Production Note
Cornell University Library produced this
volume to replace the irreparably
deteriorated original. It was scanned using
Xerox software and equipment at 600 dots per
inch resolution and compressed prior to
storage using CCITT Group 4 compression. The
digital data were used to create Cornell's
replacement volume on paper that meets the
ANSI Standard Z39.48-1984. The production of
this volume was supported in part by the New
York State Program for the Conservation and
Preservation of Library Research Materials
and the Xerox Corporation. Digital file
copyright by Cornell University Library
1994.A
DISCOURSE,
PREACHED AT THE DEDICATION
OF THE
SECOND CONGREGATIONAL UNITARIAN CHURCH,
ftefo WfsXk,
DECEMBER 7, 1826.
BY WILLIAM ELLEKY CHANNING.
SECOND EDITION.
NEW YORK:
PUBLISHED FOR THE SECOND CONGREGATIONAL
UNITARIAN CHURCH.
1827.
0Southern District of J\Tew York, ss.
Be it remembered, that on the 23d day of December, A.D. 1826, and in the
fifty-first year of the Independence of the United States of America, Henry Ueve-
reux Sewall, of the said district, has deposited in this office the title of a book, the
right whereof he claims as proprietor, in the words following, to wit:—
44 A Discourse, preached at the Dedication of the Second Congregational Unitarian
Church, New York, December 7, 1826. By William Ellery Channing.”
In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United Stales, entitled, 44 An Act
for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books
to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned,”
and also to an Act, entitled,44 An Act supplementary to an Act, entitled,4 An Act for
the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books,
to the authors and proprietors of such copies dyring the times therein mentioned
and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching
historical and other prints,”
JAMES DILL,
Clerk of the Southern District of New York.In delivering this Discourse, the author was obliged to omit
large portions; and these are now published, at once to give
some new views of the subject, and to unfold more fully those
which were then exhibited.DISCOURSE.
MARK xii. 29, 30.
And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is,
Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:
And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with
all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.
This is the first commandment.
We have assembled to dedicate this building to
the worship of the only living and true God, and to
the teaching of the religion of his son, Jesus Christ.
By this act we do not expect to confer on this spot
of ground and these walls any peculiar sanctity or
any mysterious properties. We do not suppose that,
in consequence of rites now performed, the worship
offered here will be more acceptable, than prayer
uttered in the closet, or breathed from the soul in
the midst of business ; or that the instructions de-
livered from this pulpit will be more effectual, than
if they were uttered in a private dwelling or the
open air. By dedication we understand only a sol-
emn expression of the purpose for which this build-
ing is reared, joined with prayer to Him, who alone
can crown our enterprise with success, that our
design may be accepted and fulfilled. For this re-
ligious act we find, indeed, no precept in the New6
Testament, and on this account some have scrupled
as to its propriety. But we are not among those
who consider the written word as a statute book,
by the letter of which every step in life must be
governed. We believe, on the other hand, that one
of the great excellencies of Christianity is, that it
does not deal in minute regulation, but that, having
given broad views of duty, and enjoined a pure and
disinterested spirit, it leaves us to apply these rules
and express this spirit, according to the promptings
of the divine monitor within us, and according to
the claims and exigencies of the ever varying con-
ditions in which we are placed. We believe, too,
that revelation is not intended to supersede God’s
other modes of instruction; that it is not intended
to drown, but to make more audible, the voice of
nature. Now nature dictates the propriety of such
an act as we are this day assembled to perform.
Nature has always taught men, on the completion
of an important structure, designed for public and
lasting good, to solemnize its first appropriation to
the purpose for which it was reared, by some
special service. To us there is a sacredness in this
moral instinct, in this law written on the heart;
and in listening reverently to God’s dictates, how-
ever conveyed, we doubt not that we shall enjoy
his acceptance and blessing.
I have said, we dedicate this building to the
teaching of the gospel of Ghrist. But in the pre-
sent state of the Christian church, these words aren
not as definite as they one day will be. This
gospel is variously interpreted. It is preached in
various forms. Christendom is parcelled out into
various sects. When, therefore, we see a new
house of worship reared, the question immediately
rises, To what mode of teaching Christianity is it to
be devoted ? I need not tell you, my hearers, that
this house has been built by that class of Christians,
who are called Unitarians, and that the gospel will
here be taught, as interpreted by that body of be-
lievers. This you all know; but perhaps all present
have not attached a very precise meaning to the
word, by which our particular views of Christianity
are designated. Unitarianism has been made a term
of so much reproach, and has been uttered in so
many tones of alarm, horror, indignation, and scorn,
that to many it gives only a vague impression of
something monstrous, impious, unutterably perilous.
To such, I would say, that this doctrine, which is
considered by some, as the last and most perfect
invention of Satan, the consummation of his blas-
phemies, the most cunning weapon ever forged in
the fires of hell, amounts to this—That there is
One God, even the Father; and that Jesus Christ
is not this One God, but his son and messenger,
who derived all his powers and glories from the Uni-
versal Parent, and who came into the world not to
claim supreme homage for himself, but to carry up
the soul to his Father, as the Only Divine Person,
the only Ultimate Object of religious worship.
To us, this doctrine seems not to have steamed up8
from hell, but to have descended from the throne of
God, and to invite and attract us thither. To us
it seems to come from the Scriptures, with a voice
loud as the sound of many waters, and as articulate
and clear as if Jesus, in a bodily form, were pro-
nouncing it distinctly in our ears. To this doctrine,
and to Christianity interpreted in consistency with
it, we dedicate this building.
That we desire to propagate this doctrine, we
do not conceal. It is a treasure, which we wish
not to confine to ourselves, which we dare not lock
up in our own breasts. We regard it as given to
us for others, as well as for ourselves. We should
rejoice to spread it through this great'city, to carry
it into every dwelling, and to send it far and wide
to the remotest settlements of our country. Am I
asked, why we wish this diffusion ? We dare not
say, that we are in no degree influenced by secta-
rian feeling; for we see it raging around us, and we
should be more than men, were we wholly to escape
an epidemic passion. We do hope, however, that
our main purpose and aim is not sectarian, but to
promote a purer and nobler piety than now prevails.
We are not induced to spread our opinions by the
mere conviction that they are true; for there are
many truths, historical, metaphysical, scientific, lit-
erary, which we have no anxiety to propagate. We
regard them as the highest, most important, most
efficient truths, and therefore demanding a firm tes-
timony, and earnest efforts to make them known.9
In thus speaking, we do not mean, that we regard
our peculiar views as essential to salvation. Far
from us be this spirit of exclusion, the very spirit of
antichrist, the worst of all the delusions of popery
and of protestantism. We hold nothing to be essen-
tial, but the simple and supreme dedication of the
mind, heart, and life to God and to his will. This
inward and practical devotedness to the Supreme
Being, we are assured, is attained and accepted
under all the forms of Christianity. We believe,
however, that it is favored by that truth which we
maintain, as by no other system of faith. We re-
gard Unitarianism as peculiarly the friend of inward,
living, practical religion. For this we value it.
For this we would spread it; and we desire none
to embrace it, but such as shall seek and derive
from it this celestial influence.
This character and property of Unitarian Chris-
tianity, its fitness to promote true, deep, and living
piety, being our chief ground of attachment to it, and
our chief motive for dedicating this house to its in-
culcation, I have thought proper to make this the
topic of my present discourse. I do not propose to
prove the truth of Unitarianism by scriptural author-
ities, for this argument would exceed the limits of
a sermon, but to show its superior tendency to form
an elevated religious character. If, however, this
position can be sustained, I shall have contributed no
weak argument in support of the truth of our views;
for the chief purpose of Christianity undoubtedly
210
is, to promote piety, to bring us to God, to fill our
souls with that Great Being, to make us alive to
Him; and a religious system can carry no more
authentic mark of a divine original, than its obvious,
direct, and peculiar adaptation to quicken and raise
the mind to its Creator.—In speaking thus of Uni-
tarian Christianity as promoting piety, I ought to
observe, that I use this word in its proper and high-
est sense. I mean not every thing which bears the
name of piety, for under this title superstition,
fanaticism, and formality are walking abroad and
claiming respect. I mean not an anxious frame of
mind, not abject and slavish fear, not a dread of
hell, not a repetition of forms, not church-going,
not loud profession, not severe censures of others’
irreligion; but filial love and reverence towards
God, habitual gratitude, cheerful trust, ready obe-
dience, and, though last not least, an imitation of
the ever active and unbounded benevolence of the
Creator.
The object of this discourse requires me to
speak with great freedom of different systems of re-
ligion. But let me not be misunderstood. Let
not the uncharitableness, which I condemn, be
lightly laid to my charge. Let it be remembered,
that I speak only of systems, not of those who em-
brace them. In setting forth with all simplicity
what seem to me the good or bad tendencies of doc-
trines, I have not a thought of giving standards or
measures by which to estimate the virtue or vice of11
their professors. Nothing would be more unjust,
than to decide on men’s characters from their pecu-
liarities of faith; and the reason is plain. Such
peculiarities are not the only causes which impress
and determine the mind. Our nature is exposed to
innumerable other influences. If indeed a man
were to know nothing but his creed, were to meet
with no human beings but those who adopt it, were
to see no example and to hear no conversation, but
such as were formed by it; if his creed were to meet
him every where, and to exclude every other object
of thought; then his character might be expected to
answer to it with great precision. But our Creator
has not shut us up in so narrow a school. The
mind is exposed to an infinite variety of influences,
and these are multiplying with the progress of so-
ciety. Education, friendship, neighbourhood, public
opinion, the state of society, “ the genius of the
place ” where we live, books, events, the pleasures
and business of life, the outward creation, our phy-
sical temperament, and innumerable other causes,
are perpetually pouring in upon the soul thoughts,
views, and emotions; and these influences are so
complicated, so peculiarly combined in the case of
every individual, and so modified by the original
susceptibilities and constitution of every mind, that
on no subject is there greater uncertainty than on
the formation of character. To determine the pre-
cise operation of a religious opinion amidst this host
of influences surpasses human power. A great truth12
may be completely neutralized by the countless im-
pressions and excitements, which the mind receives
from other sources; and so a great error may be
disarmed of much of its power, by the superior
energy of other and better views, of early habits,
and of virtuous examples. Nothing is more common
than to see a doctrine believed without swaying the
will. Its efficacy depends, not on the assent of
the intellect, but on the place which it occupies in
the thoughts, on the distinctness and vividness with
which it is conceived, on its association with our
common ideas, on its frequency of recurrence, and
on its command of the attention, without which it
has no life. Accordingly pernicious opinions are
not seldom held by men of the most illustrious vir-
tue. I mean not then, in commending or condemn-
ing systems, to pass sentence on their professors.
I know the power of the mind to select from a
multifarious system, for its habitual use, those fea-
tures or principles which are generous, pure, and
ennobling, and by these to sustain its spiritual life
amidst the nominal profession of many errors. I
know that a creed is one thing, as written in a book,
and another, as it exists in the minds of its advo-
cates. In the book, all the doctrines appear in
equally strong and legible lines. In the mind, many
are faintly traced and seldom recurred to, whilst
others are inscribed as wdth sunbeams, and are the
chosen, constant lights of the soul. Hence, in good
men of opposing denominations, a real agreement13
may subsist as to their vital principles of faith; and
amidst the division of tongues, there may be unity
of soul, and the same internal worship of God.
By these remarks I do not mean, that error is not
evil, or that it bears no pernicious fruit. Its ten-
dencies are always bad. But I mean, that these
tendencies exert themselves amidst so many coun-
teracting influences ; and that injurious opinions so
often lie dead, through the want of mixture with the
common thoughts, through the mind’s not absorbing
them, and changing them into its own substance;
that the highest respect may, and ought to be cher-
ished for men, in whose creed we find much to dis-
approve. In this discourse I shall speak freely, and
some may say severely, of Trinitarianism; but I
love and honor not a few of its advocates; and in
opposing what I deem their error, I would on no
account detract from their worth. After these re-
marks, I hope that the language of earnest discus-
sion and strong conviction will not be construed into
the want of that charity, which I acknowledge as
the first grace of our religion.
I now proceed to illustrate and prove the supe-
riority of Unitarian Christianity, as a means of pro-
moting a deep and noble piety.
I. Unitarianism is a system most favorable to
piety, because it presents to the mind one, and
only one, Infinite Person, to whom supreme homage
is to be paid. It does not weaken the energy of
religious sentiment by dividing it among various ob-14
jects. It collects and concentrates the soul on One
Father of unbounded, undivided, unrivalled glory.
To Him it teaches the mijid to rise through all be-
ings. Around Him it gathers all the splendors of the
universe. To him it teaches us to ascribe whatever
good we receive or behold, the beauty and magnifi-
cence of nature, the liberal gifts of providence, the
capacities of the soul, the bonds of society, and es-
pecially the riches of grace and redemption, the
mission, and powers, and beneficent influences of
Jesus Christ. All happiness it traces up to the
Father, as the sole source; and the mind, which these
views have penetrated, through this intimate asso-
ciation of every thing exciting and exalting in the
universe with One Infinite Parent, can and does of-
fer itself up to him w ith the intensest and profound-
est love, of which human nature is susceptible. The
Trinitarian indeed professes to believe in one God.
But three persons, having distinctive qualities and
relations, of whom one is sent and another the send-
er, one is given and another the giver, of w hom one
intercedes and another hears the intercession, of
whom one takes flesh, and another never becomes
incarnate, three persons, thus discriminated, are as
truly three objects to the mind, as if they were ac-
knowledged to be separate divinities; and from the
principles of our nature, they cannot act on the
mind as deeply and powerfully as One Infinite Per-
son, to whose sole goodness all happiness is ascribed.
To multiply infinite objects for the heart, is to dis-15
tract it. To scatter the attention among three
equal persons, is to impair the power of each.
The more strict and absolute the unity of God, the
more easily and intimately all the impressions and
emotions of piety flow together, and are condensed
into one glowing thought, one thrilling love. No
language can express the absorbing energy of the
thought of one Infinite Father; When vitally im-
planted in the soul, it grows and gains strength for
ever. It enriches itself by every new view of God’s
word and works; gathers tribute from all regions and
all ages; and attracts into itself all the rays of beauty,
glory, and joy, in the material and spiritual creation.
My hearers, as you would feel the full influence
of God upon your souls, guard sacredly, keep un-
obscured and unsullied, that fundamental and glo-
rious truth, that there is One, and only one, Al-
mighty Agent in the universe, One Infinite Father.
Let this truth dwell in me in its uncorrupted sim-
plicity, and I have the spring and nutriment of an
ever growing piety. I have an object for my mind
towards which all things bear me. I know whither
to go in all trial, whom to bless in all joy, whom to
adore in all I behold. But let three persons claim
from me supreme homage, and claim it on different
grounds, one for sending and another for coming to
my relief, and I am divided, distracted, perplexed.
My frail intellect is overborne. Instead of One
Father, on whose arm I can rest, my mind is torn
from object to object, and has reason to tremble lest16
among so many claimants of supreme love, it
should withhold from one or another his due.
II. Unitarianism is the system most favorable to
piety, because it holds forth and preserves inviolate
the spirituality of God. “ God is a spirit, and they
that worship him must worship him in spirit and in
truth.” It is of great importance to the progress
and elevation of the religious principle, that Ave
should refine more and more our conceptions of
God; that we should separate from him all material
properties, and whatever is limited or imperfect in
our own nature; that we should regard him as a
pure intelligence, an unmixed and infinite Mind.
When it pleased God to select the Jewish people
and place them under miraculous interpositions,
one of the first precepts given them was, that they
should not represent God under any bodily form,
any graven image, or the likeness of any creature.
Next came Christianity, which had this as one of
its great objects, to render religion still more
spiritual, by abolishing the ceremonial and outward
Avorship of former times, and by discarding those
grosser modes of describing God, through which
the ancient prophets had sought to impress an un-
refined people.
Now Unitarianism concurs Avith this sublime
moral purpose of God. It asserts his spirituality.
It approaches him under no bodily form, but as a
pure spirit, as the infinite and universal Mind. On
the other hand, it is the direct influence of Trinita--17
rianism, to materialize men’s conceptions of God ;
and, in truth, this system is a relapse into the error
of the rudest and earliest ages, into the worship of
a corporeal God. Its leading feature is, the doc-
trine of a God clothed with a body, and acting and
speaking through a material frame,—of the Infinite
Divinity dying on a cross; a doctrine, which in
earthliness reminds us of the mythology of the
rudest pagans, and which a pious Jew, in the twi-
light of the Mosaic religion, would have shrunk
from with horror. It seems to me no small objec-
tion to the Trinity, that it supposes God to lake a
body in the later and more improved ages of the
world, when it is plain, that such a manifestation,
if needed at all, was peculiarly required in the in-
fancy of the race. The effect of such a system in
debasing the idea of God, in associating with, the
Divinity human passions and infirmities, is too ob-
vious to need much elucidation. On the supposition
that the second person of the Trinity became in-
carnate, God may be said to be a material being on
the same general ground, on which this is affirmed
of man; for man is material only by the union of
mind with the body; and the very meaning of incar-
nation is, that God took a body, through which he
acted and spoke, as the human soul operates through
its corporeal organs. Every bodily affection may
thus be ascribed to God. Accordingly the Trini-
tarian, in his most solemn act of adoration, is heard
to pray in these appalling words; “ Good Lord,
3u
deliver us; by the mystery of thy holy incarnation,
by thy holy nativity and circumcision, by thy bap-
tism, fasting, and temptation, by thine agony and
bloody sweat, by thy cross and passion, good Lord,
deliver us.” Now I ask you to judge, from the
principles of human nature, whether to worshippers,
who adore their God for his wounds and tears, his
agony, and blood, and sweat, the ideas of corporeal
existence and human suffering will not predominate
over the conceptions of a purely spiritual essence;
whether the mind, in dinging to the man, will not
lose the God ; whether a surer method for depress-
ing and adulterating the pure thought of the Divin-
ity could have been devised.
The Roman Catholics, true to human nature and
their creed, have sought, by painting and statuary,
to bring their imagined God before their eyes ; and
have thus obtained almost as vivid impressions of
him, as if they had lived with him on the earth.
The Protestant condemns them for using these
similitudes and representations in their worship;
but if a Trinitarian, he does so to his own condem-
nation. For if, as he believes, it was once a duty
to bow in adoration before the living body of his
incarnate God, what possible guilt can there be in
worshipping before the pictured or sculptured me-
morial of the same being. Christ’s body may as
truly be represented by the artist, as any other
human form ; and its image may be used as effect-
ually and properly, as that of an ancient sage or19
hero to recall him with vividness to the mind.—
Is it said, that God has expressly forbidden the use
of images in our worship? But why was that
prohibition laid on the Jews ? For this express
reason, that God had not presented himself to them
in any form, which admitted of representation.
Hear the language of Moses, “ Take good heed,
lest ye make you a graven image, for ye saw no
manner of similitude on the day that the Lord
spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the
fire.” * If, since that period, God has taken a body,
then the reason of the prohibition has ceased ; and
if he took a body, among other purposes, that he
might assist the weakness of the intellect, which
needs a material form, then a statue which lends
so great an aid to the conception of an absent
friend, is not only justified, but seems to be re-
quired.
This materializing and embodying of the Supreme
Being, which is the essence of Trinitarianism, can-
not but be adverse to a growing and exalted piety.
Human and divine properties, being confounded in
one being, lose their distinctness. The splendors
of the Godhead are dimttied. The worshippers of
an incarnate Deity, through the frailty of their
nature, are strongly tempted to fasten chiefly on
his human attributes; and their devotion, instead
of rising to the Infinite God, and taking the pecu-
* Deut iv. 15,16.20
liar character which Infinity inspires, becomes rather
a human affection, borrowing much of its fervor
from the ideas of suffering, blood, and death. It is
indeed possible, that this God-man (to use the
* strange phraseology of Trinitarians) may excite the
mind more easily, than a purely spiritual divinity ;
just as a tragedy, addressed to the eye and ear,
will interest the multitude more than the contem-
plation of the most exalted character. But the
emotions, which are most easily roused, are not the
profoundest or most enduring. This human love,
inspired by a human God, though at first more
fervid, cannot grow and spread through the soul,
like the reverential attachment, which an infinite,
spiritual Father awakens. Refined conceptions of
God, though more slowly attained, have a more
quickening and all-pervading energy, and admit
of perpetual accessions of brightness, life, and
strength.
True, we shall be told, that Trinitarianism has
converted only one of its three persons into a hu-
man Deity, and that the other two remain purely
spiritual beings. But who does not know, that
man will attach himself most strongly to the God
who has become a man ? Is not this even a duty,
if the Divinity has taken a body to place himself
within the reach of human comprehension and
sympathy ? That the Trinitarian’s views of the
Divinity will be colored more by his visible, tan-
gible, corporeal God, than by those persons of the21
Trinity, who remain comparatively hidden in their
invisible and spiritual essence, is so accordant with
the principles of our nature, as to need no labored
proof.
My friends, hold fast the doctrine of a purely
spiritual divinity. It is one of the great supports
and instruments of a vital piety. It brings God
near, as no other doctrine can. One of the lead-
ing purposes of Christianity, is to give us an ever
grpwing sense of God’s immediate presence, a
consciousness of him in our souls. Now just as
far as corporeal or limited attributes enter into
our conception of him, we remove him from us.
He becomes an outward, distant being, instead
of being viewed and felt as dwelling in the soul
itself. It is an unspeakable benefit of the doc-
trine of a purely spiritual God, that he can be
regarded as inhabiting, filling our spiritual nature ;
and through this union with our minds, he can
and does become the object of an intimacy and
friendship, such as no embodied being can call
forth.
III. Unitarianism is the system most favorable to
piety, because it presents a distinct and intelligible
object of worship, a being, whose nature, whilst in-
expressibly sublime, is yet simple and suited to hu-
man apprehension. An infinite Father is the most ex-
alted of all conceptions, and yet the least perplexing.
It involves no incongruous ideas. It is illustrated
by analogies from our own nature. It coincides22
with that fundamental law of the intellect, through
which we demand a cause proportioned to effects.
It is also as interesting as it is rational; so that it is
peculiarly congenial with the improved mind. The
sublime simplicity of God, as he is taught in Uni-
tarianism, by relieving the understanding from
perplexity, and by placing him within the reach of
thought and affection, gives him peculiar power
over the soul. Trinitarianism, on the other hand,
is a riddle. Men call it a mystery, but it is myste-
rious, not like the great truths of religion, by its
vastness and grandeur, but by the irreconcilable
ideas which it involves. One God, consisting of
three persons or agents, is so strange a being, so
unlike our own minds, and all others with which we
hold intercourse, is so misty, so incongruous, so
contradictory, that he cannot be apprehended with
that distinctness and that feeling of reality, which
belong to the opposite system. Such a heteroge-
neous being, who is at the same moment one and
many ; who includes in his own nature the relations
of Father and Son, or, in other words, is Father
and Son to himself; who, in one of his persons, is
at the same moment the supreme God and a mortal
man, omniscient and ignorant, almighty and impo-
tent ; such a being is certainly the most puzzling
and distracting object ever presented to human
thought. Trinitarianism, instead of teaching an
intelligible God, offers to the mind a monstrous com-
pound of hostile attributes, bearing plain marks of23
those ages of darkness, when Christianity shed
but a faint ray, and the diseased fancy teemed with
prodigies and unnatural creations. In contem-
plating a being, who presents such different and
inconsistent aspects, the mind finds nothing to rest
upon; and instead of receiving distinct and harmo-
nious impressions, is disturbed by shifting, unsettled
images. To commune with such a being must be
as hard, as to converse with a man of three different
countenances, speaking with three different tongues.
The believer in this system must forget it, when
he prays, or he could find no repose in devotion.
Who can compare it in distinctness, reality, and
power, with the simple doctrine of One Infinite
Father ?
IV. Unitarianism promotes a fervent and en-
lightened piety, by asserting the absolute and un-
bounded perfection of God’s character. This is the
highest service which can be rendered to mankind.
Just and generous conceptions of the Divinity are
the soul’s true wealth. To spread these, is to con-
tribute more effectually, than by any other agencyr
to the progress and happiness of the intelligent
creation. To obscure God’s glory is to do greater
wrong, than to blot out the sun. The character
and influence of a religion must answer to the views
which it gives of the Divinity; and there is a plain,
tendency in that system, which manifests the di-
vine perfections most resplendently, to awaken the
sublimest and most blessed piety.24
Now Trinitarianism has a fatal tendency to de-
grade the character of the Supreme Being. By
multiplying divine persons, it takes from each the
glory of independent, all-sufficient, absolute per-
fection. This may be shown in various particulars.
And in the first place, the very idea, that three
persons in the divinity are in any degree important,
implies and involves the imperfection of each; for
it-is plain, that if one divine person possesses all
possible power, wisdom, love, and happiness, noth-
ing will be gained to himself or to the creation by
joining with him two, or two hundred other persons.
To say that he needs others for any purpose or in
any degree, is to strip him of independent and
all-sufficient majesty. If our Father in Heaven,
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is
not of himself sufficient to all the wants of his
creation ; if, by his union with other persons, he can
accomplish any good to which he is not of himself
equal; or if he thus acquires a claim to the least
degree of trust or hope, to which he is not of him-
self entitled by his own independent attributes; then
it is plain, he is not a being of infinite and absolute
perfection. Now Trinitarianism teaches, that the
highest good accrues to the human race from the
existence of three divine persons, sustaining differ-
ent offices and relations to the world; and it re-
gards the Unitarian, as subverting the foundation of
human hope, by asserting that the God and Father
of our Lord Jesus is alone and singly God. Thus
it derogates from his infinite glory.25
In the next place, Trinitarianism degrades the
character of the Supreme Being, by laying its dis-
ciples under the necessity of making such a distri-
bution of offices and relations among the three
persons, as will serve to designate and distinguish
them ; for in this way it interferes with the sublime
conception of One Infinite Person, in whom all
glories are concentred. If we are required to wor-
ship three persons, we must view them in different
lights, or they will be mere repetitions of each other,
mere names and sounds, presenting no objects, con-
veying no meaning to the mind. Some appropriate
character, some peculiar acts, feelings, and relations
must be ascribed to each. In other words, the
glory of all must be shorn, that some special dis-
tinguishing lustre may be thrown on each. Accord-
ingly, creation is associated peculiarly with the
conception of the Father; satisfaction for human
guilt with that of the Son; whilst sanctification,
the noblest work of all, is given to the Holy Spirit
as his more particular work. By a still more fatal
distribution, the work of justice, the office of vindi-
cating the rights of the Divinity, falls peculiarly to
the Father, whilst the loveliness of interposing
mercy clothes peculiarly the person of the Son.
By this unhappy influence of Trinitarianism, from
which common minds at least cannot escape, the
splendors of the Godhead, being scattered among
three objects, instead of being united in One Infi-
nite Father, are dimmed; and he, whose mind is
426
thoroughly and practically possessed by this sys-
tem, can hardly conceive the effulgence of glory in
which the One God offers himself to a pious be-
liever in his strict unity.
But the worst has not been told. I observe,
then, in the third place, that if Three Divine Per-
sons are believed in, such an administration or
government of the world must be ascribed to them,
as will furnish them with a sphere of operation.
No man will admit three persons into his creed,
without finding a use for them. Now it is an ob-
vious remark, that a system of the universe, which
involves and demands more than One Infinite
Agent, must be wild, extravagant, and unworthy
the perfect God; because there is no possible or
conceivable good, to which such an agent is not
adequate. Accordingly we find Trinitarianism con-
necting itself with a scheme of administration, ex-
ceedingly derogatory to the divine character. It
teaches, that the Infinite Father saw fit to put into
the hands of our first parents the character and
condition of their whole progeny; and that, through
one act of disobedience, the whole race bring with
them into being a corrupt nature, or are born de-
praved. It teaches, that the offences of a short
life, though begun and spent under this disastrous
influence, merit endless punishment, and that God’s
law threatens this infinite penalty; and that man
is thus burdened with a guilt, which no sufferings of
the created universe can expiate, which nothing27
but the sufferings of an Infinite Being can purge
away. In this condition of human nature, Trinita-
rianism finds a sphere of action for its different
persons. I am aware that some Trinitarians, on
hearing this statement of their system, may reproach
me with ascribing to them the errors of Calvinism,
a system which they abhor as much as ourselves.
But none of the peculiarities of Calvinism enter
into this exposition. I have given what I under-
stand to be the leading features of Trinitarianism
all the world over; and the benevolent professors
of that faith, who recoil from this statement,
must blame not the preacher, but the creeds
and establishments by which these doctrines are
diffused. For ourselves, w7e look with horror and
grief on the views of God’s government, which are
naturally and intimately united with Trinitarianism.
They take from us our Father in Heaven, and
substitute a stern and unjust lord. Our filial love
and reverence rise up against them. We say to
the Trinitarian, touch any thing but the perfections
of God. Cast no stain on that spotless purity and
loveliness. We can endure any errors but those,
which subvert or unsettle the conviction of God’s
paternal goodness. Urge not upon us a system,
which makes existence a curse, and wraps the
universe in gloom. Leave us the cheerful light,
the free and healthful atmosphere, of a liberal and
rational faith; the ennobling and consoling influ-
ences of the doctrine, which nature and revelation28
in blessed concord teach us, of One Father of Un-
bounded and Inexhaustible Love.
V. Unitarianism is peculiarly favorable to piety,
because it accords with nature, with the world
around and the world within us : and through this
accordance it gives aid to nature, and receives aid
from it, in impressing the mind with God. We
live in the midst of a glorious universe, which was
meant to be a witness and preacher of the Divinity ;
and a revelation 'from God may be expected to be
in harmony with this system, and to carry on a
common ministry with it in lifting the soul to God.
Now Unitarianism is in accordance with nature.
It teaches One Father, and so does creation, the
more it is explored. Philosophy, in proportion as
it extends its views of the universe, sees in it, more
and more, a sublime and beautiful unity, and multi-
plies proofs, that all things have sprung from one
intelligence, one power, one love. The whole
outward creation proclaims to the Unitarian the
truth in which he delights. So does his own soul.
But neither nature nor the soul bears one trace of
Three Divine Persons. Nature is no Trinitarian.
It gives not a hint, not a glimpse of a tri-personal
author. Trinitarianism is a confined system, shut
up in a few texts, a few written lines, where many
of the wisest minds have failed to, discover it. It
is not inscribed on the heavens and the earth, not
borne on every wind, not resounding and re-echo-
ing through the universe. The sun and stars say29
nothing of a God of three persons. They all speak
of the One Father whom we adore. To our ears,
one and the same voice comes from God’s word
and works, a full and swelling strain, growing
clearer, louder, more thrilling as we listen, and
with one blessed influence lifting up our souls to
the Almighty Father.
This accordance between nature and revelation in-
creases the power of both over the mind. Concurring
as they do in one impression, they make that impres-
sion deeper. To men of reflection, the conviction
of the reality of religion is exceedingly heightened,
by a perception of harmony in the views of it
which they derive from various sources. Revela-
tion is never received with so intimate a persuasion
of its truth, as when it is seen to conspire to the
same ends and impressions, for which all other things
are made. It is no small objection to Trinitarian-
ism, that it is an insulated doctrine, that it reveals
a God whom we meet nowhere in the universe.
Three Divine Persons, I repeat it, are found only
in a few texts, and those so dark, that the gifted
minds of Milton, Newton, and Locke could not
find them there. Nature gives them not a Whisper
of evidence. And can they be as real and power-
ful to the mind, as that One Father, whom the
general strain and common voice of Scripture, and
the universal voice of nature call us to adore ?
VI, Unitarianism favors piety by opening the
mind to new and ever enlarging views of God.30
Teaching, as it does, the same God with nature,
it leads us to seek him in nature. It does not shut
us up in the written word, precious as that mani-
festation of the Divinity is. It considers revelation,
not as independent on his other means of instruc-
tion ; not as a separate agent; but as a part of the
great system of God for enlightening and elevating
the human soul; as intimately joined with creation
and providence, and intended to concur with them ;
and as given to assist us in reading the volume of
the universe. Thus Unitarianism, where its genu-
ine influence is experienced, tends to enrich and
fertilize the mind ; opens it to new lights, wherever
they spring up; and by combining, makes more
efficient, the means of religious knowledge. Trini-
tarianism, on the other hand, is a system which
tends to confine the mind; to shut it up in what is
written; to diminish its interest in the universe;
and to disincline it to bright and enlarged views of
God’s works. This effect will be explained, in the
first place, if we consider, that the peculiarities of
Trinitarianism differ so much from the teachings
of the universe, that he, who attaches himself to the
one, will be in danger of losing his interest in the
other. The ideas of Three Divine Persons, of God
clothing himself in flesh, of the Infinite Creator
saving the guilty by transferring their punishment
to an innocent being, these ideas cannot easily be
made to coalesce in the mind with that, which
nature gives, of One Almighty Father and Un-31
bounded Spirit, whom no worlds can contain, and
whose vicegerent in the human breast pronounces
it a crime, to lay the penalties of vice on the pure
and unoffending.
But Trinitarianism has a still more positive in-
fluence in shutting the mind against improving
views from the universe. It tends to throw gloom
over God’s works. Imagining that Christ is to be
exalted, by giving him an exclusive agency in en-
lightening and recovering mankind, it is tempted to
disparage other lights and influences; and for the
purpose of magnifying his salvation, it inclines to
exaggerate the darkness and desperateness of man’s
present condition. The mind, thus impressed,
naturally leans to those views of nature and of
society, which will strengthen the ideas of desola-
tion and guilt. It is tempted to aggravate the
miseries of life, and to see in them only the marks
of divine displeasure and punishing justice; and
overlooks their obvious fitness and design to awaken
our powers, exercise our virtues, and strengthen
our social ties. In like manner it exaggerates the
sins of men, that the need of an Infinite atone-
ment may be maintained. Some of the most af-
fecting tokens of God’s love within and around us
are obscured by this gloomy theology. The glorious
faculties of the soul, its high aspirations, its sensi-
bility to the great and good in character, its sym-
pathy with disinterested and suffering virtue, its
benevolent and religious instincts, its thirst for a32
happiness not found on earth, these are overlooked
or thrown into the shade, that they may not disturb
the persuasion of man’s natural corruption. Inge-
nuity is employed to disparage what is interesting
in the human character. Whilst the bursts of pas-
sion in the new-born child are gravely urged, as
indications of a native rooted corruption ; its bursts
of affection, its sweet smile, its innocent and inex-
pressible joy, its loveliness and beauty, are not
listened to, though they plead more eloquently its
alliance with higher natures. The sacred and ten-
der affections of home ; the unwearied watchings
and cheerful sacrifices of parents; the reverential,
grateful assiduity of children, smoothing an aged
father’s or mother’s descent to the grave ; woman’s
love, stronger than death; the friendship of brothers
and sisters; the anxious affection, which tends
around the bed of sickness; the subdued voice,
which breathes comfort into the mourner’s heart;
all the endearing offices, which shed a serene light
through our dwellings; these are explained away by
the thorough advocates of this system, so as to in-
clude no real virtue, so as to consist with a natural
aversion to goodness. Even the higher efforts of
disinterested benevolence, and the most unaffected
expressions of piety, if not connected with what is
called “ the true faith,” are, by the most rigid dis-
ciples of the doctrine which I oppose, resolved into
the passion for distinction, or some other working
of “ unsanctified nature.” Thus Trinitarianism33
and its kindred doctrines have a tendency to veil
God’s goodness, to sully his fairest works, to dim
the lustre of those innocent and pure affections,
which a divine breath kindles in the soul, to blight
the beauty and freshness of creation, and in this
way to consume the very nutriment of piety. We
know, and rejoice to know, that in multitudes this
tendency is counteracted by a cheerful temperament,
a benevolent nature, and a strength of gratitude,
which bursts the shackles of a melancholy system.
But from the nature of the doctrine, the tendency
exists and is strong; and an impartial observer will
often discern it resulting in gloomy, depressing
views of life and the universe.
Trinitarianism, by thus tending to exclude bright
and enlarging views of the creation, seems to me
not only to chill the heart, but to injure the under-
standing. It does not send the mind far and wide
for new and elevating objects; and we have here
one explanation of the barrenness and feebleness by
which theological writings are so generally marked.
It is not Wonderful, that the prevalent theology
should want vitality and enlargement of thought,
/or it does not accord with the perfections of God
and the spirit of the universe. It has not its root
in eternal truth; but is a narrow, technical, artifi-
cial system, the fabrication of unrefined ages, and
consequently incapable of being blended with the
new lights which are spreading over the most in-
teresting subjects, and of being incorporated with
534
the results and anticipations of original and pro-
gressive minds. It stands apart in the mind, in-
stead of seizing upon new truths, and converting
them into its own nutriment. With few exceptions,
the Trinitarian theology of the present day is great-
ly deficient in freshness of thought, and in power
to awaken the interest and to meet the intellectual
and spiritual wants of thinking men. I see indeed
superior minds and great minds among the adhe-
rents of the prevalent system ; but they seem to me
to move in chains, and to fulfil poorly their high
function of adding to the wealth of the human in-
tellect. In theological discussion, they remind me
more of Sampson grinding in the narrow mill of
the Philistines, than of that undaunted champion
achieving victories for God’s people, and enlarging
the bounds of their inheritance. Now a system,
which has a tendency to confine the mind, and to
impair its sensibility to the manifestations of God in
the universe, is so far unfriendly to piety, to a bright,
joyous, hopeful, ever growing love of the Creator.
It tends to generate and nourish a religion of a low,
dull, melancholy tone, such, I apprehend, as now
predominates in the Christian world.
VII. Unitarianism promotes piety by the high
place, which it assigns to piety in the character and
work of Jesus Christ. What is it, which the
Unitarian regards as the chief glory of the char-
acter of Christ ? I answer, his filial devotion, the
entireness with which he surrendered himself to the
/35
will and benevolent purposes of God. The piety
of Jesus, which, on the supposition of his Supreme
Divinity, is a subordinate and incongruous, is, to us,
his prominent and crowning, attribute. We place
his “ oneness with God,” not in an unintelligible
unity of essence, but in unity of mind and heart,
in the strength of his love, through which he re-
nounced every separate interest, and identified him-
self with his Father’s designs. In other words,
filial piety, the consecration of his whole being to
the benevolent will of his Father, this is the mild
glory in which he always otfers himself to our
minds; and, of consequence, all our sympathies with
him, all our love and veneration towards him, are
so many forms of delight in a pious character, and
our whole knowledge of him incites us to a like sur-
render of our whole nature and existence to God.
In the next place, Unitarianism teaches, that the
highest work or office of Christ is to call forth and
strengthen piety in the human breast, and thus it
sets before us this character as the chief acquisition
and end of our being. To us, the great glory of
Christ’s mission consists in the power, with which
he “ reveals the Father,” and establishes the
“ kingdom or reign of God within ” the soul. By the
crown, which he wears, we understand the emi-
nence which he enjoys in the most beneficent work
in the universe, that of bringing back the lost mind
to the knowledge, love, and likeness of its Creator.
With these views of Christ’s office, nothing can36
seem to us so important as an enlightened and
profound piety, and we are quickened to seek it, as
the perfection and happiness, to which nature and
redemption jointly summon us.
Now we maintain, that Trinitarianism obscures
and weakens these views of Christ’s character and
work; and this it does, by insisting perpetually on
others of an incongruous, discordant nature. It
diminishes the power of his piety. Making him, as
it does, the Supreme Being, and placing him as an
equal on his Father’s throne, it turns the mind from
him as the meekest worshipper of God; throws into
the shade, as of very inferior worth, his self-denying
obedience; and gives us other grounds for revering
him, than his entire homage, his fervent love, his
cheerful self-sacrifice to the Universal Parent.
There is a plain incongruity in the belief of bis
Supreme Godhead with the ideas of filial piety and
exemplary devotion. The mind, which has been
taught to regard him as of equal majesty and au-
thority with the Father, cannot easily feel the power
of his character as the affectionate son, whose meat
it was to do his Father’s will. The mind, accus-
tomed to make him the Ultimate Object of worship,
cannot easily recognise in him the pattern of that
worship, the guide to the Most High. The char-
acters are incongruous, and their union perplexing,
so that neither exerts its full energy on the mind.
Trinitarianism also exhibits the work, as well as
character of Christ, in lights less favorable to piety.37
It does not make the promotion of piety his chief end.
It teaches, that the highest purpose of his mission
was to reconcile God to man, not man to God. It
teaches, that the most formidable obstacle to human
happiness lies in the claims and threatenings of
divine justice. Hence it leads men to prize Christ
more, for satisfying this justice, and appeasing
God’s anger, than for awakening in the human soul
sentiments of love towards its Father in heaven.
Accordingly, multitudes seem to prize pardon more
than piety, and think it a greater boon to escape,
through Christ’s sufferings, the fire of hell, than to
receive, through his influence, the spirit of heaven,
the spirit of devotion. Is such a system propitious
to a generous and ever growing piety ?
If I may be allowed a short digression, I would
conclude this head with the general observation,
that we deem our views of Jesus Christ more in-
teresting than those of Trinitarianism. We feel
that we should lose much, by exchanging the dis-
tinct character and mild radiance, with which he
offers himself to our minds, for the confused and
irreconcilable glories with which that system la-
bors to invest him. According to Unitarianism, he
is a being who may be understood, for he is one
mind, one conscious nature. According to the op-
posite faith, he is an inconceivable compound of
two most dissimilar minds, joining in one person a
finite and infinite nature, a soul weak and ignorant,
and a soul almighty and omniscient. And is such38
a being a proper object for human thought and
affection ?—I add, as another important considera-
tion, that to us, Jesus, instead of being the second
of three obscure, unintelligible persons, is first and
preeminent in the sphere in which he acts, and is
thus the object of a distinct attachment, which he
shares with no equals or rivals. To us, he is first
of the sons of God, the Son by peculiar nearness
and likeness to the Father. He is first of all the
ministers of God’s mercy and beneficence, and
through him the largest stream of bounty flows to
the creation. He is first in God’s favor and love,
the most accepted of worshippers, the most preva-
lent of intercessors. In this mighty universe,
framed to be a mirror of its author, we turn to
Jesus as the brightest image of God, and gratefully
yield him a place in our souls, second only to the
Infinite Father, to whom he himself directs our
supreme affection.
VIII. I now proceed to a great topic. Unita-
rianism promotes piety, by meeting the wants of
man as a sinner. The wants of the sinner may be
expressed almost in one word. He wants assur-
ances of mercy in his Creator. He wants pledges,
that God is Love in its purest form, that is, that He
has a goodness so disinterested, free, full, strong,
and immutable, that the ingratitude and disobe-
dience of his creatures cannot overcome it. This
unconquerable love, which in Scripture is de-
nominated grace, and which waits not for merit to39
call it forth, but flows out to the most guilty, is the
sinner’s only hope, and is fitted to call forth the
most devoted gratitude. Now this grace or mercy
of God, which seeks the lost, and receives and
blesses the returning child, is proclaimed by that
faith, which we advocate, with a clearness and
energy, which cannot be surpassed. Unitarianism
will not listen for a moment to the common errors,
by which this bright attribute is obscured. It will
not hear of a vindictive wrath in God, which must
be quenched by blood; or of a justice, which binds
his mercy with an iron chain, until its demands are
satisfied to the full. It will not hear that God
needs any foreign influence to awaken his mercy ;
but teaches, that the yearnings of the tenderest
human parent towards a lost child are but a faint
image of God’s deep and overflowing compassion
towards erring man. This essential and unchange-
able propensity of the divine mind to forgiveness,
the Unitarian beholds shining forth through the
whole word of God, and especially in the mission
and revelation of Jesus Christ, who lived and died
to make manifest the inexhaustible plenitude of
divine grace; and, aided by revelation, he sees this
attribute of God every where, both around him and
within him. He sees it in the sun which shines,
and the rain which descends, on the evil and un-
thankful ; in the peace, which returns to the mind
in proportion to its return to God and duty; in the
sentiment of compassion, which springs up sponta-40
neously in the human breast towards the fallen and
lost; and in the moral instinct, which teaches us to
cherish this compassion as a sacred principle, as an
emanation of God’s infinite love. In truth, Unita-
rianism asserts so strongly the mercy of God, that
the reproach thrown upon it is, that it takes from
the sinner the dread of punishment; a reproach
wholly without foundation; for our system teaches,
that God’s mercy is not an instinctive tenderness,
which cannot inflict pain; but an all-wise love,
which desires the true and lasting good of its ob-
ject, and consequently desires first for the sinner
that restoration to purity, without which, shame,
and suffering, and exile from God and Heaven are
of necessity and unalterably his doom. Thus Uni-
tarianism holds forth God’s grace and forgiving
goodness most resplendently; and by this manifes-
tation of him, it tends to awaken a tender and con-
fiding piety; an ingenuous love, which mourns that,
it has offended; an ingenuous aversion to sin, not
because sin brings punishment, but because it sepa-
rates the mind from this merciful Father.
Now we object to Trinitarianism, that it ob-
scures, if it does not annul, the mercy of God. It
does so in various ways. We have already seen,
that it gives such views of God’s government, that
we can hardly conceive of this attribute as entering
into his character. Mercy to the sinner is the
principle of love or benevolence in its highest form;
and surely this cannot be expected from a being41
who brings us into existence burdened with heredi-
tary guilt, and who threatens with endless pun-
ishment and wo the heirs of so frail and feeble a
nature. With such a Creator, the idea of mercy can-
not coalesce ; and I will say more, that under such
a government man has no need of mercy; for he
owes no allegiance to such a maker, and cannot of
course contract the guilt of violating it; and with-
out guilt, he needs no grace or pardon. The se-
verity of this system places him on the ground of
an injured being. The wrong lies on the side of
the Creator.
In the next place, Trinitarianism obscures God’s
mercy, by the manner in which it supposes pardon
to be communicated. It teaches, that God remits
the punishment of the offender, in consequence of
receiving an equivalent from an innocent person;
that the sufferings of the sinner are removed by a
full satisfaction made to divine justice in the suffer-
ings of a substitute. And is this “ the quality of
mercy ? ” What means forgiveness, but the recep-
tion of the returning child through the strength of
parental love ? This doctrine invests the Saviour
with a claim of merit, with a right to the remission
of the sins of his followers; and represents God’s
reception of the penitent as a recompense due to the
worth of his son. And is mercy, which means
free and undeserved love, made more manifest,
more resplendent, by the introduction of merit and
right as the ground of our salvation? Could a
642
surer expedient be invented for obscuring its free-
ness, and for turning the sinner’s gratitude from the
sovereign who demands, to the sufferer who offers,
full satisfaction for his guilt ?
I know it is said, that Trinitarianism magnifies
God’s mercy, because it teaches, that he himself
provided the substitute for the guilty. But I reply,
that the work here ascribed to mercy is not the
most appropriate, nor most fitted to manifest it and
impress it on the heart. This may be made appa-
rent by familiar illustrations. Suppose that a cred-
itor, through compassion to certain debtors, should
persuade a benevolent and opulent man to pay him
in their stead. Would not the debtors see a great-
er mercy, and feel a weightier obligation, if they
were to receive a free, gratuitous release ? And
will not their chief gratitude stray beyond the
creditor to the benevolent substitute ? Or suppose,
that a parent, unwilling to inflict a penality on a
disobedient but feeble child, should persuade a
stronger child to bear it. Would not the offender
see a more touching mercy in a free forgiveness,
springing immediately from a parent’s heart, than
i® this circuitous remission ? And will he not be
tempted to turn with his strongest love to the gen-
erous sufferer ? In this process of substitution, of
which Trinitarianism boasts so loudly, the mercy
of God becomes complicated with the rights and
merits of the substitute, and is a more distant cause
than these rights and merits in our salvation. These43
are nearer, more visible, and more than divide the
glory with grace and mercy in our rescue. They
turn the mind from mercy as the only spring of its
happiness, and only rock of its hope. Now this is
to deprive piety of one of its chief means of growth
and joy. Nothing should stand between the soul
and God’s mercy. Nothing should share with
mercy the work of our salvation. Christ’s inter-
cession should ever be regarded as an application
to love and mercy, not as a demand of justice,
not as a claim of merit. I grieve to say, that
Christ, as now viewed by multitudes, hides the
lustre of that very attribute, which it is his great
purpose to display. I fear, that to many, Jesus
wears the glory of a more winning, tender mercy,
than his Father; and that he is regarded as the
sinner’s chief resource. Is this the way to invigo-
rate piety ?
Trinitarians imagine, that there is one view of
their system, peculiarly fitted to give peace and
hope to the sinner, and consequently to promote
gratitude and love. It is this. They say, it pro-
vides an Infinite substitute for the sinner, than
which nothing can give greater relief to the bur-
dened conscience. Jesus, being the second person
of the Trinity, was able to make infinite satisfac-
tion for sin; and what, they ask, in Unitarianism,
can compare with this ? I have time only for two
brief replies. And first, this doctrine of an Infinite
satisfaction, or, as it is improperly called, of an In-44
finite atonement, subverts, instead of building up,
hope, because it argues infinite severity in the gov-
ernment which requires it. Did I believe, what
Trinitarianism teaches, that not the least trans-
gression, not even the first sin of the dawning mind
of the child, could be remitted without an infinite
expiation, I should feel myself living under a
legislation unspeakably dreadful, under laws writ-
ten, like Draco’s, in blood; and instead of thanking
the sovereign for providing an infinite substitute, I
should shudder at the attributes, which render this
expedient necessary. It is commonly said, that an
infinite atonement is needed to make due and deep
impressions of the evil of sin. But he, who framed
all souls and gave them their susceptibilities, ought
not to be thought so wanting in goodness and wis-
dom, as to have constituted a universe, which
demands so dreadful and degrading a method of
enforcing obedience, as the penal sufferings of a
God. This doctrine of an Infinite substitute, suf-
fering the penalty of sin, to manifest God’s wrath
against sin, and thus to support his government,
is, I fear, so familiar to us all, that its monstrous
character is overlooked. Let me then set it before
you, in new terms, and by a new illustration; and if
in so doing I may wound the feelings of some who
hear me, I beg them to believe, that I do it with
pain, and from no impulse but a desire to serve
the cause of truth.—Suppose, then, that a teacher
should come among you, and should tell you, that45
the Creator, in order to pardon his own children,
had erected a gallows in the centre of the universe,
and had publicly executed upon it, in room of the
offenders, an Infinite Being, the partaker of his own
Supreme Divinity; suppose him to declare, that this
execution was appointed, as a most conspicuous and
terrible manifestation of God’s justice and wrath,
and of the infinite wo denounced by his law; and
suppose him to add, that all beings in Heaven and
earth are required to fix their eyes on this fearful
sight, as the most powerful enforcement of obedience
and virtue. Would you not tell him, that he calum-
niated his Maker ? Would you not say to him, that
this central gallows threw gloom over the universe;
that the spirit of a government, whose very acts of
pardon were written in such blood, was terror, not
paternal love; and that the obedience, which need-
ed to be upheld by this horrid spectacle, was
nothing worth ? Would you not say to him, that
even you, in this infancy and imperfection of your
being, were capable of being wrought upon by nobler
motives, and of hating sin through more generous
views; and that much more the angels, those pure
flames of love, need not the gallows and an . exe-
cuted God, to confirm their loyalty ? You would
all so feel at such teaching as I have supposed;
and yet how does this differ from the popular doc-
trine of atonement ? According to this doctrine, we
have an Infinite Being sentenced to suffer as a sub-
stitute the death of the cross, a punishment moreignominious and agonizing than the gallows, a
punishment reserved for slaves and the vilest male-
factors; and he suffers this punishment, that he
may show forth the terrors of God’s law, and
strike a dread of sin through the universe.—I am
indeed aware that multitudes, who profess this
doctrine, are not accustomed to bring it to their
minds distinctly in this light; that they do not or-
dinarily regard the death of Christ, as a criminal
execution, as an infinitely dreadful infliction of
justice, as intended to show, that, without an infi-
nite satisfaction, they must hope nothing from God.
Their minds turn by a generous instinct from these
appalling views, to the love, the disinterestedness,
the moral grandeur and beauty of the sufferer; and
through such thoughts they make the cross a
source of peace, gratitude, love, and hope ; thus af-
fording a delightful exemplification of the power of
the human mind to attach itself to what is good
and purifying in the most irrational system. But
let none on this account say, that we misrepresent
the doctrine of atonement, the primary and essential
idea of which is, the public execution of a God, for
the purpose of satisfying justice and awakening a
shuddering dread of sin.
I have a second objection to this doctrine of In-
finite atonement. When examined minutely, and
freed from ambiguous language, it vanishes into
air. It is wholly delusion. The Trinitarian tells
me, that, according to his system, we have an47
infinite substitute; that the Infinite God was
pleased to bear our punishment, and consequently
that pardon is made sure. But I ask him, Do
I understand you ? Do you mean that the Great
God, who never changes, whose happiness is the
same yesterday, to day, and for ever, that this
Eternal Being really bore the penalty of my
sins, really suffered and died ? Every pious man,
when pressed by this question, answers, No. What
then does the doctrine of Infinite atonement mean ?
Why, this; that God took into union with himself
our nature, that is, a human body and soul; and
these bore the suffering for our sins ; and, through
his union with these, God may be said to have
borne it himself. Thus this vaunted system goes
out—in words The Infinite victim proves to be
a frail man, and God’s share in the sacrifice is a
mere fiction. 1 ask with solemnity, Can this doc-
trine give one moment’s ease to the conscience of
an unbiassed, thinking man ? Does it not unsettle
all hope, by making the whole religion suspicious
and unsure ? I am compelled to say, that I see
in it no impression of majesty, or wisdom, or love,
nothing worthy of a God ; and when I compare it
with that nobler faith, which directs our eyes
and hearts to God’s essential mercy, as our only
hope, I am amazed that any should ascribe to it
superior efficacy, as a religion for sinners, as a
means of filling the soul with pious trust and love.
I know, indeed, that some will say, that, in giving48
up an Infinite atonement, I deprive myself of all
hope of divine favor. To such, I would say, You
do infinite wrong to God’s mercy. On that mercy
I cast myself without a fear. I indeed desire
Christ to intercede for me. I regard his relation
to me as God’s kindest appointment. Through
him, “ grace and truth come ” to me from Heaven,
and I look forward to his friendship, as among the
highest blessings of my whole future being. But
I cannot, and dare not ask him, to offer an infinite
satisfaction for my sins; to appease the wrath of
God ; to reconcile the Universal Father to his own
offspring; to open to me those arms of Divine
Mercy, which have encircled and borne me from
the first moment of my being. The essential and
unbounded mercy of my Creator is the foundation
of my hope, and a broader and surer the universe
cannot give me.
IX. I now proceed to the last consideration,
which the limits of this discourse will permit me
to urge. It has been more than once suggested,
but deserves to be distinctly stated. I observe,
then, that Unitarianism promotes piety, because it
is a rational religion. By this, I do not mean,
that its truths can be fully comprehended; for
there is not an object in nature or religion, which
has not innumerable connexions and relations be-
yond our grasp of thought. I mean, that its doc-
trines are consistent with one another, and with
all established truth. Unitarianism is in harmony49
with the great and clear principles of revelation ;
with the laws and power of human nature; with
the dictates of the moral sense; with the noblest
instincts and highest aspirations of the soul; and
with the lights, which the universe throws on the
character of its author. We can hold this doctrine
without self-contradiction, without rebelling against
our rational and moral powers, without putting to
silence the divine monitor in the breast. And this
is an unspeakable benefit; for a religion, thus
coincident with reason, conscience, and our whole
spiritual being, has the foundations of universal
empire in the breast; and the heart, finding no
resistance in the intellect, yields itself wholly,
cheerfully, without doubts or misgivings, to the
love of its Creator.
To Trinitarianism we object, what has always
been objected to it, that it contradicts and degrades
reason, and thus exposes the mind to the worst de-
lusions. Some of its advocates, more courageous
than prudent, have even recommended “ the pros-
tration of the understanding ” as preparatory to its
reception. Its chief doctrine is an outrage on our
rational nature. Its three persons, who constitute
its God, must either be frittered away into three
unmeaning distinctions, into sounds signifying
nothing ; or they are three conscious agents, who
cannot, by any human art or metaphysical device,
be made to coalesce into one being; who cannot
be really viewed as one mind, having one conscious-
750
ness and one will. Now a religious system, the
cardinal principle of which offends the understand-
ing, very naturally conforms itself throughout to
this prominent feature, and becomes prevalently
irrational. He, who is compelled to defend his
faith in any particular by the plea, that human
reason is so depraved through the fall, as to be an
inadequate judge of religion, and that God is
honored by our reception of what shocks the in-
tellect, seems to have no defence left against
accumulated absurdities. According to these prin-
ciples, the fanatic, who exclaimed, “ I believe, be-
cause it is impossible,” had a fair title to canoniz-
ation. Reason is too Godlike a faculty, to be
insulted with impunity. Accordingly Trinitarian-
ism, as we have seen, links itself with several
degrading errors; and its most natural alliance is
with Calvinism, that cruel faith, which, stripping
God of mercy and man of power, has made Chris-
tianity an instrument of torture to the timid, and
an object of doubt or scorn to hardier spirits.
I repeat it, a doctrine, which violates reason like
the Trinity, prepares its advocates, in proportion
as it is incorporated into the mind, for worse and
worse delusions. It breaks down the distinc-
tions and barriers between truth and falsehood.
It creates a diseased taste for prodigies, fictions,
and exaggerations, for startling mysteries, and wild
dreams of enthusiasm. It destroys the relish for
the’simple, chaste, serene beauties of truth. Es-51
pecially when the prostration of understanding is
taught as an act of piety, we cannot wonder, that
the grossest superstitions should be devoured, and
that the credulity of the multitude should keep
pace with the forgeries of imposture and fanaticism.
The history of the church is the best comment on
the effects of divorcing reason from religion; and if
the present age is disburdened of many of the
superstitions, under which Christianity and human
nature groaned for ages, it owes its relief in no
small degree to the reinstating of reason in her
long violated rights.
The injury to religion, from irrational doctrines
when thoroughly believed, is immense. The human
soul has a unity. Its various faculties are adapted
to one another. One life pervades it; and its
beauty, strength, and growth, depend on nothing
so much, as on the harmony and joint action of all
its principles. To wound and degrade it in any
of its powers, and especially in the noble and dis-
tinguishing power of reason, is to inflict on it
universal injury. No notion is more false, than
that the heart is to thrive by dwarfing the intellect;
that perplexing doctrines are the best food of piety;
that religion flourishes most luxuriantly in mists
and darkness. Reason was given for God as its
great object; and for him it should be kept sacred,
invigorated, clarified, protected from human usurp-
ation, and inspired with a meek self-reverence.52
The soul never acts so effectually or joyfully, as
when all its powers and affections conspire, as
when thought and feeling, reason and sensibility,
are called forth together by one great and kindling
object. It will never devote itself to God with its
whole energy, whilst its guiding faculty sees in
him a being to shock and confound it. We want
a harmony in our inward nature. We want a
piety, which will join light and fervor, and on
which the intellectual power will look benignantly.
We want religion to be so exhibited, that, in the
clearest moments of the intellect, its signatures of
truth will grow brighter; that instead of tottering,
it will gather strength and stability from the pro-
gress of the human mind. These wants we be-
lieve to be met by Unitarian Christianity, and
therefore we prize it as the best friend of piety.
I have thus stated the chief grounds, on which I
rest the claim of Unitarianism to the honor of
promoting an enlightened, profound, and happy
piety.
Am I now asked, why we prize our system,
and why we build churches for its inculcation ? If
I may be allowed to express myself in the name of
conscientious Unitarians, who apply their doctrine
to their own hearts and lives, I would reply thus:
We prize and would spread our views, because we
believe that they reveal God to us in greater glory,53
and bring us nearer to him, than any other. We
are conscious of a deep want, which the creation
cannot supply, the want of a Perfect Being, on
whom the strength of our love may be centered, and
of an Almighty Father, in whom our weaknesses,
imperfections, and sorrow's may find resource; and
such a Being and Father, Unitarian Christianity
sets before us. For this we prize it above all
price. We can part with every other good. We
can endure the darkening of life’s fairest prospects.
But this bright, consoling doctrine of One God,
even the Father, is dearer than life, and we cannot
let it go.—Through this faith, every thing grows
brighter to our view. Born of such a Parent, we
esteem our existence an inestimable gift. We
meet every where our Father, and his presence is
as a sun shining on our path. We see him in his
works, and hear his praise rising from every spot
which we tread. We feel him near in our soli-
tudes, and sometimes enjoy communion with him
more tender than human friendship. We see him
in our duties, and perform them more gladly, be-
cause they are the best tribute wre can offer our
Heavenly Benefactor. Even the consciousness
of sin, mournful as it is, does not subvert our
peace; for in the mercy of God, as made mani-
fest in Jesus Christ, we see an inexhaustible
fountain of strength, purity, and pardon for all
who, in filial reliance, seek these heavenly gifts.—
Through this faith, we are conscious of a new54
benevolence springing up to our fellow creatures,
purer and more enlarged than natural affection.
Towards all mankind we see a rich and free love
flowing from the common Parent, and touched by
this love, we are the friends of all. We com-
passionate the most guilty, and would win them
back to God.—Through this faith, we receive the
happiness of an ever enlarging hope. There is no
good too vast for us to anticipate for the universe
or for ourselves, from such a Father as we believe
in. The horrible thought, of a large proportion
of our fellow creatures being cast by an angry God
into tortures unutterable by human tongue, and
sentenced to spend eternity in shrieks of agony,
which will never reach the ear or touch the heart
of their Creator ; this dreadful anticipation, which
would shroud the universe in more than sepulchral
gloom, and is enough to break every heart which is
not stone, this forms no part of our conception of the
purposes and government of the God and Father
of Jesus Christ. Whilst we believe, that every
new view of the constitution and administration of
the universe will reveal more strikingly the solemn
and indissoluble connexion between sin and suffer-
ing, we have equal confidence, that God’s equity
and kindness towards all his creatures will be
more and more triumphantly and gloriously dis-
played. We have an earnest of heaven in the
assurance, that all things are tending to a consum-
mation, which, however undefined and incompre-65
hensible now, will fill the benevolent heart with
unmingled joy.—Through this faith, we not only
hope for the universe, but hope for ourselves. We
are told, indeed, that our faith will not prove an
anchor in the last hour. But we have known
those, whose departure it has brightened; and our
experience of its power, in trial and peril, has
proved it to be equal to all the wants of human
nature. ' We doubt not, that, to its sincere follow-
ers, death will be a transition to the calm, pure,
joyful mansions prepared by Christ for his disciples.
There we expect to meet that great and good De-
liverer. With the eye of faith, we already see
him looking round him with celestial love on all1
of every name, who have imbibed his spirit. His
spirit; his loyal and entire devotion to the will of
his Heavenly Father; his universal Unconquerable
benevolence, through which he freely gave from
his pierced side his blood, his life for the salvation
of the world; this divine love, and not creeds,
and names, and forms, will then be found to at-
tract his supreme regard. This spirit we trust
to see in multitudes of every sect and name ; and
we trust, too, that they, who now reproach us,
will at that day recognise, in the dreaded Uni-
tarian, this only badge of Christ, and will bid
him welcome to the joy of our common Lord.—
I have thus stated the views, with which we
have reared this building. We desire to glorify
God, to promote a purer, nobler, happier piety.56
Even if we err in doctrine, we think, that these
motives should shield us from reproach; should
disarm that intolerance, which would exclude us
from the church on earth, and from our Father’s
house in Heaven.
We end, as we began, by offering up this build-
ing to the Only Living and True God. We have
erected it amidst our private habitations, as a re-
membrancer of our Creator. We have reared it
in this busy city, as a retreat for pious meditation
and prayer. We dedicate it to the King and
Father Eternal, the King of kings and Lord of
lords. We dedicate it to his Unity, to his unrival-
led and undivided Majesty. We dedicate it to the
praise of his free, unbought, unmerited Grace.
We dedicate it to Jesus Christ, to the memory of
his love, to the celebration of his divine virtue, to
the preaching of that truth, which he sealed with
blood. We dedicate it to the Holy Spirit, to
the sanctifying influence of God, to those celestial
emanations of light and strength, which visit and
refresh the devout mind. We dedicate it to pray-
ers and praises, which we trust will be continued
and perfected in Heaven. We dedicate it to social
worship, to Christian intercourse, to the commun-
ion of saints. We dedicate it to the cause of pure
morals, of public order, of equity, uprightness,
and general good will. We dedicate it to Christian
admonition, to those warnings, remonstrances, and57
earnest and tender persuasions, by which the sin-
ner may be arrested, and brought back to God.
We dedicate it to Christian consolation, to those
truths which assuage sorrow, animate penitence,
and lighten the load of human anxiety and fear.
We dedicate it to the doctrine of Immortality, to
sublime and joyful hopes which reach beyond the
grave. In a word, we dedicate it to the great
work of perfecting the human soul, and fitting it
for nearer approach to its Author. Here may
heart meet heart. Here may man meet God.
From this place may the song of praise, the ascrip-
tion of gratitude, the sigh of penitence, the prayer
for grace, and the holy resolve, ascend, as fragrant
incense, to Heaven; and through many generations
may parents bequeath to their children this house,
as a sacred spot, where God had “ lifted upon them
his countenance,” and given them pledges of his
everlasting love.
8NOTES
Page 19.—The arrangement of the text from Deuteron-
omy, quoted on this page, is a little changed, to put the
reader immediately in possession of the meaning.
Eighth Head.—Under this head, I have more than once
used the word atonement in the sense in which Trinitarians
generally use it; and without doing so, my object might not
have been sufficiently clear to some of my readers. I ought to
say, however, that I do not consider this sense as the true one,
or as agreeing with the meaning which belongs to the term
in the Scriptures ; and I always lament the necessity of using
a Scriptural word in a manner, which may countenance a
misapprehension of its real import. This subject of atone-
ment needs a much more extensive discussion, than the
limits and design of this sermon would allow. I have a
strong impression, that the prevalent views of it may easily
be shown to be false, though the true views of it may not so
easily be established. I believe, too, that time will prove,
that thinking men of opposite sects differ less on this point
than is imagined. It will be observed, that I have not under-
taken to state the way or method by which Christ’s sufferings
contribute to human salvation. On this point there is a
diversity of opinion. I have thought it sufficient to state the
general principle in which Unitarian Christians agree. They
all believe, that God’s love or mercy is “ the beginning and
the end ” of human salvation, and that this gives to Christ’s
sufferings and intercession their efficacy.