or kinds of characteristics, good and evil, will be severally assigned to two immense localities or spheres, which will be very distinct, by the names of Heaven and Hell. But admitting the existence of two such opposite spheres, there may be, if there is not, a difference of opinion respecting their locality. It may be thought for example, by some, that the distinction of the great gulf fixed between them (Luke xvi. 26) does not consist in a material barrier so much as in a spiritual and intellectual; that Heaven especially is not, as some have thought it, a place among the stars; but the presence of their Author, which was before the stars or any creature existed, and uniform then as that presence, though subsequently, or upon creation, divided into two inseparable provinces:

which are placed in this order, namely, the subjective province or happiness first, as being most suitable for discussion; and not as according to their natural order of succession, which seems to be the reverse, and is so mentioned by the Psalmist in this passage, As for me (1) I will behold thy presence in righteousness: and when I awake up after thy likeness, (2) I shall be satisfied with it" (Ps. xvii. 16).

66

Some may have considered, that the divine presence is not restricted to any sphere; as the Psalmist also intimates where he says, "Whither shall I go then from thy spirit; or whither shall I go then from thy presence? If I climb up into heaven, thou art there: if I go down to hell, thou art there also. If I take the wings of the morning, and remain in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there also shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me” (Ps. cxxxix. 6, &c.). And considering heaven to be constituted at the same time by that presence as aforesaid

in the same manner that a palace may be constituted by the presence of royalty, the reasoners on this side will infer, that if heaven can be in hell by the divine presence, it may be any where; and regard a future locality as improbable, particularly for such beings as angels and spirits, which are supposed to be not only immaterial, but also of an indefinite form and unlimited motion. They will think farther with respect to themselves, that if an inferior subject like man can find an heaven in his own breast or spirit, how much more in the principal, in the bosom of the father; as David, speaking in the person of the son, proposes to him; when, after naming the position of the wicked as a contrast or foundation for one, v. g.,. "Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell" (for it may be one sort of heaven to escape from such company) he adds thereupon, "Thou shalt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is the fulness of joy, at thy right hand there is pleasure for evermore” (Ps. xvi. 11, 12).

It may be conjectured; indeed, there is room for more than conjecture, it may be proved that the immaterial part of which we consist, will have its affinity and juxtaposition as well as the material; and if a material appointment be required for this, an immaterial will be required for that. A common character will also be as good a bond or cement for spiritual things as any adhesive principle in nature for material, and if these must have an earthly place or station, that must have an heavenly communion, as intimated by the Preacher on the event of their dissolution. "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was; and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it" (Eccl. xii. 7). The proof of these assertions is found in the observation, that no essential property of ours can be without its character of good or evil: which character, applying at the same time to other subjects will be as close a principle of union between them in that respect as any the most indissoluble subject or essence can possess in itself. And the aforesaid common character, being applied as aforesaid,

may constitute for its owner that blessed footing which is expressed by "Heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. i. 3); or more generally, by Being in Christ, (Ib. 10, &c.), or in the Holy Spirit (Gal. v. 25). And, however named, the heavenly communion or divine Presence is one and the principal Heaven, no doubt; as formerly intimated: which, whether there be another heaven or not, will deserve beyond all the good that man can enjoy either subjectively or objectively, as his happiness or his righteousness, to be the object of his constant, highest, and most earnest ambition. For the subject being united in itself likewise as well as in Christ, one affianced property of affection or sentiment will draw on others to the uniting of the whole, as St. Paul writes, " till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Eph. iv. 13).

On the other hand it may also be argued, that if the heaven now described, whether we call it second or third, be the highest to us, or the exquisite heaven of our souls, there can be no incongruity in understanding also an inferior heaven, a terrestrial paradise at the same time for the reception and accommodation of our bodies, as at present only more perfect, innocent, and agreeable. There are, it is to be hoped, those who even now enjoy with their earthly existence the heavenly communion alluded to; living, as it were, in two spheres, the spiritual and the material, at once, which is an heaven upon earth for them and why should they not live again in the same manner, enjoying the same more perfectly hereafter? For being united in themselves by a community of essentials, originating in their habitual acts as aforesaid, while they are also united to God in Christ by the community of one class, and to the earth on which they tread by the community of another, there can be no reason, why in going to heaven hereafter they should not return to the planet they now occupy (the same having been purified again

with fire during their dissolution, as it had often been purified, no doubt, before their last existence) and there enjoy themselves with him who purchased this happy privilege for them in person, according to the view held out to us in the Apocalypse (Rev. xxi).

The notion of a heaven over head and an hell under our feet may appear to some as visionary as the ancient doctrine of the stars, when the sun rose on one hand and sat on the other, now that the motions of the heavenly bodies are better understood by mechanics than they were in those days by philosophers; and some may also account that divines should be responsible for the errors of philosophy, and suffer accordingly. Nevertheless, as an enlightened and inquisitive age is generally the least dogmatical, thought should still be free; and particularly to conjecture, if any one likes, whether, in a future state à man's local condition might not correspond with his spiritual, whatever that may be. If one thinks, as before stated, another may think otherwise for him, or with him as far as he goes, and afterwards otherwise; both being right as far as they agree: and there are many good believers who differ thus, as in respect of the millennium for example, without any dangerous consequence. It will be no crime nor absurdity therefore, whatever may be its probability, to suppose that our heaven or sphere of happiness may be in a new or purified earth; which, if no larger than the present, might still be large enough to contain all the moral produce of the old worth keeping from the creation or last renovation to a period still as distant. And there would also be a nice correspondence between such an arrangement, and the past fortune of the kingdom: for as our lasting misery began with the corruption of the earth, so may our everlasting happiness with its purifying or renovation. And why should not a local union or relation be assigned to the happy hereafter, as well as a personal object of obedience, enjoyment and adoration? There is no contradiction in expecting both; and we cannot liter