God, to weaken the sense of responsibility, to break the spirit, and to loosen the restraints on guilty passion.

5. Another objection urged against us, is, that our system does not produce as much seal, seriousness, and piety as other views of religion. This objection it is difficult to repel, except by language which will seem to be a boasting of ourselves. When expressed in plain language, it amounts to this-" We Trinitarians and Calvinists are better and more pious than you Unitarians, and consequently our system is more scriptural than yours." Now assertions of this kind do not strike us as very modest and humble, and we believe, that truth does not require us to defend it by setting up our piety above that of our neighbours.-This, however, we would say, that if our zeal and devotion are faint, the fault is our own, not that of our doctrine. We are sure that our views of the Supreme Being are incomparably more affecting and attractive, than those which we oppose. It is the great excellence of our system, that it exalts God, vindicates his paternal attributes, and appeals powerrily to the ingenuous principles of love, gratitude and veneration; and when we compare it with the doctrines which are spread around us, which make God a despot, and religion an offering of abject fear, we feel that of all men we are most inexcusable, if a filial piety do not spring up and grow strong in our hearts.

Perhaps it may not be difficult to suggest some causes for the charge, that our views do not favour seriousness and zeal. One reason probably is, that we interpret with much rigour those precepts of Christ, which forbid ostentation, and enjoin modesty and retirement in devotion. We dread a showy religion. We are disgusted with pretensions to superior sanctity, that stale and vulgar way of building up a sect. We believe that true religion speaks in actions more than in words, and manifests itself chiefly in the common temper and life; in giving up the passions to God's authority, in inflexible uprightness and truth, in active and modest charity, in candid judgment, and in patience under trials and injuries. We think it no part of piety to publish its fervours, but prefer a delicacy in regard to these secrets of the soul; and hence, to those persons, who think that religion is to be worn conspicuously and spoken of passionately, we may seem cold and dead, when, perhaps, were the heart uncovered, it might be seen to be "alive to God," as truly as their own.

Again, it is one of our principles, flowing necessarily from our views of God, that religion is cheerful; that where its natural tendency is not obstructed by false theology, or a gloomy temperament, it opens the heart to every pure and innocent

pleasure. We do not think, that piety disfigures its face, or wraps itself in a funeral pall as its appropriate garb. Now too many conceive of religion as something solemn, sad, and never to be named but with an altered tone and countenance; and where they miss these imagined signs of piety, they can hardly believe that a sense of God dwells in the heart.

Another cause of the error in question, we believe to be this. Our religious system absolutely excludes those overwhelming terrors and transports, and those sudden changes of the character, which many think essential to piety. We do not believe in shaking and disordering men's understandings by excessive fear, as a preparation for supernatural grace and immediate conversion. This we regard as a dreadful corruption and degradation of religion. Religion, we believe, is a gradual and rational work, beginning ordinarily in education, confirmed by reflexion, growing by the regular use of Christian means, and advancing silently to perfection. Now, because we specify no time when we were overpowered and created anew by irresistible impulse; because we relate no agonies. of despair succeeded by miraculous light and joy, we are thought by some to be strangers to piety-how reasonably let the judicious determine.

Once more; we are thought to want zeal, because our principles forbid us to use many methods for spreading them, which are common with other Christians. Whilst we value highly our peculiar views, and look to them for the best fruits of piety, we still consider ourselves as bound to think charitably of those who doubt or deny them; and with this conviction, we cannot enforce them with that vehemence, positiveness, and style of menace, which constitute much of the zeal of certain denominations,-and we freely confess, that we would on no account exchange our charity for their seal; and we trust that the time is near, when he, who holds what he deems truth with lenity and forbearance, will be accounted more pious than he who compasses sea and land to make proselytes to his sect, and "shuts the gates of mercy" on all who will not bow their understandings to his creed.-We fear, that in these remarks we may have been unconsciously betrayed into a self-exalting spirit. Nothing could have drawn them from us, but the fact, that a very common method of opposing our sentiments is to decry the piety of those who adopt them. After all, we mean not to deny our great deficiencies. We have nothing to boast before God, although the cause of truth forbids us to submit to the censoriousness of our brethren.

6.

Another objection to our views, is, that they lead to a rejection of revelation. Unitarianism has been pleasantly called " a half-way house to infidelity." Now to this objection we need not oppose general reasonings. We will state a plain fact. It is this. A large proportion of the most able and illustrious defenders of the truth of Christianity have been Unitarians; and our religion has received from them, to say the least, as important service in its conflicts with infidelity, as from any class of Christians whatever. From the long catalogue of advocates of Christianity among Unitarians, we can select now but a few; but these few are a host.-The name of John Locke is familiar to every scholar. He is revered as the father of the true philosophy of the human mind; nor is this his highest praise. His writings on government and toleration contributed, more than those of any other individual, to the diffusion of free and generous sentiments through Europe and America; and perhaps Bishop Watson has not greatly exaggerated, when he says, "This great man has done more for the establishment of pure Christianity than any author I am acquainted with." He was a laborious and successful student of the scriptures. His works on the "Epistles of Paul," and on the "Reasonableness of Christianity," formed an era in sacred literature; and he has the honour of having shed a new and bright light on the darkest parts of the New Testament, and in general on the Christian system. Now Locke, be it remembered, was a Unitarian.-We pass to another intellectual prodigy, to Newton, a name which every man of learning pronounces with reverence; for it reminds him of faculties so exalted above those of ordinary men, that they seem designed to help our conceptions of superior orders of being. This great man, who gained by intuition what others reap from laborious research, after exploring the laws of the universe, turned for light and hope to the Bible; and although his theological works cannot be compared with Locke's, yet in his illustrations of the prophecies and of scripture chronology, and in his criticisms on two doubtful passages,* which are among the chief supports of the doctrine of the Trinity, he is considered as having rendered valuable service to the Christian cause. Newton too was a Unitarian. We are not accustomed to boast of men, or to prop our faith by great names; for Christ and He only is our master; but it is with pleasure, that we find in our ranks the most gifted, sagacious, and exalted minds; and we cannot but smile, when we sometimes hear from men and

* 1 John v. 7.-1 Tim. iii. 16.

women of very limited culture, and with no advantages for enlarged inquiry, reproachful and contemptuous remarks on a doctrine, which the vast intelligence of Locke and Newton, after much study of the scriptures, and in opposition to a prejudiced and intolerant age, received as the truth of God. It is proper to state, that doubts have lately been raised as to the religious opinions of Locke and Newton, and for a very obvious reason. In these times of growing light, their names have been found too useful to the Unitarian cause. But the long and general belief of the Unitarianism of these illustrious men, can hardly be accounted for, but by admitting the fact; and we know of no serious attempts to set aside the proofs on which this belief is founded.

We pass to another writer, who was one of the brightest ornaments of the church of England and of the age in which he lived, Dr. Samuel Clarke. In classical literature and in metaphysical speculation, Dr. Clarke has a reputation which needs no tribute at our hands. His sermons are an invaluable repository of scriptural criticism; and his work on the evidences of natu ral and revealed religion, has ever been considered as one of the ablest vindications of our common faith. This great man was a Unitarian. He believed firmly that Jesus was a distinct being from his Father, and a derived and dependent being; and he desired to bring the liturgy of his church into - a correspondence with these doctrines.

To those who are acquainted with the memorable infidel controversy in the early part of the last century, excited by the writings of Bolingbroke, Tindal, Morgan, Collins, and Chubb, it will be unnecessary to speak of the zeal and power with which the Christian cause was maintained by learned Unitarians. But we must pass over these to recal a man, whose memory is precious to enlightened believers; we mean Lardner, that most patient and successful advocate of Christianity; who has written, we believe, more largely than any other author, on the evidences of the gospel; from whose works later authors have drawn as from a treasure house; and whose purity and mildness have disarmed the severity and conciliated the respect of men, of very different views from his own. Lardner was a Unitarian.-Next to Lardner, the most laborious advocate of Christianity against the attacks of infidels, in our own day, was Priestley; and whatever we may think of some of his opinions, we believe that none of his opposers ever questioned the importance of his vindications of our common faith. To these we might, perhaps, add another distinguished

name. Paley has no where declared himself a Unitarian. But in his writings we find no traces of Trinitarianism; and the uniform impression which his works have left on our minds, is, that be considered Christ as a distinct being from his Father, and a derived and subordinate being.-We certainly do not say too much, when we affirm, that Unitarians have not been surpassed by any denomination in zealous substantial service to the Christian cause. Yet we are told, that Unitarianism leads to infidelity. We are reproached with defection from that religion, round which we have gathered in the day of its danger, and from which, we trust, persecution and death cannot divorce us.

It is indeed said, that instances have occurred of persons, who, having given up the Trinitarian doctrine, have not stopt there, but have resigned one part of Christianity after another, until they have become thorough infidels. To this we answer, that such instances we have never known; but that such should occur is not improbable, and is what we even should expect; for it is natural, that when the mind has detected one error in its creed, it should distrust every other article, and should exchange its blind and hereditary assent for a sweeping scepticism. We have examples of this truth at the present moment, both in France and Spain, where multitudes have proceeded from rejecting Popery to absolute Atheism. Now who of us will argue, that the Catholick faith is true, because multitudes who relinquished it, have also cast away every religious principle and restraint; and if the argument be not sound on the side of Popery, how can it be pressed into the service of Trinitarianism? The fact is, that false and absurd doctrines, when exposed, have a natural tendency to beget scepticism in those who received them without reflection. None are so likely to believe too little as those who have begun with believing too much; and hence we charge upon Trinitarianism whatever tendency may exist in those who forsake it, to sink gradually into infidelity.

Unitarianism does not lead to infidelity. On the contrary, its excellence is, that it fortifies faith. Unitarianism is Christianity stripped of those corrupt additions, which shock reason and our moral feelings. It is a rational and amiable system, against which no man's understanding or conscience or charity or piety revolts. Can the same be said of that system, which teaches the doctrines of three equal persons in one God, of natural and total depravity, of infinite atonement, of special and electing grace, and of the everlasting misery of the non-elected part of mankind. We believe that unless Christianity, be purified from these corruptions, it will not be able to bear the unsparing