out the rubbish and defilements which disgrace, the national church. This, from the nature of the thing, must be a process requiring time, moderation and caution; but its effects will have that lasting character which belongs to things of slow groth very ill-suited, however, it is to that intemperate zeal which it is the object of this paper to deprecate ན There is another form which modern Unitarianism assumes in some particular cases, and which to many persons is peculiarly revolting: I mean when it exhibits itself in alliance with certain political characters whom I know not how more correctly or less offensively to designate than by calling them ultra-reformists. Any distinct specification of the principles of these politicians would be here altogether superfluous. It is sufficient to say that a subversion of the present order of things and the complete subjugation of those who govern by those who are governed, if not the actual object of these political theorists, would be the certain result of their success. A decided hostility either to the laws and institutions of their country, or to the authorities by which they are framed and executed, is their essential character. Even in your pages, Mr. Editor, abounding as they are in much better things, I perceive evident marks of kindness towards two personages, of whom few impartial men can bring themselves to believe, that if either of them wielded a despotic sceptre, he would exercise his talents and his power in advancing the cause of civil freedom, genuine religion, or public or private virtue. That those philanthropists who neglect no opportunity of deprecating war between states and communities, and vehemently denouncing its authors and abettors, should be at the same time the panegyrists of Bonaparte, is not a little inconsistent and surprising: nor is it less so that the disciples and admirers of Dr. Priestley, and the assertors of religious liberty, should forget the Peter Porcupine of 1794, and tolerate the William Cobbett of later fame. If, as has been suspected, certain Unitarian ministers of the modern school, and of its latest discipline, have been desirous of propagating their religious faith with a view more widely to disseminate their political principles among the inferior classes of society, I cannot easily find terms sufficiently strong to express my disapprobation of the employment of such means to such an end. In place of seeking for terms which, if found and applied, might be deemed opprobrious, I would remind the persons in question that, as our Divine Master disclaimed for himself and his immediate followers the possession of temporal power, he certainly never meant to encourage in the future teachers of his religion any attempts to dispossess those who actually hold it. Christianity admits of no connexion with politics, except that it enjoins that every soul be subject to the higher powers, and that supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. AN OLD UNITARIAN. Archdeacon Hook's Charge. THE Monthly Review is happily waking up from its long theological slumber. The Number for April contains a very just and spirited review of an effusion of bigotry in form of a Charge to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Huntingdon, by the Rev. James Hook, LL.D. F.R.S. S. A. If the same spirit which animates this article had pervaded the later voluines of this long-established and respectable Journal, the proprietor would not have had such good reason to lament the withdrawment of the patronage of the public. It appears that Dr. Hook complains of the prevalence of Antinomianism, meaning by that term strict Calvinism. This leads the reviewer to refer the learned divine to some of the articles of his own Church, which contain the very doctrines which he reprobates. . On this subject the following passage is worthy of notice: "Some theological doctrines, which have made a prominent figure in other communions besides those of the Churches of Geneva and Rome, have a strong tendency to relax the force of moral obligation, and to scatter perplexity and confusion over the whole region of ethics. Yet truth and falsehood, humanity and cruelty, are not matters of mere arbitrary convention, but have fixed and immutable lines of difference. What should we think of a moral code which represented the purest and most beneficent virtues as owing all their claim to approbation, not to their motives or their effects, but to a reflection of splendour from some remote and foreign source? What is the first sentiment which rushes on the nusophisticated mind, when the most flagitious enormities are represented as transmuted into high moral qualities by the agonies of extraneous innocence? What could we say of the justice or mercy of that government, which should condemn such a hero as the Duke of Wellington to a lingering death, in order to expiate the cowardice of all the recreants in the land; or which should sentence, such a philanthropist as Howard to the rack or the gallows, as the fittest mode of effecting the purification of all the thieves and prostitutes in the empire? What motives to patriotic courage could be furnished by such an act as the first, or to a diffusive beneficence by the last? In fixing the criterion of right and wrong, we should never outrage the common sentiments of mankind; which will be found to merit more attention than all the mystic jargon of visionaries or polemics, to whatever party they may belong." Another part of the zealous divine's Charge is directed against a class of people whom he calls liberalists. Amongst these are included the supporters of Bible Societies and the unfortunate Unitarians, who are as much as tythes in the dreams of the clergy. With regard to them, the Archdeacon piously bewails the repeal of the Act which subjected them to corporal penalties, mingling with his lamentations a strong expression of sympathy with Bishop Burgess, poor man, who having written against these misbelievers has been answered by them! The passage is a curiosity and should be preserved: "Vice (says the learned dignitary) is without odium and virtue without attraction, when viewed through the equalizing medium of what is called liberality; a term which in its present application has no fixed or determinate meaning, but which involves in its operation" [the two last sets of italics are not the divine's]" the confusion of all principles and the encouragement A solemn act of the le of all errors. gislature has removed the veil which our ancestors considered necessary to exclude from the public eye the licentiousness of blasphemy against the Son of God; and hence" [the italics again are not to be ascribed to the Archdeacon] 66 a learned and distinguished prelate has been libelled and arraigned for supporting the dignity of our Saviour in the discharge of one of his most important functions, against the Scripture-mutilations" [once more the Archdeacon of Huntingdon must be exonerated from responsibility for the italics]" of the promoters and abettors of Socinianism." SIR, Clapton, May 15, 1817. CANNOT withhold from you an additional circumstance, which came to my knowledge several years since, respecting Jewel, mentioned in the note (p. 200) of your last number. While in Chelmsford Jail, awaiting prudence, he was visited by a friend the vengeance of our sanguinary jurisof mine, from motives of Christian compassion. misguided man recounted the great To him the unhappy kindnesses of Mr. Vidler, and confessed the unworthy return he had prepared for his benefactor, to whom I once related the story, which could not fail to interest him. I am now convinced that Mr. Palmer (p. 204) was correct in his account, and that Mr. Muir and his associates hand-cuffed. This appears from addiwere conveyed on board the Surpriza tional papers which I have very lately examined, and which may enable me to offer some further contributions to your department of Original Letters. Mr. Palmer appears to have been sent on board the ship alone, and not to have been hand-cuffed. There was probably some consideration of his clerical character, in compliment to the Alliance between Church and State. the subscribers to Dr. Priestley's Theo- expected, the subscriptions should in- GLEANINGS; OR, SELECTIONS AND AS your work is so peculiarly de voted to Unitarian literature, I would earnestly recommend to such of your correspondents as are acquainted with German writers, to favour us through the medium of it, with accounts of the most celebrated Antitrinitarian authors in that language, who, I understand, are neither few nor small. There are two in particular of whom I wish to know something, viz. Eberhard and Basedow, and I shall be sincerely obliged to any one who will inform me of the particulars of their lives and works in an early number. E. SIR, Tenterden, May 7, 1817. DERMIT me to inquire whether PERMIT there is any probability that the Life of Dr. Caleb Fleming will be introduced into your Repository. If not, although I should much wish it to be drawn up by some person more competent than myself, I am inclined, with the assistance of some materials sent me by one of the Doctor's relations, to undertake it; as it has been already much too long withheld from the public. Dr. F. was a decided Unitarian, cotemporary with Dr. Lardner, with whom he lived on terms of the closest intimacy and friendship. They lived also only a few doors from each other in Hoxton Square. They were senior to Dr. Priestley both in years and Unitarianism, and with much satisfaction beheld his rising fame. L. HOLDEN. REFLECTIONS MADE IN A COURSE OF GENERAL READING. No. CCCII. Original of Brandy and Gunpowder: a Fable. THE government of the north being once upon a time vacant, the prince of the power of the air convened a council in Hell, wherein upon competition between two Demons of rank, it was determined they should both make trial of their abilities, and he should succeed who did most mischief. One inade his appearance in the shape of Gunpowder, the other in that of Brandy. The former was a declared enemy and roared with a terrible noise, which made folks afraid and put them on their guard. The other passed as a friend and a physician through the world, disguised himself with sweets and perfumes and drugs, made his way into the ladies cabinets and the apothe caries shops, and under the notion of helping digestion, comforting the spirits and cheering the heart, produced direct contrary effects; and having insensibly thrown great numbers of humane kind into a lingering but fatal decay, was found to people Hell and the grave so fast as to inerit the government which he still possesses. Minute Philos. Dial. II. No. CCCIIL Bon Mot of Dr. Savage's to Dr. Savage, who died Lecturer of St. George's, Hanover Square, had travelled in his younger days with the Earl of Salisbury, to whom he was indebted for a considerable living in Hertfordshire. He was a lively, pleasant, facetious old man. One day at the levee, George I. asked him how long he had stayed at Rome with Lord Salisbury? Upon his answering how long, Why, said the king, you stayed long enough, why did not you convert the Pope? Because, Sir, replied he, I had nothing better to offer him. This story is told by Bishop Newton (in his own Memoirs), who succeeded Dr. Savage in the Lectureship. REVIEW. "Still pleased to praise, yet not afraid to blame."-POPE. Unitarianism Incapable of Vindication: A Reply to the Rev. James Yates's Vindication of Unitarianism. By Ralph Wardlaw. London, Longman and Co. 8vo. pp. 416. A Sequel to "A_Vindication of Unitarianism," in Reply to Mr. Wardlaw's Treatise, entitled, Unitarianism Incapable of Vindication. By the Author of the Vindication. Liverpool, Robinsons. Eaton, London. 8vo. pp. 156. A FEW years ago there was not only no religious society in Scotland in which public worship was conducted on Unitarian principles, but there was scarcely, it is said, an avowed Unitarian in that country. When a chapel was erected in Glasgow, dedicated to the worship of One God the Father, the worshippers of a "triune God" were alarmed; the kirks and chapels resounded with invectives against heresies and heretics and blasphemies and blasphemers, and when the heretic who opened the chapel, published his sermon, containing a statement of the Unitarian doctrine, the faithful of all denominations were extremely scandalized. They were indignant that "the leading doctrines of Christianity were openly impugned and denied," it being always taken for granted, by those persons, that the leading doctrines of Christianity and the leading doctrines of Trinitarianism and Calvinism are different expressions for the same thing. Mr. Wardlaw in particular, who is the minister of a Dissenting congregation in Glasgow, felt his spirit stirred within him; and having had from an entirely different cause, his thoughts directed towards the principal points of the Socinian controversy, and at this very time, revolving various subjects for a series of Monthly Sabbath Evening Discourses, he thought it would be a criminal dereliction of duty, to neglect this opportunity of extirpating, root and branch, the horrid heresy which was beginning to grow up amongst them; especially as it is not consistent with the laws and customs of Britain, in the present age, to pull down the chapels of heretics as soon as they are erected, or to burn them and their temples together, with fires kindled by their own books. Alas! that the good Bishop of St. David's and the Very Reverend the Dean of Cork should have so much occasion to lament, that they are as persons born out of due time! Mr. Wardlaw accordingly delivered a series of Monthly Sabbath Evening Discourses, on the principal points of the Socinian controversy, which were afterwards published; in answer to which, Mr. Yates wrote his Vindication of Unitarianism. After a considerable refreshment from the battle, Mr. Wardlaw again comes forward, defiance on his brow, brandishing his arms with a more terrible fury and determined to prove, or perish in the attempt, that Unitarianism is Incapable of Vindication. Mr. Yates calmly marches out to meet his irritated an tagonist, and his own account of the result is told very simply and briefly in the Sequel to the Vindication. Such is the history of this controversy. The important question whe ther it be the duty of Christians to worship One God the Father, or “One God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance," is here debated with great ability. The leading arguments on each side are acutely stated and forcibly urged, and these volumes, which are of a moderate bulk, afford any person who will take the trouble to peruse them with attention and impartiality, the means of forming an enlightened judgment on the most important controversy which has ever been agitated among Christians, and of which every intelligent Christian ought to be ashamed to be ignorant. In our notice of these publications we shall endeavour to enable the reader to form a correct opinion of the scope of the arguments they contain and of the manner in which they are conducted, not so much with a view of superseding the necessity of his reading the works themselves, as of exciting him to a careful perusal of them; for if he have not thoroughly investigated the subject of which they treat, and if it be his wish that his religious opinions should be the result of conviction, his leisure moments may be very profitably employed in this study. Mr. Wardlaw's volume contains twelve Discourses. 1. On the Unity of God and the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead. 2-5. On the Supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ. 6. On the Test of Truth in Matters of Religion. 7. On the Doctrine of Atonement. 8. On the Practical Influence of the Doctrine of Atonement. 9. On the Divinity and Personality of the Holy Spirit. 10, 11. On the Influences of the Holy Spirit. 12. On the Christian Character. This plan includes several interesting subjects, which do not particularly bear upon the controversy between the Unitarian and the Trinitarian. Mr. Yates, however, strictly confines himself to the discussion of the points in dispute, between the worshipper of One God the Father, and the worshipper of "one Godhead, containing three distinct substances, denominated for the want of a better word, persons-the Father, the Son or Word, and the Holy Spirit." Cheerfully, and from a conviction of its justice, according the name of Unitarian to every person who believes that there is One only God the Father, and that religious adoration ought to be paid to him alone, Mr. Yates still farther narrows the scope of the controversy, by confining his argument to the establishment of two great truths, the evidence of which, from the Scriptures, he contends is overwhelming; namely, that there is but One only God, One individual Being, without a distinction of persons, commonly designated in the New Testament by the term Father, and that whatever power and glory Jesus Christ possessed, he derived from this Being who is styled his God and Father. The minor questions relative to the pre-existence of Christ, his creation of the world, &c. he leaves to be settled by Unitarians themselves after they are agreed in these first great principles. In like manner, Mr. Yates declines entering on the discussion of the doctrine of the atonement, "because the Calvinistic view of atonement, according to Mr. Wardlaw's own confession, falls with the doctrine of our Saviour's Supreme Divinity:" and on the influences of the Holy Spirit, "because it is enough to observe, that they proceed throughout upon a misrepresentation of Unitarianism." This plan of restriction has evidently been adopted froin a wish to fix the attention of the reader on the main questions to be decided in this controversy: and though it is not without inconvenience, since truth is never seen to such advantage as when the whole of it is clearly stated and boldly defended, yet con sidering how little the public mind in Scotland has been directed to inquiries of this nature, it is perhaps upon the whole a judicious choice. Mr. Yates divides his work into three parts. The first part contains a statement of the general principles to be followed in investigating the truth of religious doctrines, together with some observations on the regard paid to the Scriptures by Unitarians: on the proper method of ascertaining the sense of Scripture and on the propriety of believing in mysteries. In the second part the opinions and arguments of Unitarians concerning the Unity of God, the subordination of Jesus Christ and the use of the terms Holy Spirit and Spirit of God in the Scriptures, are adduced; and the third part contains an examination of the objections by which Mr. Wardlaw has attempted to invalidate the Unitarian opinions. Mr. Yates commences his examination of Mr. Wardlaw's Discourses with bearing the following generous testimony to the worthy motives by which his opponent has been actuated, |