they are like a city set on a hill, and their light cannot be hid.

Even before the apostles were taken away by death, the man of sin had begun to work, and soon afterwards he almost wholly destroyed the fair face of Christianity. According to historians, a new race arose towards the end of the second century who new modelled the cause. Hitherto the churches had been edified by the plain, though sound, exhortations of the brethren; men possessing the qualifications mentioned by the apostles had been their bishops and deacons; and a few words spoken with understanding were not despised. But this soon became unfashionable and vanished away. Teaching no longer consisted in provok ing each other to love and to the performance of every good work, but in delivering long and unintelligible discourses; and those who displayed the most ingenuity, and could most readily puzzle the subject, and perplex their hearers, were esteemed the best teachers, and procured the greatest share of approbation. One departure from simplicity paved the way for another, and at last we find an academy erected for the express design of educating youths as teachers in the Ichurches. The first of these is said to have been in Alexandria in Egypt, and to have been conducted by one Pan

tenus.

Here was an institution for the purpose of teaching men to quibble. Formerly the truths of Christianity were considered so plain as that he who ran might read them: but now, in order to read them, it became necessary, not only to stop, but to set down, and devote a number of years to the study of them. After things had once assumed this new form; when men began to leave the common business of life, and to retire within the walls of a divinity school, they seem to have employed themselves in raising difficulties merely for the purpose of combatting them; subtile and useless questions were started; differences, and semi-differences were made between points of doctrine; hair breadth distinctions were insisted on in matters of faith. Thus amply furnished, they proceeded to wrangling and dispute; disordering their own imaginations, and vitiating the taste, and darkening the understandings of those whom they professed to teach. The churches having now lost all relish for their old mode of teaching, it became necessary that they should have it regularly administered under another form. This was a providential circumstance for the divi nity schools in question, which had now become crowded with finished divines. In the schools they could not al

ways remain, besides that they had now become properly qualified for wrangling; like bottles filled with new wine, they were ready to burst, unless a speedy vent were given to their frothy disputations; they had become too idle to work, and too vain to be taught; in a word, they were just fit persons for assuming authority over men's consciences, and with these, as teachers, the churches were accordingly supplied.

The effects of their teaching soon appeared. Having obtained a little smatering in philosophy, falsely so called, they could start doubts and difficulties, where nothing of the kind had before existed; they perplexed the simplest subjects, and effectually tickled the itching ears of the people, who were well pleased to pay them for the pains they took to lead their consciences and understandings into captivity.

The churches now became filled with controversy, and the priests in consequence contrived to call councils of their own order to fix, as they said, the sense of scripture. The people received their decisions, implicitly: indeed they could do no other than receive them in this way; for if it was in any way necessary that such councils should be called, it must have been in consequence of the people allowing themselves unable to judge for themselves; and, if they had been in the first instance unable to determine what was or was not truth, as it existed in the simple records of Christianity, they were certainly less so after it had run through the polluted channel of sophisticated and dogma. tical dispute. Let modern churches consider this; and, let thern see in this the real origin of all synods and associations of priests.

Having thus obtained the dominion over the consciences of the people, they availed themselves of every means in their power to preserve and extend their authority. They affected much gravity in their appearance; assumed certain kinds of dress; taught, like the philosophers, in long robes; and affixed to their names titles descriptive of certain qualities, which, in contradistinction from other men, they pretended to possess. They lived for the most part retired; confined the teaching of the churches to their own incon gruous harangues; and, as is always the case where investigation might be dangerous, the people were taught to keep at all due distance from their reverences.

Thus arose the priesthood ;-and the sacred order has been preserved by similiar means throughout succeeding ages; even now it appears holding the same place in the

the talent possessed by them is a mere nonentity, in com. parison with that which they hinder from being employed.

But if the priest will still urge his usefulness, let him shew wherein it consists. What actual benefit accrues to society from his employment? He tells us he teaches Christianity; but Christianity is taught, in a manner far superior to any thing of which he is capable, in the New Testament; there the whole appears simple and easy. The discourses of Jesus and his apostles are, in themselves, fully sufficient to give any one a complete knowledge of Christianity; and from them more may be learned in one hour, than from a thousand of the sermons which priests are in the habit of delivering from their pulpits. Instead of teaching, it appears rather to be the design of these men to darken Christianity. They represent it as being mysterious and obscure and to rescue it from this obscurity, a course of study, consisting of moral and natural philosophy, school divinity, logic, and mathematics, is indispensably ne

cessary.

By these, and such like arguments, are the great body of the people deluded, and induced to support in idleness, and often in luxury and debauchery, a race of men, to do what might be much better done without them. It may, however, be proper here to say who are meant by the term priest. By the term priest then is meant all, of every denomination, sect and party, who assume the exclusive right of teaching the societies to which they belong, from the first clergyman in Europe, down to the plain, though reverend, Methodist minister. Our Dissenters, indeed, are the weakest, and most inconsistent on this head. Their consciences will not permit them to dwell under the roof of the mother of harlots, yet they cling to the threshold of her dwelling as closely as they can. They must have their minister, and a pulpit to hold him in; he must be denomi nated the reverend, and dress like other priests, otherwise The would give offence to the pious people who built the chapel, or hurt the feelings of the lady who made the church a présent of the minister's gown, and the pulpit cushion. And, "that the word may become effectual to salvation," the Methodist parson must smooth down his hair, dress in black, assume a grave look, alter his very gait, contract his mouth, knit his brows, and cast his eyes towards the ground lest he should behold vanity. I know of nothing more calculated to make men dislike the amiable doctrines of Christianity, than such disgusting and wicked affectation in those who profess to be her teachers. The ignorant are

ever prone to identify Christianity with these vain gewgaws; in fact, it is difficult for the generality of people to read the history of divine revelation, without having associated together, in the mind, the idea of a minister and a man in a long black gown. Let no one soften down the subject by saying these things are harmless in themselves. They are indeed harmless to those who have knowledge enough to despise them, but they are far otherwise to the greater part of professing Christians. Such is the effect of them on the minds of some, that they are considered necessary to give effect to the word of God himself. If this is not so, will priests have the goodness to say why they do not lay them aside? Christianity needs not the aid of such trifles; and we find its great founder rebuking the priests of old for making use of them, and cautioning his disciples against imitating them. The titles assumed by priests are a complete burlesque on common sense. Let any one bestow those titles on men who are engaged in the common business of life, and the association will appear so ludicrous as that it might excite the smile of St. Job, or the right reverend father in God, Peter. Many of the Dissenting priests in this country are so fond of these titles, that they have been known to reprove their friends for omitting to style them "the reverend," in addressing their post letters. With these reverend gentlemen the country swarms, and yet we every day hear complaints of the scarcity of ministers. It is not enough that we have Moses and the prophets, Jesus and the apostles, to teach us; no! the scriptures are of little use to us without a priest to put a sense on them for us; for this the soldier must quit the ranks, the taylor his shopboard, and the cobbler his stall, and in company toge ther hie them away to the divinity school. After having learned to read a little Greek and Latin, to split up texts of scripture, and to bring something out of nothing, behold the priest! He is now considered fit for use, and those who can afford to give most for him, may have him. These are for the most part young men, who, in general, have a most miserable share of Christian knowledge; they are sometimes boys; but having obtained a call from heaven to undertake this work, they must of course obey; they must undertake the care of a church, and teach many who are much fitter to teach them, and who, by the way, are to sit as judges of the priest's own orthodoxy.

When these, and other absurdies connected with the priesthood are considered, need we wonder at the present dark state of men as it respects religion? surely not. This

one class has been the cause of more misery to the human race than any other description of men. The evils of priestcraft have deluged the world with human blood: how many thousands have been wantonly sacrificed to the absurd dogmas of arrogant priests! what scenes of cruelty have been exhibited by them in all ages! what ignorance, what superstition, what blindness, what licentiousness, what tyranny, what brutal stubbornness, have been covered by the habiliments of the sacred order! What a disgrace to Christianity! what an intolerable burden to society! what a curse to any nation, is the modern priesthood! It becomes the duty of every Christian to testify against these abominations; to oppose them by every proper means in his power; that Christianity may be cleansed from all such filth, and appear in the sight of the world in her native purity.

Leicester, Nov. 20, 1813.

Your's, &c.

C.

FURTHER REPLY TO C. B. WITH REMARKS ON THE COMMUNICATION OF A.

66

RELATIVE TO THE EXIS

TENCE OF HEAVEN.

To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine.

SIR,

1 HAVE to apologise to your correspondent C. B. for

having delayed the conclusion of an answer to his enquiries, which I will now proceed to give without intruding further on his time or patience. From the concise mode which I have chosen to express my sentiments of belief, in your number for April last, it may possibly occur that your correspondent C. B. may not fully understand me relative to the doctrines of faith and grace; let me therefore more fully explain.

The doctrine of faith which I reject, is that which supposes the justification of man to be made out by faith, independent of good works, as supported by Antinomians and others; and the salvation by grace that I allude to, is that supported by Calvinists and others, viz. that by the grace of God a certain number of individuals are saved from perdition, and called to a future state of glory; and this also independent of good works. Now as to the justification by faith above stated, I do not believe it; first, because it is irrational; and, secondly, because it is not taught in the scriptures. The word justification, as used in the scrip