Letters on Unitarianism; addressed to the members of the First Presbyterian church, in the city of Baltimore

Letter II

Prejudices cherished by many against Orthodoxy — First Prejudice, that Orthodoxy is austere and repulsive- Considered, and an attempt made to remove it — Second Prejudice, 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 persesecuting spirit— Refuted.— p. 36—70,

Subject continued — Fourth Prejudice— against every thing Mysterious in Religion— Examined, and sherm to

Contents

be unreasonable — Danger of adopting it as a general principle— Fifth Prejudice — The authority of Great Names — This plea wholly unsound, and unscriptural—*- So far as it has force, proved to be more in favour of Orthodoxy than of Unitarianism, — p. 71 HO.

Letter IV

The Scriptures the only rule of faith and practice—Testimony of Scripture. decisive in favour of Orthodoxy — - The Early Fathers equally clear in support of the same — Barnabas — Clemens Romanus — Poly carp —

Ignatius Irenceus — - Theophilus— Justin Martyr*—

Melito — Athenagoras- — Tatian — Clemens Alexandrinus — Andronicus — Tertullian — Minucius Felix — Origen — Cyprian — Dio nysius of Alexandria — Nova-

gus — Athanasius — -Martyrs worshipped Christ. — p? Ill 148.

Letter V

Subject continued — Testimony drawn from the Heresies of the first four centuries — Cerinthians—Ebionites— Martian — Theodotus—A rtemon—Noetus — Praxeas — Paul of Samosata — Arius — Macedonius — These hereticks denied the name of Christians—Their Baptisms pronounced void— Testimony of Pagans — Pliny — Hierocles—

CONTENTS, vn

Celsus — -Lucian — Witnesses of the Truth — Paulicians — Waldenses — Wickliffites — Hussites— Reformers — Remarks on this testimony, — p. 149 ISO,

Unitarians reject the inspiration of the Scriptures— Difference between them and the Orthodox with respect to the proper office of Reason in examining revelation — Ob jtctions to the Unitarian principle on this subject- Quotations from Unitarian writers, shewing that they really act upon the principle ascribed to them — Specimens of Unitarian exposition — Consequences of this mode of expounding the word of God. — p, 191 >23£ 3

Letter VII

Truth to be tried by its practical influence — Objections to Unitarianism on this ground — Unitarianism disposed to deny or conceal its principles — Indifferent to truth- Hostile to the exercises of Vital Piety — Deficient in yielding support and consolation in Death — Unfriendly to the Spirit of Missions — Every where more agreeable to Infidels, than any other system which bears the Christian name. — p. 235 -278,

LETTER VIII. Objections likely to be made by Unitarians to the foregoingvni

CONTENTS.

statements — Answer — Advice with respect to thepmp er manner of treating Unitarians — Reasons in suppor of that advice— Concluding Remarks and Counsel**— p. 279—312,

LETTERS, &q

Letter I

introductory Remarks— Design of these Letters-' Unites rian Creed — Importance of the subject.

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 obloquy 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 attack, and my sermon on that occasion a subject of protracted and tedioas discussion. I have seldom been more surprised than to find, that a few plain sentences, which were delivered

LETTEit 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 Massachusetts, 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 might not join in "idolatrous devotions;" and on their return, to strew on a Communion table, which happened to be spread on that day, a parcel of Socinian tracts, and pamphlets.* 1 have heard of nothing quite equal to this in th,e United States; but, from present appearances, am by no means confident that something of the same

, *Ryland's Partiality and Unscriptural Direction of Socman Zeal, p. 3-9 e kind will not soon be exhibited. Now, though I have no fear of the influence of all this on the minds of those who read, and think, and inquire, and pray: yet there may be others to whom an antidote is not wholly unnecessary. The sagacious and eloquent Mr. Burke has somewhere said, u Let us only suffer any peril son, however manifestly he may be in the wrong, "to tell us his story, morning and evening, but " for one twelve-month, and he will be our mas- M ter/' In almost every congregation there is a considerable number to whom this maxim applies with peculiar force. The young and inexperienced, who are not aware of the insidious arts of error; the busy, who nave but little taste for reading, and little time or disposition for profound 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 system;— all these, when frequently assailed by the zealous, the confident, and the talkative patrons of heresey, 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

Letter i.

most triumphant tone, praise the Unitarian syStern, as the only enlightened, liberal, benevolent and rational system, and its adherents as decisively the most learned, amiable, ai d pioti? friends of truth, and candid inquiry; and, on the other hand, stigmatize its opponents, as narrow-minded, prejudiced, austere, righteous overmuch, and enemies of liberal thinking; — when they find these representations made every dayj and repeated without contradiction, they will be apt at length to believe them. When they find jso many confident assertions, so many plausible professions, and so many high authorities, vaunted 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 favour of what they hear called heresey, 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 write. 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 go through a small -manual. And though they would not perhaps 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 respectfully and earnestly entreat your serious attention to this subject. Pass it not by as an unimportant 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 enemies. Recollect, too, that the native tendency of 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 modified, as to give them as little trouble;.

LETTER I.

and subject them to as little restraint, as possible,. Many others are in reality infidels; but are unwilling 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 themselves; and, therefore, are disposed to resort to something which bears the name of Christianity, while it makes few demands, either on their faith or practice, essentially different from their infidel 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 supremely love the world, and the things of the world. — All these will be naturally apt to take refuge in Unitarianism; especially if it be recommended 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 feeling; will call for less self-denial; and will more readily accommodate itself to every sort of pur suit and habit, except that which is righf, than any other scheme which calls itself by the rjamo.

LETTER I.

of Christianity. These considerations, my Friends, ought very solemnly to impress your minds. If sucli be the natural tendency of the human heart, who can say that he has no interest in the subject? Even supposing that you are in no danger yourselves from these temptations — a 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 will 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 lo undertake the dis eussion of the general subject. The limits to which I confine myself, do not admit of this. Nor is it necessary. My purpose is, to treat, 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 doubting inquirer, or of putting on his guard one whose foot was about to slide, I shall consider myself as most richly rewarded.

I hope, my Christian Friends, it is unnecessary 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, the most hearty good will, and the most unfeigned desire to pro-

LETTER I.

mote their welfare, have actuated me in this undertaking, and in ail that I have written. No attack on private character is intended, [f 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 principles. 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. Deliberately 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 profess 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

£0

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 ot 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 pupular mind, that those who bear it, are the only believers in one God, while all others believe in a plurality of Gods. Be on your guard, I pray y^u, against this illusion; for, whether intended or not, it deserves no other name. The Orthodox, it is well known, contend for the Unity of God as steadfastly and zealously as Unitarians, or any other denomination, have ever done. But when we speak of Unitarians, we mean to point

St tut those who reject the Bible doctrine of the Trinity in Unity; who contend that there is in Jehovah bat one Person, as well as one Essence; and who, with the doctrine of the Trinity, reject all the other peculiar and fundamental doctrines of the Gospel. Those who bear this name, are, indeed, by no means Jagreed among themselves. Some entertain a higher opinion of the Redeemers character than others, as well as different sentiments on some other fundamental doctrines of Christianity. It is obviously impossible, therefore, in any one statement, to exhibit the opinions of all who profess to belong to this general denomination. But the great body of those who call themselves Unitarians in Great Britain and the United States, substantially agree, it is believed, in the following 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 earliest and most mischievous of those corruptions a This is so well known, that no proof or illustration of it is required.

LETTER I.

They believe that Christ was a mere max; 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, bet liable to six, 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."t Mr. Belsham goes further, ^and suffers himself to speak in the following shocking terms: "The Unitarian " doctrine is, that Jesus of Xazareth was a man "constituted in all respects like other men, sub- "ject to the same infirmities, the same igxor-

" rians maintain, that Jesus and his apostles

" were supernatural!) 7 instructed, as far as was

" necessary for the execution of their commis-

" siori; 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

"the Jews; and that Jesus and his Apostles, and

* History of the Corruptions of Christianity, 1. p. 2* + Ibid. p. 6.

" others of the primitive believers, were occasion* u §\\y inspired to foretel future events. But " they believe that supernatural inspiration was "limited to these cases alone; and that when u Je-us or his Apostles deliver opinions upon K Subjects unconnected with the object of their "mission, such opinions, and their reasonings "upon them, are to be received with the same u attention and caution, with those of other u persons, in similar^ circumstances, of similar "education, and with similar habits of think- M ing." Further, he says, "The moral characu ler of Christ, through the whole course of his "publick ministry, as recorded by the Evangelu ists, is pure and unimpeachable in every paru 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^ u through the whole course of his private life, u was completely exempt from all the errors and " frailties of human nature, is a question of m "great intrinrick moment, and concerning which 44 we have no sufficient data to lead to a satis* factory conclusion.' 1 * In another work, Mn

*Ca!m Inquiry into the Scripture Doctrine concerning' the Person of Christ, p. 190. 447', 451.

Belsham, in consistency with the foregoing statement, 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 " for religious addresses to him, nor of gratitude "for favours now received, nor yet of confidence a 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. f 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 a phraseology of the scriptures." — And again s "The controversy (respecting the personality of "the Holy Spirit,) is almost as much at rest as 8 that concerning transubstantiation. r j

* Review of JPilberforce, fyc. Letter VIIL p. 74. j Hist, of the Corruptions, &c. 1.88. \ Review of Wilberforce, SfC. Vlh

LETTER 1.

As Unitarians reject the Divinity of Christ, so they also reject the Doctrine of his atonement. Dr. Priestley says, this doctrine is "one ci of the radical, as well as the most generally pre- " vailing corruptions of the Christian scheme/" And again, he calls it, "a disgrace to Christianity, and a load upon it, which it mast " either throw off, or sink under."* Further, he say.-, "Christ being only a man, his death i; could not in any proper sense of the word, "atone for the sins of other men^j Again, he asserts, that "in no part either of the Old or * 6 New Testament, do we ever find, asserted or '"explained, the principle on which the doctrine "of atonement is founded: but that, on the 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."| Rdsham, on

this subject, declares — "The death ot Jesus is "sometimes called a propitiation, because it put "an end to the Mosaic economy, and introduced a new and more liberal dispensasioiu f Hist* of the Corruptions of Christianity, l.jp. 227r t TheoL Repos. Up. 263.

LETTER I.

" under whieh the Gentiles, who were before re- & l 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. Jt is "also occasionally called a sacrifice, being the "ratification of that new covenant into which "God is pleased to enter with his human offspring, by which a resurrection to immortal "life and happiness is promised, without distinction, to all who are truly virtuous. Believ- " ers in Christ are also said to have Redemption "though his blood, because they are releas-

" SED, BY THE CHRISTIAN COVENANT, FROM " THE YOKE OF THE CEREMONIAL LAW, AND " FROM THE BONDAGE OF IDOLATRY."*

They further, deny Original sin. They say that all men come into the world perfectly innocent and pure; as entirely free from the least taint of moral pollution as Adam was, when he first came from the hands of the Creator; that he is by nature no more inclined to tice than to VIRTUE; that he derives from, his ancestors a frail and mortal nature: is made with appetites which fit him for the condition in

f Review of WUberforce, (J-c. Letter II,

LETTER I, which God has placed him; but 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 occasion of error and sin: that he has reason and conscience to direct the conduct of life, which may yet be neglected, perverted and misguide 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 those of any other man. They assert that the

* See Priestly and Bflsham- — And also Professor Ware's Letters, p. 20, 21.

.28

LETTER I,

PRACTICE OF VIRTUE is the ONLY GROUND OF

mope; and that any other plan of justification is unscriptural an<J absurd.

They believe that all the human race will family be saved. This was D r. 'Priestley's opinion. Mr. Belsham also expresses himself on the subject in the following terms: "We may Vt certainly conclude that none of the creau ?ures of Gob, in any circumstances, will u be eternally miserable. The wicked will a indeed be raised to suffering; but since eteiv & nal misery, for temporary crime, is inconsistent with every principle of justice, we are u naturally led to conclude, that the sufferings "of the wicked will be remedial, and that they "will terminate in a complete purification from ^ moral disorder, and in their ultimate restora* u tion to virtue and happiness."* The truth is, that although the Unitarian Purgatory differs in several respects from that of the Papists, it is 3 nevertheless, as real a Purgatory; having the same substantial characters, and being equally opposedjo the whole current of scripture.

* Review of Wilberforce, &c* Letter th

LETTER I.

Finally; the Unitarians reject the inspiration of the Scriptures. "The scriptures," says Dr. Priestly, were written without "any partic- 6 ular inspiration, by men who wrote accord- " ing to the best of their knowledge, and who, "from their circumstance:?, 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 explicitely 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. "t

To this list of Unitarian opinions, I might add, if it were necessary, a number of othej?

* History of early Opinions, IV* p. 4. 5. | Review } &c. Letter I.

3* so

LETTER I.

ariicles; such as the materiality of the soul; — the consequent denial ef 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 principle difficulty which it has to encounter is to "make men zealous in refusing "to believe."* It is plain, also, that Unitarians reject every one of what we deem the peculiar and essential doctrines of the Gospel. According lo 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

* J\Ir. Wells's Letter, contained in a "Brief History of the Progress and Present State of the Unitarian Churches in America"

LETTER X

Intercessor; nothing that can with propriety be called grace: all — all is figurative, cold, inadequate and unsatisfying.

In short, Christianity, if Unitarianism be the truth, is nothing more than a republication of the religion of nature, with very small additional 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 understand me as asserting, that all Unitarians adopt every one of these opinions. But I have no doubt that they are all adopted by the general^ ty of that denomination. Be not deceived, then, when the charge is denied, ever so strongly, by individuals^ 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 leaders of their sect, at present, in Europe and America^ do not, substantially, so believe \ and whether the spirit of their system does not g# the whole length of my statement.

Such, then, is Unitarianism. How far it differs from Deism, I leave you to judge. Mr. Belsham, who is now at the head of the Unitarians in England, gives it as his opinion, that Uiuiarianism differs with respect to no important doctrine from the system of the deistical Theophilanthropists of France* Speaking of those Deists, he explicitly says, c, Their profes- ;t sed principles comprehend the essence of u the Christian religion.''* And, truly, I can recollect no feature of the Christian religion admitted 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 doctrines 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

* Review, p. 217.

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 publications are continually offered for your perusal: and you are often tempted, if not solicited, to attend on their preaching. The questions, then, how you ought to estimate their opinions; how to treat their persons-, how to act with regard to their publications; 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 ordinances 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 questions in such a manner as God and your own consciences shall approve,