.w^ WKOU- BOOK STORE, 2 BROADWAY, 3. OF JOHN STRFRT. ^£ i THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,! Princeton, N.J. ^ ^ ^^-6 m% %%%%%%%%%%4^^%%%^^^^^l *-s<^^>ee' Case, Division l|.. Shelf, Sactien...^.;/.,.. ....i,. Bookf sea. /3.^7 LETTERS ON UNITAHIANIS.AI, f LETTERS UNITARIANISMj ADDRESSED TO THE MEMBERS er THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, CITY OF BALTIMORE. BY SAMUEL MILLER, D. D. PROFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY AND CHURCH GOTBBS;- MEXT, IX THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHDRCH IN THE UNITED STATES, AT PRINCETON, TRENTON: PRINTED BY GEORGE SHERMAX, 1821.. District of New-J£Rsky, ss. BE it remembeied, that on the nineteenth day of December, in the forty -sixth year of the Independence of the United States of America, George Sherman, of the said District, hath deposited in this Office, the title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as Proprietor, in the words fohowing, to wit: — " Letters on Unitarianism ; addressed to the members of the First Pres- " byteriaii Church in the City of Baltimore. By Samuei Miller, D. D. ♦* Professor of Ecclesiastical History and Church Government, in the ** Theological Seminary of the Presbyterian Church in the United States, " at Princeton." In conformity to an Act of the Congress of the United States, entitled ** 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 the act entitled *' An act suppleoientary to the act, entitled " An act for the encouragement of learning by securing the copies of Maps, Charts and Books, to the Au- thois and Proprietors "of such copies, during the times therein mentioned, and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, etching, and eagraving historical and other prints.'* ^ WM. PENNINGTON, *" Clerk of the District of New-Jersey. CONTENTS. LETTER L Mrodudonj Bemarks-^Zeal of Unitarians to propagaie their opinions — Design of these Letters — Attention to the subject earnestly requested — Leading articles of the Unita- nan Creed — The present no sectarian dispute-^Impor-' tance of the poiiUs in controversij. — p. 9—35. LETTER IT. Prejudices cherished hy many against Orthodoxy — ^First Frejudice, that Orthodoxy is austere and repulsive — Con- sidered, and an attempt made to remove it — Second Pre- judice, that Orthodoxy lays too much stress on opinions — = Shewn to be unfounded — Unitarians have, at different times, made themselves equally liable to this charge-^ Thirdly; the spirit of Orthodoxy is a persecuting Spirits-Refuted — p. 36 70. LETTER III. Subject continued — Fourth Prejudice — against every thing Mysterious in Religion — Examined, and shewn to be unreasonable — Danger of adopting it as a general principk^FiiBTu. Prejudice-^The atithority of Great. VI CONTENTS. J\'*ames — This plea wholhj unsoihnd, and unscripiural^-^ So far as it has force, proved to be more in favmir of Or- thodoxy than of Unitarianism.' — p. 71 110. LETTER IV. The Scriptures the only rule of faith and practice — Testis mony of Scripture decisive in favour of Orthodoxy — The Early Fathers equally clear in support of the same — Bar- nabas — Clemens Romanus — Polycarp — Ignatius — Ire- noeus — Theophilus — Justin Martyr — Melito — Mhenago- ras — Tatian — Clemens Mexandrinus — »3ndronicus — Tertullian — Minucius Felix — Origen — Cyprian — Dimuj- sius of Alexandria — J\*ovatian — Arnobius — Lactantius — Gregory Thaumaturgus — Mhanasius — Martyrs wor- shipped Christ— p. 111 14^8. LETTER V. Subject continued — Testimony drawn from the Heresies of the first four centuries — Cerinthians — FMonites — Marci- on— Theodotns — Artemon — JS'hetus — Praxeas — Paul of Samosata — >Arius — Macedonius — These hereticks denied the name of Christians — Their Baptisms pronmmced void . — Testimony of Pagans — Pliny — Hierocles — Celsus — Lucian — Witnesses of the Truth — Paulidans — Walden- ses — WicUiffites — Hussites — Beformers — Remarks on this testimony, — p, 149 190. LETTER VL Unitarians reject the inspiration of the Scriptures — Differ- ence betxvc^irihem and the Orthodox with respect, to the CONTENTS* vif proper office ofBeason in examining revelation — Objec^ iions to the Unitarian principle on this' subject — Quota- tions from Unitarian writers^ shewing that they realltj act upon the principle ascribed to them — Specimens of Unitarian exposition — Consequences of this mode of ex^ pounding the word of God — p, 191 23*. LETTER Vir. Truth to be tried by its jJractical infiuence-^Objeciions to Unitarianism on this ground — Unitarianism disposed to deny or conceal its principles-^Indifferent to truth^Hos- tile to the exercises of Vital Piety— Deficient in yielding support and consolation in Death— Unfriendly to the Spir- it of Missions— Every where more agreeable to Infidels, than any other system which bears the Christian name, ^p. 235 27S. LETTER VIIL Objections likely to be made by Unitarians to the foregoing statements— Mswer— Advice with respect to the prop- er manner of treating Unitarians— Reasons in siipport of that advice— Concluding Remarks and Counsels,-^ p. 279 312. y LETTERS, &c LETTER I. Introdudorij Remarks — Design of these LetterS'^Uniia' rian Creed — Importance of the suhject. Christian Brethren^ A TRAIN of events, as unexpected as unsought by me, has led to the present publication. When, in the course of the last year, my ardent desire to promote your welfare, and my affectionate respect for your young Pastor, prompted me to consent, on the day of his Ordination, to address you from the pulpit, I little thought that oblo- quy and controversy were to result from the service of that day. But so it has happened. Some of your Unitarian neighbours have deemed it proper to make me an object of repeated at- tack, and my sermon on that occasion a subject of protracted and tedious discussion. I have seldom been more surprised than to find, that a few plain sentences, which were delivered B 10 LETTER I. under the impression that they contained noth- ing more than what was universally understood to he the sentiments of the Orthodox, should give such deep offence, and lead to so much waste of ink and paper. Nor can I yet account for the fact, but by supposing that the Unitarians in the United States are determined to make the experiment whether they can write themselves into notice and importance, and in prosecuting this experiment, resolve to let nothing, however trivial, escape their animadversion. If this be their plan, I make no complaint of its opera- tion on me. I am not certain that any thing which has occurred^ is to he, for a moment, re- gretted. On the contrary, a consciousness of having done my duty, has cheered me under the past; and if the following pages should, prove in any degree useful to You or your Children, I shall have reason unfeignedly to rejoice in what was, in itself, by no means desirable to a lover of peace. But, although the circumstances alluded to, have certainly given occasion to the present ad- dress, and have served to create, at once, an Interest in your prosperity, and a freedom in ap- LETTER L H preaching you, which I might not otherwise have felt in the same degree ; yet I hope you will not consider these Letters as intended to answer any thing which has been recently published against me or my Sermon, by the "Unitarian of Baltimore P My account with that writer has been, long since, on my part, finally closed.; and it is by no means my purpose to open or review it. Whatever may be the case hereaf- ter, my resolution, as yet, remains unshaken, not to take the least notice of any thing from that quarter. And to this resolution I adhere, not merely because it has been once formed and an- nounced ; but also because the writer who has honoured me with so much hostile notice, has, happily, conducted his attacks in such a manner as to render defence altogether unnecessary. My object in writing at present is your benefit. It is to put you on your guard against a system of error, which I have no hesitation in consid- ering as the most delusive and dangerous of all that have ever assumed the Christian name. This system its advocates in your neighbour- liood, are endeavouring to recommend and establish with a zeal worthy of a better cause. 1^ LETTER I. From the pulpit and the press, by the formal volume, the humble pamphlet, and every variety of exhibition that ingenuity can devise, they are endeavouring to make an impression on the publick mind. In every direction, and with a profusion of the most lavish kind, they are daily scattering abroad their instruments of seduction. Probably in no part of our country out of Massa- chusetts^ do these poisoned agents so completely fill the air, or, like one of the plagues of Egypt ^ so noisomely " come up into your houses, your '' chambers, and your kneading troughs,'^ as in Baltimore. In fact, the Unitarians in that neighbourhood seem to be emulating the zeal of some of their brethren in England^ who have been known to go into an Orthodox church ; to withdraw during the prayer, that they mi^ht, not join in ^^ idolatrous devotions;" and on their return, to strew on a Communion tabley which happened to be spread on that day, a parcel of Socinian tracts, and pamphlets.* I have heard of nothing quite equal to this in the United States ; but, from present appearances, am by no means confident that something of the same * Rtland's Partiality and Unscriptural Direction of Socinian Zeal. p. 39. _ LETTER I. X3 kind will not soon be exhibited. Now, tliough I have no fear of the influence of all this on the minds of those who read, and think, and in- quire and pray; yet there may be others to whom an antidote is not wholly unnecessary. The sagacious and eloquent Mr. Burke has somewhere said, " Let us only sulTer any pers- " on, however manifestly he may be in the wrong, '^ to tell us his story, morning and e^ ening, but " for one twelve-month, and he will be our mas- ^' ter.'^ In almost every congregation there is a considerable number to whom this maxim applies with peculiar force. The young and inexperi- enced, who are not aware of the insidious arts of error; the busy, who have but little taste for reading, and little time or disposition for pro- found reflection ; the amiable, who are ready to look with a partial eye on every serious and plausible claim ; and the gay and worldly, who are predisposed in favour of an indulgent sys- tem; — all these, when frequently assailed by the zealous, the confident, and the talkative patrons of heresy, will be peculiarly liable to be unduly impressed in their favour. When they every day hear individuals, and every day meet with pamphlets, which, on the one hand, in the 14 LETTER L most triumphant tone, praise the Unitarian sys- tem^ as the only enlightened, liberal, benevo- lent and rational system, and its adlierents as decisively the most learned, amiable, and pious friends of truth, and candid inquiry; and, on the other hand, stigmatize its opponents, as nar- row-minded, prejudiced, austere, righteous over- much, and enemies of liberal thinking ; — when they find these representations made every day, and repeated without contradiction, they will be apt at length to believe them. When they find so many confident assertions, so many plausible professions, and so many high authorities, vaun- ted on one side, and little or nothing of a counter kind produced on the other; they may begin to think that there is really more to be said in fa- vour of what they hear called heresy, and less in support of what they have been accustomed to think truth, than they once imagined. It is for such persons, more especially, that I wTite. Though neither their occupations or habits will allow the greater part of them to read a large work, they may be willing to spare an hour or two, occasionally, to gq, through a small . manual, ^nd though they would not, perhaps, LETTER I. 15 feel much interest in the best written treatise, by a distant stranger, who had no particular refer- ence to themselves ; yet they may be disposed to listen, for a short time, to one who gives some evidence that he ardently desires the prosperity of them and their Pastor, and who has written with a special view to their benefit. I would then, my Christian Friends, most res- pectfully and earnestly entreat your serious at- tention to this subject. Pass it not by as an un- important speculation. Give at least a transient hearing to one who has something to say to you- which he considers as deeply momentous, and who is conscious of no aim but that of doing you good. Recollect that the cause of truth has more to fear from the indolence and indifference of those who profess to be her friends, than from the activity or the arguments of her ene- mies. Recollect, too, that the native tendency qf the human heart is to embrace some such corrupt and delusive system as that which calls itself Unitarianism. Many who respect Religion in general, and who would abhor the thought of throwing off all regard to it ; yet desire to have it so modijQied, as to give them as little trouble, 16 LETTER 1. arid subject them to as little restraint, as possible. Many others are in reality infidels ; but are un- willing to avow it, on account of the pain which such an avowal would inflict upon their friends, and the disgrace which it might draw upon them- selves ; and, therefore, are disposed to resort to something which bears the name of Christianity, while it makes few demands, either on their faitii or practice, essentially different from their infi- del creed. And there are not a few who have had a pious education, and whose consciences will not suffer them to rest without some form of godliness, while, at the same time, they su- premely love the xvorld, and the things of the zvorld. — All these will be naturally apt to take refuge in Unitarianism ; especially if it be recom- mended by a plausible and confident advocate, or have obtained currency to any considerable extent among the splendid and fashionable around them. Something such persons must have, to save appearances, or to satisfy conscience ; and Unitarianism will give less pain to natural fee- ling ; will call for less self-denial ; and will more readily accommodate itself to every sort of pur- suit and habit, except that which is right, than any other-scheme which calls itself by the name LETTER I. 17 of Christianity. These considerations, my Friends, ought very solemnly to impress your minds. If such be the natural tendency of the human heart, who can say that he has no inter- est in the subject? Even supposing that you are in no danger yourselves from these temptations — I supposition which no professor of religion who feels as he ought the deceitfulness of his own heart, will be ready to admit ; — still your children, and other relatives, may be seriously exposed to danger. It behoves you, then, to exercise the most constant and anxious care, that they be properly armed against the enemy ; that they do not fall a prey to his seductions, from want of fidelity on the part of those whom God has constituted the guardians, no less of their spiritual, than of their temporal welfare. You wall not expect me, in these Letters, to enter at large into the controversy between the Orthodox and the Unitarians. A number of distinguished Individuals, both in our own country and in Europe, within a few years past, as well as in former times, have written so largely and so well, on this branch of polemick theology, that I forbear to undertake the dis- C 18 LETTER I. cussion of the general subject. The limits to which I confine myself, do not admit of this. Nor is it necessary. My purpose is, to treaty, in a very cursory manner, a few points in the controversy, chiefly practical, which, though not wholly neglected by other writers, have not been so frequently or fully exhibited as I could have wished to see them. Those who have an opportunity and a taste for more extensive and critical reading on the subject, will, of course^ seek for other and larger works. In the mean time, if, by taking a view of the subject more adapted to those who have little leisure, and no convenient access to the volumes of the learned, I shall be the means of satisfying a single doubt- ing inquirer, or of putting on his guard one whose foot was about to slide, I shall consider myself as most richly rewarded. 1 hope, my Christian Friends, it is unneces- sary for me to assure you, that in offering to your consideration the following remarks, I have not an unfriendly feeling towards any individuals on earth who bear the Unitarian name. On the contrary, unless I am deceived, Jihe most hearty . good will^and the most unfeigned desire to pro- LETTER I. 19 mote their welfare^ have actuated me in this un- dertaking, and in all that I have written. No attack on private character is intended. If I know myself, I abhor every weapon of this kind. It is not with the persons of Unitarians that I have to do ; but with their acknowledged prin- ciples, These^ I am persuaded, are not only erroneous, but awfully and destructively so. No man who allows himself to reflect, can be neuter or indifferent in this warfare. It is a warfare waged for all that is glorious in the Gospel, and for all that is precious in the hopes of man. De- liberately believing as I do, that the system of the Unitarians is nothing less than a total denial and subversion of the Christian religion ; and that, so far as they gain an influence, it is, like that of the fabled Syrens of old^ to allure but to destroy ; it is impossible for me to think of ma- king terms with such a system. Having profes- sed to devote myself unreservedly and forever to the glory of the ever blessed Redeemer, " wo " is me'^ if I consent, for a moment; to parley with those who blaspheme his name, or would degrade his religion! Whatever may be the sacrifice, even if it be that of life itself, this must be forborne and abhorred. While, therefore, I 20 LETTER I. respect the persons^ and desire to promote the happiness^ of those who embrace the heresy in question, I am bound, as a conscientious man, to do all in my power to expose the sin and danger of the heresy itself, and to warn my fellow men against its fatal allurements. And this, by the grace of God, I am resolved to do, as long as the convictions are such as have long impressed, and do now^ with growing strength, impress my mind. But before we proceed further, it may not be improper to pause a moment and inquire, what is meant by Unitarianism ? What system of faith does this title designate ? It is a specious title. It purports, at first view, and is, perhaps, really intended to convey an impression to the popular mind, that those who bear it, are the only be- lievers in one God, while all others believe in a plurality of Gods, Be on your guard, I pray you, against this illusion ; for, whether intended or not, it deserves no other name. The Ortho- dox, it is well known, contend for the Unity of God as steadfastly and zealously as Unitarians, or any other denomination, have qyer done. But when we speak of Unitarians, we mean to point LETTER I. 21 out those who reject the Bible doctrine of the Trinity in Unity ; who contend that there is in Jehovah but one Person^ as well as one Es- sence ; and who, with the doctrine of the Trin- ity, reject all the other peculiar and funda- mental doctrines of the Gospel. Those who bear this name, are, indeed, by no means agreed among themselves. Some entertain a higher opinion of the Redeemer's character than others^ as well as different sentiments on some other fundamental doctrines of Christianity. It is obviously impossible therefore, in any one state- ment^ to exhibit the opinions of all who profess to belong to this general denomination. But the great body of those who call themselves Unitari- ans in Great Britain and the United States^ substantially agree^ it is believed, in the follow- ing opinions. They believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is not found in Scripture ; that it is one of the corruptions of Christianity, and among the ear- liest and most mischievous of those corruptions. This is so well known, that no proof or illustra- tion of it is required. 22 LETTER I. They believe that Christ was a mere man ; that he was the Son of Joseph and Mary^ born in the ordinary way ; that he had no existence previously to his birth and appearance in Judea ; that he was not only fallible^ but liable to SIN, like other men; and that, of course, he ought by no means to be worshipped. Dr. Priestley expressly says, that the apostles had no other ideas of Christ than ^^that he was " A MAN LIKE THEMSELVES.'^* Again ; he says, " It is the clear doctrine of scripture that ^^ Christ was simply a man.'^f Mr. Belsham goes further, and suffers himself to speak in the following shocking terms : " The Unitarian ^' doctrine is that Jesus of Nazareth was a man " constituted in all respects like other men^ sub- ^^ject to the same infirmities, the same ignor- ^^ANCE, PREJUDICES, AND FRAILTIES. Unita- ^^rians maintain, that Jesus and his apostles »^were supernaturally 'wssAxvsiX^^^ as far as was ^' necessary for the execution of their commis- " sio7i ; that is, for the revelation and proof of ^^ the doctrine of eternal life, and that the favour ^^ of God extended to the Gentiles equally with • History of the Corniptiom of ChrktianityiJ., p. 3. j; im. p. 6. LETTER I. 23 ^^ the Jews; and that Jesus and his Apostles, and ^^ others of the primitive believers ^ were occasion- " ally inspired to foretel future events. But " they believe that supernatural inspiration was ^' lifnited to these cases alone ; and that when ^^ Jesus or his Apostles deliver opinions upon " subjects unconnected with the object of their *^ mission, such opinions, and their reasonings ^^ upon them, are to be received with the same ^^ ATTENTION and CAUTION, with those of other ^^ persons, in similar circumstances, of similar ^^ education, and with similar habits of think- ^ ing.'^ Further, he says, ^^ The moral charac- ^' ter of Christ, through the whole course of his "publick ministry^ as recorded by the Evangel- " ists, is pure and unimpeachable in every par- '' ticular. Whether this perfection of character ^' in publick life, combined with the general dec- '' laration of his freedom from sin, establish, or " were intended to establish the fact, that Jesus, " through the whole course of his private life, ^' was completely exempt from all the errors and ^' frailties of human nature, is a question of no ^' great intrinsick moment , and concerning which ^' we have no sufficient data to lead to a satis- " factory conclusion. '^^ In another work, Mr. * Calm Inquiry into Jie Scripture^ Doctrine concerning the Per- son of Christ, p. 190. 447. 451, 24 LETTER I. Belsham^ in consistency with the foregoing state- ment^ observes — '^ Jesus is^ indeed^ now alive ; " but as we are totally ignorant of the place where " he resides, and of the occupations in which he ^' is engaged, there can be no proper foundation "iov religious addresses to him, nor of gratitude '' for favours now received, nor yet of confidence ^' in his future interposition in our behalf.^^*^ Unitarians with one voice, also, deny the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit. Dr. Priestley declares, that by the Holy Spirit we are to understand nothing more than the power or influence of God, and by no means a distinct person, j Mr. Belsham^ with still more freedom, and less decorum, allows himself to say, ^^The distinct, personal existence of the, ^' Holy Spirit, is, I believe, abandoned by every " person who has paid much attention to the ^^phraseology of the scriptures'' — And again, ^*'The controversy (respecting the personality of ^* the Holy Spirit,) is almost as much at rest as '' that concerning transubstantiation.'' J * Revie-M of Wi'berforce. &- Letter Vlll. p. 74. •\ Hist, of the 'orvvptiom &c. I, 88. i Review of Wilberforce^ &c. VII. LETTER I. 25 As Unitarians reject the Divinity of Christ, so they also reject the Doctrine of his atone- ment. Dr. Priestleij says, this doctrine is " one '^ of the radical, as well as the most generally pre- ^» vailing corruptions of the Christian scheme." And again, he calls it, " a disgrace to Chris- ^^tianity, and a load upon it, which it must ^' either throw off, or sink under.'^* Further, he says, '* Christ heing only a man, his death " could not in any proper sense of the word, '^ atone for the sins of other men.^^'\ Again, he asserts, that ^^ in no part either of the Old or ^* New Testament, do we ever find, asserted or '^ explained, the principle on which the doctrine ^' of atonement is founded : hut that, on tlie con- ^^ trary, it is a sentiment every where abounding, ^^that repentance and a good life, are, of ^^ THEMSELVES SUFFICIENT TO RECOMMEND US '^ TO THE FAVOUR OF GOD.'^f Mr. BelsJiam^ on this subject, declares— ^^ The death of Jesus is ^' sometimes called a propitiatiQn^ because it put " an end to the Mosaic economy, and introdu- ^^ced a new and more liberal dispensation. • Theol. Rep. V. p. 124. 429. \ Hist, of the Cormptions of Christianity. I. p. 9.27. \ Theol. liepos. 1. p. 263. D 26 LETTER I. " under which the gentiles^ who were before re- ^' garded as enemies^ are admitted into a state of '' amity and reconciliation ; that is, into a state ^' of privilege similar to that of the Jews. It is ^^also occasionally called a sacrificey being the ^^ ratification of that new covenant into which ^^ God is pleased to enter with his human off- ^^ springy by which a resurrection to immortal "life and happiness is promised, without dis- ^^ tinction, to all who are truly virtuous. Believ- ^^ ers in Christ are also said to have Redemption " through his blood, because they are relea- <^SED, BY THE CHRISTIAN COVENANT, FROM "the yoke of the CEREMONIAL LAW, AND "from the BONDAGE of idolatry.'^* They further, deny Original sin. They iSay that all men come into the world perfectly ini^ocent and pure ; as entirely free from the least taint of moral pollution as Adam was, when lie first came from the hands of the Creator ; that he is by nature no more inclined to VICE than to VIRTUE ; that he derives from his ancestors a frail and mortal nature ; is made with appetites which fit him for the condition ia * Jieview q^Wilberforce, &c. Letter IT. LETTER I. 27 which God has placed him ; hut that in order to their answering all the purposes intended, they are so strong as to be very liable to abuse by excess : that he has passions implanted in him, which are of great importance in the conduct of life ; but which are equally capable of impelling him into a right or a wrong course : that he has natural affections, all of them originally good, but liable, by a wrong direction, to be the oc- casion of error and sin : that he has reason and conscience to direct the conduct of life, which may yet be neglected, perverted and misguid- ed : that with all these together, he is equally capable of right or wrong, and as free to the one as to the other.* Unitarians reject the doctrine of justification by the merits of Christ. To quote authorities in support of this charge is needless. All their leading writers declare, without ceremony, that the sufferings, the blood, and the righteousness of Jesus Christ, are nothing more, as to the point of our personal acceptance with God, than thosie of any other man. They assert that the * See Pnestley and £elsham^And also Professor JVare*s Let^ t^r?, p, 20. 21. 2S LETTER I. PRACTICE OF VIRTUE is the ONLY GROUND 0¥ hope; and that any other plan of justification is unscriptural and absurd. They believe that a/l the tuanan race will finally be saved. This was Dr. Priestleifs opin- ion. Mr. Behham also expresses himself on the subject in the following terms. '^ We may '^certainly conclude that none of the grea- •^TURES OF GOD^ IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES^ WILL ^^BE ETERNALLY MISERABLE. The wickcd will ^•indeed be raised to suffering; but since eter- ^^nal misery^ for temporary crime^ is inconsis- "tent with every principle of justice, we are ^' naturally led to conclude^ that the sufferings '^ of tlie wicked will be remedial^, and that they •^will terminate in a complete purification from '^ moral disorder^ and in tlieir ultimate restora- '^^ tion to virtue and happiness.''* The truth is, that although the Unitarian Purgatory differs in several respects from that of the Papists^ it is nevertheless, as real a Purgatory; having the same substantial characters, and being equal- ly opposed to the whole current of scripture* ;jf Revierj of IVilberfovce, 6cc. Letter II. BETTER I. 29 Finally ; the Unitarians reject the mspi7'ation of the Scriptures. " The scriptures^" says Dr. Priestley y^'^VQ, written without " any partic- " ULAR INSPIRATION^ by men who wrote accor- '^ ding to the best of their knowledge, and who, ^•' from their circumstances^ could not be mista- '' ken with respect to the greater facts of which '' they were proper witnesses ; but (like other ^•men subject to prejudice) might be liable to ^^ adopt a HASTY and ill-grounded opinion " concerning things which did not fall within the ^^ compass of their own knowledge/'^ Mr. Belsham very explicitly tells us, that ^^The " scriptures contain a very faithful and credible '^ account of the Christian doctrine^ which is the ^'true word of God; but they are not them- " selves the word of God ; nor do they ever as- " sume that title : and it is highly improper to ^' speak of them as such, as it leads inattentive '• readers to suppose they are written under a ^•^ plenary INSPIRATION; to which they make "no PRETENSION.'^! To this list of Unitarian opinions, I might add, if it were necessary, a number of other ♦ Historij of Early Opinions, IV. p. 4. 5. f Reviexv, &c. Letter L 30 LETTER I. articles ; such as the materiality of the soul ; — the consequent denial of a separate state, of activity or even consciousness^ between death and the resurrection ; — the denial of the existence of either Devils or good Angels ; and the rejection of all sanctity in the Sabbath. But my limits forbid me to multiply particulars ; and I 'would by no means allow myself to do any thing that might look like unduly darkening the horrid picture. From this summary view, it is evident that Unitarianism, according to the statement of one of its most zealous friends in the United States, consists ^'•' rather in not believing;'^ and that the principal difficulty which it has to encounter is to " make men zealous in refusing *^ TO believe/^* It is plain, also, that Unita- rians reject every one of what we deem the I'eculiar and essential doctrines of the Gos- pel. According to this scheme, there is no other than a mere human, fallible, and peccable Sa- viour: no real redemption by the blood of Christ ; no justification by his merits ; no Holy Spirit to sanctify our depraved nature ; no prevailing * Mr. WeUs^s Letter, contained in a " Brief History of the Pro- 'gress and Present State of the Unitarian Churches in Aimrica. LETTER I. 31 Intercessor ; nothing that can with propriety be called GRACE : all — all is figurative, cold, inade- quate and unsatisfying. In short, Christianity, if Unitarianism be the truth, is nothing more than a republication of the religion of nature, with very small addition- al light. A future state, a pure morality, and the efficacy of repentance, form the sum total of its discoveries ; and men are left, after all, to ac- complish their own salvation. I repeat, that you are by no means to under- stand me as asserting, that all Unitarians adopt every one of these opinions. But I have no doubt that they are all adopted by the generali- ty of that denomination. Be not deceived, then, when the charge is denied, ever so strongly, by individuals J who wish to avoid the odium of sentiments which are found shocking to popular feeling. The question is, not whether some who call themselves, and who deserve to be called. Unitarians, believe every article in the list which I have given ; but whether the lea- ders of their sect, at present, in Europe and America^ do not, substantially, so believe ; and S2 LETTER I. whether the spirit of their si/stem does not go the whole length of my statetment. Such^ then, is Unitarianism. How far it dif- fers from Deism, I leave you to judge. Mr. Behham, who is now at the head of the Unita- rians in England, gives it as his opinion, that Unitarianism differs with respect to no impor- tant doctrine from the system of the deistical Theophilanthropists of France, Speaking of those Deists, he explicitly says, " Their profes- ^^sed principles comprehend the essence of " the Christian religion.''*' And, truly, lean recollect no feature of the Christian religion ad- mitted by Unitarians, which is not substantially admitted by serious Deists, except the divine mission of Jesus Christ, and the resurrection of the body ; and both these are maintained by Mohammedans, It follows, then, that they reject ALL the PECULIAR doctrincs of Christianity. — Now the question which you are called upon to decide, is, whether those who occupy this ground are Christians, and ought to be acknowledged as such ? And it is a question which can hardly fail of coming home to your consciences almost LETTER I. 33 every day that you live. You reside in the midst of Unitarians. They are daily thrown into your company. They converse on their favourite opinions. Their puhlications are con- tinually offered for your perusal : and you are often tempted, if not solicited, to attend on their preaching. The qiiestions then, how you ought to estimate their opinions ; how to treat their persons ; how to act with regard to their publi- cations ; how to consider their preaching ; whether you ought to regard them as Christians at all ; whether their congregations ought to be called Churches of Christ ; and whether the or- dinances which they administer, ought to be sus- tained as valid ? — are questions which you must decide, at least practically. You cannot evade them. If you forbear to answer them in words, you must and will answer them by your actions. It is my confident hope that you will not attempt to evade a decision ; and it is my earnest desire to aid you in deciding these momentous ques- tions in such a manner as God and your own consciences shall approve. . The slightest glance at the subject will enable you to perceive that this is no sectarian dispute. E 34 LETTER I. It is not a controversy between Presbyterians and Episcopalians^ or between Calvinists and ArminiajiSj in which men may take different sides^ and yet be equally safe with regard to their eternal prospects. Although I am a decid- ed Calvinist, yet it would never occur to me to place the peculiarities of the Calvinistick creed among the fundamentals of our common Christianity. While it is impossible for me to be satisfied myself with a theological system which does not include them ; I find no difiiculty in embracing as brethren in Christy many who do not view them with the same eyes. But the controversy between the Orthodox and Unitari- ans;, is of more vital and awful import. It is a controversy which relates to nothing less than the Object of our worship^ and the Foundation of our hope. It is a controversy which involves a question of no less import than this — How you will regard the character and principles of those who would take away your God and Saviour ; who would tear from Chris- tianity^ not merely some important parts^ but the SUM totXl of its essence ; that which alone renders it a Religion adapted to the case jof miserable sinners ? I cannot suppose that you LETTER I. 35 will feel at a loss, for a moment, how this ques- tion ought to be answered. I trust that every feeling of your hearts, as well as every dictate of your understandings, will furnish a prompt and decisive reply. My dear Brethren! in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the one living and true God, the God of the Bible, whom Unitarians re- ject, your Fathers believed. In the name of the ever blessed and undivided Trinity, you have all been baptized. In this adorable Trinity, the true Church of God, in all ages, as we shall see in the sequel, have steadfastly confided and re- joiced. May I not take for granted that a doc- trine so obviously interesting, and so long the hope of the pious, will not be, by any who have been educated in the belief of it, lightly or hastily discarded ? May I not cherish the assu- rance that you will inquire long, and deliberate seriously, before you will abandon your Fa- ther's God ? Thus saith the Lord, stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and xvalk therein, and ye shall Jind rest unto your souls,^ * Jeremiah, VI. 16. LETTER 11. Prejudices cherished by many against Orthodoxy — That Orthodoxy is austere and rejmlsive — That it lays too much stress on opinions-— lliat it is a spirit of perse- cution. Christian Brethren^ In entering on the discussion of the points in controversy between the Orthodox and Unitari- ans, there ^re some popular Prejudices, which continually meet us, and which seldom fail to exert an unfavourable influence on, the. minds of many persons who profess to be seek- ing the truth on this subject. I need not say that a Prejudice is an opinion taken up without solid reason or inquiry, and adhered to rather from feeling than from enlightened judgment. Nor is it necessary to remark, that prejudices ought to be carefully avoided. No man in his senses will be willing to commit ^limself delib- erately to J:heir guidance ; yet nothing is more LETTER 11. 37 common than to be under this guidance, even on the most important of all subjects. And per- haps it may be said with truth that there are no points on which men are more peculiarly apt to give themselves up to the government of preju- dices, than on those which are now under con- sideration ; because there are none on which the feelings of the corrupt heart are more apt to rise in arms. It shall be my endeavour, in this and the next Letter, to put you on your guard against some of these prejudices, and to engage those who have hitherto indulged them, to in- quire impartially before they proceed further in this course. I. The FIRST that I shall mention in this catalogue of Prejudices, is, ^^That the Or- " THODOX SYSTEM IS AUSTERE AND REPUL • ^' siVE ; that it gives gloomy and discouraging " views of human nature ; and that the whole " method of restoration to the favour and en- **joyment of God which it exhibits, is hu- ^^miliating and melancholy: while Unitarian- ^^ism, on the contrary, represents the con- " dition of man as much more favourable, •^his danger as far less, his duty as more 38 LETTER II. ^easy and pleasant^ and the whole aspect of ^religion as more attractive.'' — "I always ^ feel/' said a gay^ worldly hearer, " I al- ' ways feel easy and comfortable when I listen *^to the sermons and prayers of Unitarians. • There is nothing to hurt the feelings ; nothing ^ to excite alarm ; nothing to make me displea- ' sed with myself. But when I attend on the ^ ministry of the Orthodox, I am constantly ren- ' dered uneasy by the views which they give of ' the condition of man, dissatisfied and anxious ' about myself, and discouraged at their state- ' ment of what is necessary to salvation. From ^ the one I can always come away with a smile ^ and a light heart ; from the other, if I have ' listened at all, I seldom fail of coming away ' trembling at my danger, full of self-reproach, • and feeling as if some serious and immediate ^ measures were indispensable to my safety."-— Such was the substance of the frank confession of an individual; but the feeling which dictated it, is doubtless that of thousands. I am confi- dent that many, for this very reason, deliberate- ly prefer going to Unitarian places of worship ; and have little doubt that others, as deliberately, resolve to cast in their lot permanently with ]that LETTER II. 39 denomination, rather in obedience to the feeling which has been just described, than as the result of careful, or even serious inquiry. But, I ask, is it reasonable, is it justifiable, upon any principle, to yield to a prejudice of this kind ? Is that which is most palatable al- ways most salutary ? Ought a w ayward child to take for granted that that plan of education is the wisest and best, which is most lax and indul- gent, most agreeable to his present feelings, and from which all painful restraint and discipline are excluded ? Ought a sick man to conclude hastily that a certain physician is more skilful than any other, merely because he constantly deals in soothing and palliatives, and never ad- ministers the remedy, which, while it would give temporary pain, would also remove his dis- ease ? No ; every one would say, that the folly, in both these cases, w^as extreme. Now we are all wayward children ; and we cannot be reclai- med and led in the right way without painful discipline. We are all morally diseased ; and remedies at present painful are necessary to our restoration. Should we not call that man infat- uated, who desired to be soothed, flattered, and 40 LETTER 11. made easy^ for a few days^ at the expense of years of extreme suffering? Surely, no less pal- pable is the infatuation of that man, who is most pleased with those who flatter and set him at ease in his sins ; who resolves, anteriour to all examination, to throw himself into the arms of those who tell him the most gratifying story, and predict most favourably, concerning his situ- ation and eternal prospects. It is undoubtedly true, that the Orthodox uni- formly represent man as a sinner, a fallen, lost, miserable sinner ; as guilty, and standing in need of pardon ; as polluted, and standing in need of regenerating and sanctifying grace ; as labouring, in his whole constitution, under a deplorable disease, from which he can obtain deliverance only through the atoning blood, and purifying Spirit of an Almighty Redeemer, And it is equally true, that they always repre- sent the course of a sinner's return to God, and of holy obedience to his commands, as a much more humiliating, spiritual, difficult, self-deny- ing course, than Unitarians represent it. On this diversity of representation, JLhe first ques- tion that jkvould occur to a wise man, is. How is LETTER II. 41 this matter to be decided ? Is it by the word of God, or by the assertions of fallible men ? If by the word of God, what does that unerring guide say on the subject? To the law and to the testi- many : if they speak not according to this wordy it is because there is no light in them* I ask you/ then, my Brethren, and I entreat you to ask yourselves in the fear of God, with which of these representations do the sacred Scriptures, both in their letter and spirit, best accord ? Do they teach man that he is in a state of spiritual health ; that his nature is pure 5 that he stands in no need of the regenerating, and sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit ; that he can purchase pardon, if he should ever hap- pen to need it, by his own works ; that he has inherent strength to perform all that God re- quires ; that he has no hell, or a very trivial one^ to fear ; and that final happiness will be attained by every man, however disobedient? Do the Scriptures teach thus ? Do they thus throw the Saviour and the Holy Spirit into the shade, and make salvation an unmeaning term ? Or do they teach directly the reverse of all this? Let not your feelings decide these questions. This F 4^ LETTER II. would be like making a culprit at the bar botli juror and judge in his own case. But let en- lightened^ impartial conscierice^ with the word of God in your hands, give the answer. What will it avail you, in the great day of trial, to find that you have been flattered by blind leaders of the hlindj and have set at naught the plain, repea- ted, solemn declarations of that word, which was given to guide you into the xv ay of peace ,, and which will be the great standard of judg- ment in that day ? But is the system of the Unitarians really more favourable to comfort of mind than that of the Orthodox ? " Is that system " gloomy'' and " full of horrors," which directs the guilty and •^^ burdened mind to a Saviour, who is described " by the inspiration of God, as able to save to ^^THE uttermost; or that which must consign '* us to all the miseries of despondency and des- /^pair, by representing this Saviour as a mere ^•^man — a fallible^ peccable man — a man liable to '' ignorance^ prejudice^ and sin ?^^ Is not the latter* in fact, like evbry other deceiver, though smiling and flattering in its aspect, utterly hostile to true enjoyment ? Read the Xllth of the excellent LETTER 11. 43 Letters of Dr. Fuller, on the Galvinistick and Socmian Systems compared; and I have no doubt you will be fully convinced that the system of the Orthodox is, in every view, most friendly to peace of conscience, to habitual tranquility and cheerfulness of mind, and to that genuine spiritual joy, which flows from the richest conso- lations, and the purest and most exalted hopes. Like a faithful physician, it wounds but to heal ; like a precious medicine of life, it gives tempo- rary pain, but to produce infinitely more than a counterbalance of health and comfort in the end. It is not, indeed, and it is one of its glories that it is not, friendly to carnal and grovelling joys ; to those which are connected with the theatre, the card- table, the midnight revel, or any scene of unhallowed sensuality. It boasts of no pow- er to place men at ease in their sins, or to say. Peace, peace, when there is no peace. On the contrary, it ever tends to make wicked men deeply anxious and apprehensive, as they ought to be. It allows none to be tranquil and happy but those w ho have forsaken sin, and become true penitents and believers in Christ. But to the humble, the contrite, and the obedient be- liever, it speaks peace, aud comfort and blessed- 44 LETTER II. ness : it presents a foundation of hope of the most firm and ample kind ; it elevates the soul with the assurance of God's love ; imparts to it a peace which passeth all understandings and spreads before it the most animating and trans- forming prospects for the life to come. I do consider the undoubted fact^ that Unitarian- ism allows all classes of men^ even those against whom the word of God denounces the most aw- ful threatenings, to dismiss all anxiety about their condition, and to live at ease, as one of the most conclusive symptoms of its anti-christian character. That system cannot be of God^ which, in proportion as it takes more full pos- session of the mind, renders it more firmly at- tached to worldly pursuits and pleasures, more at ease in a licentious course, less inclined to the duties of devotion, and more reluctant to think of death and eternity. ^' I should like,'' said one of the shrewdest men in our country, on be- ing asked, after his return from hearing the most popular Unitarian preacher then in Boston^ how he was pleased with him, " I should like," said he, " always to hear such preachings if J were ^' sure I was never to die.'^ LETTER II. 45 II. A SECOND Prejudice against which I wish to put you on your guard, is expressed in various terms ; but the substance of it is, " that ^^THE Orthodox attach too much impor- ^^TANCE to the POINTS IN CONTROVERSY BE- ^^tween them and the Unitarians.'' Many are willing to allow that Unitarians are wrong — sadly wrong ; — but that they should be regar- ded as so essentially wrong, as to endanger their eternal salvation, to preclude all ecclesias- tical intercourse with them, and even to render it improper to give them the name of Chris- tian ; — they consider as going by much too far : as a sort of theological extravagance, rather fit- ted to exasperate feelings, and make infidels,, than promote the cause of truth and charity. Accordingly, the minds of such persons are not a little wounded, when they hear the errors of Unitarians denounced as " dreadfuP' and " soul ^' destroying.'' They imagine that more mild and inoffensive language would better accord with the spirit of the Gospel. These impres- sions, in many, are rendered still more deep and unfavourable, when they observe that Unitari- ans commonly profess to speak a very difi*erent language ; that they plume themselves on their 46 LETTER II. " liberality ;'^ that they profess to be ever ready to respect as pious, and to receive to the arms of their '' charity/' all classes of men who as- sume the Christian name ; and that they consider no difference whatever, on the score of doctrine, as sufficient to preclude ecclesiastical communion. Before you allow yourselves, my Christian Brethren, to countenance, in the least degree, this prejudice, I beg your candid attention to a few remarks, which I hope will convince you, that the common cry against the Orthodox, of ^^Uncharitableness,'' is one of the most un- founded and unreasonable that ever obtained currency in a deluded world. I am sensible that we are not, in all cases, capable of deciding what doctrines are to be considered as absolutely essential to Chris- tianity, and what doctrines, though important, are of secondary moment. Hence the wisest and profoundest divines have always regarded the task of making a list of the fundamental trutlis of reli'gion, as a very delicate and difficult one. But with respect to some doctrines, there can be no hesitation in deciding, that if there LETTER II. 47 be any such thing as fundamental truths, these belong to the number. Of this number, the Orthodox have always been persuaded, is the doctrine of the true and proper Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who admit this doc- trine, and build their whole system upon it ; and those who totally reject it, can never worship or commune together. It will be easy, I think, to make it appear that they are of different reli- gions ; and that to consider it in any other light, is a perversion of reason as well as of scripture. The Orthodox assuredly believe, that man is a guilty, depraved and ruined creature, by na- ture as well as by practice. They believe that there is no other way by which he can regain the favour and image of his Maker, than by the atoning blood, and sanctifying Spirit of the eter- nal Son of God. They are persuaded, moreover, that it is the union of Divinity and humanity in the adorable Person of the Saviour, that makes his atoning sacrifice infinitely meritorious, and that stamps infinite sufficiency, efficacy, and glory on his righteousness. And they believe, with equal confidence, that without an humble and cordial reception of this great Mediator, as 48 LETTER iL the Lord our righteoumess^ and the Lord our strength^ as the foundation of our hope, and the life of our souls, there is no vital union to Him ; no interest in his atonement ; no salvation. But all this Unitarians reject as a vain delusion, and denounce as gross idolatry. In their view, man, stands in no need of a Redeemer, and Jesus Christ is nothing more than a mere human teach- er. Now I ask, can these two parties consider their points of difference as of a minor sort, or re- concileable ? When the question is, whether the Saviour in whom I put my trust, is a Divine being, or only a man, like myself; whether He is a mere creature, or tlie uncreated God, the Maker and Governor of all worlds ; whether He is to be honoured and worshipped as my Almighty Deliverer from sin and death, or only respected as a mere human preacher of mercy — • when these are the questions to be asked, can those who answer them not only differently, but OPPOSITELY, be of the same religion, or worship in the same temple? Impossible! The objects of their worship are different; the grounds of their confidence are different; the whole current of their exercises, and of their language, in contemplating and in seeking LETTER iL 49 salvation, must be entirely different. They who adopt the erroneous side, substitute another Gospel, nay, it is not too much to say, another God, in place of the Gospel and the God of the Bible. As well might light and darkness be expected to agree. Either the Orthodox must be involved in the dreadful guilt of worshipping a creature instead of the Creator ; or the Uni- tarians in the no less shocking guilt of denying^ the Lord that bought us^ and habitually blas- pheming that Name which is above every name. Can this difference be a matter of small mo- ment ? Is it easy, nay is it possible to " make too ^^much" of it — to ^^ attach too much impor- "tance" to it? I could just as soon believe that the points in controversy between the Christian and the Atheist are trivial matters, and that both might, with perfect comfort, worship in the same sanctuary, and commune at the same table ! Before any one, then, can reasonably find fault with the Orthodox for laying too much stress on the opinions in controversy between them and Unitarians, he must first assume as a conceded Jact that the opinions of the Orthodox are false. For if they are admitted to be true* G 50 LETTER 11. (and surely the Orthodox believe them to be so) then all the important consequences which we contemplate must, demonstrably, flow from them. If the children of men be lost and perishing sin- ners ; — if we essentially need pardon and sanc- tification ; — ^if the eternal Son of God became incarnate that he might be made an atoning sacrifice for our sins ; — if there be no other WAY in which forgiveness and purity can be im- parted to us, than by the obedience, the suffer- ings, and the Spirit of an Almighty Redeemer ; • — if the plan of salvation adopted by infinite Wisdom be a plan, not of works, but of mere GRACE ; — and if we must receive it with humble gratitude, as a system of grace, or perish;-— then, I ask, do we attach unwarrantable impor- tance to tliese truths, when we represent, th^ reception of them as essential to salvation, and Consider those who reject them as unworthy of the Christian name? If they be true, all this follows of course. <^^Let none persuade you *•' then, my friends, that the doctrine of the ^' Trinity is a matter of curiosity and specu- •nation only. Our religion is founded upon ^^ IT. For what is Christianity but, a manifesta- ••tion of the three Divine Persons as engaged in LETTER II. 51 ^"^ the great work of man's redemption, begun, " continued, and to be ended by them, in their ^^ several relations of Father, Son and Holy ^^ Ghost; Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier; ^•' three Persons in one God ? If there be no Son " of God, WHERE IS OUR REDEMPTION ? If there '' be no Holy Spirit, where is our sanctifi- " cation ? Without both, where is our Sal- " VATiON ? And if these two Persons be any •^ thing less than Divine, why are we baptized " equally in the name of the Fatlier, and of the " Son, and of the Holy Ghost ? Let no man, '^ therefore, deceive you. This is the true God " and eternal lifeP"^ Accordingly, let me entreat you, my Breth- ren, to appeal to the unerring Word of God, and see whether the true doctrine concerning the Person and work of Christ, is not. there repre- sented as that great fundamental matter, on which the whole fabrick of Christianity, and all our hopes for eternity must rest. The Saviour himself expressly declares, that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father, He that honoiireth not the Son^ honourcth not the * Bishop Hobxe's Discourses on the Trinitij, 5ie LETTER II. Father which hath sent him.^ The Apostle Pe- ter speaks thus — But there were false prophets nlso among the people, even as there shall be false prophets among youy who privily shall bring in DAMNABLE HERESIES^ even DEIFYING THE LORD THAT BOUGHT THEM, and bring upon themselves SWIFT DESTRUCTION.! The Apostle John, amidst all the tenderness, and benevolence which so strikingly characterize his writings, declares — ZTd* that abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God ; he that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Soji, If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive Mm not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed, is a partaker of his evil deeds, % Again, it is said, who is a liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ ? Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father,^ Again, another inspired Apostle pronounces. As we said before^ so say I now again. If a?7y man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.^ Again, we are assured. Other foundation can no man lay but that which is laid^ ♦ John V 22. 23. f II Peter U. 1. ^ II. JoJm 9. § 1. John II. 22. 23. d Galatians, I. 9. LETTER II. 53 which is Jesus Christ ;* and concerning liimself our blessed Lord solemnly pronounces, If ye be- lieve not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins,\ — Now, whatever doubt may exist as to the im- port of these passages in other respects, one thing is plain. They unquestionably teach that the true doctrine concerning Christ is essential TO Christianity, and that a rejection of it is nothing less than an anti-christian departure from the faith. Let not, then, the charge of want of " chari- '' ty," or laying a " bigotted*^ and unreasonable stress on a particular set of opinions, alarm you. As long as you are borne out by the word of God, you may be perfectly content under char- ges of this kind. Why should we disguise the tri^th, or deceive ourselves or others concerning this matter ? \^^ly should we be led away, under the pretence of " liberality'' or " benevolence,'' to give up that which is essential to the life of our souls ? Is it real " charity" to our fellow men to allow them to be hoodwinked and decei- ved, nay directly to help to blind and embolden them, in rushing on to their own destruction ? * I. Cor. III. IL t •'o^" VIII. 24. 54 LETTER II. Is it real -'* charity" to tell men that an error is non-essential^ and that there is no danger in adopting it^ when Jehovah has pronounced that it is " damnable/' and brings upon those who adopt it^ '' swift destruction ?'' O my Friends, the folly of desiring Ministers to prophecy smooth thi?2gs in such a case, is of the most extreme and wonderful kind! To give the name of christian <^ benevolence'' and ^^ charity" to conduct which is calculated eternally to destroy all who are influenced by it, is, of all perversions, both of language and of principle, one of the most enor- mous Nor let it be forgotten, while we are on this branch of the subject, that Unitarians themselves were 07ice accustomed to speak a very different language, on the points in controversy between them and the Orthodox, from that which they now commonly employ. Now they endeavour to make you believe that the questions in dis- pute between them are not fundamental ; th^,t they are matters of doubtful speculation, about which good 'men may entertain very diiFerent\ opinions, without separating from each other. But they have not been always in the habit of LETTER II. 5S speaking thus : and I am persuaded I do them no injustice when I express a suspicion^ that they sometimes, at least, speak thus to serve a turn. Formerly they were accustomed to main- tain, that the doctrines of the Divinity of Christ, and of the Trinity in Unity, ought to be consid- ered, not only as the most outrageous of all absurdities, but as among the most pestiferous of all errors ; that they are directly contrary to every sound principle of natural and revealed religion ; that those who embrace them, make more Gods than one ; that they are guilty of a shocking breach of the first Commandment, and are chargeable with the sin of gross idolatry. This was the habitual language of the Unitari- ans, until within a few years. Faustiis Socinus himself speaks on the subject in this strain. Though he believed Christ to be a mere man, yet he maintained, with the most ardent zeal, that he ought to be worshipped. He expressly says, that, " to deny worship to him, is not a " simple error, or a mere mistake ; but a most '' pernicious error ; an error which leads to Ju- " daism, and is, in effect, denying Christ ; that "it tends to Epicurianism, and even to Athe- ^' iSM.'^ And to shew that he was really in 56 LETTER tl. earnest, in believing as he taught, he and his friend Blandrata persecuted poor Davidies, in a manner which issued in his miserable death, because he could not be brought to teach or ad- mit, as they did, that a mere man ought to be worshipped. Smalcius^ another Socinian, ex- pressly says, that they are no Christians who refuse to give divine worship to Christ. And, in the spirit of these declarations, some of the most distinguished English Unitarians have, within a few years, used language quite as de- cisive and '' uncharitable" as any that the most thorough-going Calvinists have ever employed. They have called upon their followers to " come '' out from Babylon ;'' to '' separate themselves ^^ from idolaters ;'' have publickly declared that the separation of Unitarians from Trinitarians is as obviously proper and necessary as was the separation of Protestants from the church of Rome ; and they have not scrupled to stigma- tize the Orthodox continually as ^' Polytheists,'^ ^^ Idolaters,'' ^*' Blasphemers,'' &c. This is ^"'laying stress" with a witness on doctrinal opinions ! It is hoped that no Unitarian, here- after, will ever find fault with the Orthodox for considering^ the Divinity and worship of Christ LETTER 11. 57 as essentials in the Gospel of his grace, and for maintaining that they are no Christians who reject them. Dr. Priestley himself says, ^^If there ever '^ was any such thing as idolatry^ it is paying '' religious worship to any other than the one " only living and true God ; and if it he of any '' consequence to preserve inviolate the first ar- '^ article of all revealed religion, viz. the unity " of God, and the exclusive worship of Him, " (which was the one great object of the Jewish " religion, and continues to be so in the Chris- '' tian) it must be incumbent' upon us to frequent " no society of christians, however pious and " sincere they may be, if v/e be convinced they ^' err in so essential an article of faith as this. " It is innocent in them who are ignorant, and '' act agreeably to their consciences ; but it is '' criminal in us who know better. There are, " no doubt, differences in lesser matters, which ^' may be borne with in members of the same " society ; but if any difference in opinion and " practice will justify a separation, it must '' be THIS. That such a corrupt mode of reli- " gion is enjoined by the civil powers under H 58 LETTER IL ^' which we live, will no more authorize or ex- ^' cuse our conformity to it, than the same con- ^' siderations would have justified the primi- " tive Christians in conforming to the rites of ^^ the Pagan worship, which were enjoined by ^^ the laws of the Roman empire. The answer '' of the apostles, Peter and John, to the Jewish '' High Priest, should be adopted by all chris- " tians : JVe ought to obey God rather than It is true that modern Unitarians, while they adopt this language, profess to feel kindly to- wards their orthodox neighbours^, and not to suppose that their opinions will be destructive of their final safety : nay, some Unitarians do not even deny the christian character of the or- thodox, on account of their alledged idolatry. But how this is to be accounted for, I will not undertake td decide ; unless, indeed it be suppo- sed, as I am rather inclined to think, with the late excellent Mr. Fuller^ we ought to suppose, that ^* ho reason can be assigned for it, excepting their * Introdrictorn Essay to Forms of Prayer for the use of Unitarian Societies. 8 70. 1783. LETTER IL 59 •^ indifference to trutb^ and the deistical turn ef •^ their sentiments.'^* Unitarians^ indeed^ pretty generally disclaim the opinion^ that any particular belief is neces- sary to salvation : and, in truth, it must be so, for they are generally believers in the doctrine of universal salvation. Such persons are, of course, persuaded that no departure from the truth, either in faith or practice, not even athe- ism itself, or the most fiend-like abominations in conduct, can eternally destroy any one. But I leave you to say, how this opinion can be recon- ciled with such declarations as the following — - If ye believe not that lam he, ye shall die in your sins. He that hath the Son hath life ; but he that hath not the Son, hath not life. He that beli&veth on the Son of God hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is pass- ed from death unto life ; but he that believeth 7iot on the Son of God, shall not see life, but the WRATH OF God abideth upon him. As to the suggestion sometimes made, espe- cially by weak and superficial writers, that con- fidently believing and pronouncing the reception * Fuller's Calvinistick and Socinian sytema comparcdt HJc. Letter 10th. / m LETTER II. of certain opinions necessary to salvation^ in- volves a claim approaching^ if not amounting, to something like papal infallibility ; it is really too silly to need a formal refutation. The plain im- port of the suggestion, is neither more nor less than this, that humhly to credit God's word, and to believe and pronounce that to be necessary to salvation, which the great Author of salvation has declared to be so, is presumptuously setting up our own notions as an infallible rule of faith. If this be reasonable, or if it deserve any respect- ful name, I know not what deserves to be con- sidered as supremely preposterous. If I know what the most arrogant, daring, impious assump- tion of more than ^^ papal infallibility'^ of which fallen man is capable, is, it is undertaking to pronounce that a trifle which the infinite God has pronounced all-important ; and that unessen- tial to the safety of man, which he has declared to be the foundation of all christian hope. III. A THIRD Prejudice, closely allied with the preceding, is, " that undertaking to denounce ^' Unitarianism, as not only a dangerous but also ^^ a destructive heresy ; and to exclude those who ^^ embrace /^ it from our communion, and all LETTER II. 61 ^' ecclesiastical intercourse^ is really nothing less '' than PERSECUTION ; and if so, contrary to the '^ spirit of the Gospel.'^ That we should have our own private thoughts of any system of here- sy^ and should privately warn against its fasci- nations^ those with whom we may have influence, is acknowledged by most persons to be a chris- tian right ; but that we should publickly, openly, alid continually, hold up a particular heresy, from the pulpit and the press, as cmti- christian and destructive^ and thus habitually endeavour to draw upon it the abhorrence of all who believe our representations, is considered, even by some who are not willing to be accounted friends of the heresy in question, as partaking of the na- ture of that spirit of persecution, which, as pro- testants, we all profess to reprobate. But this is a mere prejudice, which a little consideration will serve effectually to remove. What is persecution, as applied to the subject of religion? It is pursuing men with personal malignity and bitterness, subjecting them to ci- vil penalties, and offering violence to their per- sons or property, on account of their religious opinions. Happily the government under which 62 LETTER 11. God has cast our lot^ does not admit of subject- ing any man to civil penalties on account of his religion, unless that religion lead him to disturb the peace of society. No violence can be offered either to the person or the property of any one, for any modification of religious belief, however shocking, as long as he remains a quiet, orderly citizen. Of persecution such as this, no person, it is presumed, in our country, has any reason to complain. But, supposing we may call, — as I believe we may call — that man persecuted, who, on account of his religious opinions, is loaded with calumny and abuse, hunted down with slan- der and reproachful names ; and either shut out from the ofiices of social kindness, or driven from his residence, by the unrelenting intolerance of public opinion. In short, where personal gr social vengeance is wreaked on the person of a supposed heretick, instead of a decent refuta- tion of his opimons ; or where even his opinions are visited with a violence and outrage, incon- sistent with the laws of christian benevolence — there is " persecution.'^ Publick sentiment, and individual abuse, may, no doubt, as really persecute, as the magistrate, who spjills the blood, incarcerate^ the body, or seizes the property of LETTER II. 63 an alledged heretick. But is any individual or community in our country, chargeable with per- secution even of this kind ? I know of no exam- ple of it ; andj unless I am deceived, should be as ready to join in heartily condemning it, as any Unitarian in the land. Is it " persecution'^ to pronounce a set of opin- ions unscriptural, and destructive to the souls of men, if we really think them so ? Is it '^ perse- cution'^ to warn those around us against a here- sy which we unfeignedly believe that the Holy Ghost hath pronounced " damnable ?" Then no man can preach the gospel with fidelity without being a persecutor. Nay, if this be so, no one of the inspired Apostles ever did preach it without laying himself open to this charge. In short, if this principle be admitted, it is persecution to warn our neighbours against a prowling thief, a secret incendiary, or a midnight assassin. But can any man reconcile such a doctrine with scripture, or even common sense ? In denounc ing Unitarianism, then, and in opposing it with scriptural weapons, we humbly conceive, we are not liable to the charge of persecution. We do not offer personal violence to its advocates. We 64 LETTER 11. have no desire to injure them in their secular" business, or to deprive them of a single comfort in society. We should think ourselves guilty of a baseness unworthy of the cause which we plead, were we to assail their private characters^ or direct toward their persoris the language of re- proach. On the contrary, we consider it as our duty to perform to them every office of christian benevolence ; to be careful of their good name ; and to be ready to promote their temporal and eternal welfare^ by all the means in our power. Nay, while we disclaim all hostility to their per-' sons, we oppose even their opinmis with no other weapons than those of scripture and argument. Must we, notwithstanding, be still branded as •"^ persecutors V^ Must it still be often more than intimated, that nothing but the ^' power" is wanting, on the part of Trinitarians, to renew the tragedy of Sci'vetus and others, in the six- teenth century ? Where is the '' liberality,'^ the justice, or even the decorum of such charges? It is difficult to repel them without the use of epithets, which the christian would wish to ex- clude even itom his controversial vocabulary. If the notions of some of our Unitarian neigh- bours concerning persecution^ be correct^ then LETTER II. 65 they have been themselves, for sometime^ in the habit of persecuting the Orthodox ; for they have not hesitated to hold up them and their opinions to publick view in a most odious light, and to ascribe to both a most pestiferous character. Again ; if these notions be correct, then, too, Dr. Priestley^ and Mr. Belsham, and other champions of Unitarianism, were in the constant habit, for many years, and some of them contin- ue in the habit, of " persecuting"^ the Orthodox of Great Britain^ in publickly stigmatizing them as " polytheists,*' ^^ idolaters,'^ and "blasphe- " mers.'' But did the Orthodox ever call this " persecution V^ I never heard of such a charge. They were too candid and too reasonable ever to think of it. Nay more ; I have long known that the Pagans persecuted the primitive Chris- tians. But I never supposed that the primitive Christians persecuted the Pagans, under whose government they lived : yet they certainly did^ with the utmost plainness and fidelity, proclaim to their Pagan neighbours, that Paganism was a most false and corrupt system, poisonous to the morals, and destructive to the souls of its adhe- rents. Was this " persecution ?'' I 66 LETTER 11. And here I am forcibly reminded of what oc- curred between the Christians and the Pagans^ in the early periods of the church. The Pagans had been long accustomed, without the least dif- ficulty, to tolerate each other. So obscure were their views of truth, and so slight their impres- sions of its importance, that the prevalent idea among them seems to have been, that almost all sects were equally right, and equally safe ; that they all had truth enough in their respective sys- tems to answer the great purposes of religion ; and that, therefore, they ought to live together without the least disposition to impeach the standing or the prospects of each other. These being the current opinions, and the established habits of Pagans, it might have been expected that, when Christianity appeared, and began to attract publick notice, they would have regarded and treated it with the same indulgence that they were accustomed to exercise towards one another. But it proved to be entirely otherwise. The Christians were utterly prohibited by their religion from acceding to that principle of indis- criminate reciprocity with all other sects, which Paganism allowed. They steadfastly maintai» ed, as th^ bible taught them, that all who LETTER II. 67 rejected the religion of Christ, were aliens from God: they called upon all men every where to repent, to turn from their dumb idols, and carnal ordinances, and to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation ; and proclaimed, that all who failed to comply with this command, incur- red the most dreadful guilt and danger; and, continuing so, must perish eternally. The blinded Pagans construed this honest fidelity, on the part of christians, into an evidence of enmity to mankind. Their holy zeal in beseech- ing men to flee fiom the wrath to come, was considered as indicating a malignant spirit ; and that which ought to have been recognized as the purest benevolence, was reviled as the bitterest and most merciless bigotry ! The consequences were melancholy. Both government and people persecuted the christians with unrelenting fury ; they were hunted like beasts of prey ; their blood flowed in every direction ; and that they were not exterminated from the earth, was not owing to the charity or the forbearance of those whom they sought to save. Such has been the spirit of the enemies of the truth in all ages ; and such it is at this hour. 6S LETTER II. To every form of error they are indulgent. When any modification of heresy presents itself, however widely it may differ from their own, it appears as if the milk of kindness v/ere the very element of their souls. Even the tenets of the mortal deist, though allowed to be erroneous and to be deplored, are yet spoken of in the lan- guage of forbearance and commiseration, rather than of heavy censure, or of solemn warning. But let Orthodoxy make her appearance ; and however mild her language, or respectful her address, not only the frown of disapprobation is visible ; but all the vials of wrath are poured cut upon her. She is loaded with opprobrious epithets ; and appears to be really regarded as the most odious and dangerous of all adversaries. i do not say that all who are called Unitarians manifest this temper towards Orthodoxy. But I do say, without fear'of contradiction, that this spirit of ancient Paganism is very strikingly ex- hibited by the great majority of those Unitarians with whose persons or writings I have been ac- quainted. They have appeared willing to tole- rate every thing excepting the truth. But when Christ wa^ to be opposed, or his truth sacrificed, LETTER II. 69 Herod and Pilate^ by whatever names they were called, have been ever ready to make friends together. On this fact I make no further com- ment You will judge for yourselves whether it is characteristick of the spirit of truth, or of the spirit of error. After all, it cannot be denied, that Orthodoxy, both in her doctrinal opinions, and her practical spirit, has been considered, in all ages, ])y Uni- tarians, and indeed by the children of this world generally, as austere, bigotted, and even intoler- ant. So it was, as every one may see from the New Testament, in the days of Paul ; So it was in the days of Irenaeus, Tei^tullian and Cyprian. So it was when the Waldenses exhibited their testimony in the cause of holiness, as well as of ti^uth. So it is at the present day ; and so it must be in the very nature of things. In the eyes of a dissipated and profligate child, the most affectionate parent who wishes to restrain and reform him, is an enemy to his happiness ; his commands are unreasonable, and his controul hateful tyranny. In the view of the lawless in- vader of the publick peace, the conscientious and faithful magistrate, who loves and enforces 70 , LETTER II. the principles of social order, appears an odi- ous despot; a foe to all rational enjoyment. For this I know of no remedy, but the conver- sion of the deluded. When his eyes are opened, THEN and not before, he will see, that what he thought tyranny, was benevolent regulation; and what he loathed, as unfriendly to enjoy- ment, was most directly fitted to promote his temporal as well as his eternal happinesse lETTER m. Subject continued — Fourth prejudice^ — against every thing Mysterious in religion — Fifth prejudice,^-^the Authority of Great J\*ames, Christian Brethren^ I have not yet done with the Prejudices which set themselves in array against humble and can- did inquiry on the subject in which we are en- gaged. Two more remain to be considered. — IV. The Fourth which I shall mention is, the disposition in multitudes to revolt at the SUGGESTION OF ANY THING MYSTERIOUS IN RE- LIGION. This prejudice and outcry against MYSTERY, are among the weapons which Unita- rians most frequently employ against Ortho- doxy ; and at which many who call themselves Orthodox are often perplexed, and at a loss to answer. The substance of the objection com- monly made on this subject, may be thus expressed — 72 , LETTER III. '^ The term Revelation is only applicable to ^^ those things which are made known^ conse- ^^qnently which ar£_ brought down to a level '^ with our reason^ that is^ which may be com- *^ pr eh ended. What is not brought down to a " level with our rational powers, cannot be un~ '' derstood, and of course^, is no revelation to us. " Did the Gospel really contain doctrines above '' reason, it would, so far, cease to be a divine " revelation. We may also safely conclude, that, *• as the Gospel w as originally preached to the •• poor, and intended more especially for them ; "• as it is a revelation to babes in knowledge, it *• cannot be supposed to contain any mysterious ^^ or incomprehensible doctrine. Nay, to be- ^' lieve a doctrine which we cannot comprehend, *• is impossible and absurd. We may say we •* believe it ; but we cannot really believe it, be- " cause we know not what it is. And if we say '* we believe what we do not understand, we, in *'fact, say we believe we know not what; and " how, in that case, are we either to explain or " give a reason for what we believe. It is im- ^^ possible. Where Mystery begins, faith and " religion end.'' LETTER III. 73 The first remark which I have to offer on this pfeasoning, which, in truth, scarcely deserves to be called plausible, is, that if it prove any thing, it proves by far too much. It will banish from the list of credible things many articles of belief;, which no man in his senses thinks of doubting, much less of rejecting* In fact, upon the princi- ple of the reasoning just detailed, a man can believe nothing, or next to nothing ; for, assu- redly, there is nothing either in nature or in grace, either in creation or in providence, which he can fully explain. Mystery surrounds us ; it besets our path, wherever we go ; and 4)n every subject that comes before our minds, physical or moral, after we proceed a very few steps, we are met by impenetrable mystery. The facts are indubitable, but the manner in which they exist as facts, the process by which they are brought about, and the reasons of that process, are alike wholly unknown. The truth is, it is only allowed to man in the present state to perceive effects; to observe facts; to ar- range them in the best order, and to make the best deductions from them, that he can ; that he may foresee how far similar effects may be ex- pected in given circumstances, and thus be able K 74 LETTER III. to apply them to purposes of practical utility. He can do no more. He may talk in proud and pompous language of unfolding and explaining the secrets of nature, and may sometimes ima- gine that he has really done so : but it is an entire mistake. Still all that he knows is a few facts. Of the essence of things, or of the nature of causation^ in any case, he knows nothing — literally nothing. To reveal^ then, does not signify in all cases, or, indeed, in almost any case, to explain. Any thing may be revealed, and remain a profound mystery still. When the discoverer of the Mag- net brought to light a series of facts concerning that wonderful influence, he may be said to have revealed to men a knowledge of them. But did he explain them ? Have they ever been explain- ed to the present hour ? Why does the m ague tick needle point to the poles ? Why does it, in any case, deviate from the true meridian ? Why do some of its known and registered laws differ so entirely from those of all other substances with which we are acquainted? To these inquiries the most acute philosophers have nothing to re- ply. The principles upon which the phenomena LETTER III. 75 in question rest, are still hidden from our view, by a veil which no man has been able to penetrate. Yet no man thinks of doubting the facts alluded to, or of questioning the great util- ity of the knowledge of them to mankind. And^ for any thing we know, both the persons and the property of men, may be transported across oceans just as safely, and as expeditiously, with our present scanty knowledge, as if we were able to go to the bottom of the subject. In like manner, the wind bloweth where it listeth^ and xve hear the sound thereof; but whence it cometh^ or whither it goeth ; what is the source of its end- less variations, and what the rules, if there be any, by which we might calculate them, no student of this branch of natural history, that I have ever heard of, (though some of the shrewd- est and closest observers that ever lived have been busy on the subject for near sixty centu- ries) has hitherto imagined he was able to tell. But, while all this is covered with mystery, the mariner spreads his canvass to the gale without hesitation, and receives all the benefit of its im- pulse, in traversing the deep, perhaps just as well, as if he knew all that is knowable on the subject. The same train of remark might be 76 XBTTER IM. applied to Electricity and Chemistry, each of which is really a little world of mysteries ; and of hoth which all that we can say is, that an as- semblage of facts is revealed, or made known ; but that we are not able to explain one of them, or approach to an explanation. Again ; does any one doubt the propriety of saying that many of the attributes of God are revealed to us in his word ? Yet no one means by this that revelation enables us to comprehend them ; but only that it asserts the fact that such perfections exist in Jehovah, and makes a prac- tical application of them. For example, that God is OMNIPRESENT, rcvclatiou distinctly and frequently affirms. But does it explain this attribute of the Supreme Being? Does any man think of comprehending it ? Should we not consider that man as insane, who should talk of being able to comprehend it ? What do we mean, then, when we say that this doctrine is revealed? We certainly mean nothing more than that we are assured the fact exists, as before suggested. In like manner, the Unitarians, as well as the Orthodox, are accustomed to say, that the scrip- tures reveal a future world of bliss and glory^ LETTER III. 77 prepared for the righteous, after death; and also inform us that the happiness of that world will exceed our highest conceptions. But do we comprehend that exceeding and eternal weight of glory ? How does the disembodied spirit, after death, travel to that world ? How does it perceive and enjoy the unutterable glories of heaven, without bodily organs, which are the inlets to our principal pleasures, and the instru- ments by which the soul acts, in the present life ? How will all the activity, and the inter- course, and the services of that exalted state be carried an ? Above all, what is comprehended in seeing God face to face^ and knowing as we are known P I profess not to be able to explain one of these glorious realities ; while yet we all ad- mit that the general facts are undoubtedly ^^ revealed." These things are not, indeed^ incomprehensible in their own nature ; but only by us, as long as we are in the body. Glorified saints comprehend them entirely; and so will saints now on earth, by and by, when their faculties are enlarged. But even glorified saints are, probably, not able to comprehend many things which are easily comprehended by Ga- briel. But as God is a Being who has no parallel 78 LETTER IIL in the Universe; and as our knowledge of all beings must be derived through the medium of analogy, that is by means of some other being, with which we are more familiar ; so it is cer- tain that, to eternity, the most exalted creature will see many glories in Jehovah which he will be forever unable to comprehend. Now, to apply all this to the case in hand. We say, that the one only living and true God exists in a Trinity of Persons — tiie Father, the Son, and the Holy- Ghost ; that the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding ; that the Son is, in a mysterious manner, eternally begotten of the Father, and is a Divine Person, equal with the Father ; that the Holy- Ghost is also a Divine Person, proceeding from the Father and the Son, from all eternity ; and that these Three are One, the same in substance, equal in power and glory. We think that the scriptures reveal this mode of the Divine existence, that is, de- clare the fact, without explaining it ; and, on the authority of scripture alone, we believe the fact, simply as revealed, while we confess our- selves utterly unable to comprehend it. We do not suppose that any man on earth ever did, tETTER III. 79 or ever can, understand this august mystery. Whether glorified spirits, or angels around the throne of God comprehend it, we pretend not to conjecture; although we have no doubt that many things relating to the Divine mode of existence will be, to the most exalted principali- ties and powers in heaven, entirely and forever incomprehensible ; and for any thing we can tell to the contrary, that under consideration may be among the number. But, however mysterious this fact, as to the mode of the Divine existence may be, it is not more incomprehensible than the Divine Omni- presence, and other attributes of the Godhead, which are revealed in scripture, and which Uni- tarians no more than others ever think of calling in question. It is said to be utterly incredible that any being should be One and Three at the same time. There is said to be an absurdity — a self-evident, mathematical absurdity, in the very proposition; and no one, our opponents alledge, can be required to believe that which is, in the very nature of things, and in terms, a manifest absurdity. They confess that we may believe, that which is above reason, but not that 80 LETTER III. which is plainly and undoubtedly contrary ta reason. But does not all this presumptuous lan- guage arise from our venturing to do^ what the scriptures expressly and strongly condemn, viz. considering God as a being altogether such an one as ourselves? When the Most High speaks of himself to mortals^ it must be in the language of mortals. But shall we not certainly and greatly err if we interpret that language as meanings when applied to Jehovah, the same thing that it means when applied to ourselves ? Yet is not this error the foundation of the whole objection? When it is objected that the doctrine of the Trinity is contrary to reason, what is meant ? Does the objector mean, that the doc- trine is contrary to the nature of things ; con- trary to reason, as it exists in the infinite and eternal Mind ? If this be his meaning, the asser- tion is utterly denied. He does not understand what the nature of things is ; and, of course, is not qualified, unless to a very small extent, to pronounce what is, or is not, contrary to it. Until he is able to comprehend the nature of ALL THINGS, and among others, of God him- self, he surely ought to be cautious in pro- nouncing what is irreconcileable with reason. LETTER TIL 81 But if he mean, that the doctrine in question is contrary to his reason ; — contrary to his narrow, unphilosophical prejudices, which render him unwilling to allow any thing in God which he does not perceive in himself, or in creatures, — then, it may indeed be so, that the doctrine in question cannot be reconciled with such reason ; but this, I humbly conceive, will be no solid objection to it with any reasonable man. On account of the poverty of language, we are obliged to express our ideas of the Divine simplicity by the term Unity. Perhaps it is the best word for the purpose that language affords. But before any one undertakes to de- cide that a Trinity of Persons in God is incon- sistent with the Divine Unity, he ought to be able to tell us what Unity is. But is any man able to do this? Most people are, probably, ready to suppose, at first view, that this is an easy task ; that the idea expressed by this word is so plain, simple, and perfectly intelligible, that there is no difficulty in defining it aright. But I suspect that the more an enlightened and acute mind contemplates the subject, the more he will be inclined to believe, that, like the L 82 LETTER III. subject of personal identity^ and some others of similar character^ there is a difficulty in compre- hending and stating it, which is almost, if not altogether insuperable. An individual man is one ; — yet he is made up of soul and body, and some say of a third part, called spirit; each having its distinct and appropriate nature. But does this two-fold, or three-fold nature interfere with his unity ? I presume no one will suppose it does. But why not, on the principle of the objection which I am repelling? A machine is one, though made up of a number of parts. In what sense is Unity applied here ? A Legisla- tive body is one, though composed of many members. What is meant by unity in this case ? We are accustomed to say, and I believe that, in mechanical philosophy, it is a true saying, that more than one substance cannot occupy the same space at the same time ? But are we sure that this axiom has any application to spirit — jand, above all, that it applies to that Infinite Spirit, who is every where equally present ? In short, if we cannot tell what Unity means ; if we find ourselves utterly perplexed when we undertake to define what Oneness, in the ab- stract, implies, and especially what it means LETTER III. 83 when ascribed to the great Eternal, who is exalted above all blessing, and all praise ; we surely cannot be prepared to decide how far a Trinity of Persons in the Divine Essence is in- consistent with it, and involves any thing like an absurdity or contradiction. But further ; suppose we were able to com- prehend and define perfectly what Unity means, and to remove every difficulty on that score; has any Trinitarian ever said that the Deity is 07ie in the same sense in which He is three ? If any thing of this kind had ever been asserted, it might be called a contradiction. But this, it is well known, is explicitly disavowed, and the contrary asserted, by all sober believers in the doctrine of the Trinity ; and how far it is consis- tent with candour and honesty, in disputants on the Unitarian side, to be perpetually recurring to an implied charge on this subject, for which there is no foundation, I shall not at present stop to inquire. Let it be distinctly understood, then, that when Trinitarians say there are three Persons in the Godhead, they do not by any means intend to say, that God is thj^ee and one in the same sense. The Unity refers to one respect. 84 LETTER III. the Trinity to another. How this is to be ex- plained, they do not pretend to know, or even to have an opinion. They consider it as their duty, simply and humbly to receive the fact, as a great mystery, without presuming to compre- hend it, or to attempt a developement of the manner in which the fact exists ; just as they receive the fact of the Divine Omnipresence, or of the blessedness of heaven ; although the same Bible which reveals these facts, declares that they are both far beyond the reach of our minds. But it will, perhaps, be asked, what we mean when we say, there are three Persons in the Godhead ? What kind of distinction is that which is expressed by the word Person ? We frankly answer, we do not know. We find a certain three-fold mode of existence in the Deity frequently referred to in Scripture, but not ex- plained; it may be because it is not possible adequately to explain it to creatures in our situ- ation ; perhaps not even to any created being. There is an essential poverty in all human lan- guage, when we attempt to speak of the proper- ties of spirits, and more especially when we speak concerning the most Exalted and Incom- LETTER III. g5 prehensible of all Spirits. The term Person has been employed in the Church of Christ, to y express the distinction before us, for many centuries. We found it in use ; and not know- ing a better term for the purpose intended, we have cheerfully adopted, and continue to use it still. We by no means understand it, however, in a gross or carnal sense. We utterly deny that we mean by it three distinct, independent beings ; for we believe that there is but one God. But we mean to express by it a certain (to us mysterious) three -fold mode of existence, in the one living and true God, which carries with it the idea of an ineffably glorious So- ciety in the Godhead, and lays a foundation for the use of the personal pronouns, I, Thou, He, in that everblessed Society. In short, to employ the language of Dr. Barrow, we believe, '' That ^' there is one Divine Nature or Essence, com- " mon to three Persons, incomprehensibly uni- ^^ted, and ineffably distinguished; united in " essential attributes, distinguished by peculiar '' relations ; all equally infinite in every Divine " perfection ; each different from the other in ^' order and manner of subsistence ; that there " is a mutual existence of One in All, and All in 86 LETTER IlL ^^ One ; a communication without any depriva- ^^tion or diminution in the communicant; an ^^ eternal generation, and an eternal procession, <^ without precedence or succession, without pro- '' per causality or dependence ; a Father impar- " ting his own, and the Son receiving his Father's '' life, and a Spirit issuing from both, without ^^any division or multiplication of essence. — - '' These are notions which may well puzzle our ^^ reason in conceiving how they agree, but ^' should not stagger our faith in assenting that '^ they are true : upon which we should medi- " tate, not with hope to comprehend, but with ^•dispositions to admire; veiling our faces in " the presence, and prostrating our reason at the ^' feet, of Wisdom so far ti'anscending us/^* Nor ought it to give rise to the least difficulty in the minds of any, that the second Person of the Trinity is called the Son of God; that He is said to be the only Begotten Son^ and the eter- nally Begotten, I know that the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son of God is regarded by many as implying a contradiction in terms. But here again is a most presumptuous assump- • Bj^vlilow^s JDcfetice of the TriniU'. p. 7. 8, LETTER ill. 87 tion of the principle, that God is a being altogeth- er such an one as ourselves. Because generation among men necessarily implies priority^ in the order of time as well as of nature, on the part of the father, and derivation and poste?'ioriti/ on the part of the son, the objection infers that it must also be so in the Divine nature. But is this a legitimate, is it a rational inference ? It certainly is not. That which is true, as it respects the nature of man, may be infinitely removed from the truth, as it respects the eternal God. It has been often well observed, that, with regard to all effects which are voluntary, the cause must be prior to the effect ; as the father is to the son, in human generation : But that in all that are necessary, the effect must be coeval with the cause ; as the stream is with the fountain, and light with the sun. Has the sun ever existed a moment w^ithout sending out beams ? And if the sun had been an eternal being, would there not have been an eternal, necessary emanation of light from it? But God is confessedly eternal. Where, then, is the absurdity or contradiction of an eternal, necessary emanation from Him, or. if you please, an eternal generation, — and also an eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the 88 LETTER III. Father and the Son ? To deny the possibility of thisj or to assert that it is a manifest contradic- tion, either in terms or ideas^ is to assert that, although the Father is from all eternity, yet He could not act from all eternity ; which, I will ven- ture to assert, is as unphilosophical as it is IMPIOUS. Sonship, even among men, implies no personal inferiority. A son may he perfectly equal, and is sometimes greatly superior to his father, in every desirable power, and quality : and, in general, he does in fact partake of the same human nature, in all its fullness and per- fection, with his parent. But, still, forsooth, it is objected, that we cannot conceive o^ generation in any other sense than as implying posteriority and derivation. But is not this saying, in other words, that the objector is determined, in the face of all argument, to persist in measuring Je- hovah by earthly and human principles ? Shall we never have done with such a perverse begging of the question, as illegitimate in reasoning, as it is impious in its spirit? The scriptures declare that Christ is the Son, the only begotten Son of the Father ; to the Son the Father is represen- ted as saying, Thy throne, God, is forever and ever: and concerning himself the Son declares, LETTER III. 8^ I and my Father are one. This is enough for the christian's faith. He finds no more difficulty in believing this, than in believing that there is an eternal; omniscient and omnipresent Spirit, who made all worlds out of nothing, and upholds them continually by the word of his power. I am aware that some who maintain, with great zeal, the Divinity and atonement of Christ, reject his eternal Sonship^ or generation^ as being neither consistent with reason, nor taught in scripture. It does not accord, either with my plan or my inclination, to spend much time in animadverting on this aberration, for such I must deem it, from the system of gospel truth. I will only say that, to me, the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of the Saviour appears to be plainly taught in the word of God, and to be a doctrine of great importance in the economy of salvation. Of course, I view those who reject it, not merely as in error, but in very serious error ; an error which, though actually connect- ed with ardent piety, and general orthodoxy, in many who embrace it, has, nevertheless, a very unhappy tendency, and cannot fail, I fear, to draw in its train many mischievoi^s conse- M /' OO LETTER III. quences. If the title Father^ be the distinctive title of the first Person of the adorable Trinity^ as suchy does not the correlative title of Son seem to be called for by the second Person, as such ? If the second Person of the Trinity is not to be distinguished by the title of Son^ what is his distinguishing title ? By what appropriate name are we to know Him, as distinguished from the other Persons ? In the form of Bap- tism, all the friends of orthodoxy grant that the Father and the Holy Ghost are expressive of divine personal distinctions ; but if so, what good reason can be given why the Son should be understood differently ? In short, my belief is, that the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, is so closely connected with the doctrine of the Trinity, and the Divine character of the Saviour, that where the former is generally abandoned, neither of the two latter will be long retained. I must therefore, warn you against . the error of rejecting this doctrine, even though it come from the house of a friend. It is a mys- tery, but a precious mystery, which seems to be essentially interwoven with the whole substance, as well as language, of the blessed economy of mercv. LETTER in. 91 Concerning this eternal generation of the Son, the early christian writers constantly de- clared that it was firmly to be believed ; but^ at the same time^ that it was presumptuous to attempt to inquire into the manner of it. Irentsus asserts, that " the Son, from eter- ^^NiTY, CO-EXISTED WITH THE Father ; and ^^that from the beginning, he always revealed ^^the Father to angels, and archangels, and ^' principalities and powers, and all to whom it " pleased him to reveal him/^* Lactantius, in his fourth book De vera Sapien- tia, says, " How, therefore, did the Father beget " the Son ? These divine works can be known of '' none, declared by none. But the holy scrip- ^' tures teach that He is the Son of God, that ^^He is the Word of God/^ Ambrose, in his treatise, De Fide, ad Gratian- um, speaks in the following decisive and elo- quent strain — I inquire of you " when and how " the Son was begotten ? It is impossible for me '' to know the mystery of this generation. My * Contra Bareses, Lib. II. cap. 20, 92 LETTER III. ^^ mind fails ; my tongue is silent ; and not only ^^ mine^ but the tongues of angels : it is above ^^ principalities J above angels, above the Cheru- <^bim, above the Seraphim, above all understan- ^^ ding. Lay thine hand upon thy mouth. It is ^^ not lawful to search into these heavenly mys- ^^ teries. It is lawful to know that He was born, <^but not lawful to examine how he was born. <*' The former I dare not deny ; the latter I am ^' afraid to inquire into. For if Paul, when he ^^was taken up into the third heaven, affirms ^^ that the things which he heard could not be ^^ uttered, how can we express the mystery of ^^ the Divine Generation, which we can neither ^^ understand nor see V^ Let not, then, my Christian Brethren, the eharge of " mystery," or the cant proverb, that " where mystery begins, faith and religion end,-'' in the least move you. That mystery should be readily allowed to exist every where in God's Creation, and in God's Providence, and at the same time be unceremoniously rejected from God's Revelation/\s indeed more than strange ! That creatures who acknowledge that the na- ture of God is infinitely unlike, and infinitely LETTER III. 93 above, that of any other being in the Universe ; and that their own share of reason is so small that they can scarcely think or speak intelligibly about it^ or so much as define their own faculties of reasoning ; should yet refuse to believe any thing of Jehovah whicli does not accord with human notions ; is^ surely, as weak and irrational as it is presumptuous. But that creatures who confess themselves to be miserable sinners, lying at the footstool of mercy, and standing in need of a revelation from God, to teach them, what they could not otherwise know, concerning his perfections, and the way of acceptance with Him ; should yet, when they acknowledge that such a Revelation has been given, undertake to sit in judgment upoii it, and to reject such parts of it as are above the grasp of their disordertjd and enfeebled reason ; argues a degree of daring and infatuated impiety, which, if it were not so com- mon, we should be ready to say could not exist. Wherein does it essentially differ from that tem- per by which " angels became apostate spirits V' In truth, when men once begin to indulge in this disposition to reject from revelation that which they cannot comprehend^ they not only 94 LETTER III. cherish a temper hostile to piety ; but they ven- ture upon a stream which will land them they know not where. I referred^ in a preceding page, to the Omnipresence and Omniscience of God, as attributes which all who bear the Chris- tian name are ready to acknowledge. But you will, perhaps, be surprised to learn that this representation was not strictly correct. The fact is, that both these perfections of God, as well as his Eternity, his Immensity and his Spirituality, have been virtually called in ques- tion by some Unitarians ; on the principle that our reason could not comprehend them. On the same ground, also, they have denied that the creation of all things out of nothing is credible. Now my remark on this reasoning is, not that there is any inconsistency in it ; for, conceding to them their fundamental principle, that noth* ing incomprehensible is to be believed, all the Divine perfections which have been alluded to, and several others, must be drawn into doubt, or totally rejected. Accordingly, the progress which this compen- dious mode of disposing of the mysteries of revelation has made among the Unitarian the- LETTER III. 95 ologians and criticks of Germany, affords a sol- emn warning. Once they stood substantially on the same ground with the body of the Unitarians in this country ; and would have been shocked at the thought of going to the length in scepticism at which they are now found. But, proceeding step by step, many of them have come to reject from the Bible, all mysteries, and all mira- cles. In their view, the Mosaic account of the Creation, is a mere poetical fable ; the delivery of the Law on Mount Sinaiy a dexterous man- agement of a thunder storm ; the whole Jewish ritual, a mere contrivance of ingenious super- stition ; and the effusion of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, nothing more than a gust of wind, accompanied by an unusual excitement of electric fluid ! This is the natural course of the Unitarian doctrine respecting mysteries. Some serious men among them may, and no doubt do, abhor what they would call such impi- ous extremes ; but others will probably soon be found following the German example ; and the next generation will perhaps find the majority of American Unitarians standing on German ground. Such is the deceitfulness of error ; and so great the danger resulting from the adoption of one corrupt principle ! 96 LETTER III. The following quotation from an eminent Di- vine^ and truly eloquent Preacher^ is so much to my purpose^ and so admirably expresses what I wish to communicate on this branch of the sub- ject^ that I make no apology for closing with it what I have to say oh the mysteries of revelation. ^' This grandeur of God removes the greatest ^^ stumbling blocks that sceptics and infidels pre- ^^tend to meet with in religion. It justifies all ^^ those dark mysteries which are above the ^^comprehension of our feeble reason. We ^^ would not make use of this reflection to open ^^ a way for human fancies^ or to authorize every ^^ thing that is presented to us under the idea of ^^ the marvellous. All doctrines that are incom- ^' prehensible, are not ' divine ; nor ought we to ^^ embrace any opinion merely because it is be- ^^ yond our knowledge. But when a religion m ^' other respects has good guarantees ; when we ^' have good arguments to prove that such a rev- ^*^ elation comes from heaven ; when we certainly '^ know that it is God who speaks ; ought we to ^^ be surprised if ideas of God which come so ^^ fully authenticated^ absorb and confound us? ^^ I freely grant, that, had I consulted my own LETTER III. 97 " reason only, I could not have discovered some ^' mysteries of the Gospel. Nevertheless, when '' I think on the grandeur of God ; when I cast ''' my eyes on that vast Ocean ; when I consider '' that immense All ; nothing astonishes me, ^^ nothing stumbles me, nothing seems to me in- ^^ admissible, how incomprehensible soever it " may be. When the subject is Divine, I am " ready to believe all, to admit all, to receive " all ; provided I be convinced that it is God '' himself who speaks to me, or any one on his ^^part. After this, I am no more astonished ^^that there are three distinct Persons in one " Divine Essence : one God, and yet a Fath- " er, a Son, and a Holy Ghost. After this I am " no more astonished that God foresees all with- " out forcing any ; permits sin without forcing '^ the sinner ; ordains free and intelligent crea- " tures to such and such ends, yet without des- ^^troying their intelligence or their liberty. " After this, I am no more astonished that the ^^ justice of God required a satisfaction propor- " tional to his greatness ; that his own love hath " provided that satisfaction ; and that God, from '^ the abundance of his compassion, designed the '' mystery of an incarnate God : a mystery which N 98 LETTER III. ^^ angels admire^ while sceptics oppose : a mys- '' tery which absorbs human reason, but which ^^ fills all heaven with songs of praise : a mys- (' tery which is the great mystery, by excellence, ^^but the greatness of which nothing should ^*make us reject, since religion propose th it as <^ the grand effort of the wisdom of the incompre- ^Oiensible God, and commandeth us to receive " it on the testimony of the incomprehensible ^^God himself. Either religion must tell us «^ nothing about God, or vvhat it tells us must be " beyond our capacities ; and in discovering ^' even the borders of this immense Ocean, it ^' must needs exhibit a vast extent, in which our " feeble eyes are lost. But what surprises me, ^^ what stumbles me, what frightens me, is to see ^' a diminutive creature, a contemptible man, a " little ray of light glimmering through a few '' feeble organs, controvert a point with the Su:- *^preme Being, oppose that Intelligence who '' sitteth at the helm of the world ; question ^' what he affirms, dispute what he determines, ^' appeal from his decisions, and, even after " God hath given evidence, reject all doctrines *^ that are beyond his capacity. Enter into thy ^* nothingness, mortal creature ! What madness LETTER III. 99 •* animates thee ? How durst thou pretend ; thou •^who art but a point; thou whose essence is *^ but an atom, to measure thyself with the Su- ^' preme Being, with Him who fills heaven and ^' earth ; with Him whom heaven^ and the heaven " of heavens cannot contain ? Canst thou by " searching find out God? Canst thou find out " the Almighty to perfection ? High as heaven^ " what canst thou do ? deeper than hell, what " canst thou know ? He stretcheth out the north " over the empty place, and Jiangeth the earth " upon nothing. He bindeth up the waters in his " thick clouds, the pillars of heaven tremble, and ''are astonished at his reproof Lo these are "parts of his xvays, but how little a portion is " heard of Him ? But the thunder of his power, " who can understand ? Gird up now thy loins " like a man ; for I will demand of thee, and " answer thou me. Where wast thou when I " laid the foundations of the earth ? Declare if "thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the " measures thereof? Who hath stretched out the " line upon it ? Whereupon are the foundations " thereof fastened ? Who laid the corner stone " thereof, when the morning stars sang together^ *' and all the sons of God shouted for joy ? Who 100 LETTER 111, '^ shut up the sea with doors^ xvJien I made the " cloud the garment thereof ^ and thick darkness a <^ swaddling hand for it ? When I break up for '' it my decreed place ^ and set hars^ and doors , ^' and said^ Hitherto shalt thou co7ne, and no "farther ; and here shall thy proud waves be "stayed? He that reproveth God, let him an- " swer this. O Lord, such knowledge is too " wonderful for me ; it is high, I cannot attain " unto it:^^ V. The FIFTH and last Prejudice on tliis subject to which I wish to call your attention^ is that which arises from the authority of GREAT Names. Unitarians are more apt^ if I do not mistake^ than any other sect who assume the Christian name^ to boast of the patronage of distinguished men. This is, possibly owing, in part at least, to that lurking consciousness that their cause stands in need of such a prop, which more frequently, perhaps, than is imagined, attends the advocates of error. And hence there is scarcely any method of - defending their an ti- christian citadel of which they appear more fond, than to array a list of eminent men, to * Sauhih's SermonSj by Robinson^ Yol. I. p. 78, LETTER III. 101 whom they lay claim, as the open or the secret friends of Unitarianism. That cause, they tell us, cannot be bad, which some of the greatest and best men that ever lived, have espoused. The weakness of this plea is so obvious, that a formal refutation of it will not be thought ne- cessary by any impartial reader. The same plea might be urged with quite as much force in sup- j^t of Trans ubs tan tiation, the worship of Ima- ges and Relicks, and many other of the most palpable and irrational errors, that ever disgra- ced the Christian Church. They have all had able and eminent advocates, whose opinions have been confidently quoted in their favour, and whose authority would be decisive, if tal- ents, learning and virtue, could be admitted as substitutes for scriptural warrant. Yet if any one were to argue that, because John Duns Scotusj and Aqiiwas, and Bellarmm^ and Fenelon and Pascal, and a host of other eminent men, were all Catholicks, and devoted their great powers and erudition to the support of many of the superstitions of the Papacy, that therefore these superstitions must be founded in Scrip- ture; every impartial man would perceive such 102 LETTER III. a conclusion to be at once illegitimate in reason- ing, and false in fact. Not a whit better is the argument drawn by Unitarians, in favour of their cause, from the authority of great names. As | long as they themselves are compelled to ack- nowledge that the grossest absurdities, and the most wretched superstitions, have been counte- nanced by many men equally distinguished, they will hardly venture to lay much stress on an ar- gument so capable of being turned against thenu The truth is, if all the World were against the Bible, it would be of no weight in the Chris- tian's estimate. If all the talents and learning that ever apostate man could vaunt, were lea- gfued for the support of Unitarianism, it would only be another proof that the wisdom of this world is foolishness zvith God, Thus we argue in the case of those who reject Revelation alto- gether ; and the argument is just as good with respect to their near relatives, the Unitari- ans. The question which we are called upon to solve, is, not, whether this great man believed in accordance with us ; or whether that great man believe4 differently; but the question is, what saifh. the Scriptures ? If they be in our LETTER III. 103 favour, we can well afford to have thousands of great names in the ranks of our opponents. But it ought to be known^ that^ whatever may- be the vahie of this argument^ it operates with incomparably more force in favour of Orthodoxy, than in favour of Unitarianism. In taking a sur- vey of the Christian world, from the time of the Apostles to this hour, for one truly great man who has avowed himself a Unitarian, I will ven- ture to produce five hundred, who have taken the opposite side. All the great Reformers, throughout Europe, as we shall see hereafter, espoused the cause of Orthodoxy with perfect decision. Nay, the great body of the most pro- foundly learned and pious men that ever adorn- ed both Catholick and Protestant Christendom, have espoused the same cause, so far as respects the main points in dispute between the Orthodox and Unitarians. If the question, then, is to be carried by a majority of votes — -by a majority of the great and the erudite, the majority is im- mense in favour of Orthodoxy. But if the weight of piety f as well as of talent ; — of deep Biblical and theological knowledge, as well as of elegant lUerature and human science, is to be taken 104 LETTER III. into the accou^t^ the preponderance in favour of Orthodoxy, is beyond all comparison. This Unitarians well know; and, therefore, it must be confessed they had no small temptation to make, as they have done, an ostentatious display of the comparatively few respectable names that could be mustered on their side. This being so, you will readily perceive what estimate you ought to form of those sanguine, impetuous, and superficial advocates of Unitari- anism, who represent the friends of their system as the only really great and learned men ; as the only men of large views, and profound know- ledge ; while the friends of Orthodoxy are spoken of by them as persons of contracted minds, of scanty acquirements, of low, grovelling prejudi- ces, and as the weak slaves of system and authority. Such miserable rodomontade may pass very well v/ith those who know nothing of the history of the human mind, and its greatest ornaments. But by all others it will be regarded as the vainest boasting that can well be imagin- ed, and of which a truly learned Unitarian would be utterly ashamed. LETTER III. 105 But it will, peHiaps, be asked. Have not some men of distinguished talents and learning, who avowed themselves Unitarians, written with great ability on the evidences of Christianity, and in the defence of some of its doctrines ? They have. But if Unitarians are not to be acknowledged as Christians, what estimate ought we to form of these men and their labours ? Were they powerful writers on behalf of Chris- tianity, and yet no Christians ? By what name, then, ought they to be known ? There is really no difficulty in this case. A man may write with great zeal and force in support of a par- ticular PART of a religious system, who can by no means be considered as a cordial friend of the GENERAL SYSTEM. A Deist may write yvith great ability in defence of the doctrine of a particular Providence, which is evidently a doctrine of the Bible ; and a Jeiv may write with no less ability in support of the miracles and inspiration of the Old Testament Scrip- tures, in which the Christian will always own him as an auxiliary. But you would not think of calling either, on this account, a Christian. In like manner, if Dr. Priestley , or Dr. Lard- ner^ or any other distinguished Unitarian, wrote 106 LETTER III. well on any subject connected with Christianity^ while we venerate them for their learning and virtues, and thankfully avail ourselves of their aid, on any subject on which they have written ably and instructively ; we are no more bound to call them Christians, or to consider the gene- ral spirit of their writings as coinciding with the Gospel, than we are to consider Josephusy MaimonideSf or Ben Jarchi^ as entitled to the name of Christian, while we esteem, and employ their works, in aid of the Christian cause. But, after all. Unitarians are in the constant habit of pressing into the list of their friends and advocates, many whose names ought never to be placed in such company. If any distin- guished man be found to have speculated on the doctrine of the Trinity, or that of the Deity of the Redeemer, in an unusual manner; if he be found to doubt whether the common mode of speaking on these doctrines is the best, or whether the Athanasian creed is expressed with sufficient caution ; he is immediately set down as a Unitarian. If one of this character hap- pen to say a word against Creeds and Confes- sions ; or to employ mild, indulgent language LETTER III. 107 toward those who deny the Saviour's Divinity ; he is unceremoniously affirmed to be a Unitari- an. Nay if, in the honesty of his heart, the most thorough Trinitarian should drop an ex- pression, which can be so construed, by a tortur- ing logick, as to admit of a consequence never thought of by him who uttered it ; he is forth- with pronounced a Unitarian. On grounds of this sort, you may rely upon it, my brethren, many a pious friend of Orthodoxy has been rep- resented as standing in the Unitarian ranks. You are by no means, therefore, to conclude^ that every one to whom they give this name, really deservea it. The gross calumny with which they have perseveringly followed the ex- cellent Doctor TFatts, is a specimen of this injustice as striking as it is shameful. With respect to many others whom Unitarians claim, my only wonder is, that conscientious men can possibly boast of such persons as an honour to any cause. When they bring forward, for example, a long list of clergymen and others, of the church of England^ who solemnly pro- fessed their belief in the 39 Articles, and who constantly made use of a liturgy, the whole char- lOB LE'rrER iij. acter of which is strikingly Trinitarian; but who are still alledged to have been Unitarians in principle ; I am amazed at their inconsider- ate zeal. Either these persons were really Unitarians, or they were not. If they were not, then they have been basely calumniated. If they xvere, then they have lived in habits of the most shameful dishonesty, and perjury ; a dishonesty and perjury which, if known, could not fail of rendering them, in the eyes of all up- right men, a disgrace to any society calling itself a church of Christ. I shall not now agitate the question whether Newton and Locke were Unitarians, as has been confidently alledged. But if they were, their morality was worthy of their creed. Both of them repeatedly subscribed the Articles of the Church of England; and both of them habitu- ally joined in the communion, as well as in the prayers of that church. Did they do this, then, believing those Articles to be essentially er- roneous, even with regard to fundamental doc- trines ; and that worship to be gross idolatry ? If so, claim them who will ! They would have been a disgrace to an Orthodox Church, and r LETTER III. 109 would certainly have been cast out of it^ unless it had been unfaithful, or they had concealed their principles. Winston^ it seems, does alledge that Newton was almost incurably displeased with him for having said that he (Newton) was &x\.Arian, This looks as if, either, the charge was false, or he was ashamed of his creed, and wished to maintain the character of an Or- thodox man. Either supposition, I should think, would be far from doing credit to the Unitarian cause. As to Mr. Locke, if there were truth and candour in the man, he was no Socinian ; for he solemnly denied it while he lived; he acknowledged the doctrine of Christ's satis- faction FOR SIN ; and after his death, a dis- tinguished literary friend, who lived with him during several of the last years of his life, and who translated the most valuable of his works into the French language, declares, that, in his last moments, he thanked God ^^for the love " shewn to man in justifying him by faith in ^^ Jesus Christ, and in particular for having " called him to the knowledge of that Divine " Saviour.^'^^ * Locke's rrorA's~9tb Vol. p. 173. 8vo. Edit. 110 LETTER III. You see, then, my Christian Friends, the amount of this prejudice founded on the au- thority of GREAT NAMES. It tums out to be a plea of no force whatever : or rather, so far as it has any force, it is in the proportion of five HUNDRED TO ONE IN FAVOUR OF ORTHODOXY, AND AGAINST Unitarianism. Will you cast in your lot, then, with that comparatively small body, who have abandoned the religion of the Apostles, and of the primitive Church ; some of whom have been distinguished for their talents and learning, and a few of them eminent for their moral virtues; but the generality of whom, even Dr. Priestley being judge, have never been remarkable for their piety ; or will you unite your destiny with that great body of holy men of God, of whom the world was not worthy ; men as distinguished for the ardour of their piety, and the activity of their benevolent zeal, as for the vigour of their minds, and the extent of their erudition ? If I must follow hu- man authority, let the latter be my guides ! LETTER IV. Testimony of the early Fathers on this Subject, Christian Brethren^ . The wbrd of God, as the Orthodox believe, is the only certain test of divine truth ; the only infallible rule of faith and practice. Of course, that which is not found in Scripture, however extensively and unanimously it may have been received by those who bore the Christian name, must be rejected, as forming no part of that pre- cious system which God has revealed to man for his salvation. But when we think we find a doc- trine plainly, frequently, and solemnly taught in the Bible, it certainly does, and in the esti- mation of all reasonable men, it ought to corrob- orate the fact, that the doctrine is really found there, and is, consequently, of God, when we find the true Church, in all ages, maintaining 112 LETTER IV. and cleaving to it^ nay contending for it, with zeal, as a fundamental part of divine truth. I need not tell the pious that there is a conso- lation as well as a duty, in walking in the foot- steps of the flock. Now, if I am not greatly deceived, nothing is more easy than to show, that the doctrines of a Trinity of Persons in the adorable Godhead, and the Divinity of Jesus Christ, have always been held as doctrines of the Gospel by the true church of Christ, and been regarded and conten- ded for as fundamental ; that in the purest ages and portions of the church, they have been maintained with most care, and preached w ith most zeal; and that those who rejected them have been always branded as heretics^ and, as such, cast out of the church, and even denied the name of Christian. If all this can be made out, as I have no doubt it can, to the satisfaction of every impartial mind, will it not go far to- wards demonstrating, that the views of the Or- thodox on this subject are correct, and that the doctrines which they cherish, are indeed' the truth of God ? LETTER IV. 113. In attempting to give a sketch of that portion of the testimony in favour of our doctrines which may be called historical, I might begin with the Primitive Churchy and examine the evidence found on this subject in the Sacred records. But this would be to enter into so large a field^ that I must at present decline it, as leading me beyond the limits which I have prescribed for these Letters. This is a branch of the testimony which, if entered upon at all, must be pursued into considerable detail. But this has been done by so many hands, and with so much ability, that I refer you to their labours ; and shall feel myself warranted in taking for granted that the doctrines for which I contend are plainly and undoubtedly taught in Scripture. When I find the Scriptures declaring, in the most express and unequivocal manner, that God was manifest in the flesh ; that Jesus Christ is the Lord from heaven ; that He is Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, which was, and which is, and which is to come, the Almighty ; that the Jews crucified the Lord of glory ; that in the beginning was the Word, and the JFord was with God, and the JFord was God; that all things xvcre made by him, and for him, and that P 114 LETTER IV. without him was not any thing made that was made'; that as He made all things, so He upholds all things by the word of his power, and is over all God blessed Jbrever :^— When I find Him called the brightness of the Father^ s glory, and the express Image of his Person — Jehovah our righteousness — Immaniiel, which is, being inter- preted, God with us — the mighty God, the ever- lasting Father, the Prince of Peace : — When I find Him asserting concerning himself, that which plainly implies Divinity — such as that wherever his people are assembled, in all parts of the world, there He is in the midst of them-^ that He has power to forgive sins — and that He searcheth the hearts, and trieth the reins of the children of men : When I hear him say — / and my Father are one — Before Abraham was, I am : — When I find it solemnly enjoined that we honour the Son even as we honour the Father-; accompanied with the declaration, that he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father : — When I find it said, with peculiar emphasis, that He has all power in heaven and on earth — that his throne is forever and ever — that He had gloi'y with thq Father before the world rvas — that 7ve must all stand before the judgment seat of LETTER IV. 115 Christ — that He bore our sins in his own body on the tree — that his blood cleanseth from all sin — that He is the propitiation for oiir^ sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world — that He has made peace by the blood of his cross, — and that He saves his people from their sins : — When I read the form of Baptism, which the Saviour himself prescribed, and find the Son and the Holy Ghost put on a par with the Father, both as to personality, and Divine char- acter : — When I read the apostolical Benedic- tion, and find the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, placed before the love of God the Father, as if on purpose to show that the former was not in- feriour, either in nature or dignity to the latter : ■ — When I find good men represented in the sa- cred history as praying to Christ, and commen- ding their departing spirits to him : — When I find divine perfections, divine works, and divine worship every where ascribed to Him : — When I read these passages, and many others of a similar character^ I am compelled to believe that the true and proper Divinity of the Son, as equal with the Father, is taught in Scripture. To suppose language and representations of this kind to be applied to a mere man, or to any 116 LETTER IV. creature^ however exalted^ is, in my view, of all incredible things, one of the most incredible. In short, to suppose that men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost — men who con- stantly had it as one of their grand objects, to guard their fellow men against idolatry, should speak thus concerning any mere created being, would be to suppose them speaking with an utter disregard of all that is correct in language, of all that is sober in thought, and of all that is reverential to the majesty of heaven. The Bible, if this be supposed, instead of speaking the xvords of truth and soberness, must exhibit (with the deepest reverence I would write it) the most wonderful compound of empty bombast, and of cabbalistical jargon, that ever was utter- ed. It cannot be. The eternal Son, therefore, is Jehovah, of the same substance or essence, with the Father, equal in power and glory. It is no valid objection to this conclusion, that Christ is spoken of, in other parts of Scripture, as a man, and that He is represented as speak- ing the language, and acting the part of a man. This is precisely what we say, that 'He is God and man, Jiaving two natures united in one LETTER IV. 117 Person forever. This we hold , to have been absolutely necessary in order to his being quali- fied to be a Mediator between God and man^ and, as such, to lay his hands upon both. Had He not been man, He could not have been made subject, as our Surety, to the law which we had broken ; nor have obeyed and suffered as our representative ; and had He not been God, his obedience and sufferings could not have had that infinite value which was indispensable to their efficacy for justifying and saving the un- numbered millions of his people. And I will add, had not his Person been constituted in this wonderful manner, why should the inspired wri- ters appear to labour as they do, for adequate expressions to set forth the transcendent mys- tery and glory of his appearance in the flesh ? This, I said, is not only the doctrine of the Bible, but it has also been the doctrine of the true Church of Christ, from the Apostles to the present day. To an attempt to establish this position, I would now, my Christian Brethren, request your candid attention. 118 LETTER IV. The early Christian writers are usually called, by way of distinction, the Fathers, They were men, of course, of different degrees of talent and attainment ; placed in different situations ; of different ways of thinking and feeling, on a great variety of subjects ; and, consequently^ in very different degrees entitled to the confidence of those who come after them. But I think it may be said, without fear of contradiction, that they ALL concur in bearing testimony to the truth of the position which I am now engaged in supporting. The following extracts from a few of them (for to give the whole, would be to write several volumes, instead of a small manual,) will be sufficient for my purpose.* Barnahasj sometimes called the Apostle, who was probably born before the cri^cifixion of the Saviour, and who wrote soon after the destruc- tion of Jerusalem^ by Titus^ is a very decisive * With respect to a large part of the following extracts from the early Fathers, the Author has drawn them himself from the original writers, and will be responsible for the accuracy of the citations. , With regard to the rest, not having the ori- ginals within convenient reach, he has taken them from Bishop ^ullt Mr. Burghf Dr. Jamieson^ Mr. Simpson, and others, of es- tablished reputation. It has been his study, in ervery instance, in making, or adopting a translation, to give the strict, unvar- nished sense <^ the writer. LETTER IV. 119 witness in favour of the Divinity pf Christ. In the 3th section of his Catholick Epistle^ he says, '' The Lord was content to suffer for our souls, '' although He be the lord of the whole '' earth ; to whom God said, before the begin- " ning of the world, Let us make man after our " own image and likeness." Again, in the 7th section, he says, '' If therefore the Son of God, " who is Lord of all, and shall come to judge ^' BOTH the quick AND THE DEAD, hath Suffcr- '' ed, that by his stripes we might live, let us '' believe that the Son of God could not have '' suffered but for us.'' Surely He who is Lord OF THE WHOLE EARTH LORD OF ALL and who will JUDGE THE QUICK AND DEAD, CaU be no other than a Divine Person. Cleinejis Romanus was probably born before the middle, and wrote towards the close, of the first century. As is generally supposed, he was personally acquainted with most of the Apostles, and seems to have been the same person whom saint Paul speaks of as his follow labourer. All the writings of this Father which have reached us, are comprised in a few pages. In these, though he no where treats formally or 120 LETTER IV. professedly on the subject in hand, he inciden- tally expresses himself in the following manner — " For Christ is theirs who are humble, and '' who do not exalt themselves over his flock. '' The sceptre of the majesty of God, ouij " Lord Jesus Christ, came not in the shew of " pride and arrogance ; though He could have " done so ; but with humility, as the Holy ^^ Ghost had before spoken concerning him. '' And again — " God is good to all, especially "to those who flee to his mercy through our "Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom be glory and " majesty forever and ever. Amen !" Polycarp, who flourished in the beginning of the second century, and who suffered martyr- dom under the emperor Marcus Antoninus^ about A. D. 167, in a short Epistle to the Phillip- piansj the only writing of his which is now ex- tant, writes thus. " Mercy and peace unto you, ^^from God Almighty, and the Lord Jesus ^^ Christ, our Saviour, be multiplied. — Every "living creature shall worship Christ— Now " the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, " and he himself, who is our everlasting High '^ Priest, th^ Son of God, Jesus Christ, build LETTER IV. 121 •^ you up in faith and truth, and in all meekness " and gentleness, and grant unto you a lot and '^ portion among his saints ! — God is good to ^^ all, especially to those who flee to his mercy, '^ through our Lord Jesus Christ ; to whom be ^^ glory and majesty forever and ever. Amen !'^ After the death of Polycarpj the church of Smyrna^ of which he had been pastor, wrote a circular letter to other churches, in which they gave an account of his sufferings. From this let- ter we learn, that, when he was at the stake, he addressed a prayer to God, which he concluded with this doxology — ^^For all things I praise " thee, I bless thee, I glorify thee, together with " the eternal and heavenly Jesus Christ, with ^^ whom unto thee, and the Holy Spirit, be glory ^^both now and forever, world without end. "Amen!'' — The same epistle informs us that, after his death, the Jews suggested to the hea- then judge, that he should not suffer the Chris- tians to take his body and bury it, lest they should leave the worship of their crucified Mas- ter, and begin to worship Polycarp, " Not con- "sidering,'' says the epistle — "that we can "never either forsake the \^rship of Christ, 122 LETTER IT. ^^who suffered for the salvation of those who "are saved in the whole world^ the just for the "unjust^ or worship any other. For we wor- " SHIP Him as being the Son of God ; but the " martyrs we only love^ as they deserve, for their " great affection for their King and Master^ and ^' as being disciples and followers of their Lord, " whose partners and fellow disciples we desire " to be.'^ The next witness whom I shall adduce is j^- ?2atiusy who suffered martyrdom under the Em- peror Trajan^ A. D. 107. In his Epistles the following passages occur.* The salutation of his Epistle to the Ephesians^ is in these words — " Ignatius^ who is also called " Theophoritsj to the church which is at Ephe- " sus^ in Asia^ most deservedly happy ; being " blessed, through the greatness and fullness of * The author is aware, that the authenticity of the Epistles of Jg-natins, has been called in question, as. well as that of IJar- nabas, before quoted. It is impossible in a work written on the plan, and with the design, of these Letters, to enter into the merits of coutroversies of this sort. It is sufficietit for his purpose to say, that the great body of learned men consider the Epistle of Barnabas, and the smaller Epistles of JgnatiuSf (and from these alone he offers quotations) as' in the n^ain, the real works of the writers whose names they bear. Of this ■ opinion was the eminently learned Unitarian, Dr. Lardner. LETTER IV. _ 123 ^^ God the Father, and predestinated before the "world began J that it should be always unto an "enduring and unchangeable glory; being uni- " ted and chosen through his true passion^ ac- ^^ cording to the will of the Father, and Jesus " Christ OUR God ; all happiness, by Jesus '' Christ, and his undefiled grace.'^ In the 7th section of the same Epistle, he says, " There is " one Physician, both fleshly and spiritual ; ^' made and not made ; God incarnate/' And again, in the 19th section — " Ignorance was " taken away, and the old kingdom abolished, "God himself appearing in the form of "a man.'' Toward the close of his Epistle to the Mag- 7iesianSj he expresses himself thus — " Study, ^* therefore, to be confirmed in the doctrine of '^ our Lord, and of his Apostles ; that whatso- " ever ye do, ye may prosper, both in body and "spirit; in faith and' charity; in the Son, and " in the Father, and in the Holy Spirit." He begins his Epistle to the Smyrneans thus — " I glorify God, even Jesus Christ, who has " given you such wisdom." And in the close of 124 LETTER IV. his Epistle to Polycarp, he says, " I wish you ^' all happiness in Jesus Christ, our God.'^ All the witnesses whom I have yet cited lived in the first century, and were personally ac- quainted with some of the Apostles. Their testimony, therefore, is weighty, and. worthy of peculiar attention. Irenceusy who was a disciple of Polycarp, and who is said to have suffered martyrdom about A. D. 202, is an important and decisive witness on the subject before us. In the fourth book of his work against the Heretics^ he begins by as- serting That " God was made man.'^ — In the second book of that work, and toward the close of the thirteenth chapter, as quoted in the last Letter, he says " The Son from eternity co- ^^ EXISTED WITH THE Father, and from the ^^ beginning he always revealed the Father to " angels, and archangels, and principalities and " powers, and to all to whom it pleased him to " reveal Him.^/ In the fourth book and tenth chapter of the same work, he asserts that Jesus Christ was the God who interrogafed Adam ; whp conferred with Noah^ and gave him the LETTER IV. 125 dimensions of the ark ; who spoke to Abraham ; who brought destroying judgments on the in- habitants of Sodom ; who directed Jacob in his journey^ and addressed Moses out of the burning bush at Horeb. And^ to give^ but one example more ; in the third book, and sixteenth chap- ter of the same work, he says — ^' He (Christ) " is called Immanuel, lest we should think him " ONLY A MAN." And to illustrate and confirm this, it is worthy of notice, he immediately subjoins, with some other pointed passages of scripture, that remarkable text in Romans IX. 5. " Of xvhom, as concerning the flesh, Christ " came J who is over ail God blessed forever ;'^^ which he evidently interprets and applies, just as it is interpreted and applied by modern be- lievers in the Divinity of the Saviour. About the same time with Irenceus lived The- ophilus, Bishop of the church of Antioch. He expressly acknowledges " Christ to be God, " and says the world was made by him : "for when the Father said, ^Let us make " man in our image, after our likeness,^ He " spake to no other but to his own Word, and " his own Wisdom, that is to the Son, and the 126 LETTER IV. ^^HoLY Spirit.'' — These he expressly styles a "Trinity IN THE Godhead.* Justin Martyr^ who, about A. D. 165, sealed his faith with his blood, as the latter part of his name signifies, affords important and decisive testimony on this subject. In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, the latter is represented as finding fault with Christians for maintaining the Deity and worship of Christ. '^ To me it ^^ appears,'' says Trypho, ?i "paradox/incapable "of any sound proof, to say that this Christ " WAS God before all time, and that then he *^ was MADE MAN and suffered : and to assert ^' that he was any thing more than a man, of ^^ men, appears not only paradoxical but fool- " ish." "' I know," replies Justi?!, " that it "appears paradoxical, and particularly to those " of your nation, who are determined neither '' to know nor do the will of God, but to follow " the inventions of your teachers, as God de- " clares of you. However, if I could not de- " monstrate that He existed before all time, Seeing God, the Son of the Maker of the " Universe, and was made man of the Virgin : " * Theoph. ad^Autolnc. Lib. 11. p. 106, 114, 130. LETTER IV. 127 ^^yet as this personage was shewn hy every " sort of proof to be the Christ of God^ be the " question as it may respecting his Divinity and " humanity, you have no right to deny that He " is the Christ of God, even if he were only a " mere man ; you could only say that I was " mistaken in my idea of his character. For " there are some who call themselves Chris- " tians, who confess him to be the Christ, but " only a mere man ; with whom neither I, nor ^^THE MOST WHO BEAR THAT NAME, AGREE; ^^ because we are commanded by Christ himself, " not to obey the precepts of men, but. his own " injunctions, and those of the holy prophets.''^ In another part of the same Dialogue, he speaks of Christ as ^^he God of Israel who was " with MosesP In his first Apology, he expresses himself thus " We WORSHIP AND ADORE THE FATHER, * The true rendering" of this passage in Justin Martyr has been not a little controverted by Unitarians. I have given that which appears to me to be the true sense of it. But to stop to adjust disputes of this kind, in detail, would lead me far be- yond the limits of th^se Letters, and defeat their great ob- ject My readers may rest assured, that I will not knowingly mislead them with respect to a single quotation ; and that I will, in no case, introduce, either witnesses or argurot-nts, which appear to me to have been either set aside, or weaken- ed, by Unitarian criticism. 128 LETTER IV. ^^ AND THAT SON, who came from him^ and the " Spirit of Prophecy^ honouring them in word '' and in truth. Those who say that the Son is '' the Father, are convicted of being ignorant of ^' the Father, and of not knowing that the Fath- '' er of all hath a Son, who being the first begot- " ten Word of God, is also God.'' In his second Apology^ he speaks thus^ — '^ We " worship and love the word of the Unbe- ^^ GOTTEN and INEFFABLE GoD, who is with " God, because for our sakes he became man, " that being also a partaker of our sufferings. He " might accomplish our cure." — Now, when it is recollected that these Apologies were intended to give general information concerning the faith and practice of the Christians in his day, we cannot suppose that he would be so insane as to lay before the Pagan rulers, in the face of the world, any doctrines but those which were known to be embraced by the great body of his fellow believers. . ■ - Of the writings of Melito^ pastor of the church of Sardis, who flourished about A. D. 170, only a few fragments remain, as preserved by Euse- LETTER IV. 129 bius^ Anastasiusj and others. In one of these fragments, he speaks thus, '' We are not wor- ^' shippers of stones ; but we are worshippers of '^ the one God, who is before all, and in all, and '^ in his Christ, who is truly God, the eternal ^^WoRD.''* — In another he expresses himself in this pointed manner. After saying that it was unnecessary to give further proofs of Christ's humanity, he adds, ^^the miracles which He '' wrought after his baptism, most forcibly de- '' monstrate and confirm his Divinity conceal- '' ED IN FLESH. Tlius being at once perfect '^ God and perfect man, he discovered his two '' natures to us — his Divinity, by the miracles '' which he performed in the three years after " his baptism — his humanity, by the thirty ante- ^' cedent years, in which the meanness of the " flesh hid the tokens of his Divinity, though he '' was true and everlasting GoD.'^f The following testimony of Athenagoras, who flourished about A. D. 175, is very express and pointed. " The Son of God is the Word of the ^^ Father, in power and energy; by him, and * Chron. Alexander, ap Spanhem : Hist. Christ : p. 610. ■j- Anastasius, of Sinai^ as quoted by Cavb, in his Historia Jjiteraria, p. 43. R 130 LETTER IV. <^ through him were all things created. The ^' Father and the Son are one. If you desire a ^^ further explanation of the meaning of Son in '' this point, I will endeavour to give you a brief ^^one. He is the First-born of the Fath- '' ER, but NOT AS EVER BEGINNING TO EXIST ^i Who is not filled with admiration/^ says he, '^. that we who declare God the Father, and God 'f THE Son, and the Holy Spirit, shewing both ^' the power of their Unity, and the distinction '' of their order, should be called perverse Athe- <^^ists?" — ^^We are not Atheists, who reckon as ^^God, the Maker of the Universe, and his ^» Word who proceedeth from him.''* Tatian, a disciple of Justin Martyr^ in reply to the accusations of the heathen, says, " we do not ^' O Grecians, act the part of fools, nor do we tell '' you idle stories, when we declare that God " WAS BORN IN THE HUMAN FORM-f Contemporary with Athenagoras^ was Clemens AlexandrinuSf whose testimony is no less expli- cit on the subject under consideration. In his * Athenaoor. Legatio. p 11, 34. {■ Tatiast, centra firce cos f p. 159. LETTER IV. 131 Pedagogue, book first, chapter second, he says, '^O children, our Master is like to God his ^' Father, whose Son He is, without sin. He is '' God in the form of man, immaculate." Again, in the third book, and twelfth chapter, of the same work, he thus exhorts — ^^Let us ^' give thanks to the only Father and Son ; to the " Son and the Father ; to the Son our Teach- ^' er and Master, with the Holy Spirit ; one in " all respects ; in whom are all things ; by whom ^' all things are one ; by whom is eternal exis- ^' tence ; whose members we are ; whose is the ^' glory, and the ages ; who is the perfect good,^ ^Uhe perfect beauty, all-wise and all-just, to " whom be glory both now and ever. Amen V^ And a little after, in the same work, he pours out the following exhortation — " Gather togeth^ *^er thy simple children, to praise in a holy •^ manner, to celebrate without guile, Christ the " Leader of children, the eternal Logos, the in- " finite Age, the eternal Light, the Fountain of " mercy, &c. — Filled with the dew of the Spir- '' it, let us sing together sincere praises, genuine ^' hymns, to Christ our king, &c. !" The same writer in his Exhortation to the Gentiles, styles Christ, THE LIVING God, who was then wor- 132 LETTER IV. '^ shipped and adored. Believe," says he, " O " man in Him who is both man and God : be- '^ lieve, O man, in Him who suffered death, and '' yet is adored as the living Gqd,'^* About the same time, that is, toward the close of the second century, flourished Andro7iicus, the martyr, in the account of whose martyrdom, it is represented as having been objected to him by the heathen judge, that Christ, whom he pro- fessed to invoke and to worship, was a man, who had suffered under the government of Pontius Pilate, and that the records of his sufferings were then extant. It seems that the worship of Christ was so openly avowed by the christians, and so universally known to the heathen, that at every turn it was objected to them ; and their answer was always the same ; " That they wor- '' shipped Him, indeed ; not however, as a mere ^^ man, but as a God, the Son of God by na- <^ture, and of the same substance with the "Father.''! The testimony of the eloquent Tertullian^ who flourished about A. D. 200, on this^subject, is * Clem. Alex. Protreptic^ p. 84 • \ Baronii, Ahnaks. Acta Jlndronici-^ati 190. LETTER IV. 133 as direct and indubitable as can well be imagin- ed. Those who read his treatise against Prax- easy will no longer have any remaining doubt. Praxeas was a heretick, who taught that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, were one and the same ; in other words, he denied all dis- tinction of Persons in the Godhead, maintaining the same error which was afterwards revived, and has been since generally known, under the name of Sabellianism. Tertullian entered the lists against him, and wrote a treatise, in which with great decision and force, he supported what were then, and have ever since been considered, as the Orthodox opinions on this subject. In this treatise he speaks pointedly and clearly of the Trinity in Unity ; of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, yet one God ; He speaks of the Lord Jesus Christ as both God and man, as son of man and Son of God, and called Jesus Christ. He speaks also of the Holy Spirit, the Comfort- er, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And he explicitly declares, not only that he and those around him received this faith ; but that it had obtained from the beginning, antecedently to any former heretics ; and much more antecedently to 134 LETTER lY. Praxeas^ who was of yesterday. The following is a small specimen of his language. " The Fa- "ther is God, the Son is God, and the Holy " Ghost is God, and every one of them is God." " The name of the Father is God Almighty, the ■" Most High, Lord of Hosts, &c. These names ^^ BELONG TO THE SoN LIKEWISE.''* The same Father, in his work De Prcvscrip- tio7ie, gives a creed, which he calls Regula Fideij in which is found the following article. ^^We believe that Christ was the Word, by ^^ whom God made the worlds, and who, at vari- '' ous times, appeared to the patriarchs and pro- ^' phets." And to this " rule of faith'' the fol- lowing explicit declaration is affixed — " This is ^^the Rule of Faith which was appointed by " Christ, and which admits of no dispute among " us, but such as hereticks raise, and such as ^^ make men hereticks." Minucius Felix ^ Vfho lived about A. D. 220, taking notice of the calumny circulated against the Christians, that they worshipped a mere man, as God, thus repels the charge— 7^^ You are ■ * TEBTrLWAK^ Opera. Rigalt. p. 500—519. I^TTER IV. 135 *^ greatly mistaken in ascribing to our religion " the worship of a guilty man, who was crucifi- '' ed ; and in thinking, either, that a guilty man '' shouldj or that a mere man could, be acknow- '' ledged by us as God. He is miserable indeed ^^ whose hope is wholly in a mortal man ; for his '^ help perishes with the destruction of the mor- ^' tal nature."* Origen, who flourished about A. D. 230, and who undoubtedly was the most learned and able divine of his day, thus expresses himself on the subject now under consideration — " When you " confess one God, and assert in the same con- " fession that the Father, the Son, and the Holy '' Ghost are One God, how perplexed, how diffi- '' cult, how inextricable does this seem to the un- " believing ! And again, when you say that the " Lord of Glory was crucified, and that it was " the Son of man who descended from heaven, ^^How perplexed," cries he who hears, but ^Oiears not with faith; how difficult do these "things appear! because they are them- " SELVES IN AN ERROR. But do thou hold fast^ "nor entertain a doubt concerning this faith, * Miirvcii OcTAT. Jipolog : 31. 136 LETTER IV. " knowing that God hath shewed this way ot* ^' faith unto thee.'^* And again ; " There are ^« some, indeed, who make a declaration concern- '' ing the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, ^' but not in sincerity nor in truth. Such are " all HERETiCKS, who indeed profess the Father " and Son and Spirit, but not in a right and be- " lieving manner : for they either separate the '^ Son from the Father, that they may ascribe " one nature to the Father, and another to the " Son ; or they erroneously confound them, by "^ thinking to make of three a compound God ; or " by supposing only three different names. " But he wiio rightly confesses the truth, will " indeed ascribe to the Father, Son and Holy '' Ghost, their distinct properties, but confess ^Hhat there is no difference as to nature or- " SUBSTANCE. '^t Speaking of the ordinance of Baptism, Ori- gen says, " When we come to the grace of Bap- " tism, renouncing all other Gods and Lords, " we acknowledge one God only, the Father, the " Son and the Holy Ghost.'^ And again ; * Homil VI. in Exod. f In Epist. ad Romanos, cap". X, LETTER IV. 137 ^^ I believe that faith of the Father, the Son, '' and the Holy Spirit, which is believed by all " WHO ARP UNITED TO THE CHURCH OF GOD.'^* Cyprianj who was contemporary with Origen^ and who, though inferiour to him, in learning, greatly excelled him in pastoral zeal and fideli- ty, and in general Orthodoxy, expresses himself on the subject under consideration in a way which cannot be mistaken. In his work on the Unity of the Churchy he speaks thus — ^^The Lord saith, I and my Father " are one ; and again, concerning the Father, the '' Son and the Holy Ghost, it is written. These " Three are One,^ Whoever does not hold this " UNITY, does not hold the law of God ; does not *^ hold the faith of the Father and of the Son ; ^^and DOES not hold the truth unto salva- * Hoinil. VIII. in Exod XX. It is freely granted, that OrigeUf on some occasions, expressed himself concerning the Saviour's Person, in a manner which an accurate theologian would pro- nounce exceptionable, and unsafe. But when he was called to speak directly and carefully on the subject ; and especially when he undertook to say what the Church believed, he em- ployed the language above cited. Unless we make him a com- mon liar, and a liar, too, without any known temptation to de- part from the truth, we must suppose that the Chtjuch at large, received and held fast the creed which he declares they did. 138 LETTER IV. " TioN."* — Again, he says, Christ was God ^' AND MAN, that he might be the fitter to be the " Mediator between them.'' And again, " This " Christ is our God ; and being a mediator " between two, he put on the man, that he ^^ might lead him to God his Father. Christ "became man, that man might become like " Christ.''! In a Council at Carthage^ called to deliberate on the re-baptizing of heretics, and in which Cyprian presided, one of the sentences pronoun- ced was the following. " Our Lord said, ' Go " and baptize all nations^ in the name of the Fa- '^ ther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghosts " When therefore, we plainly see that heretics " have neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the ^' Holy Spirit, they ought, on coming into our " mother Church, to be re-born and baptized." Another sentence pronounced in the same Coun- cil was equally decisive — "The Lord Jesus " Christ, our God, and the Son of God the Fa- " ther, hath built his Church on a rock, not on " heresy. Wherefore those who are out of the *7>e Unit at Eceles : § 5. * t Ailver. Jiidisos. Lib. II. sect. 10. et de Fanit, JdoU Sect. 6. LETTER IV. 139 ^^ Church, and stand in opposition to Christ, ^' scatter his flock, and cannot be considered as ^^ baptized.'' In conformity with the spirit of these declarations was the unanimous decision of the Council. The same devoted martyr, in another place, expresses himself in this pointed manner. " If '^ any one could be baptized among the heretics, ^^ he might also obtain remission of sins : and if ^^he obtained remission of sins, be sanctified, ^^ and made the temple of God. I ask, of what ^' God ? If of the Creator ; he could not, who ^' did not believe in him : if of Christ, neither *^ could he be his temple, who denies Christ to '^ BE God : if of the Holy Spirit ; since these " three are one, how could the Holy Spirit ^^ be reconciled to him, who is an enemy to the ^^ Father and the Son ?''* It is very remarkable, too, that Cyprian, like Irenausj and others before him, having occasion to quote that strong passage in favour of the di- vinity of Christ, which is found Romans IX. 5. instead of doubting its appropriateness, or adopt- * Bpist. p. 73. 140 LETTER IV. ing any thing like the modern Unitarian per- versionsj falls in exactly with the interpretation of our English translators^ and makes it to read, ^^ Of xvhonij as concerning the flesh, Christ '' camcy who is over all God blessed forever P^ Dionysius of Alexandria, was one of the zeal- ous champions for the truth, who opposed the heresy of Paul of Samosata, which will be men- tioned in the next Letter. He is strongly com- mended by J3asil,\ for always using the following form of doxology — " To God the Father, and '^ the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy ^^ Spirit, be glory and dominion, now and for- ^^ever, world without end, Amen!'' — The same Dionysius, in writing against Paul of Samosata, speaks in such pointed and unequivocal terms as. these — " Christ is uncreated — ^He is the Crea- ^^tor of all things — He is God by nature — " He is consubstantial with the Father — He is " immutable, as being God — He is God over ^' ALL, our refuge — He is the Lord and God " of Israel, &c.'' Novatian, who was contemporary with Cyp- rian, is one of the most powerful witnesses * Conira Judtsos^ L. II. § 6. f Basil, de Spirit. Sancio, cap. 29. LETTER IV. 141 that could be wished for on the subject before us. He left a treatise expressly " On the Trinity ^^ ill which that doctrine is asserted, illustrated, confirmed by numerous quotations from scrip- ture, and zealously maintained, with a clearness worthy of the most thorough Trinitarian, of the Athanasian school. The structure of the trea- tise is such, that it would be difficult to make satisfactory extracts, without extracting a num- ber of pages. Novatian contends for three Per- sons in the Godhead, cautioning his readers against Sabellianism, on the one hand, and Tritheism on the other. He maintains the eter- nal generation of the Son ; and that Christ is very God and very man, in the same mysterious and glorious Person. And, finally, he maintains the divine personality of the Holy Spirit. And, what is w orthy of notice, he arrays, in sup- port of these various doctrines, very much the same series of texts of scripture, to which the modern advocates of the same doctrines are accustomed to resort. It is evident that those scriptures which are now deemed decisive on these points, were, in general, viewed in the same light by the Orthodox sixteen hundred years ago. 142 LETTER IV. About the time of Novatian, lived Arnobius, a distinguished father of the church of Africa. This writer brings in the heathen as objecting to the worship of Christ. " Our Gods/' say they^ " are not displeased with you for worshipping '' the Almighty God ; but that you make a God " of one that was born a man^ and put to death "by the punishment of the cross, (an infamous ^^ punishment, only inflicted on vile men,) and '^ because you believe him to be still alive, and ^' make daily supplications to him.'' To this he answers, first, upon their own principles, that, admitting it were so, that Christ was only a mere man ; yet he might with more reason de- serve to be worshipped for his good deeds to mankind, than either their Bacchus, or Ceres, Q\ Misculapius, or Minerva, or Triptolemus, er Hercules, &c. But, secondly, he answers more closely, upon true christian principles, that the reason of their worshipping Christ, was the certain knowledge that He was the true God, whom they could not but worship and hon- our. He proceeds-—" What then ? suppose any " one, raving, should ask. Is Christ God ? We "will reply, He is God, and God of the inmost . '' powers o^the soul."* * Arnob. Contra Gentes — Lib : I. 30, 36. LETTER IV. 143 The same objection is proposed by Lactantiusy a learned and eloquent father, who was a disci- ple of Arnobius, " They (the heathen) are •^wont/' says he, ^^ to object tons the suffer- ^' ings of Christ by way of reproach, that we '' worship a man, and one that was put to a no- " torious death by men.'^ In replying to which objection, after having largely set forth the rea- sons of the Redeemer's incarnation and suffer- ings, he particularly answers that part of the objection which respects their worshipping him, and pleads that they worshipped him as one God with the Father. ^^For,'' says he, ^^when we speak of God the Father, and '^ God the Son, we do not speak of different '' natures, or separate the one from the other ; " for neither can He be a Father without a Son, " or the Son be divided from the Father : for- '' asmuch as He cannot be called a Father with- '' out a Son, nor the Son be begotten without a '^ Father. Seeing, therefore, a Father makes a ^^ Son, and a Son makes a Father, they have ^^BOTH ONE mind, and ONE SPIRIT, and one ^' SUBSTANCE.''* * Lactant. Div. Imtit. I.lb. IT. cap. 29. 144 LETTER IV. The celebrated Confession of Faith of Gi'ego- ry ThaiimatiirguSj who flourished about A. D. 235^ precludes all doubt with respect to his opinions. It is as follows. ^^ There is one " God, the Father of the living Word, of the ^^ subsisting Wisdom and Power, and of Him '' who is his eternal Image ; the perfect Beget- " ter of Him that is perfect, the Father of the " only begotten Son. There is one Lord, the '* Only, of the Only, God of God, the Character '' and Image of the Godhead ; the powerful '' Word, the comprehensive Wisdom, by which " all things were made, and the Power that gave " being to the whole creation : the true Son of " the true Father, the Invisible of the Invisible, " the Incorruptible of the Incorruptible, the Im- '^' mortal of the Immortal, and the Eternal of Him " that is eternal. There is one Holy Ghost, ^' having its subsistence of God, which appeared " through the Son to mankind, the perfect Image " of the perfect Son ; the life giving Life ; the ^' holy Fountain ; the Sanctity, aiid the Author ^^of sanctification ; by whom God the Father "is made manifest; who is over all, and in all; " and God the Son, who is through all. A " PERFECT ^RiisiTY, whicli neither in glory, >' LETTER IV. 145 ••eternity, or wisdom is divided; or separated >^from itself.^'* I shall only add to this list a short quotation from Atlianasius, one of the most celebrated Fa- thers of the fourth century, and a great cham- pion for the Divinity of Christ, and a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead. I do not make the extract so much for the purpose of enabling you to decide what the opinions of Athanasius him- self were on these important subjects ; for, that he was zealous in support of the Orthodox opin- ions. Unitarians themselves have granted with- out hesitation. But my principal object is to adduce his testimony with respect to what was the uniform doctrine of the church before his time — " We see that this was the tradition, and " the doctrine, and the faith of the church uni- ^^ versal, from the beginning ; which our Lord ^' himself delivered, which the Apostles preach- '' ed, and which the Fathers preserved. For in " this is the church founded, and he who falls " from it, can neither be a Christian, nor ^* DESERVE THE NAME OF A CHRISTIAN. That * See CaVk's Lives of the Fathers^ATt : Gregory Thmma," tVrtrit of God, and the Son of man ; from heaven ^*and from earth ; impassible and passible; and " that He was no other; not two persons; not two '^ hypostases ; not tw^o objects of adoration.^f In accordance with all this, it is remarkable that the Martyrs, who suffered in the second, *' Ad Scrapionem. f Unum esse Christum — Opera. Tom. 1. p. 666. LETTER IV 147 third and fourth centuries, were generally wont, in their last moments, to pray to Christ, and to resign their spirits into his hands, as their Creator and Redeemer. Of this I might fill a number of pages with examples, from the wri- tings of Eusebiusy and Jmbrose, and from various collections of what are called, the " Jets of the '' Martyrs/^ In those solemn and interesting seasons, we find them pouring out their devo- tions in such language as the following. "O Lord, '^ God of Heaven and earth, Jesus Christ, I ^' bow my neck to thee as a sacrifice, who livest ^' to all eternity : to whom belongs honour and ^' power forever and ever. Amen.'' — And again, — " I give thanks to the God of all kingdoms. ^^Lord Jesus Christ, we serve thee. Thou art "our hope. Thou art the hope of Chris- "tians. Most holy God, God Almighty, we "give thanks unto thee for thy great name.'^ "Again; "I beseech thee, Christ; I give " thanks unto thee ; deliver me, O Christ. In " thy name I suffer ; I suffer for a moment ; I " suffer willingly : let me not be confounded, "Christ!'' Once more; — "O Lord Jesus " Christ, my Saviour and my God, command " that my spirit may be received, for I desire 148 LETTER IT, ^^to obtain the crown which thy holy angd '' hath shewed me;'^* So much for the direct testimony of the early Fathers. In the substance of this testimony they ALL CONCUR. I cannot recollect a single WRITER, prior to the council of Afice^ who so much as intimates, either, that he himself deni- ed the Divinity of Christ, or the Holy Trinity ; or that the Christian Church denied it. The extracts which I have given, are a fair speci- men of the manner in which the writers of that period express themselves on the subject, when it comes before them. In the next Letter, their testimony, to the same amount, but under a dif^ ferent aspect, will be briefly considered. * Baron, an. 259, an. 301, an. 302, an. 303. &c. Etiseb.' /fe' Martyr. Palosst. c- 11. Ambros. Exhort^ ad Vir^ines, L LETTER Y. Subject continued — Testimony drawn from the Heresies of the first four centuries — Remarks on that testimony. Christian Brethren, The series of extracts from the writings of the early Fathers, which I laid before you in the preceding Letter, have, I trust, convinced you, that the doctrines of a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, and of the real and proper Divinity of the Son, were universally maintained in the primitive Church, and deemed of fundamental importance. But, for the purpose of illustrat- ing this fact still further, I design, in the pres- ent Letter, to inquire what those opinions were on these subjects, which, during the first three or four centuries, were pronounced Heresies, and of which the abettors were cast out of the church, as unworthy of a place among; those who bore the christian name. 150 LETTER V. If it be a fact, as I suggested in my first Let- ter, that Orthodoxy, both in its opinions and spirit, is by no means congenial with depraved human nature, and that the leading features of Unitarianism have ever been most pleasing to a worldly taste ; then we might naturally expect to find some of these features early beginning to disclose themselves. Accordingly, various forms of heresy respecting the Person and work of the blessed Redeemer, began to make their ap- pearance very soon after the christian church was established; and have scarcely ceased, from that time to the present, to tarnish her lustre, and to disturb her peace. Some of the most remarkable of these will be cursorily noti- ced, and a brief account given of the estimation in which they were held, and the manner in which they were treated^ by the great body of believers. The first class of hereticks that I shall men- tion, is the Ceriiithians. They were so called from Cerinthus^ who is alledged to have been a disciple of Simon Magusj and who lived in the apostolick age. Without entering into detail concerning tfhe opinions of this man, on other LETTER V. 151 subjects, it is sufficient to state, that he denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ; believing that Jesus was a mere man, born of Joseph and Mary; that a superangelick being, or influ- ence, was united to this man, at his baptism, and thereby constituted him the Christ or Mes- siah ; that this union, however, was not so com- plete as to make one person ; and that it was the mere man who suffered on the cross, — the superangelick being having abandoned him, before he suffered. What kind of reception these opinions met with from the christians of that day, the following testimonies will be suf- ficient to shew. Irencdus expressly declares, that the Evangelist " John designed by his Gos- '' pel to remove the error which was sown among " men by Cerinthus,^^ Jerome^ quite as directly and strongly, bears witness to the same fact, " Last of all,'' says he, " at the request of the '^ bishops of Asia^ John wrote his Gospel against '^ Cerinthus and other hereticks, and espe- " cially against the doctrine of the Ebionites^ " then beginning to appear, who say that Christ '' did not exist before MaryP^ Irenaus also re- lates, that the Apostle Johiy while he resided at * Catalog: Script. Eccles. in Joann, 152 LETTER V. Ephesusj once going to bathe, and perceiving that Cerinthus was in the bath, came out again, hastily, saying, ^^Let us flee, lest the bath ^^ should fall, while CerinthiiSy an enemy of "the truth, is within/^* The Cerinthians were soon succeeded by the Ebionitesy who appeared early in the second century, and took their name from Ebion, a dis- ciple of Cerinthusy who seems to have adopted all his leading opinions. At any rate, he taught that Jesus Christ was a mere man. Dr. Priest- ley has laboured much to shew, that the great body of the early Jewish christians were Unita- rians ; and that they were called Ebionites^ not from Ehion^ their alledged leader, but from their poverty ; being generally a poor and mean peo- ple. Hence he would make us believe, that they were by no means considered as hereticks ; but that they formed the mass of the Jewish con- verts to Christianity, during the apostolick age, and for some time afterwards. To those who have any disposition to adopt this opinion, I would recommend the perusal of the Revd. Dr. Jamiesori^s Vindication of the Doctrine of Scrip- ture, and of the Primitive Faithp coneej'ning the * Contra ffareses. Lib. Ill, § 4. LETTER V. 153 Deity of Christ; and also Bishop Horsley\ Tracts in controversy with Dr, Priestley. In these works, if I do not mistake, they wiU find the most ample evidence that Dr. Priest- ley^ s allegation is totally unfounded ; and that all antiquity testifies, that the Ebionites were a mere heretical sect, and not acknowledged as christians at all by the Orthodox church of their day. Irenceus^ speaking of this sect, ex- presses himself thus : '^ They who say that he '' was merely a man engendered of Joseph^ die ; " continuing in the bondage of the former diso- ^^bedience; having to the last no conjunction '' with the Word of God the Father, nor receiv- ^^ing freedom through the Son, according to " that saying of his own, If the Son, therefore^ ■" make you free, ye shall be free indeed. But '' not knowing Him who is the Immanuel of the a Virgin, they are deprived of his gift^ ^^ WHICH IS ETERNAL LiFE.'^^ Again he says^ ^^The truly spiritual disciple will judge the "Jews, will judge the Mai'cionit es, wiW. judge '' the Falentinians, (both of whom are acknow- '' ledged to have been hereticks) will judge the "Ebionites, How can they be saved, unless * Lib. HI. cnp. 21. 154 LETTER V. ^^ He who wrought their salvation on earth be "God?"* — TtrtuUian thus speaks of this heresy — "John in his Epistle calls those chiefly •^^Anti-christs, who denied that Christ had " come in the flesh, and who did not think that "Jesus was the Son of God. The former Mar- " cion ^Id, the latter EhionP\ Besides these testimonies, Justin Martyr^ Clemens Alexandri- mis, Origen, and Jerome all decisively speak of Ebion as a heretick, and most of them speak of him, as separated froni believers, and out of the way of salvation. Jerome, in one place, speaks of him as " that heresiarch Ebion." J In the second century also appeared Mar cion ^ an Asiatick, who, being expelled from his fath- er's church for immorality, went to Rome, and espoused the cause of heresy. He denied the plenary Divinity of Christ, and taught that he had not a real, but only an apparent human body. Marcion seems to have taken his sys- tem from Cerdo, whom he found at Rome ; and in his opinions respecting the person of Christ, Valentinus, Basilides, Bardasanes, and Manes, all of the same century, appear to liave sub- . * Lib. IV. cap.f3o. 4. f De Prcescnpt. c. 33. * In Galat, III. LETTER V. 155 stantially conciirred. Marcion, , like modern Unitarians, mutilated the Gospels^ and indeed the whole Bible, with great freedom, especially easting out every thing relating to the genealo- gy of Christ. Accordingly we find this man stigmatized as a heretick, not only by Ire?!- (Cus, in terms of strong reprobation ; but also by Justin Martyr J who formally opposed and con- futed his errors, as destructive heresies ; by Tertullianj who wrote several books against him, in which he condemns him as a gross here- tick, and speaks of him as having departed FROM the faith AND THE CHURCH OF ChRIST ; and by Polycarpj who not only denounced him as a heretick, but w^hen Marcion, mortified at Polycarp^s treatment of him, said, — " Polycarp^ " acknowledge us ;" the holy man of God repli- ed — " I do acknowledge thee as the first born " OF Satan.^' This anecdote is related by Ireiir ausj who was nearly contemporary both with Poly carp and Marcion,^ Concerning this heretick^ Cyprian also writes in the following manner. " Our Lord, after his •• resurrection, instructing his disciples hovy they * Contra Hareses. Lib. III. cap- 3. 4. 156 LETTER V. ^^ should baptize, says, Go ye^ therefore^ and " teach all nations^ baptizing them in the name of '' the Father^ and of the Son, and of the Holy ^' Ghost, Here he gives an intimation of the ^^ Trinity, in whose sacrament the nations ^^were to be baptized. Does Marcion believe ^' this Trinity ? Does he believe the same Fa- ^^ther, the Creator, as we believe in? Does he ^^ acknowledge the same only Son, Christ, born ^^of the virgin Mary; who being the Word, ^^was made flesh, and suffered for our sins? " Marcion, and all other hereticks held a very " different faith.'^* Toward the close of the second century, Theor dotiis the currier, appeared at Rome, and pub* lickly taught that Jesus Christ was a mere man.- He was immediately excommunicated from the church ; and by all the principal writers of that time, and for several centuries afterwards, who had occasion to speak of heresies, he is denoun- ced, not only as a Heretick, but as one of the WORST SORT. Yet he and his followers, of course, asserted, like modern Unitarians, that theirs was the true Apostolical doctrine. In answer * Epist, 73, / LETTER V. 157 to this plea, as made by certain Unitarians^ some time after Theodotus^ Caius, a Presbyter of Rome, thus speaks — ^^They affirm that all ^^the primitive christians, and the Apostles ^^ themselves, both received and taught these '' things which are spoken by them : and indeed "that the true preaching (as they think) was " preserved even to the time of Victor, who was " the thirteenth Bishop of the city of Rome ^' from Peter ; but that from the time of Zep- "hyrinus, who succeeded Victor, the truth was " adulterated. And perhaps what they assert ^^ might appear credible^ were it not that, in the " first place, the Holy Scriptures directly op- " pose them. Then there are writings of cer* '' tain brethren, prior to the age of Victor, which "'they have written in defence of the truth, "against the Gentiles, and the hereticks of " their own time. I mean Justin, and Miltiades,, " and Tatian and Clement, and many others "besides; in all whose books the Divini- " TY OF Christ is maintained. For who is ^' ignorant of the writings of Irenceus, and Meli- " to, and the rest, proclaiming Christ to be "both God and man? Of which number are " the Psalms and Hymns composed by the faith- 158 LETTER V. ^^ful in the earliest times^ which celebrate ^^ Christ the word of God, ascribing Divinity ^' TO Him* Since, then, the ecclesiastical doc- ^' trine was preached so many years back, how '^ can it be that all, even to the time of Fictor, " have proclaimed that doctrine of which they '' speak ? How ai*e they not ashamed to frame ■" such falsehoods concerning Victor^ when they *^ certainly know that Victor excommunicated " Theodotus the currier, the chief and parent of 'Uhis God-denying apostacy; being the first ^' that called Christ a mere man ? For if Victor , *' as they pretend, was persuaded of the truth ^' of their blasphemous doctrine, how did ^'he cast out Theodotus, the inventor of the ^^ heresy?''* Contemporary with Theodotus was Artemon, who seems to have adopted a system very much the same with that of the Byzantine currier. He also was opposed by several of the principal fathers, condemned as a here tick, and exclu- ded from the communion of the christian church. About A. D. 220, arose Noetus, of Smyrna , an obscure man, of small talents, who broached * Euseb. Lib. V^cap. 28. LETTER V. 159 certain opinions concerning Jesus Christ, which were a few years afterward adopted, in sub- stance, by Sabellius, of Africa^ from whom, on account of his superiour eloquence and conspi- euity, the system which he maintained, has since received the name of Sabellianism, Sa- bellius rejected all distinction of Persons in God. He alledged that the Trinity was only nonmial or modal, that is, that Father, Son and Holy Ghost, were only three names or offices of one and the same Hypostasis, or Person. He affirm- ed that Jesus Christ was truly God and man ; but that the one, undivided Deity was incarnate in him. And hence he and his followers were sometimes called Patripassians, because they considered the Father as incarnate in Christ, and were charged with believing that the eter- nal Father might suffer. This doctrine the pious of that day considered as striking at the foundation of the system of redemption, and therefore condemned it as a fatal heresy. Noe- tus was solemnly excommunicated from the church, and his doctrine stigmatized as heret- ical, by two successive synods ; and a few years afterward, iS«6e//zw.y, and his opinions received the same treatment. A modification of the same 160 LETTER V, system having been adopted, about this time, by Beryllus^ Bishop of Bozrah, he was opposed by Origeiij and excluded from the body of the Or- thodox. He remained, however, but a short time under this discipline ; for, professing to be convinced by the reasoning of his antagonist, he returned to the communion of the church, and his party became extinct. The heresy of Praxeas was transiently noti- ced in the preceding Letter. He was in sul>- stance a Sahellian ; that is, he denied the dis- tinction of Persons in the Godhead to be any thing more than nominal. He was formally con- demned by Zephyrbms, Bishop of Rome, fn consequence of his condemnation, he wrote and signed a recantation of his errors. But not long afterward he began to propagate them anew. ^^For some time,^' says Tertidlian, "\m " a hypocritical manner he lay hid, craftily re- '' taining life under ground ; but at length he '' again burst forth,'' and it appears was again cast out of the church. Tertullian opposed him with zeal and Vigour, and, if we may judge by a variety of circumstances, seems to have driv: en him off the field with triumph. LETTER V. lel The next conspicuous advocate of erroneous opinions concerning the Saviour's Person, was Paul of Samosata, He was a vain, arrogant, artful, and licentious man, who gave great un- easiness to such of his neighbouring brethren a^ were friendly to exemplary piety. Paid coinci- ded in opinion, almost entirely, with modern Socinians ; in other words, he considered Christ as a mere man. But when his brethren conve- ned to ascertain his sentiments, and give judg- ment concerning them, he manifested so much skill in the arts of concealment and equivocation, that, for a considerable time, they could decide nothing in his case. In the first Council that Avas convened to try him, he went so far as to declare, on oath, that he held no such opinions as were imputed to him ; but that he adhered to the Apostolical decrees and doctrines. This gave so much pleasure to the members of the council, that, before its dissolution, they united in singing a hymn, in which they celebrated THE PRAISES OF THE SaVIOUR AS GoD. But it was soon found that he had acted a disingenuous part, and was beginning again to propagate the opinions which he had disavowed. Another Gouacil was called. Again he denied and prc- X 162 LETTER V. varicated. At length Malchion, one of the cler- gy of the church of Antioch,, had the address and the fidelity to interrogate him in such a rnhnner, and to press him with such effect, that he could no longer escape detection. He was unani- mously CONDEMNED AS A HERETICK, and DE- POSED FROM THE MINISTRY. The hishops wllO composed this Council also addressed an Epistle to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria^ giving them an account of the opinions and character of Paul, for their information and warning ; in which they exhibit a shocking picture of his conduct as well as his principles. What Euse- bius thought of the opinions of this man^ will ap- pear from his saying concerning him — " The '' leader of the heresy at Antioch was discover- ^' ed, and by all manifestly convicted of another '' doctrine than that which is preached by the " WHOLE CaTHOLICK ChURCH UNDER HEAV- i( EN.''* It seems to have been on this occasion^ and prompted by the mortifying scenes to which the heresy of Paul had given rise, that Felix, bishop of Rome, addressed a letter to Maximus of Alexandria, in which he thus speaks — " We " believe that our Saviour, Jesus Christ, was . * ErSEB. mst^Lib. VII. cap. 29. LETTER V. 163 ^^ born of the Virgin Mary ; we believe that he ^' himself is the eternal God, and the Word, " and not a m :n, whom God hath taken into " hi:nself, so as that man should be distinct from '^ him ; for the Son of God, being perfect God, ^^ W;is also made perfect man, being incarnate ^' of the Virgin.*'^ Early in the fourth century arose the celebra- ted Ariiis of Alexandria^ an eloquent and pop- ular ecclesiastick, who taught that Christ was the most exalted of all creatures, but still a creature, and of course unworthy of Divine honours ; that this exalted creature was united to a human body ; that in the person thus con- stituted there was nothing more of human na- ture than the Jiesh ; the Word or Logos being the soul which animated this body. These no- tions were no sooner divulged than they made considerable noise ; and Arius, being not only a man of art, acuteness, and eloquence, but also of exemplary morals, succeeded in obtaining many friends and advocates. A number of cler- gymen, and some of no small distinction, embra- ced and openly taught his heresy. In short, his * Fleurt, h. 8. c. 4. 164 LETTER V. adherents became so numerous and bold, that measures of a more decisive character than usual were thought necessary by the friends of truth. Accordingly, A. D. 325, the Council of Nice was assembled, by command of the Emperor, to consider and decide on the case of Arius, This was the first General Council, that ever convened in the christian church. Other Coun- cils, comprising the ministers of large sections of the church, had often assembled before^ and some of them were truly respectable in point of numbers. But the Council of JVice was the FIRST in which delegates from the whole christian church were summoned, by imperial authority, to meet on the business of the whole Church. In fact, it was only about that time that such a measure had become practicable: For it was only in that very year that Constan- tine, the first Christian Emperor, became the sole head of the empire. When the Council came together, it was found extremely difficult to obtain from Arius any sat- isfactory explanation of his views. Like Paid of Samomta, he discovered a strong disposition to evade and equivocate, and actually baffled. LETTER V. X65 for some time, the attempts of the most ingen- ious and learned of the orthodox, to specify and bring to light his errors. At length, by adopt- ing some expressions which were thought to be of sufficiently discriminating import, they suc- ceeded in detecting and exhibiting his opinions in their real deformity. These opinions were condemned as heretical, by an almost unanimous vote of the Council, and a creed drawn up and signed, in substance the same with that which we now commonly call the Nicene Creed. Out of more than six hundred members of which it was composed, only twenty two or twenty three dissented from the final judgment, and of these dissentients, twenty at length yielded, and sub- scribed the Orthodox synodical creed. Arms and two of his adherents in the Synod, persis- ting in their refusal to subscribe, were not only condemned as hereticks, but also deposed from the ministry, and excommunicated from the church. It may not be improper to mention that Ace- sius^ a Novatian bishop, being present at the Council, was asked by the Emperor Constantinej whether he assented to its judgment? He repli- 166 LETTER V. ed — ^^The Council has decreed nothing new. ^' So I have always understood the church to '^'^have received, even from the times of the ^^ Apostles."* The Greedy as drawn up and ratified by the Council of JViccy differed considerably from what is now commonly called the Nicene Creed ; which was modified and made what it is, by several subsequent Councils. It originally stood thus — " We believe in one God, Almighty, ma- ^^ker of all things, visible and invisible: and in ^' one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begot- ^^ ten of the Father, the only begotten, that is ^^of the substance of the Father, God of God, ^' Light of Light, very God of very God, begot- ^' ten not made, consubstantial with the Fath- " er ; by whom all things both in heaven and ^^ earth were made. Who for us men, and our <^^ salvation, came down from heaven, and was " incarnate, and made man, and suffered, and ^' the third day rose again, and ascended into ^^ heaven, and shall come again to judge the " quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. "And the Catholick and Apostolick Church / * SocBAT. Hht. Lib. I. cap. 10. LETTER V. 15^ '■' anathematizes those who say, that there was a ^^time when the Son of God was not; or that '' He was not before He was born ; or that He '' was made out of nothing, or of another sub- '* stance or essence 5 or that He was created ^* or rautable.'-^ In estimating the degree of importance to be attached to this Creed, let it never be forgotten, that we are by no means to consider it as ex- pressing the individual opinions of a few eccle- siasticks; but as the digested, solemn judgment of THE WHOLE Church, by its representatives, assembled for the express purpose of consider- ing and deciding the conti'oversy to which it related. We have here, then, the creed of the WHOLE Christian World^ on the point in question, professedly and formally stated, in a single document. And, when those who are ac- quainted with the history of the Nicene Coun- cil, remember how amply the subject was dis- cussed, and with what peculiar care and mature advisement, the strong language of their creed was selected and adjusted, they cannot fail of seeing in it evidence amounting to demonstra- * Socb!)lt. Hist. Eccles. Lib. I. cap. 8. 168 LB:T TER V. tion, that the doctrines of the Divinity and Personality of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and of the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, were universally deemed, at that time, as es- sential PARTS OE THE CHRISTIAN FAITH. Hitherto we have contemplated cases of de- parture from the Orthodox faith, with respect to the Trinity in general, or the person of Jesus Christ in particular. But it appears that pious believers, from the earliest times to the present, were no less jealous of any deviation from the truth with respect to the Personality and Di- vinity of the Holy Spirit. A few years after the Arian heresy had been condemned by the Council of Nice^ Macedomus^ bishop of Con- stantinople, denied the Personality of the Holy Ghost ; maintaining that what was called by this name in scripture, was only a Divine energy diifused throughout the universe, and nothing properly distinct from the Father and the Son. Macedonius was condemned and deposed as a heretick, by a Council at Constantinople, K. D. 360; and his opinions still more solemnly examined, and again condemned, by#the second general Cou/icil, convened at Constantinople^ by ^ LETTER V. 109 order of Theodosiiis, A. D. 381. Here is anoth- er instance in which we see, not merely a distin- guished individual, but the whole Christian Church, deliberating on a new form of heresy, and solemnly deciding, that the Divinity and Personality of the Holy Spirit, and, by conse- quence, the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, were to be considered as fundamental articles of Christian truth. It would be an easy matter to extend this list of heresies to a much greater length, if the limits which I have prescribed to myself did not for- bid it. I might mention the Carpocratians^ the Basilideans, and the Montanists, the followers of Hermogenes, of Photimis, of Apollinaris, and of many more ; all of whom were unsound with respect to the Person of Christ ; and all of whom were condemned as corrupter* of the faith, and excluded from the community of Christians. •Indeed, I can candidly assure you, that, after devoting much of my life to reading of this sort, I cannot recollect a single instance in all ANTIQUITY, in which any individual, or body of individuals, who were known to deny the Trini- ty of Persons in the Godhead, the true and Y 17(5 LETTER V. proper Divinity of the Saviour, or the Person- ality and Divinity of the Holy Spirit, were regarded as Christians^ or were suffered to re- main in the communion of the Church. When we take a retrospect of these details, the result, I should think, cannot fail of being as conclusive as it is striking. Had the scriptural doctrine concerning the personal glory of Christ, been asserted, ever so pointedly by a single early writer only ; or had merely a single form of heresy been condemned by the assembled church ; the enemies of the truth might, per- haps, alledge some plausible ground for doubt on so important a subject. But, as if to pre- clude the possibility of doubt in any candid mind, almost every form of heresy now knowi^ made its appearance within the first four cen- turies, and was, by name, denounced as a depar- ture from tlie true faith, and its advocates put under the ban of the church. Those who con- sidered the Saviour as a mere man ; those who regarded him as the first and most exalted of all creatures ; those who held to a mere nominal^ but denied a real Trinity, that is, w4io held to a Trinity ot^amesj, but not of persons ; and those LETTER V. 171 who rejected the Divinity and Personality of the Holy Spirit; in short the Paidians — the Arians — the Semi-Arians — the Sabellians-—t\\t Apjllinarians and the Macedonians^ were each pronounced, in their turn, by the universal church, to be corrupters of the truth, and were publickly treated as such. Here is no possibili- ty of mistake ; no ground for doubt. We are presented with an assemblage of decisions, which illustrate, support, and confirm each other; which form a perfect system ; and which speak the most unequivocal language. Either the WHOLE Church, from the time of the Apostles^ to the fourth century, had entirely lost sight of the truth, and become the unanimous advocates of error, on the most fundamental of all doc- trines ; or the Orthodox opinions concerning the Person of the Saviour, and the Trinity of the Godhead, were, from the beginning, the genuine faith of Christians. * Thereis a further fact worthy of notice. It is the fact, that such hereticks were not only exclu- ded from the catholick or general Church ; but their right to the name of Christian was sol- emnly and formally denied. This was the case 172 LETTER V. generally, and is particularly mentioned, by the early writers, with respect to those who avowed heretical opinions concerning the Trinity, or concerning the Person of Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit. And, accordingly, all baptisms performed by such hereticks, were considered as NULL AND VOID, and when those who had recei- ved baptism from them, were disposed to return into the bosom of the Church, they were always re-baptized, or, to speak with strict propriety, baptized, by the Orthodox ministers who recei- ved them. I might produce a number of wit- nesses who abundantly testify to these facts. Those who have any considerable knowledge of the history of the early church, know that Cyp- rian^ Tei'tullian^ Lactantius^ Jerome^ Augustine and others, speak of them as established eccle- siastical practices. I have hitherto produced the testimony of the early Christians themselves, as to the doctrines which were taught, and as to the point of light in which departures from those doctrines, were considered by 'the body of the faithfid. But it is quite as easy to go a step further, ai\d to shew, that the Pagans understood the Christians to hold and teach as has been stated. LETTER V. 173 Pliny certainly understood that ,the primitive ehristians considered and worshipped Christ as a Divine Being. Having occasion, as Pro- con- sul of Bithynia and Pontus^ to transmit to the Emperor Trajan an account of the principles and conduct of some christians, who had been brought before him as a magistrate, he expresses himself concerning them in this language : '' They affirmed that this was the whole amount " of their crime or error, that they were wont, on '' a certain day, to assemble before it was light^ ^^and to SING a hymn to Christ as God.''^ The very fact of singing hymns to Christ, was enough to determine the point of light in which they viewed his Person. It was a solemn act of WORSHIP, which, upon the principles continually avowed by all christians, could have been offer- ed only to Jehovah. But we are not left to ar- gue from mere inference. Pliny tells us expli-. citly that the christians avowed that it was to Christ as God that they sung praises. Hierocles^ president of Bithynia^ and after- ward governor of Alexandria^ in both which offices he manifested great zeal against christi- * Plin. Epist. Lib. 10. Ep. 97. 98. 174 LETTER V. anitVj in his abridgment of the life of Apolloni- tis Ti/anaus, by Pliilostratus, undertakes to com- pare the wisdom and dignity of the heathen^ with the folly and superstition of Christians. ^' We, indeed/' says he, " do not account the ^^ person (Apollonius) who has performed such ^^ actions, God, but a man favoured of the Gods. ^' But they, because of a few miracles, pro- ^' CLAIM Jesus to be God."'*- Celsiis, the Epicurean philosopher, who lived a little before Origen, and who wrote with great bitterness against Christianity, beyond all doubt considered the Christians as believing in the Divinity of Christ. He says, expressly, that ^' Jesus was owned by Christians to be the Son ^^ OF GoD."t He says, moreover, that " Jesus, ^^ elated with his great powers, declared him- <^^SELF TO BE GoD.^'f And again, Origen, in answering Celsiis, brings us acquainted with a similar charge. "He (CelsusJ objects to us,'^ says Ongen, "I know not how often, that we "believe Jesus, though possessed of a mortal "body, to BE God, and that we seem to be " serious in this.'-^ These charges Origen * See Burgh's fnquiry. r>. 403. f OairrEif. contra Celswn. L. L p. 21- t Ibid. p. 22. § Jbicl Lib. III. p. 135. »' LETTER V. 175 does not deny ; but, on the contrary, avows that Christians did so esteem and honour the Son of God. Luciaii, in one of his Dialogues, takes notice of the christian worship. Personating a chris- tian instructing a catechumen, he makes the catechumen ask this question, " By whom shall "1 swear?'' The christian instructor replies, *' By the God that reigns on high ; the great, '•^ immortal, heavenly God, and the Son of the *^ Father, and the Spirit proceeding from the ^^ Father, One in Three and Three in One.'^^ This Luciayi had evidently learned from the christian doctrine of the Trinity. He else- where directly charges the christians with ^•worshipping their crucified impostoiy' as he blasphemously styles our blessed Lord. But there is no need of adducing further testi- mony to establish the fact, that the primitive Christians were understood by their Pagan neighbours to consider and worship Christ as God. There is nothing in early history more indubitable. A number of the Fathers express- * LuciAX. PhUopat. .176 LETTER V. ly state the fact, and plead guilty to the charge"; but declare^ that the sole ground of their wor- shipping Christ is, that they consider him as TRULY God ; for that they abhor the thought of giving divine honours and worship to a creature. If I do not mistake, Unitarians acknowledge, without hesitation, that, after the council of Nice, what are called the Orthodox doctrines, respecting the Trinity, and the Person of Christ, were the prevailing doctrines of the church; and that those who rejected them were cast out as hereticks ; their ordinances pronounced in- valid ; and their congregations denied the name of Christian Churches. Further than this, then, there is no need of pursuing the train of testimony. From the council of Nice in the fourth century, till the reformation in the six- teenth, no one disputes that the doctrines of three Persons in the Godhead, and, of course, of the Divinity of the Saviour, were universally maintained, by those who were considered as correct believers, and the rejection of them re- garded as an essential departure from the truth. But it ought not to be forgotten, that, from the rise of the Papal Beast uatil that of the Pro- ♦* I.KTTER V. 177 testant Reformers, there was a constant succes- sion of Witnesses for the truth, who separated themselves from the Man of sin ; refused to sanction his corruptions ; formed a distinct com- munion ; and maintained a constant testimony in favour of the simplicity of the gospel. If may be worth while to inquire, what these wit- nesses held, with regard to the principal points in controversy between the Orthodox and Unita- rians. And, if I am not deceived, it will be easy to shew that they all concurred with the former. The first that I shall mention in this list are the Paulicians^ who arose in the seventh centU" ry, in Asia Minor ^ and may be considered as forming the most conspicuous and importitnt portion of the true Church, in opposition to the Papacy, for 150 or 200 years. They appear to have received their name from their enemies, on account of their great attachment to the Epistles of Paul the Apostle. While they re- jected all the principal corruptions of the cath- olick Church ; such as the use of Images, the worship of the Virgin Mary^ &c. which had even then begun to gain currency 5 aud while Z 178 LETTER V. they acknowledged but two Sacraments, and appear to have been, in the main^ scriptural in their views and use of them ; — they concurred with the general Church in maintaining the doctrines of the Trinity, and of the Divinity and Atonement of Jesus Christ, and con- stantly represented them as being the founda- tion of christian hope.* The very same statement may be made con- cerning Claudius of Turin^ and his followers, in the ninth century. While they separated themselves from the corrupt nominal christians around them, and publickly renounced all the leading errors of Popery, they maintained with zeal the Divinity and Atonement of the Sa- viour, as the life and glory of the gospel system. To these succeeded the Wddenses and Albi- genses ; or rather there is reason to believe, that the disciples of Claudius of Turin, settling- in the vallies of Piedmont, were the parents of * Our information concerning the PaiiUcians is far from be- ing ample. The excellent Mr. Milner''s view of them is prob- ably correct. With him Mr. Gibbon, as to all th^points which are important in this controversy, coincides. Decline a?id Fall. ■ Sec. chapter 54/ LETTER V. 179 both the Alhigenses and JValdenses, who receiv- ed their names from the places of their resi- dence. That these venerable Witnesses for the truth, maintained, unanimously, and with zeal, the doctrine of the Trinity, and of the Divinity of Christ, in correspondence with the opinions of those who are now called the Orthodox, is one of the most indubitable facts in all ecclesias- tical history. Dr. Priestley^ indeed, w^hile he acknowledges that the JFaldeiises were Trini- tarians, tells us that the first traces of the revival of the Unitarian doctrine were to be found among the Albigenses, Of these " traces,'^ I have never been able to meet with the small- est appearance, that deserved to be considered as even plausible. In fact, the Waldenses and Albigejises were undoubtedly the same peo- ple, inhabiting different countries, and deriving, from that circumstance, diiferent names. In the Paprd edicts against the Albigenses, they are expressly styled Waldenses, and condemned as such. They were persecuted as professing the faith of the Waldenses ; and they uniformly ac- cepted the title when it was given them, and thought themselves honoured by it. This being so, it is not easy to see how the Albigenses could ISO LETTER V. be Unitarians, while the TFaldenses were deci- sively Orthodox. But we have better evidence than that of the mere inferential kind. John Paul Perrin, one of the pastors of the WaMen- sian Churches, gives several confessions of faith, and other authentick documents, by which he makes it appear that the lFalden;es and Albigen- ses were entirely agreed in doctrine ; and tliat the latter, as well as the former, maintained, in the most pointed manner that can well be ima- gined, a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, and the true and proper Divinity of the Saviour. Under the head of the ^^Old Albigenses,^^ as well as the TFaldenses^ he gives the following articles as held by them, and as " handed down ^^ from f.ther to son for several hundred years,'V prior to the date of these Confessions, Concerning the Trinity, and the Person of the blessed Redeemer, they speak in the following language: ^^ We do believe that there is one ^^God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy ^' Ghost/' In an ^^ Ancient Catechism,'' for tiie instruc- tion of their youth, the following questions and LETTER V. 181 answers are found : " QtiestionJ^ , ^^ Dost thou ^M)elieve in the Holy Ghost.'' ''^ Amwer, Yes, ^' I do believe. For the Holy Ghost proceeds ^' from the Father and the Son, and is one Per- '' SON OF THE Trinity ; and, according to the '' Divinity, is equal to the Father and the Son.'^ " Question, Thou believest God the Father, ^^ and God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost :- ^' thou hast, therefore, three Gods.'' '' Answer. I have not three; for although ^^ there are three Persons, yet, notwithstand- ^^ing, there is but one Essence." In a ^^ Brief Exposition of the Apostle's ^^ creed," in early use among that people, there is the following passage : ^^ We believe in God the Father, Almighty, '^ maker of heaven and earth, which God is one ^^ Trinity ; as it is written I John V. 7. There '' are three that bear record in heaven, the Fa- rther, the Word, and the Hohj Ghost, and ^' these three are oneP 182 LETTER V. Nor ought it ever to be forgotten, that while these excellent Witnesses for Christ, in a dark world, maintained the doctrine of three Persons in the Godhead, and the Divinity of the Son of God, they also maintained in their purity all those precious doctrines which have been regar- ded by the true Church, in all ages, as funda- mental ; — such as the original corruption of our nature— the atonement of the Saviour — justifica- tion by his righteousness alone — and the neces- sity of regeneration and sanctification by his Holy Spirit. Nay, not only did this system distinguish those humble followers of the Re- deemer ; but I am persuaded it would be per- fectly easy to demonstrate, that, in proportion as simple, humble piety, has been manifested in any portion or period of the church, just in tlie same proportion have those who displayed it^ been patrons of the same humiliating and puri- fying doctriues. When, after the JValdeyises^ John WickUffe^ of Great- Britain^ and John Hiissy and Jerome^ of Bohemia, appeared as witnesses of the truth, the Divinity of Christ, and his atoiiing sacri- fice for sin,/were radical principles of their sys- LETTER V. Ig3 tern. Nay, it is not going too far to say, that their testimony in behalf of the truth, and their opposition to the corrupt church of Rome^ were in no respects more conspicuous, or more pre- cious, than in teaching men to transfer their confidence for acceptance with God, and eternal life, from the miserable superstitious dreams of human merit, to the atoning blood, the perfect righteousness, and the prevalent intercession of an Almighty Saviour. This was, in fact, the ESSENCE of what they did. Their attacks on particular superstitions were the body and the members ; while that to which I have just allu- ded, was the vital principle of that precious cause to which they devoted their lives. When we come down to the Reformation by Luther^ and his ever-to-be venerated coadju- tors, the same fact appears, in a still more lumin- ous and interesting view. Still Jehovah in a Trinity of Persons, and the atoning sacrifice of Him who was very God and very man, that who- soever believeth in Him might not perish j but have everlasting life, are not only found to make a part of the system of those blessed men ; but to form the foundation, nay the Alpha and 184 LETTER V. the Omega, the beginning and the end, the LIFE and the glory of their system; Yes^ every one knows, that the friends of the Refor- mation, whether led, nnder God^ by Zuingle, in Sxvitzei'land, by Luther, in Germany, by Calvin^ in Geneva and France^ by Cranmer, in Eng- land, by Knox, in Scotland, or by other ilhistri- ous servants of Christy in other parts of Eu- rope, were all agreed in i his general sys- tem. I defy any one to produce me a single individual, during that eventful period^ who materially departed from any of the doctrines embraced in this system, without being, as soon as known, stigmatized as a here tick, and cast out of the Church. Accordingly, (for nothing is so decisive, on a subject like this as matter of fcict) when the dif- ferent Protestant Churches^ in the sixteenth century, undertook to frame and publish their ecclesiastical Formulas, and Creeds, they all^ WITHOUT A single exceptio>:, distinctly re- cognized in those creeds, the unity of God ; the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead ; the eternal Generation and Divinity of the Son^; the union of his Divine and human natures in one Per- LETTER V. 185 son, and the distinct Personality and Divinity of the Holy Spirit. The most cursory glance at th a. Confessions of Faith of the Churches of England^ Scotland^ France^ Holland^ Geneva^ Switzerland, Germany^ Bohemia, Poland, not to mention several others, will convince any one, not only that the articles of doctrine above mentioned, were all universally received in those churches ; but also, that, from the careful and pointed manner in which they are stated, they were regarded as fundamental articles of the christian system. Whence this remarkable harmony? How are we to account for it, that, amidst so much diversity of situation and habit, and while they discovered so much readiness to throw off the superstitions of the Church of Rome, they should still unanimously con- cur in maintaining a set of doctrines, which, if Unitarians be correct, are entirely and grossly idolatrous ? I know it has been said by Unitarians, that the Reformers found the doctrines of the Trini- ty, and the Deity and atonement of Christ, already consecrated by the Formulas and Cate- chisms of the Romish Churchy that their A 2 186 LETTER V. own prejudices were in favour of them ; and that they had neither sufficient light, nor suffi- cient boldness to reject them, while they cast off the trammels of some more prominent and appalling corruptions. This plea is at once weak and erroneous. When the Reformers had deliberately dared to draw down upon them- selves the hottest vengeance of the Papacy, by openly teaching that the Bishop of Rome was Anti- Christ, and that the Redeemer alone was the Head of the church; when they had ventured, without scruple, to denounce as un- scriptural abominations. Purgatory, Transub- stantiation. Prayers for the dead. Image wor- ship, the worship of the Virgin Mary^ Indul- gences, withholding the Scriptures, and the cup in the Eucharist, from the common people, and all that enormous system of human merits by which the Pope and his emissaries, had so long contrived to fill their own coffers, and to enslave the minds of men : — I say, when they dared openly to attack all these as unscriptural abominations — -is it supposeable that they would be very timid or scrupulous about rejecting a doctrine, which was far less connected with the interests or, the feelings of any portion of the LETTER V. ISr Gommunityj in or out of power ? Now, that, in these circumstances, when they discovered so little backwarJness to reject whatever the Bi- ble did not appear to them to sanction ; and when they actually differed among themselves, respecting church government, respecting the Saviour's presence in the Eucharist, respecting the propriety of placing pictures and images in churches, and some other smaller points; — that they should all concur, amidst their di- versities of residence, and light, and early hab- it, in maintaining the doctrines alluded to, and not merely maintaining them, but in laying the UTMOST STRESS upon them, as essential to THE Gospel ; is surely conclusive proof that they retained these doctrines, not because the Church had long believed them ; but because they were persuaded that they found them in the Word of God. But it is an utter misrepresentation to say, that the venerable Reformers merely retained the doctrines alluded to, as they found them in the Romish Church. I know that some modern writers are fond of representing the Reforma- tion, as a mere successful effort, on the part of 188 LETTER V. a few discerning and good men, to shake off the tyranny of the Pope, and an oppressive burden of Papal rites and superstitions. But this view of the subject is altogether inadequate, and even false. That which the Reformers were called upon, and were employed as instruments, by a sovereign God, to accomplish, was, not merely to demolish a fabrick of ecclesiastical despo- tism ; not merely to take away a mass of cere- monial corruptions ; but it was to restore Christ to that throne in his church, which had been for ages filled by human idols. It is true, the doctrines of a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, and of the Deity of Jesus Christ, had been long nominally maintained in the Church of Rome ; but they were maintain- e^d in name only. While the votaries of that wretched system said much, and wrote much, concerning the Divinity of Christ, and the atonement of Christ, they, in fact, made little of either. Canonized saints, relicks, indul- gences, and an impious system of human mer- it, were substituted in the place of that blood which cleanseth from all siii. To bring back the doctrine of Christ crucified, from its long bamshment, and its miserable perver- LETTER V. 189 sioiis, may be said, without hesitation, to have been the grand object of the Reformers ; and the object in which they were all united. Other things were evidently regarded as im- portant, just in proportion to the degree in which they were subservient to this, their first AND HIGHEST PURPOSE. The doctriucs espous- ed by the Orthodox, then, in opposition to Uni- tariansj may, with just as much propriety and emphasis, be styled the doc irines of the Reformation, as any opposition to Papal des- potism, or Papal superstitions^ may be called the work of the Reformation ; and to insinuate the contrary, is to betray either an ignorance or a prejudice truly extraordinary. In the review of all this, I entreat you, my christian Brethren, to lay your hands on your hearts, and then say, whether those doctrines which, besides their plain scriptural warranty have been embraced, with affectionate attach- ment, by the pious in all ages ; which were the doctrines of all the early Fathers^ who say any thing on the subject ; which no indi- vidual, from the time of the Apostles, to the time of Luther ^ is known to have openly rejec- 190 LETTER V. ted, without being cast out of the Church ; which were the doctrines of the Pauliciam^ the JValdenses, the Albigen^es^ the followers of JVick- liffe^ the Bohemian Brethren, and all the Wit- nesses FOR THE TRUTH, duHng the dark ages ; and finally which all the Reformers from Popery concurred in maintaining, as the very ESSENCE OF THE GosPEL — I repeat it — Lay yovu' hands on your hearts and say, whether these doctrines can be any other than the faith once delivered to the saints, and for which all christians are commanded " earnestly to con- tend V^ >' LETTER VI. Unitarians reject the inspiration of the Scriptures — Difference between them and the Orthodox with res- pect to the proper office of Reason in examining Reve- lation — Specimens of Unitarian expositioii — Consequent ces of this mode of expmmding the tvord of God. Christian Brethren, As the Unitarians, in their controversies with the Orthodox, constantly appeal to the Scrip- tures, and profess to cherish a very profound respect for them, it has probably appeared to many that they view the inspired volume in the same light with the Orthodox. They fre- quently speak of the reverence and diligence with which they and their friends study it. They insist upon referring every question to it as a standard. They often quote, with much emphasis, the celebrated saying of Chilling- xvorthj " The Bible, the Bible is the Rbli- 192 LETTER VI. "gion of Protestants/' They object to Creeds and Confessions^ lest they should come into competition with the Scriptures as a rule of faith. They frequently charge the advocates of evangelical truth with being backward to ap- peal to this standard^ and with being governed by prejudice^ or love of system^, or feeling, rather than by the Word of God. In short, you would sometimes be led, by their language, to suppose, that none who bear the christian name, either feel so much reverence for the sacred Scriptures, as Unitarians, or lay so much stress on their authority, as an ultimate resort in con- troversy. But this is a mere illusion : and a very small acquaintance with their writers and preachers will be quite suiTicient to dissipate it. I asser- ted, in the first Letter, that Unitarians common- ly deny the inspiration of the Scriptures, and produced some testimony in support of my as- sertion ; but the subject is worthy of more par- ticular notice. In my view the manner in which they consider and treat the Scriptures, is, next to their rejection of the Red eemer'*s true glory, one of the/most conclusive evidences of the vital LETTER VI. i93 rottenness of their system. Some, Unitarians, indeed^ profess, in words, to believe in the inspi- ration of the Word of God ; but even they^ when they come to explain themselves, plainly shew that it is not the reality, but the 7iame only, of inspiration which they admit. They set out with a principle concerning the inspired vol- ume, which almost entirely nullifies it, at once^ as a rule of faith. According to them. Reason^ after all, is the only safe and adequate guide. They assume it to be the prerogative of reason to sit in judgment upon Revelation, and to modify, or expunge from it, every thing which that reason cannot comprehend, or does not ap- prove. Of course, whenever they meet with a passage which appears hostile to their general views, it gives them no serious difficulty. They find an easy way, either to silence it, or to make it speak agreeably to their wishes. It is true the Orthodox also profess to employ reason in their inquiries respecting Revelation ; but the essential difference between them and Unitarians, as to this point, lies here. The Or- thodox maintain, that our own reason is alto- gether insufficient to guide us in spiritual things i B2^ 194 LETTER VL that we stand in need of a revelation from heaven, to inform lis concerning the Divine character, concerning our own condition, and the means of obtaining eternal happiness ; and that such a revelation has actually been given to us, to enlighten our darkness, and bring us accjuainted with what we otherwise could not have known. They suppose, therefore, that since it is the weakness and utter insufficiency of our reason, that renders a revelation neces- sary, nothing can be more presumptuous, or indeed more irrational, than to undertake to judge WHAT OUGHT TO BE REVEALED. They conclude, of course, that the only legitimate province of reason, in examining revelation, embraces two points of inquiry, viz. first — Is there evidence that a revelation has been giv- en ? And secondly — What does that revelation, in fact, contain ? In other words, have we satis- factory proof that God has spoken? and, if so, WHAT has He said ? Having ascertained thus much, the Orthodox suppose that the proper office of reason there ends. For if God have spoken, we have nothing to do but humbly to re- ceive vvhat He has revealed ; to submit ourselves without reserve to his teaching. Whatever is LETTER VI. 195 clearly and indisputably taught in Scripture, they consider themselves as bound implicitly to believe, without another question. To under- take to judge whether that which we find in a revelation opiifessed to be from God, is reason^ able and credible, or not, is really neither more nor less than undertaking to judge what God OUGHT TO REVEAL ; wliilc the facts, that we need, and have received a revelation, pre- sup- pose, froiU the very nature of the case, that we are not capable of judging. Is not such an as- su nption as absurd as it is impious ? Is it not, in fact, as Lord Bacon long ago observed, treating God just as we should treat a suspected wit- ness, that is, measuring his title to our cre- dence, not by his personal character^ but by the probability of his testimony? Is it not prac- tically saying, that we cannot, and will not, rely on the veracity of God; that we cannot and will not trust Him further than we can see ; iu one word, that we will give credit to the mat- ter, but not to the Author of Revelation? Is this receiving the kingdom of God as a little child, without which; we are told; that no one ean enter therein ? 196 LETTER Vi. But Unitarians view this subject in a very different light. After having applied their rea- son to the evidences of revelation, and ascer- tained that it is from God ; they consider them- selves as at perfect liberty to go further, and to apply it to the alledged facts and doctrines of revelation ; to inquire whether these facts and doctrines are reasonable and credible in them- selves ; that isj whether they are such as it be- comes God to reveal ; and if they judge them NOT to be such, to reject them. In plain language, they consider it as the province of reason not only to decide whether the Bible is God's word or not ; but also whether the con- tents of the Bible are reasonable and w orthy of God, or otherwise. Every thing found in it that appears agreeable to their notions of rea- son, they receive as credible. That which they cannot reconcile with reason, or which their reason cannot comprehend, they reject as false ; insisting either, that the passage which contains it is spurious, and ought to be expunged ; or, that it is impossible it should mean what the Or- thodox suppose it to mean ; or, if it plainly mean that, and cannot be construed to mean any thing else, /that the sacred writer has blunder- LETTER VL i^f ED, or been led by some popular prejudice to express himself in an unwarrantable man- ner ! Nay, some Unitarians of great name and in- fluence have gone so far as to maintain, without ceremony, that certain doctrines are so manifest- ly irrational and incredible, that they ought not to be received,^ even if the Scriptures did ap- pear ever so explicitly and decisively to teach them. The spirit of their argument is precise- ly the same with that of the celebrated infidel, Mr. Hume^ against Miracles. It is this. " The " doctrines in question,'' say they, " are so ab- ^^surd and incredible, that the presumption ^^ against them is stronger than any evidence '' in their favour possibly can be. In other " words, these doctrines are so perfectly revol- " ting to the human mind, that no testimony can " BE conceived strong enough to command our ^' belief of them ; because no testimony in their ^^ favour, can be so strong, as that which their '' manifest absurdity and impossibility presents "against them. There is, from the very nature " of things, a presumption, against their truth, *' which NO evidence, however clear, can 198 LETTER VL " overcome.'' — ^Unitarians have applied this ar- gument to the doctrines of the Trinity, the In- carnation and Atonement of the Son of God^ and the endless duration of future punishment. They utterly deny, indeed, that these doctrines ARE found in Scripture : but they do not hesi- tate to say, that if they were found there, they would not believe them, but would rather have recourse to almost any assignable supposition, than sustain the testimony in their favour. They would say, " These doctrines cannot be true. ^^It is IMPOSSIBLE that we should believe, or " that we should be required to believe^ such ^' gross absurdities. There must be some mis- " take about the matter. The passage in ques- '' tion has been dishonestly inserted by some ^' interested transcriber ; or it has been unde- " signedly introduced by accident or careless- ^' ness ; or, the sacred writer, if he really wrote " thus, reasoned inconclusively, or thought pro- " per to countenance, out of respect to popular " delusion, what he knew to be false : at any " RATE, we are resolved not to receive such " doctrines as coming from God, whatever '' MAY BE THE EVIDENCE WITH WHICH THEY .^' ARE attended.'' LETTER VI. 199 It is, indeed, readily acknowledged, that if we were to find in Scripture propositions plainly and undeniably contradictory to reason, we could not receive them. If, for example, we were to find there the assertion, that something IS and IS not, at the same time ; that God is ONE and three in the same sense ; or that two beings, or quantities, are equal to each other, and UNEQUAL, at the same time, and in the same respect ; we might venture to say, without hesi- tation, it is incredible that such propositions should be true. No testimony whatever can es- tablish that which is, in its own nature, self- evidently, impossible and absurd. But is any thing maintained by the Orthodox of this char- acter? Do they believe that God is one and three in the same sense ? Do they not, with one voice, as was observed in a former Letter, sol- emnly declare the contrary? Where, then, is the contradiction'? There is manifestly, nay, I will venture to say, there is self-evidently^ none ; any more than there is in saying that man is mortal and immortal at the same time ; when we know that both are true, though of dif- ferent parts of his constitution. I repeat, then, a number of the doctrines of revelation are 200 LETTER VI. ABOVE our portion of reason ; but none of them CONTRARY to it. A man, indeed, may say, " It is ^^ contrary to my reason, that any being should '' be every where equally present at the same " time ; or that any being should create worlds " out of nothing .-'^ Or, a malefactor, at the bar of justice, when the judge addresses him on the importance of supporting the authority of the laws, and assures him of the necessity, and even benevolence, of awarding exemplary punishment to transgressors ; may declare, and perhaps with truth, that such principles appear to him in the highest degree revolting and unreasonable. I say^ some persons may object ^nd argue thus ; nay^ they have done so. But when they do it, they must be content to be thought very foolish and absurd by all rational men. Every one will say^ they are neither competent nor impartial judges. Now, among all the truths of revelation, as held by the enlightened and sober among the Ortho- dox, there is nothing in any other sense, or in any greater degree, opposed to reason, than many of the acknowledged perfections of God are opposed to it. And of them we can only say, not that they are really opposed to it, but that they aye above it. We can only say, as LETTER VI. 201 the Bible says^ when speaking of those perfec- tions^ Such knowledge is too wonderful for us s it is high^ xve cannot attain unto it* That, in the foregoing remarks, I have done no injustice to Unitarians, will, I presume, be made perfectly manifest by the following quota* tions from some of their most distinguished wri- ters. Indeed, when the doctrine of the plenary inspiration of the scriptures is once abandoned, and every man feels himself at liberty to reject whatever he finds in the Bible, which appears unreasonable to his oxvn mind, there is no longer any uniform standard, and we ought not to won- der at any licentiousness of interpretation or rejection that can afterward occur. Dr. Priestley, while inculcating great respect for the Scriptures, expresses himself thus — " Not that I consider the books of scripture as " inspired, and, on that account, entitled to this " high degree of respect ; but as authentick ^^ records of the dispensations of God to maa- " kind, with every particular of which we can- ^' not be too well acquainted.'^ In another place^ in the same work; he says — " If you wish to C2 202 LETTER VI. ^^know what, in my opinion, a christian is ^^ bound to believe with respect to the scrip- ^^ tares, I answer, that the books which are ^^ universally received as authentick, are to be ^' considered as faithful records of past transac- ^^tions. No christian is answerable for more ^' than this. The writers of the books of scrip- ^' ture were men^ and, therefore, fallible ; but ^^all that we have to do with them, is in the ^' character of historians and witnesses of what " they heard and saw. Of course, their credi- " bility is to be estimated, like that of other " historians, viz. from the circumstances in ^^ which they wrote, and the biases to which *^^ they might be subject. Like all other histo- " rians, they were liable to mistakes, with ^^ respect to things of small moment, becaus.e ^^they might not give sufficient attention to '^ them ; and with respect to their reasonings '' we are fully at liberty to judge of it, as well ^^as that of other men, by a due consideration '^^of the propositions they advance, and the ar- " guments they alledge.''* The same writer also says elsewhere, " I think I have shewn * Letters to a Philosophical Unbeliever— Y^vX. IL Preface, p. 13. again. Letter V., J.KTTER YI. 20^ ^^that the apostle Paul often reasons incon- ^•clusively; and therefore that he wrote a» ^^ANY OTHER PERSON of his tum of mind and ^^ thinking, and in his situation, would have ^^ WRITTEN, WITHOUT ANY PARTICULAR INSPI- ^* RATION.'^* And again " I have frequently '^declared myself not to be a believer in th© ^' INSPIRATION of the Evangelists and Apos- ^^TLES AS WRiTERs/^t He also, on a variety of occasions, charges the sacred writers with giving " lame accounts,^^ " inconclusive reason- ^' ings," and " improper quotations.'^ J Mr. Evanson, another distinguished English Unita- rian, says, without ceremony, " The Evangelic- ^•al histories contain gross and irreconcile- "ABLt. contradictions/^^ Mr. Belsham says, that in the Gospel of Johrij our Saviour sometimes uses metaphors " of the "most obscure and offensive kind;'' that Paul^ in his Epistles, introduces " many harsh " and uncommon figures ;" that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews indulges himself in an ingenious, but FORCED and fanciful analogy^ * Uialory of the Conmptions of Christianity, Vol II. p. o7Q. f Letters to Dr. Hordev. part I. p. 132, T Letters to Mr. Burn — Letter 12t/^ f Diss9nance, p. X. 204 LETTER Vl\ between the Mosaic institutions and the Chris- tian dispensation; that Jesus Christ was born fifteen years before the death of Augustus, and at least two years after the death of Herod; "SL fact which completely falsifies the '' WHOLE NARRATIVE Contained in the prelimi- ^^nary chapters of Matthew and Luke ;^^ that to argue the doctrine of the Divinity of Christy or even his pre- existence and superiour nature^ from the strong and " hyperbolical^' expres- sions used by the Evangelist John, ^^unsuppor- " TED by any other sacred writers/' is drawing a grand conclusion from very ^^ precarious'^ premises.* Damm, a German Unitarian^ in the same strain^ says^ that " the writings of Mo- " ses were inspired^ in so far as they instruct us ^' concerning God^ and lead us to God. He could ^^know the age of the world no better than '' WE DO. The history of the fall is a fable ; ^^and though there is much truth in Moses^ ^^ history, the dress is poetick. In Joshua, " the circumstance of the conquest of Canaan^ " ARE FICTITIOUS. The books of Samuel con- '' tain a multitude of falshoods. There are ^f no prophecies in the Psalms. Dajiiel is full * Calm Inquirxjf, p. 12, 19, 186, &c. LETTER VI. ^05 '^of stories contrived or exaggerated by "SUPERSTITION. With the other Prophets, "Christians haa^e no concern."* Eichhorn^ another German Unitarian, accounts for prophe- cy by referring it rather to human penetra- tion and INGENIOUS conjecture, than to inspi- ration. Semler, of the same country, on 2 Pe- ter I, 21, where it is written. The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost J remarks, " Peter speaks there "according to the conception of the Jews. "The Prophets may have delivered the off- " SPRING OF their OWN BRAINS AS DIVINE' " REVELATION S.f" Let none say, " These last are German Uni- " tarians, whose extravagances are well known, " and between whom and the Unitarians in this " country there is no alliance.'' Rely on it, my friends, whoever may endeavour to persuade you to believe the contrary, the fundamental principles of both are the same ; the one have learned to go a little further than the others, * Ersktne's Sketches cf Church History^ i^c Vol. I. p. 84. t Erskiste's Sketches, ^c. p. 71. 206 LETTER VI. and are only less restrained by piiblick opinion ; but the others will probably soon overtake them. Certainly they are on the same road. These quotations clearly go to show, not only that the writers whose words they are, virtual- ly reject the inspiration of the scriptures, (for what is that inspiration worth, which admits of ''inconclusive reasoning^'' — "gross mistakes'^ — "lame accounts''^ — and deliberate sacrifices to " popular prejudices and delusions T^) but also that they stand ready to expunge from the sacred volume, or to explain away, any passages which do not entirely accord, with their pre- determined opinions. Thus, instead of bringing their opin- ONS TO THE Bible, to be tried and decided by it, as the only perfect standard ; they bring the Bible to their opinions, to be judged, modi- fied, and decided by them. What is this, but making their own reason the supreme judge of truth, instead of the word of Him who is the source of all reason ? What is it, in effect, but every man's making his own notions (for these are the dictates of his reason) his highest rule of faith ? And wherein does this essenjtially differ from the doctrine of the Deist, who acknowl- LETTER VI. 207 edges that there is much truth in the Bible, but denies its inspiration, and receives only so much of its contents as accords with his views of what is reasonable ? But the following extracts speak a still more daring language, and must, I think, banish all doubt from the minds of those who have hereto- fore entertained any, respecting the deep and thorough corruption of Unitarian principles, in regard to the scriptures. Dr. Priest leif, in his History of Early Opin- ions^ with a degree of frankness which always distinguished him, declares, that even ^^if the ^^ doctrine of the Trinity had been found in •^THE SCRIPTURES, it would havc been impossi- " ble for any reasonable man to believe it, as it '^ implies a contradiction^ which no miracles can ^^ prove.''* The same writer, commenting on John VI. 62, TVhat, and if you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before ? and endeavouring to shew that it affords no evidence of Christ's existence before he appeared in this world, uses the following wonderful language — * Vol. I. p. 48. 208 LETTER VI. '' Tliough not satisfied with any interpretation ^* that has been given of this extraordinary pas- '' sage ; yet rather than believe our Saviour to '' have existed in any other state, before the cre- '' ation of the world, or to have left some state " of great dignity and happiness when he came '' hither, I would have recourse to the old and " exploded Socinian idea of Christ's actual as- ^' cent into heaven, or of his imagining that he " had been carried up thither, in a vision, which, '' like that of Paul^ he had not bp:en able to " distinguish from a reality. Nay, I would ^^not build an article of faith of such magnitude ^^on THE correctness of Johin's recollec- ^*TION, AND representation OF OUU LORD^S ^^ language; and so strange and incredible " does the hypothesis of a pre-existent state " appear, that, sooner than admit it, I would " SUPPOSE the whole verse to be an inter- ^^polation; or that the old Apostle dicta- '' ted one thing, and his amanuensis wrote "another.'^* Nor is language of this kind confined to Dr. Priestley. He only copied it from his equally daring predecessors. Faustus Socinusy treating of the doctrine of Atonement, * Lttte\-s to Bf. Price, p. 57, 58. LETTER VI. 209 speaks in the following bold and unequivocal manner: ^^For my part, though the doctrine ^^ WERE stated^ not once merely, but often, ^' IN THE SACRED RECORDS, I WOuld UOt, OU that ^^ account, believe it/'^ Speaking of the doctrine of the incarnation of Carist, Smalcius, another distinguished foreign Unitarian, with equal explicitness, declares — " Although it ^'^WERE AFFIRMED in ScHpturc, not once and ^ again, but very frequently, and most ex- " pressly, that God became man, we think it *^ much better, on account of the great absurdi- '' ty of that doctrine, and its evident cOntradic- ^' tion to sound reason, and its blasphemy against ^^God, to imagine a certain mode of speak- " ING, by which such things may be said con- " cerning God, than to understand the words ia >Uheir simple and literal meaning.^'f It seems, then, that if there had been, not merely one, or a small number, but many hun- dreds of passages, in which the doctrines of the Trinity, and of the Divinity and Atonement of Jesus Christ, were taught in the most precise and unequivocal manner that could be conceiv- * Socjsi Opera, torn. II. p. 204. f Homl VIIL ad cap. I. Jehan. D2 210 LETTER VI. ed ; If all the powers of language and of logick had been laid under contribution to express these doctrines in the way least of all liable to doubt or misconstruction ; if we had been told often, that " there are three Persons in the God- ^Hiead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy ^' Ghost, and that these three are one, the same '' in substance, equal in power and glory \^ that Jesus Christ is very God, and very man in the same mysterious Person ; and that He died as the substitute of his people^ to make atonement for their sins, and to bring in a vicarious right- eousness for their justification before God , — if we had been told all this ever so often, and ever so expressly, still it would have been all in vain, as to the establishment of these doctrines as true. It is pre-determined that theycais:- NOT POSSIBLY BE TRUE. Of course it would be IMPOSSIBLE to reveal them with such clearness of light, or ejxplicitness of language, as to com- mand belief. Accordingly, the manner in which Unitarians have actually treated, and interpreted the scrip* tures, is a comment on the principles ^which they have avowed, as instructive as it is shocking. LETTER VL 211 A few specimens of this manner will be given^ as proof that they do not shrink from the appli- cation of their own principles ; and will abun- dantly suOice to show of what Unitarianism is capable. They are taken from the publications of some of the most respectable leaders of that sect in modern times ; men most of whom Amer- ican Unitarians continually quote^ and recom- mend in the most respectful terms. The narrative in Genesis, respecting Abra^- ham^s offering up his son Isaac, is thus explain- ed by Eichhorrij a Unitarian of Germany. "Abra- "ham DREAMED that he must offer up Isaac, and, " according to the superstition of the times, '^ regarded it as a divine admonition. He pre- •^ pared to execute the command, which hisr " dream had conveyed to him. A lucky acci- ^•DENT (probably the rustling of a ram entan- ^^gled in the bushes) hindered it; and this ac- ^^ CORDING TO ancient IDIOM, was also the '^ voice of the Divinity.^'* The same writer gives it as his opinion, that Moses' account of tlie creation and fall of ma% * See Professor Stfart's learned and able Letters^ p. 144. ^2 LETTER VI. is merely a poetical, philosophical specu- lation of some ingenious person, on the origin of the world, and of evil. So that, whenever he meets with any circumstance in the narrative, not to be accounted for on natural principles, he removes all difficulty by ascribing it to poet- ick fiction. In Colossiafis I. 16, &c. we find these words— For by Him (i. e. by Christ) were all things cre- ated^ that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by Him, and for Him, and He is he/ore all things, and by Him all thuigs consist. Mr. Belsham, after a number of remarks inten- ded to show, that creation, in this passage, has a very different meaning from that which we are accustomed to attach to the term, and that all things here spoken of, mean, not material or physical objects, but moral dispensations ; he goes on to assert that the language of this pas- sage is as applicable to a certain European mon* arch, then in his glory, as to Jesus Christ. The following are his words. " Of a certain person ^^ who now^ makes a very considerable figure iii LETTER VL 2ia <^ the world^ it may be said with truth^ so far as '' the civil state of the continent of Europe is ^' concerned, that he is the creator of all these " new distinctions, high and low, whether *^ thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or ^' powers ; all these things are made by him, " and for him, and he is before them all ; takes " precedence, both in time and dignity, and by ^^ him do all these things consist. Yet who ^^ would infer from such language as this, that '' the present ruler of France is a being of supe- ^' ripur order to mankind, much less that he is ^' the maker of the world ? The language ^^ WHICH IS TRUE OF BuONAPARTE, IN A CIVIL ^^VIEW, IS APPLICABLE TO JeSUS ChRIST IN A ^' MORAL viBW ; but it no more implies pre-ex- ^' istence or proper creative power, in one case, ^^than in the other.''^ The view given of the same passage in the authorized Unitarian Ver- sion of the New Testament, is little, if any better. '' The creation which the Apostle here ascribes ^' to Christ, expresses that great change which " was introduced into the moral world^ and par- " ticularly into the relative situation of Jexvs and '' Gentilesj by the dispensation of the Gospel, * Letters on Onanism, p. 129. &c. 214 LETTER VL ^^ This gfeat change the Apostle here describes ^^ under tlie symbol of a revolution introduced ^^ by Christ among certain ranks and orders of "beings^ by whom, according to the Jewish *^ DEMONOLOGY, BORROWED FROM THE OhIEN- ^^TAL PHILOSOPHY, the affairs of states and in- •^^ dividuals were superintended and governed.'^* Another Unitarian writer, of no small repu- tation, in commenting on I Cor. III. 11. Other Joimdation can no man lay than that is laid^ which is Jesus Christ; tells us that by Jesns Christ here is meant the doctrine of the Gospel ; that the most important part of the Gospel is the preceptive part; and that, there- fore, the meaning of the text is, that obedi- E>iCE to the precepts OF THE GoSPEL IS THE ONLY SURE FOUNDATION OF HOPE FOR ETERNAL LIFE.f Mr. Bekham, in his Calm Inquiry j p. 178, referring to our Saviour's declaration, Matt, XVIII. 20, For rohere tivo or three are gathered together in my name^ there am I in the, jnidst of them^ informs us that we are to understanjl 9' ■■ * Improved Version- Lindset*s -Sequel, p. 477'. . % Dr. Harwo^d on 1 Cor. III. 11. LETTER VI. 215 our Lord as saying, " Such requests, dictated ♦^ by my authority, and prompted by the spirit ^' which I will communicate, will be as effica- ^^cioUS AS IF I MYSELF WERE PERSO.VALLY ^^ PRESENT.'^ The same writer, (p. 179) re- marking on Matt, IX. 4. and Mark II. 8, says — " By these expressions, perhaps the histori- ** ans, Matthe-iv and Mark^ might mean nothing "more than that he judgkd fkOxM their coun- "tenaxces what was PASSiiSG in their ^' heartsP Dr. Priestley^ commenting on Ephesians I. 10, says — "To the phrase, things in heaven^ and " things on earthy it is possible that the Apos- "tle MIGHT NOT ANNEX ANY DEFINITE IDEAS, " intending only to express how very great and " comprehensive, the scheme of the Gospel was, " Or he might allude to that saying of our Sa- '' viour, all power is given unto me in heaven " and on earth ; by which we are to understand " that all things, even divine interpositions, if ^^ necessary, will be sueservient to the •• spread of the Gospel.^'^' * ^^otcs on all the Jiools of Scripture, 216 LETTER VI. The passage in Ephesians III. 9. TFho crea- ted all things by Jesus Christ, is thus explained by the same writer. " The Apostle alludes to "the NEW CREATION, or the renovation of " MEN, or of the world, by the Gospel, and " not the creation of the heavens and the earth ; " Si notion which I am confident would never " have come into the minds of any christians^ ^^who had not previously learned something " like it in the principles of Platonism. In the " idea of the Apostles, the promulgation of the " Gospel made a new and great sera in the his- '^ tory of the world, from which things took, as "it were, a new commencement; and this he " figuratively calls a new creation, the great ^^ agent in which was Jesus Christ.'^ In commenting on Ephesians, V. 2, where the Apostle says, Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God; the same distinguished Unitarian thus explains the passage — " Here Christ is repre- " sented in his death as a sacrifice ; but it is "only BY WAY of FIGURE; aS ANY MAN DYING "in a good cause, may BE SAID TO BE A SA- " ORIFICE TO IT. But did not Peter and Paid LETTER VI. ^17 suffer, and finally lay down their lives, in the same cause ? Yet are they, any where in scrip- ture, represented as a sacrifice for the sins of men ? Or are we ever said to be saved by that sacrifice^ or by the shedding of their blood? Truly such unhallowed trifling with the Sa- viour's character, and with the language of the Holy Spirit, fills me with horror ! In I Peter I. 12, it is written, JVJuch things the angels desire to look into. This passage Unitarians must explain in accordance with their opinion, that there are no such spiritual beings as Angels at all. In the Improved Uni- tarian Version, therefore, the following comment upon it is found — •' Perhaps the meaning of the ^' Apostle may be, that the messengers, (min- *' isters) who are now employed to promulgate ^^this glorious doctrine, cannot fully comprehend *^its import, and are desirous of improving their ^' acquaintance with it.'' In the same Version, we find the following comment on I Peter III- 18. For Christ also hath once suffered for si?is, the Just for the uii' just^ that he might bring us to God. Christ E2 218 LETTER VI. suffered for sin, not by bearing the ^^ punishment ^^due to sin, but to introduce and ratify a ^^DISPENSATION, BY WHICH THE IDOLATROUS ^^ HEATHEN WOULD BB ADMITTED INTO COVE- "NANT WITH GOD.'^ In II Peter II. 4, these words occur — For if God spared not the Angels that sinned^ but cast them down to hell, Wc. How is this passage to be disposed of, in consistency with the Unitari- an doctrine, that there is no devil, and no good or bad angels ? With perfect ease, as follows — If God spared rwt the Angels that sinned, &c. " Or if God spared not the messengers who had ^^ sinned, i. e. the spies who were sent to " explore the land of Canaan, &c/^ But '' if the common interpretation be admitted, it ^^ will not establish the popular doctrine concer- ^^ ning f^illen Angels ; fori. The Epistle it- ^' SELF is of doubtful AUTHORITY. 2. From ^^the change of style, this is the most '^ doubtful portion of the Epistle. 3. By ^' those who admit the genuineness of the Epis- ^^tle, this chapter is supposed to have been a ^^ quotation from some ancient jvpocryphal /^book; a^ the Apostle might not mean to LETTER VI. 219 ^.- GIVE AUTHORITY TO TrfE DOCTRINE, but tO " argue with his readers upon known and allow- '■' ed principles — &c."* The explicit declaration of the Apostle, II Peter III. 12, 13, is thus unceremoniously con- tradicted in the Improved Unitarian Version, ^^This, in a literal sense, is impossible, be- '^CHUSe THE HEAVENS ARK INCOMBUSTIBLE. ^^Nor is it reasonable to believe that an event ^^SO LITTLE COUNTENANCED BY NATURAL AP- " p::arances, as that of the destruction of the ^^ earth by a general conflagration, is the subject " of a divine prediction. It is well known, that " in the language of prophecy, great political '' chcmge^ and revolutions are foretold under the ^^ symbol of terrible convulsions in the natural " world — The heavens and the earth xvhich are " noiUj V. 7, must necessarily signify the Jew- ^' ish dispensation, or the then moral state of the " world, which must pass away to make room " for the promulgation of the christian religion. " But this revolution cannot take place without ^^ producing great changes and convulsions in " the political world; which; in prophetick lan- ♦ Improved Version. 220 LETTER VI, ^* gaage, is expressed by the heavens being on ^' fire, the elements melting, and the earthy with ^' the works on it, being burned iip.'^ Once more ; the first two chapters of the Gos- pel according to St. Matthew^ and the first two of the Gospel hy ^i, Luke, are so explicit in asserting the miraculous conception of Christ, that they have always been considered by sober Christians as perfectly decisive against the Uni- tarian system. Unitarians, perceiving this, have generally agreed to expunge the whole of THESE CHAPTERS FROM BOTH THE EVANGELISTS, except a few verses, which they suppose may be reconciled with their scheme. On what plea, do you suppose tliey take this liberty with the sacred text ? Not because the chapters in question are wanting in any of the manuscript copies of the original; for they are confessedly found in all of them. Not because they are wanting in any of the early and most respectable versions ; for Unitarians do not deny that in all these also they are found. Not because they find the least authority from any early writer, for believing that those chapters made no part of^^the origi- nal Gospels./ But they alledge, that the Ebion- LETTER VI. 221 ites and Marcion, (who, as you have seen in the last Letter, were hereticks of the second centu- ry) excluded those chapters from the Gospel as used by them : and, therefore, as their successors in heresy^ they think proper to expunge the same chapters now. But how shall we account for it that modern Unitarians, while they follow the Ebionites and Marcion, in their rejection of these passages from Matthew and Luke, do not go further, and imitate them in their still more serious mutilation of the sacred Oracles? The Ebionites rejected the three entire Gospels of Markj Luke and John, and all the Epistles of Paul: and Marcion refused to receive as canoni- cal any part of the Old Testament, or indeed any part of the JVexv, which contained quotations from the Old. The only Gospel he received was that of Luke, and even from that he expunged WHATEVER HE DID NOT APPROVE.^ If thcSC ancient hereticks are to be followed as authority at all, why not fully? Is it that publick opinion would not allow, at present, of such bold and deep mutilation as they ventured upon ; but that it was thought necessary to get rid, at least, of the troublesome passages in question, at all hazards ? * Waedlaw's DiscourseSf p. 179, 181. 22% LETTER VI. I have now endeavoured faithfully to lay be* fore you, both text and comment on this subject : both the avowed Unitarian doctrine respecting the interpretation of the scriptures, and a fair exemplification of their doctrine, as drawn from their own expositors. I appeal to you, my Christian Friends, whether you can conceive of departures from every principle of fair construc- tion more manifest and unwarrantable ; of per- versions more outrageous ; and of invasions of the sacred text more bold, violent, and impious ? If this mode of treating the Holy Scriptures be admissible, then I should say, there is an end of all confidence in the Bible, as a rule of faith : any thing may be proved from it, that a disor- dered imagination, or a depraved heart may happen to fancy. It would be as reasonable to appeal to revelation in arguing with a Deist, as in arguing with a Unitarian of this stamp. Nay, on this plan, the scriptures^ instead of being a light to the feet^ and a lamp to the pathy of the humble inquirer, are rather fitted to be- wilder, to darken counsel, and to lead astray. The Orthodox do not, indeed, deny that the scriptures contain much figurative language ,5 LETTER TI. 223 nay^ that they abound in figure ; that they em- ploy very many expressions and representa- tionsj in condescension to human weakness ; and many alhisions, which can only be understood by comparing scripture with scripture, and all with the other works of God. Still they maintain, that the Bible*is to be interpreted upon the same gene- ral principles with other books ; that is, that the plain, simple, obv ious sense, is to be adopted, un- less the undoubted connection, or the still plainer and more unquestionable sense of other passa- ges, forbids it. Thus when the Saviour says of himself — / am the Door; when the Apostle says of Him, that He is a tried corner Stone ; and when it is said of our first parents, in the event of their falling from their primitive recti- tude, ye shall be as Goch, knoxving good and evil; and in another place, of mere men, / have said ye are gods; every one understands the expressions, in all these cases, to be figurative, and not to be construed literally. In like man- laer, when the inspired writers speak of the light hand of God, and of his rising from his seat, and coming forth out of his place, to mani- fest his power, no one supposes that Jehovah has bodily members; or that He is limited to any 224 LETTER VI. place ; but the language is universally under- stood to be analogous to that which we all use, when we speak of the aiin^ or the frown^ of civil government ; by which every one perceives to be meant, the exertion of the authority, or the expression of the disapprobation, of the indi- vidual or individuals who execute a nation's will. So far, and to a similar extent in all analogous cases, the most sober Orthodox criticks go, in the interpretation of scripture. Such use of figurative language belongs to all ages and coun- tries ; and is just as well understood, as when we speak of a tide of success, or a gust of pas- sion, or the opening of a door of usefulness. Neither have the Orthodox any objection to that sober criticism of the sacred text, which leads to attempts at new and more exact trans- lation, and to illustrations drawn from a compar- ison of manuscripts, and from the best ancient versions. All this they consider as perfectly fair, and as warranted, no less by the reverence which is due to Gods' word, than by the prin- ciples which are applied to the interpretation of all ancient books. But these legitimate rules of LETTER Vt. 22d interpretation, established at once by good sense, and by general practice, by no means, as yon have seen, content Unitarian expositors. Every usage of language must be abandoned ; every rule of grammar must be violated ; the plain and universally received meaning of terms must be set aside ; and passages, which in their sim- ple and obvious sense, appear natural, and in- telligible to the humblest capacity, must be for- ced, and perverted, in a manner which reverses all just principles of construction, and draws from the whole a meaning so remote, so cold, so vapid, and so far beneath what the L iiguage would seem naturally to import, that a serious inquirer is equally astonished and mortified at the result. How would this mode of interpreta- tion be viewed, with respect to any other book ? Would it not be deemed unfair and presump- tuous in the highest degree? How much more exceptionable, then, when applied to that book which professes to be dictated by the Spirit of God, and which treats of subjects which, of all ethers, are most beyond the reach of our minds ! If the Bible contains a revelation from God ^ the mass of mankind, and is expressly intend- F2 226 LETTER VI. Bd ta teach them the way of duty and happi- tiess^ we must suppose it adapted to the purpose for which it was given : that is, we must sup- pose it to be a plain book, suited to the common people, as well as to the learned and wise. The Gospel was originally preached to the poor ; and is fitted no less to nourish babes in Christy than to support and invigorate strong men. The Bi- ble, it is true, has depths which are beyond the ken of angels ; and portions of its contents by no means unfrequently occur, which require much various knowledge to enable any one to peruse them with intelligence and satisfaction. While there is more than enough in the scrip- tures, as there is in the great Author of them, to fill the most enlarged intellect, and to give scope and exercise to the most profound erudi- tion ; yet it is equally certain, that the great body of those truths which relate to our com- mon salvation^ which hold forth to us redemption through the blood of Christy even the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace, and which enforce the various duties of the christian life, are plain, and level to the most common capacity, disposed humbly to receive them. They are, indeed; so plain, that we are assured^. LETTER VL 2S7 he who runs may read them ; and even the way- Jhring man^ though a fool^ shall not err therein^ Such is the representation every where given on this subject, in the sacred volume itself. Nothiog more is necessary, as we are assured, to enable a simple, unlettered man to read the word of God with int<^lligence and profit, thau common sense, accompanied with an humble and teachable disposition. But if the Unitarian no- tions be correct, then the Bible is a sealed book : a book of all others least fitted for the common people ; and rather calculated to mislead than to instruct ; until some Unitarian expositor comes to open the seals ; and, by means of his various readings, his conjectural emendations, and his complicated criticism, to dispel the darkness which must otherwise rest upon it. Is this credible ? I must candidly declare, that if I be- lieved it, I should be strongly inclined to concur with the Papists in withholding the scriptures from the laity, as unfit to be trusted in the hands of any but the initiated. Can such a view of the subject be tolerated by those who believe that all scripture is given by the inspiration of God^ and is profitable ; that holy men of Gocf spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ; '228 LETTER VI. and that not many wise men after the fiesh, not many mighty^ not many noble are called; but that God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty^ and foolish things to confound the wise, and things which are despised^ hath God chosen^ yea and things which are not^ to bring to naught things that are, that no Jiesh should glory in his presence ? Let me entreat you here, my Christian Breth" ren, to look back, for a moment, to the beginning of my fourth Letter, and then say, whether the passages of scripture, setting forth the Sa- viour's glory, and the work of redemption by him, there quoted, can possibly be considered, upon any established principles of interpreting metaphorical language, as importing any thing less than his Divinity and Atonement ? I appeal to your candour, whether, if we construe those passages as Unitarians tell us we ought, there is a single fact or doctrine recorded in the Bible, which we can venture, with confidence, to inter- pret, as containing literal truth ? Shall we not be constrained to admit, that the Resurrection ©f the body/ is to be considered; not as a literal^ LETTER VI. 229 but as a metaphorical event? Where shall we draw the line, on any subject^ between reality^ and mere figure of speech ? Accordingly, while we notice the characteris- tick tendency of Unitarians to apply to the Bi- ble the most forced and unnatural principles of interpretation, it is curious to observe what por- tions of scripture they are, to which these prin- ciples are most frequently and elaborately appli- ed. They are precisely those portions which are most hostile to the Unitarian system. When the advocates of that system meet with passa- ges which appear strongly to teach the Trinity of Persons in Jehovah ; the Deity and Atone- ment of the Redeemer, and other allied doc- trines ; then it is that the mightiest efforts of their wonder-working management are put in requisition ; then it is that the plainest terms lose their ordinary and direct meaning, and are made to speak something essentially different, if not opposite. Other parts of scripture are com- monly left to speak their native, simple lan- guage ; but these never. Has not this a most suspicious aspect ? when persons are ready to interpret like other people those passages which 230 LETTER VI. do not implicate their peculiar creed ; but imme? diately adopt the most singular and unwarranta- ble principles of exposition, when those which do implicate them, are in question ; can charity herself forbear to indulge suspicions of the most unpleasant kind ? Further ; in marking the distinctive characters ©f the Orthodox and the Unitarians, as to their manner of studying the scriptures, I have also thought that I could, every where, perceive this difference : — With the Orthodox, the explaining and applying the word of God, is chiefly an af- FAIR OF THE HKART. They coutcud, indeed, as much as any professing christians, for the exer- cise of the understanding in the interpretation of scripture, and in every department of reli- gion : and it is presumed that they go as far as any in giving proofs of this exercise. But still in the study of the scriptures, unless I am de- ceived, they are distinguished, above all others, by a spirit of affectionate devotion. The views which they take of Gospel truth, are peculiarly suited to humble, to soften, to interest the feel- ings in the highest degree, to engage and ele- vate the afjectioas, and to inspire jot/ and peaop LETTER VI. 231 in believing. Accordingly, when the Orthodox, who are pious, read the Bible with a practical view, they, for the most part, wish to have the spirit of criticism dormant, and to lay open their minds to those heart- affecting, self- abasing, and purifying impressions, which are, at once, more delightful and more profitable than any other. When they read, that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin ; that He hare our sins iji his own body on the tree ; that He is the propitiation for our sins ; and that He gave himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity — they delight to yield them- selves to all the constraining influence of re- deeming love, and te dwell with the liveliest wonder, gratitude, and joy, on the unparal- leled scenes of the Garden and the Cross* They never enjoy themselves so well, in the pe- rusal of the scriptures, as when, gazing on the unutterable wonders of the incarnation and suf- ferings of the Son of God, the love of his Per- son becomes their ruling passion, and conformity to his example and will, the precious model of their lives. 23^ LETTER Vl. But how different the spirit with which Uni- tarians approach and peruse the scriptures! With them the study of the sacred volume ap- pears to he chiefly a cold intellectual exer- cise. They take it up very much as they would take up a Latin or Greek classick ; con- sidering it, indeed, as treating of far more im- portant subjects ; but as proper to be examined with the same spirit of free, bold, and even scept- ical scrutiny ; as proper to be suspected, and questioned at every turn. Accordingly, they never seem to be so much at home in the Bible^ as when estimating the comparative value of ancient manuscripts ; discovering and expung- ing passages alleged to be spurious ; and set- tling the niceties of verbal criticism. Their peculiar element seems to consist in persuading themselves and others not to believe too MUCH ; and in endeavouring to shew that the scriptures speak a language less serious, less affecting, and less solemn, than the Orthodox imagine. In short, their object seems to be at' tained, exactly in proportion to the degree in which they can divest the word of God of those truths and characteristicks which are peculiarly fitted to warm, to elevate, and to enrapture the LETTER VL 233 heart ; in which they can reduce its contents to little more than a system of cold^ heartless eth- icks. With them, the amazing scenes of Geth- semane and Calvary^ are brought down to a level with the events of common history ; and all those immeasurable glories and benefits of the Saviour, which are adapted to fix the heart, and to move the profoundest affections of the christian, are either wholly denied, or, with a frigid ingenuity, explained away. Which of these systems, then, my Friends, ought the serious christian to countenance ? — Tiiat which honours the Bible, as the inspired word of God; or that which virtually denies its inspiration, and places it on a level with mere human compositions ? — That which bows to it, as the infallible rule of faith and practice, to which nothing can be added, and from which nothing can be taken ; or that which establishes a higher tribunal than the scriptures, and main- tains the lawfulness of adding to them, and ex- punging from them, at pleasure ? — That which interprets the word of God in a simple, natural, analogical manner ; or that which applies to it principles of exposition often the most forced G2 234 LETTER Vt. and unnatural that can be conceived ; principles which would be rejected with indignation if ap- plied to any other book ? — In fine, that which, recognizes in the sacred volume all those fea- tures of grandeur and glory, which are adapted to fill and warm the heart ; or that which would divest it of all those features, and hold up the inspired writers as continually using the most bold and high-sounding language^ to express the most diminutive and common ideas ? — Which of these systems, I say, ought the serious christian to countenance? — It is impossible to hesitate. The former is the humble, filial spirit of chil- dren sitting at the feet of the Saviour and learn- ing of Him, as the great and all wise Prophet of his church ; the latter, is the genuine spirit OF INFIDELITY, to wliich, uudcr all its disguises^ the christian ought to say, with his Master — Get thee behind me^ Satan ; for thou savourest not the things that be of God^ but the things that be of mm* LETTER Vir. Tndh to be tried &f its practical infimnce — Objections iQ. Un'darianism on this ground — Umturianism disposed to deny or conceal its principle^ — Tndifferent to Tnitlh-^ Hostile to the exerci.ses of Vital Piety — Deficient m ^fielding support and consolation in Death — Unfriendly to the svirit of Mission^ — Every where more agreeable- to Lijideh^ than any other system which bears the Christian name. Christian Brethren, The principle, that truth must be tried by its MORAL Influence, is as old as truth itself. By their fruits ye shall know them^ is a maxim of our Lord, which common sense, and every part of scripture, conspire to enforce. This is a test to which we ought to be willing to bring all oup own opinions ; and by which every wise maa will be careful to try the spirits^ whether they are of God, 236 LETTER VII. Whether Unitarianism can, advantageously, stand this test, is a question which I desire in this Letter candidly to examine. The consider- ations urged in the foregoing Letters against the Unitarian system, are, to my mind, perfectly conclusive. That system which finds no coun- tenance in the word of God ; which has been opposed by the pious in all ages; and the advo- cates of w^hich have always been cast of the Church, and denied the name of Christian, sure- ly has little claim to our respect or confidence. But I have some further objections to this sys- tem, which press upon my mind with irresistible force, and which compel me to believe that it is " not of God.'' These are objections drawn from the practical iufliienee of Unitarianism, in a great variety of respects. This branch of the controversy between the Orthodox and Unitari- ans, has been treated, as many of you know, in a very able and satisfactory manner, by the E.ev. Mr. Fuller^ in a work to which I before referred, and which I would again recommend to your careful perusal. The points, however, to which I wish, at present, to call your atten- tion, are such as that eminent Servant of Christ, has either wholly omitted to notice, or has treat- ed in a very cursory manner. LETTER Vn. 237 I. The first of the Objections which I propose to consider, is that Unitarians manifest, more re- markably than any other sect with which I am acquainted, A disposition to deny or con- ceal THEIR RELIGIOUS OPINIONS. The sacred Scriptures solemnly enjoin upon us, not only to search diligently after the truth ; but also, having discovered it, to hold it fast ; to be ever ready to profess our belief of it, and eve?^ ready ^ also, to give an ansxver to every one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in tis. Nor can I conceive how the command^ to confess Christ before men^ or the duty of not shunning to declare all the counsel of God^ can be duly re- garded, especially by ministers of the Gospel, without a frank and habitual readiness to make known the truth as it is in Jesus, to all who ask to be instructed, or are willing to receive it. And I presume it will not be denied, that the Orthodox, in general, have not only manifested a disposition to attach much importance to doc- trinal opinions ; but also no less of a disposition to embrace every suitable opportunity to com- municate and preach them. ^^ LETTER VII. But, unless I am greatly deceived, the saine. cannot, with truth he said of Unitarians. On the contrary, I am persuaded, that, in all ages, since the first appearance of Unitarianism in the church of Christ, a disposition to practise the arts of concealment, denial, and evasion, when- ever there was any considerable temptation to do so, has been one of its most remarkable charac- teristicks. More than sixteen hundred years ago, Iren- Kits made this complaint concerning certain Uni- tarians of his day. " In publick,'^ says he, ^^ they use alluring discourses, because of ^' the common christians, as they call those who ^' wear the christian name in general ; and to ^^ entice them to come often, they pretend to ^^ PREACH LIKE US ; and complain, that, although ^^ THEIR DOCTRINE BE THE SAME AS OURS, WC ^^ abstain from their communion, and call them ^' hereticks. When they have seduced any from " the faith by their disputes, and made them ^^ willing to comply with theni; they begin to "open their mystebies.^^^ * Lib: m. cop. 15. / XETTER VII. 239 In the case of Paul of Scunosata^ a distin- guished Unitarian of the next century, a similar spirit was manifested. You were told, in a for- mer Letter, that when charged with holdiiig^ certain opinions which he had preached, he sol- emnly denied the charge ; nay, denied it on OATH. Yet, in a little while, he preached the same doctrines again, and was again charged, and again found to deny and equivocate ; un- til, at length, the most decisive measures became necessary to expose his true character, and to exclude him from the sacred of&ce. When Arhis^ the father of the Arians, arose, and began to propagate his opinions, he acted a similar part. Finding that these opinions g:;ve offence, and were about to become matter of pub- lick scrutiny, he professed a willingness to re- ceive the popular language concerning them, and wished to have it believed that he differed but little from the body of the church. Much time and ingenuity were employed by the Coun- cil which tried him, in attempting to drag him from his lurking places, and to extort from him an explanation of his views. Nor was their purpose accomplished at last without extreme 240 LETTER VII. difficulty. Afterwards, indeed, when his fol- lowers, for a time, got the civil power into their own hands, they were ready enough to avow their principles, and to persecute the Orthodox, with far greater fury than ever they had been persecuted themselves. It is worthy of notice, too, that the same gen- eral system of evasion and concealment, was adopted by both Lxlmsj and Faustus Socinus, in the sixteenth century. The former joined an Orthodox church, and remained in its commu- nion while he lived, passing himself off as an Orthodox man, with the greater part of those with whom he conversed. Nor do his senti- ments appear to have been fully disclosed but by his private papers after his decease. The lati ter, even after he had adopted his Uncle's opinions, and ventured, in a degree, to profess them, practised the most unworthy acts, if the best historians are to be believed, to conceal or to varnish over the most offensive features of his system, and to induce the belief that he differed much less from the Orthodox church than he really did. # LFTTER VII. 241 Nor has it been otherwise in later times. Dr. Priestley declared, a few years ago, that there were great numbers of persons in the church of England^ even among the clergy^ who, while they privately held Unitarian opinions, did not scruple in publick to countenance " 2l mode of ^' worship, which, if they were questioned about ^^it, they would not deny to be, according to ^^ their own principles, idolatrous and blasphe- ''mousP^ \i Newton and Locke were Unita- rians, they acted, as I have hinted in a former Letter, the same unworthy part. And, if I have not been misinformed, there is too muvh i tason to believe that there are a few persons of a sim- ilar character, at this time, in the established church of Scotland, The history of American Unitarianism most remarkably accords with these striking facts. The course of conduct pursued by the Unita- rian clergy in Massachusetts j for a number of years, was perfectly in character for disciples of the distinguished hereticks already mentioned. Strong suspicions that they were friendly, if not devoted, to the Unitarian System, were enter- tained for a considerable time, before direct H 2 242 LETTER VIL proof of the fact could be fastened upon them. Charges to that amount were frequently made ; but by most of them repelled, as unkind, and even slanderous. They appeared anxious to have it believed that they did not differ ma- terially from the Orthodox around them. And it was not until a publication, made by one of thfeir own friends, beyond the Atlantick, and re- published and circulated in this country, had grievously offended them, but effectually dis- closed their views, that any considerable number of them consented to take the name of Unita- rians. And even now, if I mistake not, while they own the general name, they are, most of them, extremely reserved in communicating their opinions in detail ; insomuch that, not only the publick at large, but some of their own peo-, pie, are entirely uncertain what they believe eoncerning some of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. May I not venture to say, too, that some of the Unitarians in your own neighbourhood, are^ in some degree, chargeable with the same con- duct ? You have worshipping assem^ies of al- most every denomination of christians in your I.ETTER VIL 243 City. Respecting the religious sentiments of the pastors and teachers of these different de- nominations, no one is at a loss. They have not only each publickly and solemnly subscribed a particular creed ; but you can hardly go into their respective places of worship, v/ithout hear- ing their peculiar tenets openly and freely pro- claimed. But how is it with your Unitarian neighbours ? Have they ever told any one, fairly and fully, what they believe ? I have at- tended to their publications, from time to time; when they happened to fall in my way, but have never been able to discover. I have perceived, indeed,* that there are many truths, in my view all -important, which they do not bdieve. I have perceived, too, that they are very zealous in NOT BELIEVING, and are taking unwearied pains to persuade others to follow their exam- ple. But which of the various Unitarian sys- tems, differing so widely from each other, tiiey DO embrace, I have no recollection of having ever seen or heard any thing that enabled me to decide. They speak of one writer, of that class, as having gone too far, and of another, as having expressed himself erroneously ; yet, af- ter all, they do not inform us whom they are 244: LETTER VII. willing to regard as a model, or what scheme they actually adopt. Why all this reserve? Even if they consider the Orthodox around them, as I suppose they do, as a crooked and perverse generation^ still, themselves being judg- es, ought they to be ashamed of Christ and of his words before them? Nay, I have not only observed a striking re- sei've among Unitarians, as to the disclosure of their sentiments, which I was never able to re- concile with correct principles ; but I have also observed, among many of them, another prac- tice, still more evidently, as it appears to me, unfair and criminal. I refer to the practice complained of by Dr. Wardlaw^ in his able re- ply to Mr. Yate^^ and often noticed by others, as indulged by Unitarian polemicks. When they feel pressed by a text or an argument which bears hard on the Socinian hypothesis, they take refuge in Arianism, and endeavour to maintain that the difficulty vanishes, on the plan of the pre-existence and superangelick nature of Christ, as held by Arians. On the contrary, when pressed by a passage of scripture, or a consideration^ which wears an aspect unfavoura- LETTER Vir. 245 ble to Arianism, they can, with equal dexterity^ avail themselves of the Socinian doctrine, and argue with the lowest Humanitarian. Is this change of armour and of colours, characteristick of the christian soldier, or of a warrior of a dif- ferent stamp ? Is it characteristick of the king- dom of light, or the kingdom of darkness ? I am far, indeed, from alledging that all Unitarians have been chargeable with pursuing this disingenuous conduct. In many cases, they have been under no temptation to con- ceal or equivocate ; but every inducement was the other way. Such is now, probably, and has been for some time, the state of things in Ger- many, And even in situations in which the greatest odium was to be incurred in avowing Unitarian opinions, some truly honourable ex- amples of candour and firmness have been ex- hibited. But my position is, and I believe most sincerely that it may be maintained — that, in all ages, from the time of Ebion to the present hour, where the mass of the surrounding popu- lation was Orthodox, Unitarians have manifested a disposition to conceal their sentiments, to equivocate; to evadc; and even solemnly to deny 246 LETTER VTI. them, when questioned, and to disguise them- selves under the garb of Orthodoxy, to a degree which no other sect calling itself Christian ever manifested. To what, I ask, is this fact to be ascribed ? I leave it with You, my Christian Brethren, to solve the question. I will only say, that I can think of no possible reason for it, but such as must stamp the character of deep corruption upon the Unitarian cause. II. Another strong Objection to the Unitarian system, in my mind, is, the tendency which IT EVERY WHERE MANIFESTS TO PRODUCE IN- DIFFERENCE TO Truth. This objection is close- ly connected with the preceding ; but it der serves more distinct consideration. The vital importance of truth, and the duty of loving, seeking and maintaining it, are laid down in scripture with a degree of plainness and force, truly impressive. Great stress is laid on 7'eceiving the truth ifi the love of it ; on being established in the truth; on walking in the truth ; on being sqnctijied through the truth ; and pn LETTER VIL 247 contending earnestlij for the faith once delivered to the saints. We are solemnly warned against believing every spirit ; we are commanded to try the spirits whether they are of God ; to prove all things^ and hold fast that which is good. And with the language of the Bible^ the spirit of the pious has^ in all ages^ most strikingly agreed. This appeared eminently in the primitive churchj in which truth seems to have been prized and defended with peculiar affection ; and all who opposed any of its essential por- tions, as you have seen in a former Letter, to have been excluded from the body of believers^ as unw^orthy of the Christian name. The same thing is observable in the history of all the Wit- nesses for the truth, from the rise of the Papa- cy till the Reformation. That which distin- guished them, was their earnestly contending for the essential articles of the christian faith^ and separating themselves from all hereticks. For the same great truths, all the Reformers contended, both in their writings and preachings and some of them laid down their lives. And perhaps there is no point concerning which the Orthodox of the present day, differ more re- markably from Unitarians, than in maintain- 248 LETTER VII. ing the great importance of certain doctrines^ and contending for them as fundamental. This is not denied by Unitarians themselves ; but is, on the contrary, continually brought forward by them, as matter of reproach against the Ortho- dox. With the charge, as such, I have nothing to do at present. My sole concern is with the acknowledged fact, as a fact that has been most remarkably connected with Orthodoxy in all ages. And I maintain that it is natural, reason- able, scriptural, and just such a fact as might be expected to result from the conviction, that there is an essential and eternal difference between truth and error, and that they can never coa- lesce. Now my objection to Unitarianism is, that it is generally found connected with a spirit di- rectly the reverse of this ; with a marked indif- ference to truth ; not only with a singular unwil- lingness to say much about the articles of its own creed in detail ; but also with quite as singular a disposition to underrate the importance of any truth, and to be on friendly terms with the advocates of all creeds^ ex.ce;^t the Or- thodox. , LETTER Vir. 249 To believe in the innocence of error, and even of- fundamental error, is what I call indif- ference TO TRUTH. And if this be not one of the most striking features of Unitarianism, at any rate, of the Unitarianism which is most prevalent in our country, I am egregiously de- ceived. What would be admitted as proof of such a belief, before any enlightened and impar- tial tribunal? If persons calling themselves Uni- tarians differ essentially from each other, with- out any bar to constant religious intercourse : if some of them consider Christ as possessing a real, though derived Divinity ; others as the most exalted of all creatures; and a third class, as a mere man : if some of them think he ought to be worshipped, and others that all worship directed to him is gross idolatry : if some of them believe that Christ really made, in some sense, atonement for sin, and that this atonement is the foundation of all christian hope ; while others regard the doctrine of atonement, in any sense, as a mere corruption of Christianity, which deserves nothing better than ridicule, or abhorrence : if these men, notwithstanding all these diversities of opinion, still call each other brethren of the same denomination ; worship 12 250 LETTER Vll. and commune together without diflUculty ; mutu- ally praise and recommend each other's books and preaching : more especially^ if all these dif- ferent parties profess to be ready to worship and hold communion with the Orthodox, while they, at the same time, acknowledge that they cannot help considering them as blasphemers and idolaters : — Would this be manifesting indif- ference to truth, or w^ould it not? Surely the answer is not difficult. Let us see, then, what are the facts. Dr. Samuel Clarke^ was a high Arian, or Semi-Ari- an. He professed to believe in the Divinity of Christ, in a derived and qualified sense. Dr. Price was an Arian, of the common stamp, who taught that Christ was the most exalted of all creatures. Socijius made a still lower estimate of the character of the Saviour : he supposed him to have been a mere man, but miraculously conceived, and taken up into heaven, to be in- structed in the divine will ; and that, being en- dowed with special authority and dignity, he ought to be worshipped. Dr. Priestley^ as you have seen, went lower still. He supposed that Christ was a mere man, born like other men, and LETTER VII. 251 likp other men fallible and peccable. With Dr. Priestley^ Mr.i^eA/^a;?? substantially agrees. Mr. Channing, of Boston j is said to be an Arian; yet he says, that he considers it as " no crime to believe with Mr. Belsham ;'' that is, to consider Christ as a mere fallible and peccable man.^ And Professor Stuart, of Andover, tells us that, if he is correctly informed, " there are scarcely any ^' of the younger preachers of Unitarian senti- " ments, in Ne-w-England, who are not simple Humanitarians :"t in other words, who do not in the main agree with Dr. PriestUy and Mr, Belsham, Yet, when you come to hear Uni- tarians of these different classes speak of each other, it is in terms which indicate all that de- gree of harmony which is necessary to ecclesi- astical communion. They claim each other as brethren. They make a common cause when attacked. They recommend each others wTit- ings ; not, indeed, always, with an explicit dec- laration that they approve of everij thing in them ; but in a way which an Orthodox man would be shocked at doing, concerning any books of which he did not; in substance^ ap- • See his Letter to Mr. Thacher. f Letters to J\lr. Chanmng. p, 152. 252 LETTETl VII. prove. When the lowest Humanitarian attempts to make a list of those distinguished men from whose character he hopes to derive countenance, he confidently quotes Arians and even Semi- Arians as on his side. And when the highest Semi-Arian makes out a corresponding list^ he quotes, without scruple, the most lax Priestley- an, or Belshamite, as his Unitarian bbother ! Can men who act thus, reasonably complain, if a discerning publick consider them as all ALIKE, and as having no attachment whatever to truth ? But, what crowns all, as a specimen of Unita- rian indifference to truth, is the following decla- ration from Dr. Price^ who was just mentioned as ranking with tlie Arians. " Give me but the " fact, that Christ is the resurrection and the " l[fe, and explain it as you will. Give me but '' this single truth, that eternal lifi is the gift of ^' God through Jesus Christ our Lord and Sa- " viour, and I shall be perfectly easy with ^' respect to tjie contrary opinions which are en- ^^ tertained about the dignity of Christ ; " ABOUT HIS NATURE, PERSON, ANlD OFFICES, ^^ and the manner in which he saves us. Call LETTER VII. 253 ^^ him, if you please, simply a man, endowed (^ with extraordinary powers ; or call him a su- ^^ PERANGELiCK BEING, wlio appeared in hu- ^^ man nature for the purpose of accomplishing "our salvation; or say, (if you can admit a " thought so shockingly absurd) that it was the ^^ second of three co-equal persons in the God- ^^ head, forming one person with a human soul^ " that came down from heaven, and suffered " and died on tlie cross : — Say, that he saves us ^^ merely by being a messenger from God to ^' reveal to us eternal life, and to confer it upon " us ; or say^ on the contrary, that he not only ^^ reveals to us eternal life, and confers it upon ^* us, but has obtained it for us, by offering him- ^^ self a propitiatory sacrifice on the cross, and ^' making satisfaction to the justice of the Deity " for our Sins : I shall think such differ- ^^ E\CES OF LITTLE MOMENT, provided the fact " is allowed, that Christ did rise from the dead, ^^ and w^ill raise us from the dead, and that all " righteous penitents will, tiirough God's grace " in him, be accepted and made happy forev- ii er.'^ — In the opinion of this distinguished Uni- tarian, then, it is a question of very little mo- ment, — not worth contending about; — whether 2154 LETTER VIL Christ be a Divine Person, or a mere man ; whether the worship of Christ, be a christian duty, or gross idolatry ; whether his atonement be the grand foundation of hope, or a corrupt human invention. In his opinion, all who call themselves Christians, may worship and com- mune together with perfect concord and affec- tion, although they may regard each other, at the time, as blasphemers, polytheists, and idola- ters ! If this be not indifference to truth, I know not what deserves the name. If this be the counsel of Unitarians, I must say, O my soul, come not thou into their secret ; unto their assem- bly y mi?ie honour^ be not thou united! Dr. Priestley, with his usual frankness, con- fesses that many Unitarians have this character- istick indifference to truth, and attempts to ac- count for it. And, whatever may be thought of the private opinions of this eminent man ; yet his testimony, as a witness, respecting the prin- ciples and character of Unitarians, will surely be considere4 as unexceptionable. He speaks thus : " Though Unitarian dissenters are not '^ apt to entertain any doubt of the truth of their ^f principled, they do not lay so much stress LETTER Vir. 255 *• UPON THEM, as other christians do upon theirs. *^Nor, indeed, is there any reason why they ^* SHOULD, when they do not consider the hold- •^ ing of them to be at all necessary to salvation^ '' which other christians often do with respect ^^.to theirs. Besides, it cannot be denied that " many of those who judge so truly concern- •^ing particular tenets in relii^ion, have attained •*' to that cool, unbiassed temper of mind, in con- ^' sequence of becoming more indifferent to re- ^^ligion in general, and to all the modes and ^^ doctrines of it. Though, therefore, they are in " a more favourable situation for distinguishing ^^ between truth and falsehood, they are not ^^ likely to acquire a zeal for what they conceive " to be truth.''* The Author does not, indeed, apply this representation to all Unitarians, but only to a particular class of them ; but he un- doubtedly, at the same time, intimates that persons of that denomination, generally, attach much less importance to religious truth than most other professing christians ; and that there are solid reasons why, upon their principles, they should do so. This is sufiicient for my purpose. * Discourses on Varmin Subjects, p. 95. 96, 25& LETTER VII. III. Another most serious Objection which I have to the Unitarian system, is, that 1 1 is to- tally AND IRRECONCILEABLY HOSTILE TO THK EXERCISES OF VITAL AND EXPERIMENTAL PIETY. I need not inform You, my Brethren, that the religion of Jesus Christy as a practical system, is a religion of redeemed, recovered sinners ; and that there are certain feelings and views, which the Orthodox suppose invariably to mark the return of a convinced and repenting rebel to his reconciled God, and his subsequent life of holy obedience. We do not pretend to say, that these feelings and views are the same in all ca- ses, or to lay down rules by which they are to be formally regulated, in any case. But we be- lieve that there are certain general principles^, which are, in substance, realized in every in- stance of genuine repentance, and of christian walk with God. We suppose, that, in every such instance, there is an impression of the glo- ry of God, and the purity of his law, never ex- perienced before ; a deep, heartfelt conviction of the exceeding evil and ill-desert of sin; a cor- dial hatred of it ; a sincere mourning over it; and a heayty turning from it unto God, with LETTER VII. 257 ^^fiill purpose of, and endeavours after, new obedience ;" an affectionate " receiving and resting on the Lord Jesus alone for salvation, as He is freely offered in the Gospel ;'' an habitilal looking to Him, as the foundation of hope, and the life of the soul ; a constant disposition to glory in his cross ; a deep sense of obligation to Him for justifying righteousness, for sanctifying grace, and for daily strength ; a hearty renun- ciation of all confidence in the flesh ; unfeigned self abasement before God ; daily self reproach- es on account of daily short comings, and cor- ruptions; sincere endeavours to crucify the Jiesh with the affections and hists^ and to shun the very appearance of evil ; a sense of dependence^ and a love of dependence, on free and rich grace ; a governing desire to glorify Christ in body and spirit which are his ; rejoicing in hope of his glory ; and sometimes rejoicing with joy unspeakable and full of glory, — Such are the ex- ercises which the Orthodox consider as essen- tial, in a greater or less degree, to all true re- ligion ; which they believe to be found strongly pourtrayed in the Bible, as constituting the es- sence of christian character; and which they are persuaded will ever meet a response of deep K2 258 LETTER Vll. and delightful interest in the bosom of every one who loves the Lofd Jesus Christ in sincerity. But, I ask, is Unitarianism friendly to these exercises, as a system of experimental piety ? Is it consistent with them ? Is it not directly hos- tile to them ? Nay, do not the great body of Unitarians ridicule these exercises as fanatical and delusive ? In fact, are not their views of hu- man nature, of the Saviour's character, and of the ground of hope toward God, utterly irrecdn- cileable with such views and feelings as have been described, and which hold so conspicuous a place among the pious breathings of scripture saints? I have never known exercises of this character treated by any persons of the Unita- rian denomination, otherwise than with frigiil indifference, or repelling contempt. And I can, with equal sincerity- declare, that I have never known an instance of a Unitarian, who appeared to be led on through the stages of seriousness, anxiety, and deep conviction of sin, to a cordial acceptance of the offers of salvation through a Redeemer, who did not, in the course of these exercises, solemnly renounce the Unitarian sys- tem, as one which afforded no adequate hope to LETTER VII. 259 the soul, and which would hy no means stand the test of either scripture or experience. I suppose, indeed, that no Unitarian living, would think it any compliment to have either the belief or the experience of such exercises as I have referred to above, ascribed to him. Dr. Priestley speaks of them in a manner expressive of both contempt and horror,^ Mr. Bchham denounces every thing of this kind, so frequently and Uiiceremoniously, that proof of his opinion on the subject is not necessary. Indeed he goes so far as to speak of ardent love to Christ as an unreasonable feeling, and as one which deserves to be considered as a mere illu- sive imagination. Can we, then, my Friends, with the sacred volume in our hands, and, I trust I may add, with the personal experience of many of us, deeply impressed upon our hearts ; — can we regard with any other feelings than those of abhorrence, a scheme which open- ly turns into ridicule those conflicts, consola- tions and joys, which have been for ages conse- crated in the experience of the truly pious, and without which, in some degree, we conscien- tiously believe, no man shall see the Lord? * Memoirs of himself ^ p. 7. 260 LETTER VII. IV. A fourth Objection to the Unitarian sys- tem which deeply impresses my mind, is, that I NO WHERE FIND THAT CLOUD OF WITNESSES TO ITS CONSOLATION IN A DYING HOUR, which in all ages have been furnished by the Orthodox system. Those principles which are found most effec- tually to support and elevate .the mind, in that trying season, when " heart and flesh fail/' and when all the realities of eternity are opening on the soul, have certainly a strong presumptive claim to our confidence. In that honest hour, when the world is withdrawing, when the solici- tations of appetite and passion are silent, and when the judgment seat is in view, many a prin- ciple which once appeared firm and tenable, has most ignobly and miserably failed its pos- sessor, and left him without a prop. It behoves every one of us, therefore, in the day of our health, to ask ourselves, without partiality, and •without evasion, how far the hopes which we cherish will be likely to stand this solemn, thi§ inevitable test* LETTER VII. 261 Now, I can aver, witli unwavering confidence, that I have never known the system of the Orthodox to fail any one, in that interesting hour which tries the hopes of men. That is, I have never known any one who had cordially embraced the system of redemption through the blood of Christ ; who had built all his confi- dence on the atoning sacrifice and perfect right- eousness of a Divine Redeemer ; and who had long cherished the hope that he should finally receive eternal life, as the purchase of the Sa- viour's blood, and the gift of his hands : — I have never known such a man, when he came to die, fearful that this ground was not firm enough to support him, and disposed to aban- don it for something which promised to be more adequate to his wants. I have known some such, indeed, fearful lest they might have de- ceived themselves as to their own personal char- acter; lest they might not have been really building on the Saviour, but on something else. In short, of the great Foundation of their hope itself, they had no apprehension, but only whether they were resting upon it. But never did I see or hear of a man who, in those trying circumstances^ began to think that he had made 262 LETTER VH. too high ail estimate of Christ, or who regretted that he had relied upon Him so much, or Irdd so much stress upon his atonement and his right- eousness. On the contrary, no one, I will ven- ture to say, ever knew a votary of Orthodoxy who did not meet death with joy and triumph, just in proportion to the degree in which he was assured, that he was really and practically a believer in Christ. And 0, how often have I seen such leave the world in the most joyful and triumphant manner! How often have I heard them, with the smile of assured hope, and some- times with the rapture of anticipated glory, marked on their dying features, exclaim — I am not asliamedy for I know in whom I have believ- ed^ and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed to Him against tlmt day. death, where is thy sting ? O grave^ where is thy victory ? Thanks be unto God, who giveth me the victory through my Lord Jesus Christ ! And close the scene, by crying out, with their expiring breath, Loi^d Jesus receive my spirit! Can the same be said with trutlv of Unitari- ans and th^ir system? It, Biost assuredly, can- - LETTER VII. 263 not I have known many, very in any, who felt confident and satisfied with that system in the days of their liealth ; but who, when death ap- proached, renounced it, as affording to the soul no foundation of hope. Then, when they took a retrospect of all the sins and short-comings of their lives, they began to see that, without a better righteousness than their own, they coald never appear before a holy God in peace. They have, accordingly, abandoned, — wholly aban- doned, their old ground ; and felt constrained to fall at the feet of Immanuel, and to exclaim, humbled and adoring, with Thomas^ my Lord, AND MY God ! And, even among those who did not thus renounce their old creed, but died fond- ly cleaving to it; the utmost that I have ever heard of, as manifested by them, on the ap- proach of death, was a certain philosophick calm- ness. This, it is but justice to say, was remark- ably displayed in the death of Dr. Priestley himself. But his calmness, according to his bi- ographer, was not only connected with a belief in the doctrine of Universal Salvation, but FOUNDED upon it. '' Hc desired me,'^ says his Son (this was a few hours before he expired) " He desired me to reach him a pamphlet which 264 LETTER VII. ^^ was at his bed's head, ^ Simpson on the Dura- " tion of future Punishment/ It will be a source '' of satisfaction to you to read that pamphlet^ " said he, giving it to me. It contains my sen- '' TiMENTS ; and a belief in them will be A sup- '' PORT TO YOU, in the most trpng circumstan- '' Ces, AS IT HAS BEEN TO ME. We shall ALL "meet finally. We only require different " degrees of discipline, suited to our tempers, to " prepare us for final happiness.''* But who ever witnessed, in a Unitarian, such a death as that of Stephen, or such as that which Paul des- cribes, as exhibited by the triumphant believer ? I believe it may with confidence be asserted, that such a sight was never witnessed. In- deed a great part of the language concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, which the inspired writers put into the mouths of dying christians, or of christians approaching the end of their pilgri- mage ; and which the pious, in all ages, have delighted to adopt and to utter, on the confines of eternity, could not possibly, in my opinion, be uttered by a Unitarian, without, either assuming a new vocabulary, or entirely changing his prin- ciples. *' * Memoirs off Dr. Priestley^ Vol. I. 217. LETTER VIL 265 Need I say, my Friends, that this is a consid- eration which ought deeply to impress the heart of every one who experts to die, and who de- sires to embrace such principles, and take such ground, as will stand the test of a dying hour ? It is far from my wish to make any unfair appeal to the passions of men. I know that the artful and designing have sometimes made such ap- peals on behalf of the grossest error. But is not this one of the subjects, on which the hearty and the feelings ought to be solemnly consult- ed ? O that I could persuade every one who is about to decide between that blessed foundation of hope which the Bible exhibits, and that which Unitarians recommend, to place before him the solemnities of a dying bed ; the rupture of those ties which bound him to a retiring world; the end of all human illusions ; and the approach of a decisive reckoning, and a dread eternity ! O that they were wise^ that they understood thisj that they would consider their latter end! V. I object to the Unitarian system as being, in my opinion, decisively and necessarily UNFRIENDLY TO THE SPlRlT OF MISSIONS. L 2 266 LETTER VII. By the Spirit of Missions, I mean an enlight- ened, ardent, and persevering zeal for the spread of the Gospel among those who have it not. I think I am not deceived when I say, that such a spirit has remarkably characterized the Orthodox in all ages, and just in proportion as their system was pure and predominant. Their expenditures and labours to promote this great object ; their holy courage, self denial, suffer- ings, perseverance, and occasional sacrifices of life, in the precious cause, are on record. We have seen them devoting their time, and talents, and strength, and property, to the preaching of the Gospel among the poor and destitute. We have seen them going with the light of life, to dreary frontier settlements, to benighted pagans, and to the ignorant and depressed children of Africa, We have seen them contriving and ex- erting themselves to send christian instruction, in almost every variety of form, to the labourers in mines and manufactories ; to the hut of the beggar ; to the wigwam of the savage ; to the cells of hospitals ; and to the prisoner's dungeon. Nor is this to be wondered at. It is precisely what migl^.t be expected of those who love the Lord Jesus Christ supremely ; who have expe- LETTER VII. 267 i'ienced in their own souls the sweetness of his gracious consolations ; who firmly believe that there is salvatiofi in no other ; and who are deep- ly convinced that the situation of those who are strangers to the grace of Christ must be deplo- rable in time and eternity. I do not assert, indeed, that the Orthodox have been always equally awake to the im- portance of this object, or equally zealous in pursuing it ; far less that they have ever done all that became them, in this or any other de- partment of christian duty. But I do conscien- tiously believe that the whole of the substan- tial, faithful missionary work that has ever been done in our world, has been done by the Ortho- dox, as distinguished from Unitarians ; and that the latter have manifested a most marked and characteristick deficiency in the Missionary Spirit. Have Unitarians ever fitted out a mis- sion to the heathen ? I have never heard of it. They have often had, at different periods, in the course of their history, great wealth, talents^ and enterprize, at their command. But have any of these ever been, in good earnest, employ- ed in imparting a knowledge of Christianity t© 268 LETTER VII. the poor, the ignorant, the depressed, and the friendless ? They have, indeed, it must be con- fessed, in former times, made great exertions, and incurred hirge expenditures, for propagat- ing their opinions ; and they are still doing the same. But in what manner ? By going out, as other denominations have done, into the highr xvays and hedges^ and endeavouring to bring in to the gospel feast, the maimed, the lame^ the halt^ and the blind F Have they directed their exertions to the children of want and sorrow, and made the chosen objects of their evangelical labours those who had no7ie to help them ? No ; they have always been remarkable for sending their missionaries and their books, to the most polished and populous places; to the upper clas- ses of society ; to the rich and literary ; to those who already enjoyed the Gospel, and stood in no need of their instruction. So it has ever been^ with so little exception, as not to impair, in the least degree, the force of the general assertion ; and so it continues to be to the present hour. And, indeed, with the prevalent Unitarian helief, could it be expected to be otherwise ? Surely thos^ who believe that all men will final- LETTER Vn. 269 ly be saved ; and, of course, that no particular faith or religious system, is necessary to salva- tion ; those who deny the original corruption of human nature, and do not, consequently, consid- er the heathen, or any other class of men, as in such deplorable circumstances as the Orthodox believe them to be ; and those who, systematical- ly, discard the constraining influence of that su- premelove,and deep sense of obligation, to Christ, which prompt the Orthodox to exert themselves in extending the kingdom of an atoning and re- deeming Deliverer ; — those who embrace these opinions, cannot reasonably be expected to feel that desire for the spread of the Gospel, and the conversion of souls, which the Orthodox feel themselves bound every hour to cherish. This representation is confirmed by Mr. Rob- inson j an English Unitarian, of great talents, and of extensive information. " It is remarka- " ble," says he, " that Socinianism has never ^' been in fashion with the illiterate ; for in re- ^* gard to the Polish churches, the ministers, " and the far greater part of the members, were " either noblemen, or eminent scholars, or '^ both.^^ Again ; " It is remarkable that So- 270 LETTER Vli. ^' cinians seldom a ] dress their peculiar senti- '' ments to the populace^ but generally to gen- '' tlemen of eminent learning and abilities. ^^ Though this is inconsistent with that profes- ^' sion of the simplicity of revelation, which they " so commonly treat of in all their accounts of ^' the Gospel, as it was written by the Evange- " lists ; yet it is perfectly agreeable to that ''philosophical, scientijick mode of expounding it, '' which they have thought proper to adopt, and ^' v.hich will probably always put it out of the ^' power of man to render Socinianism popu- ci lar.'^^ Are these facts ? Then there is assuredly something f.dse and rotten in the system to which they belong. That mode of interpreting and exhibiting the religion of Jesus Christ which cannot be adapted to the capacities of the poor, the ignorant, and, in general, to the low- est classes of society ; that system, calling itself Christianity, whi h is ever found to flourish most among the rich, the splendid, and the lux- urious ; and to languish when attempted to be propagated in the humbler walks gf life: that * Hcclesiasiifal Researches, p. 604, 605, 623. LETTER \ II. 271 system whicli^ indeed, none but the ranks in some degree literary, can understand or relish : that system, in fine, which takes away almost THE WHOLE of the MOTIVES wliich the Orthodox feel for endeavouring to send the glad tidings of salvation to the ends of the earth — cannot, I will venture to say, be the system which is found in the Gospel of the grace of God. It cannot be the system which our blessed Lord described, when, in the synagogue at Nazareth^ He appli- ed these words of the Prophet to himself — The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor ; He hath sent me to heal the broken hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recover- ing of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised : or, when, in answer to the in- quiry of John^s disciples, who He was. He said — Go, and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see : the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk ; the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear ; the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached unto them, VI. One more insurmountable Objection to the Unitarian system with me, is, that Infidels 272 LETTER VII. EVERY WHERE PREFER THIS SYSTEM TO ANY OTHER THAT BEARS THE CHRISTIAN NAME, aild feel no reluctance to uniting in worship with its adherents. It is not an Uncommon thing for Unitarians to boast, that avowed Deists, on hearing, or read- ing the discourses of their distinguished preach- ers, have greatly admired them ; and declared, that if the system exhibited in them were Chris- tianity, they had no longer any difficulty in taking the name of Christian. I have been credibly informed of repeated instances of this kind in reference to the Rev. Mr. Channing^s sermon, preached and published in Baltimore. Unitarians consider this fact as a most potent argument in favour of their creed ; as an argu.- ment, that it is so rational, and so strongly com- mends itself to common sense, that even infidels bow to its authority. But is it not a much more direct and powerful proof of something very different ; viz. that Unitarianisnl and Infidelity are so closely allied, that he who embraces the one, has really no good reason for objecting to the other ? This, I have no doubt, is the r;eal ground of the fact ii^ question. And; iadeed^ how can LETTER vn. 273 it be otherwise ? The prevalent system of Uni- tarianism at the present day, not only makes Christ a mere man, and discards the whole doc- trine of Redemption ; but also, as you have seen, rejects the inspiration of the scriptures ; and, in short, presents a system reduced so nearly to a level with the Deistical scheme, and allows so much latitude of belief and of feeling, with re- gard to what is left, that the Deist must be fastidious indeed, who would feel much repug- nance to joining in communion with a Unitarian society. Dr. Priestley seems to have been very much of this opinion ; for, in writing to a Uni- tarian friend, co!ficerning a gentleman who had been commonly reputed a Deist, he observes — '' He is generally considered as an unbeliever : ^' IF SO, HOV/EVER, HE CANNOT BE FAR FROM ^' US ; and I hope in the way to be not only al- ^' most but altogether what we are."* Mr. Belsham^ according to a representation given in a former Letter, explicitly acknowledges, that Unitarianism does not differ, in any important point, from serious Deism; and, in another * See Historti of American Unitananism. M2 274 LETTER VII. place, does not hesitate to avow, that he would much rather embrace Deism than Orthodoxy.*^ So Infidels themselves view the matter. They have little objection to the prevalent forms of Unitarianism ; not because they are willing to approximate to real Christianity ; but because they see something, under the name of Christi- anity, NEARLY APPROACHING TO THEM. Thc Editors of the French Encyclopedic^ under thc article Geneva^ express themselves thus — ^* Many ministers of Gcjieva have no other re- ^' ligion than complete Socinianism, rejecting all '^ they call mystery j and supposing it to be the ^^ first principle of true religion to propose ^^ nothing for belief contrary to reason. Thus, '' when we press them on the necessity of Reve- '' lation, a position so essential to Christianity, ^^ many of them substitute in its place utility ^ '' which appears to them a softer term. In this, ^' if they are not orthodox, they are at least " consistent. At Geneva^ thei'e is less com- " plaint made than elsewhere of the progress of '' infidelity ; which ought to excite no surprise : '^ religion is there reduced almost entirely to thc * Sevievf of l^ilberforce. LETTER VIL 275 '^ worship of one God, at least with all above ^^ the lowest ranks. Respect for Jesus Christy '^ and the Scriptures, is, perhaps, the only thing ^^ which distinguishes the Christianity of Geneva ^' from pure Deism/' Again; under the article UnitariafiSf they speak as follows — '* The Unitarians have al- ^^ ways been regarded as christian divines who ^^ had only broken and torn off a few branches •^^ of the tree, but who still held to the trunk ; ^^ whereas they ought to have been considered ^' as a sect of philosophers, who, not willing to ^^ give too violent a shock to the worship and *^ opinions, true or false, which were then re- ^^ceived, did not choose openly to avow pure ^^ Deism, and reject formally, and without re- ^' serve, every kind of revelation ; but who were ^^ continually doing with respect to the Old and ^' New Testament, what Epicurus did with res- ^' pect to the gods ; admitting them verbal- ^^ LY, but DESTROYING THEM REALLY. In fact, ^^ the Unitarians received only those parts of ^^ scripture which they found conformable to ^^ the natural dictates of reason, and which ^^ served to support and confirm the systems ^^ which they had embraced. A man becomes a 276 LETTER VIL ^' Protestant. Soon perceiving the inconsisteu-' ^' cy of the principles which characterize Fro- ^' testantism, he applies to Socinianism for a ^^ solution of his doubts and difficulties ; and he ^^ becomes a Socinian. From Socinianism to ^^ Deism there is but an imperceptible shade; ^^ and a single step to take— and he takes it." In coincidence with this representation, it cannot be denied, that the ti'ansitions from Uni- tarianism to open infidelity ; — the instances in which the single, short step, just referred to, has been taken, have been numerous in Great Brit- ain, and in the United States, as well as on the continent oi Europe, Nay, instances have not been wanting of their students of theology, and even their ministers, becoming avowed Deists> and even Atheists. The history of the Acade- my at Hackney, in England, presents a strik- ing number of very instructive memorials on this subject. Mr. Belsham himself does not deny it. " This fact,'^ says he, " to a certain extent, can- " not be denied ; and most surely it excited " unpleasing sensations in many, and not least ^^in the minds of those whose endeavours to LETTER VIT. 277 '' form them to usefulness in the churchy were; " thus painfully disappointed.'' Nor is a fact^ the counterpart of that which I have just stated, less striking. It is the fact that Deists are peculiarly apt to unite in plans and worship with Unitarians. Accordingly, if is, I believe, notorious, that, in all those places, in our Middle and Southern States, in which Unitarian congregations have been organized^ within a few years past, a number of Deists have joined them, and become attendants on their worship ; and that without any change of opinion. They have alledged, that, ^fc^ich places of public worship, they seldom or never heard any thing that wounded their feelings, or interfered with their principles, and that they were fond of the good moral lectures which they commonly heard from the preachers. They have remarked, indeed, that a few of the clergymen who ministered to these congrega- tions, (as for example, now and then an Arian w'ho came along) were a little more serious, and disposed to make rather more of the Scriptures, and of Christ, than the other Unitarian preach- ers were wont to do ; and this they could wish 278 LETTER VIL were otherwise. But, then, they have remark- ed, at the same time, that, as the highest Arians, and the lowest Socinians, appeared to regard each other with entire complacency, and evi- dently made a common cause ; and as the most serious of them were infinitely less revolting than the Orthodox, they have, in general, felt very comfortably at home among them. Some who attend at Unitarian places of worship, upon principles, and with feelings of this kind, I per- sonally know ; of others I have heard, and have no doubt they are numerous. But I must bring this long Letter to a close. If the foregoing objections be well founded ; if Unitarianism be averse to a candid avowal of its own principles ; if it be chargeable with ,a characteristick indifference to truth ; if it be hostile to the exercises of vital piety ; if it strik- ingly fail of yielding support and consolation in death ; if it be peculiarly deficient with respect to the spirit of missions ; and, finally, if it be nearly allied to Deism, and be universally pre- ferred by Deists, to any other system which bears the christian name ; — need we ^further tes- timony tha^it is not the religion of Jesus Christy hut ANOTHER GOSPEL ? LETTER VIII. Objections likely to he made by Unitarians to the foresoing statements — Mswer — Mvice with respect to the prop^ er manner of treating Unitarians- — Reasons in support of that advice — Concluding Remarks and Counsels. Christian Brethren, I HAVE endeavoured, in the foregoing pages, to the best of my knowledge and understanding, to set before you a portrait of Unitarianism as it really is. I can sincerely say, that I have not, intentionally, distorted or magnified a sin- gle feature. My aim has been to inform you, not merely what the adherents of this system say of themselves ; but also what the pious have said of them, in all ages ; and, further, what consequences, both in regard to doctrine and practice, appear to me naturally, and indeed 280 LETTER VIIE necessarily, to flow from their fundamental prin- ciples. And the whole has been done with the sole view of assisting you in forming a judgment^ how they and their principles ought to be re- garded by Christians. It is probable that many Unitarians will tell you, that the picture I have drawn is not a cor- rect likeness ; that the representation given of their opinions, is altogether erroneous. And I have no doubt that some who go under the gen- eral name of Unitarians, may with truth say^ that they abhor some of the sentiments which I have set down as parts of Unitarianism. But what would such persons wish us to do ? Here are embattled hosts, drawing near the camp of our Master and King, and manifesting every disposition to destroy both Him and us. They send us word, that they are willing to be at peace with us, on condition that we suffer them to come into our camp, and to vilify and stab our beloved Lord at pleasure. And when we decline to receive them as friends on these terms, they complain of us, as narrow-minded and unsocial, and even bitter and ^malignant. Some of thi^ hostile army; are particularly loud LETTER VIII. 281 in their complaints of the injustice of our refu- sal. " Why/' say they, "will you refuse to ad- " mit us into your camp, since we by no means " carry our enmity to you and your king, so far ^' as the great mass of our associates. We ex- " ceedingly disapprove of a great deal that they " have said and done. Why, therefore, should " we be treated as if we resembled them ? Sure- " ly this is not equitable." Our reply is, doubt- less, anticipated — " We cannot receive! you, or " treat you otherwise than we do your associates " in arms. You confess that, although not so '' intensely hostile as they are, you are still ene- " mies to the dignity and kingdom of our Mas- '' ter. Tbis is enough for us. We have no wish '* to receive known and avowed foes into our ** camp. But if we were willing to take per- " sons of your character by the hand, still we " could not consistently do it, as long as you re- " main connected with the worst of our oppo- ^' sers. You say, you entirely disapprove '' of much that they have said and done ; but " still you take their name ; you follow their ^^ leader ; you fight in their ranks ; you aid and " abet them in all that they do ; nay, you " ajre not willing to be friends with us^ unles? N 2 g82 LETTER VIIL ^^ we will consent to take them to our friendship ^^ with you. We will receive neither. We must ^^ treat you all alike. As to all practical results^ ^' you are equally guilty with them." Where is the injustice of this answer? It applies, most exactly, to the case before us. Although there may be some in the Unitarian camp in the United States y who are by no means prepared to degrade the character of the Sa- viour to mere fallible and peccable humanity; and who are far from wholly denying, either his Atonement, or the inspiration of his Word ; yet as long as they countenance, assist, and defend those who do go the whole length of all this ; and as this is evidently understood to be the predominant system of Unitarianism in ouj* country, there can be no injustice in pursuing the course which I have done. It is against the system as it prevalently exists, that we wish to warn christians ; and especially as we believe that even the more softened and plausi- ble forms of the general scheme, have, in reali- ty the same spirit ^ and are leading to the same issue. »• LETTER VIII. 283 It is not improbable that some Unitarians may further object, that I have not, after stat- ing each testimony or argument, in the forego- ing pages, annexed the Unitarian reply; so that my readers might be able to weigh what is al- ledged on both sides. I answer, the volume is larger than I intended, as it is ; but if I had done this, it must have swelled to twice or thrice its present size. Besides, is this demand reasonable? Do our opponents act upon it themselves ? Do no Unitarians allow themselves to state and enforce their own interpretations of scripture, and their own arguments, without stopping after each, to exhibit all, or the sub- stance of all, that learned and able Trinitarians, have said against them ? They will not pretend that they do this. I can, however, assure you, my Christian Friends, that, in each case, as far as was in my power, I have carefully weighed v^rhat Unitarians are accustomed to say in reply to my testimonies and arguments ; and have of- fered none, but what appeared to me to remain in full force, after all they have urged. You are now, I trust, prepared, without hes- itation^ to answer the questions which were ask- iS4 LETTER VIIl. ed toward the close of the first Letter ; — viz— What estimate you ought to form of the opinions of Unitarians ? How you ought to treat their persons? How to consider their /?r(?«6'Am^? How to act with respect to their publications F Wheth- er you ought to regard them as Christians at all ? Whether their congregations ought to he called churches of Christ? And whether the crdinances which they administer ought to be sustained as valid ? You are prepared^ I hope, to decide, promptly and without wavering, that they are by no means to be considered as CHBiSTiANS, in any scriptural sense of the word ; that their preaching is to be avoided as blasphemy ; their publications to be abhorred as pestiferous ; their ordinances to be held un- worthy of regard as christian institutions; and their persons to be in all respects treated as de- cent AND SOBER DeISTS IN DISGUISE. Such is the estimate which I feel constrained to form for myself; and, of course, that which I wish to im- press upon your minds. And, if I do not de- ceive myself, you have seen enough to preclude all doubt as to its justice. If they reject every fundamental doctrine of the religion of Christy they, of course, reject ehristianity ; if they ve~ LETTER VIII. 28o ject Christianity^ they, surely, are not christians ;. if they are not christians, their congregations, evidently, ought not to be called churches, nor their ordinances considered as valid : and, these things being so, you ought to regard a propo- sition to go and hear them preach, or to read their publications, as you would a proposition to hear a preacher of open infidelity, or to read an artful publication of a follower of Herbert or of Hume, I have said, that Unit.ariaus ought to be con- sidered and treated as Deists in disguise. I beg that this language may not be misconstrued. It is by no means my intention to intimate, for I do not believe, that Unitarians are, as a sect, a set of hypocrites ; that they profess one thing, and really believe another. I have no reason to doubt that they are as sincere in their profession of belief, that is, that they as really believe what X\\Q^Y profess to believe, as any of us all. But my meaning is, that, while they assume, and insist on retaining the christian name, their creed real- ly does not differ much, in substance, from that of serious Deists. Now, if this be the case, and if the fact that they are substantially Deists, be, 286 LETTER VIIL in effect, concealed from popular view by the name which they bear, what is this but being Deists under the christian name, in other words, Deists in disguise ? I certainly take no pleasure in using offensive language. On the contrary, I can truly say, that every thing of this kind which I have employed in these Letters has been extorted from me by a painful sense of du- ty ; but my obligation to state that which I deem both true, and highly important to the best in- terests of mankind, is paramount to all consider- ations of delicacy or ceremony. My advice to refuse all attendance on the preaching, and to avoid all perusal of the publi- cations, of Unitarians, will, perhaps, appear to some, of more dubious propriety. " What V^- some may be ready to say, " are you so great ^' an enemy to free inquiry, and so fearful of the *• effects of it on your own cause, as to oppose ^' the reading of works hostile to what you deem '' truth ? How are the friends of orthodoxy to *'• be establishe^d in the faith, but by temperate ^' and candid discussion ? And how is such dis- '' cussion to be impartially conducted,^ without at '* least the occasional perusal of books written in LETTER VIII. 2Sf ^' opposition to the truth ?'' This plea appears, at first view, by no means destitute of plausibil- ity ; but will be found, I think, when carefully examined, wholly without force. I am a warm friend to free and impartial in- quiry ; and where persons have leisure, a taste for reading, and such habits of investigation as qualify them for the task, I think it my duty to encourage extensive reading on both sides of the most fundamental subjects wliich become matter of controversy. Those who are called to defend the truth, are especially and solemnly bound to make themselves acquainted, as far as they have opportunity, with the diversified arts and re- fuges of error ; and even some of those who are not ofiicial defenders of the faith, may, profitably to themselves, and usefully to others, employ a portion of their time in examining the works of hereticks, and even of the worst hereticks. Such an examination, when properly conducted, will tend to confirm their faith; to enlarge their minds and views ; to put them on their guard against the spirit of Antichrist; and to render the truth as it is in Jesus more dear to their hearts. No man was ever yet injured by an enlightened, de- 288 LETTER YIII. voutj and cautious investigation of the ground on which he rests. And I will venture to add^ that if any man will honestly; and patiently read both sides of the Unitarian controversy ; if he will, with diligence, and prayer, and candour^ do ample justice to the best works in support of that system, as well as to the best in opposition to it, I have no fear of the result. I have no doubt that the further he proceeds in this course, the more he will discover of the perni- cious and blasphemous character of that '* God- denying heresy/' which it is the object of these pages to exhibit and oppose. But where persons have little leisure or taste for reading ; where they have no opportu- nity of perusing the ablest works which have been written in favour of the personal glory and work of the Redeemer, and no conscientious, set- tled purpose of procuring and studying them ; — in short, where they do not firmly resolve to go deeply into the subject, and do something like full justice to both sides in the dispute ; then let them carefully avoid Unitarian publications. To do otherwise would be like swallowing poi- son, without accompanying or following it with LETTER VIIT. 289 the requisite antidote. Many a man has begun with the intention of reading no more than an occasional pamphlet or two on the side of her- esy, and fully resolving, at the same time, to study some of the best replies, or other respec- table treatises, on the opposite side : but as he advanced, his taste for the former daily increas- ed ; they soothed his feelings, flattered his pride, and drew him insensibly into the snare. He forgot his resolution to read on the side of truth; and, in a little while, became confirm* ed in fundamental error, without any thing that deserv