the Universalist
denomination very different from that of any other sect in the country;
studious of the Scriptures, confident in the truth of their distinguishing
doctrine, zealous, firm, industrious; depending more on the truths
communicated for their success, than on the manner in which they are
stated. It has had the effect, also, to give the ministry a polemic
character--the natural result of unwavering faith in the doctrine believed,
and of an introduction into the desk without scholastic training. But the
attention of the denomination, in various parts of the country, has of
late been turned to the education of the ministry; and conventions and
associations have adopted resolves requiring candidates to pass
examinations in certain branches of literature. The same motives have
governed many in their effort to establish literary and theological
institutions. The desire to have the ministry respectable for literary
acquirements, is universal.

A few years since, a small number separated from the denomination, and
adopted the appellation of _Restorationists_. To prevent misapprehension,
it may be repeated, that, although a few have thus seceded, yet a
difference of opinion in regard to the duration of punishment has not
disturbed the harmony of the denomination generally, nor is it regarded as
sufficient cause for breach of fellowship, or alienation of heart and
affection.

The Universalists quote the following texts of Scripture, among others, in
support of their sentiments:--Gen. 22:18. Ps. 22:27; 86:9. Isa. 25:6, 7, 8;
45:23, 24. Jer. 31:33, 34. Lam. 3:31-33. John 12:32. Acts 3:31. Rom. 5:18,
21; 8:33, 39; 11:25-36. 1 Cor. 15:22-28, and 51-57. 2 Cor. 5:18, 19. Gal.
3:8. Eph. 1:9, 10. Phil. 2:9-11. Col. 1:19, 29. 1 Tim. 2:1-6. Heb. 8:10,
11. Rev. 5:13; 21:3, 4.

-------------------------------------

We copy the following from the _Trumpet and Universalist Magazine_ of June
4, 1836. It is by the Rev. HOSEA BALLOU, of Boston, in answer to the
question, "Who are Universalists?"

"There seems to be an evident propriety in calling all who believe in the
final holiness and happiness of all mankind, _Universalists_. There
appears no good reason why those who believe in a limited punishment, in
the future state, should have a less or a greater claim to be called
Universalists, than those who entertain a hope that all sin and misery end
when the functions of life cease in the mortal body. As they bo