TENT WITH THE HOLINESS OF How is it consistent with the holi- wisdom dictate should take place. So that the holiness of the Deity not only allows, but even requires Him to determine, that sin should exist. Yet, 3. The production of sin, or of a sinful volition, is the immediate effect, not of Divine holiness, but of Divine power. God produces sin and every other effect by the mere exertion of power.1. That the existence of sin is Hence, we cannot always deterconducive to the general good. mine the nature of the cause, simThough sin, in itself, be an evil, ply from the nature of the effect. yet its existence affords an occaFor instance-we cannot detersion for God to make such displays mine, that a finite effect must proof his nature and perfections, as ceed from a finite cause; that a are requisite to the most complete | material effect must proceed from enjoyment of him. Creatures can a material cause; that a selfish efenjoy God no farther than they fect must proceed from a selfish have the knowledge of his perfec- cause; or that a sinful effect must tions. But, the more holy crea- proceed from a sinful cause. The tures know of the Divine charac- | production, therefore, of sin, after, the greater is the felicity they fords no evidence of sinfulness in derive from the service and enjoy- the cause of its existence. God's ment of Him. The greatest good holiness is concerned only in his of the universe, therefore, must determination to produce sin; but consist in the most perfect mani- not in producing it, which is a festation of God; which cannot be mere act of power. There appears made, without the exercise of his nothing, then, contrary to the holimercy, which cannot be exercised ness, or any perfection of the Debut upon sinners. Hence, the|ity, in producing sin, whenever He existence of sin is absolutely connected with the most perfect plan of Divine conduct. Therefore, 2. The holiness of God must incline him to determine that sin should exist. Whatever effect, or event, is necessary to promote the general good, both holiness and sees it is necessary to promote the general good. The pure, perfect and infinite holiness of God, requires the existence of sin, in order to accomplish the best, wisest, greatest and holiest purposes. COMMON SENSE. with the disjointed remains of evangelical doctrine." We have seen the strict practice of receiving none to communion without evidence of a change of heart and a cordial assent to the truths of the gospel, gradually give place to the loose practice of receiving all that would come. We have seen a flood of Arminianism pouring in upon the churches. We have seen the progress of doctrinal error accelerated by the prevalence of false notions of Christian experience. We have seen a disposition prevailing, in those who call themselves Calvinists, to soften down the truth to suit the taste of opposers, and thus surrendering at discretion to the enemy, to keep him quiet." We have seen the practice beginning to prevail of licensing candidates to preach, with a slight examination; and of those who were erroneously concealing their sentiments, in order to gain a settlement in orthodox churches. And thus, we have seen the way prepared for the introduction of Socinianism in its proper form; and accordingly it very soon made its appearance. Essex-street (London) and perfectly Unitarian." In 1789, Mr. Freeman, the minister of the above mentioned Church, speaking of the visit of Mr. Hazlitt, a Unitarian minister from England, says, "Before Mr. Hazlitt came to Boston, the Trin itarian Doxology was almost universally used. That honest, good man prevailed on several respectable ministers to omit it. Since his departure, the number of those who repeat only scriptural doxologies has greatly increased, so that there are now many churches in which the worship is strictly Unitarian." This was the policy-not to say any thing against the truth, but only to pass it over in silence, and gradually to drop every thing which was likely to bring it into The native temper of the human heart would do all the rest. This policy will more fully appear from further extracts. The following extract appears to have reference to the same period: "As a further means of diffusing the important doctrines of the proper Unity of God, and the simple humanity of Jesus Christ. Mr. Lindsey made a present of his own, and of Dr. Priestley's theological works, to the library of Harvard College, in the Universi It was not till the year 1815, that those who embraced Unitari-view. an sentiments generally avowed them. It was their policy to work in the dark, and under professions of unbounded charity and liberality, to conceal their real views. In that year was republished in Boston a brief history of American Unitarianism, compiled by Mr. Belsham, a leading Unitarian in England, from private letters written by leading Unitarians in this country. The information The information contained in that work is of the most authentic kind, being deriv-ty of Cambridge in New-England; ed from unquestionable sources, and is fully entitled to credit. The following extracts will throw light upon the subject: 66 It was with great pleasure that Mr. Lindsey received information, in the year 1786, from a respectable correspondent, the Rev. I. Smith, afterward librarian to the University of Cambridge in New-England, that the principal Episcopalian Church in Boston had consented to the introduction of a liturgy reformed on the plan of that which has been adopted in for which as a very valuable and acceptable present, he received the thanks of the President and Fellows. These books were read with great avidity by the students. But though there is great reason to believe that the seed thus sown took deep root, and that in many instances it produced an abundant harvest; and though many persons eminent for rank and talent in the New-England States openly avowed the Unitarian creed, it does not appear that any numerous societies of Christians have hitherto followed the example of the congregation at the King's Chapel, in making a public profession of the Unitarian doctrine." Among the Among the persons of rank and talent, Mr. Freeman mentions Governor Bowdoin, General Knox, General Lincoln, Mr. Thatcher, member of Congress, and says, "there are many others, besides, in our Legislature, of similar sentiments. While so many of our great men are thus on the side of truth and Free enquiry, they will necessarily influence many of the common people." to be preached to excite alarm. No public controversy was to be raised. The real object was to be concealed, till the people were gradually and insensibly led into Unitarianism. Mr. Freeman was too honest entirely to approve of this policy, though he saw that it was the best way of advancing the cause. In view of the above extracts, I wish to pause, and propose a question for the serious consideration of my readers. How long would it take, for a minister, who is orthodox in sentiment, but so pru in his preaching, and so liberal as to be a zealous advocate for the fashionable notion of universal charity, to prepare his congregation to receive without suspicion one of the above-mentioned prudent Unitarians for his successor? and In 1796, Mr. Freeman writes-dent as to avoid all doctrinal points "though it is a standing rule of most of our social libraries, that nothing of a controversial nature should be purchased, yet any book which is presented is freely accepted. I have found means, therefore, of introducing into them some of the Unitarian tracts with which you have kindly furnished me. There are few persons who have not read them with avidity. From this and other causes, the Unitarian doctrine appears to be still on the increase." After speaking of some ministers (very few, however) who openly preached the Unitarian doctrine, he says, "there are others more cautious, who content themselves with leading their hearers, by a course of rational, but prudent sermons, gradually and insensibly to embrace it. Though this latter mode is not what I entirely approve, yet it produces good effects: For the people are thus kept out of the reach of false opinions [Calvinistic opinions] and are prepared for the impression which will be made on them by more bold and ardent successors." These extracts make a full disclosure of the policy which was generally pursued. The people were to be kept out of the reach of Calvinistic opinions. Nothing was what difference would the mass of the people perceive in their preaching? In the same year (1796) Mr. Freeman says, 66 a few seeds [of Unitarianism] have been sown in Vermont, and an abundant harvest has been produced in the vicinity of Boston, and the counties directly south of it." From information received about the year 1810, Mr. Belsham says, "in the State of Massachusetts, and particularly in the environs of Boston, the great cause of Christian truth [Unitarianism] is making a silent but rapid and irresistible progress. From the inquisitive and liberal spirit which prevails in the University of Cambridge, which has never been checked at any time, the happiest consequences may be expected to ensue." Again, he says, " Bigotry is discountenanced; and if I am not greatly misinformed, Divine worship in many of the principal churches at Boston is carried on upon principles strictly, if not avowedly Unitarian. Being myself a friend to ingenuousness and candour, I could wish to see all who are truly Unitarians, openly such. But I would not presume to judge for another. There may possibly be reasons for caution, which do not occur to me, and of which I am not competent to judge. I think it at all necessary to conceal their sentiments on these subjects, but express them without the least hesitation, when they judge it proper. I may safely say, the general habit of thinking and speaking on this question in Boston, is Unitarian. At the same time the controversy is seldom or never introduced into the pulpit. The majority The time must, however, come, of those who are Unitarian are perperhaps it is near, when truth, haps of these sentiments, without [Unitarianism] will no longer en- any distinct consciousness of being dure confinement, but will burst so. This state of things appears forth in all her glory. The to me so favourable to the dissemdull hollow rumbling at the bot-ination of correct [Unitarian] sentom of the sea, which is scarcely timents, that I should perhaps renoticed by the inattentive travel-gret a great degree of excitement ler who is gliding carelessly over in the public mind on these subthe solid plate of ice which en-jects. The majority would eventcrusts the surface, is to the waryually be against us. Not to dwell and experienced observer, a more on the consideration, that Unitasure presage of the speedy andrianism consists rather in not besudden explosion of the immense lieving, I think it must be assumsuperincumbent mass, and of the ed as an axiom, that a persevering restoration of the imprisoned waves controversy on this question, would to their native freedom, to the con- render the multitude bigoted and sternation and often to the utter persecuting Calvinists." destruction of those who refuse to listen to the friendly premonition." Such is the conclusion of Mr. Belsham's account! How signally has his prediction been verified! Will not the churches take warning in time? In an appendix to the same work, we are favoured with a letter from William Wells, Esq. of Boston, to Mr. Belsham, dated in 1812. He says "With regard to the progress of Unitarianism, I have but little to say. Its tenets have spread very extensively in New-England; but I believe there is only one church professedly Unitarian.Most of the Boston clergy, and respectable laymen (of whom we have many enlightened theologians) are Unitarian. Nor do they 66 Here, then, is a full avowal of the whole policy. It was to cry down doctrinal preaching, and to cry up what they called practical religion, to oppose all open controversy, to keep all but Unitarian sentiments out of sight, and to introduce these gradually and insensibly," so as not to create any alarm. And it is avowed, also, that to this policy the advocates of error owe their success. They are conscious that open and public and persevering controversy would result in the triumph of Calvinism. Are not some of the opposers of religious controversy among us conscious of the same thing? And are they not opposed to it for the same reason? There is a remarkable confession also of what Unitarianism is. "It consists rather in not believ ing." It is infidelity. It is Deism in disguise. This coincides with what Dr. Priestley says of a gentleman who had been regarded as a Deist. "He is generally considered as an unbeliever: If so, however, he cannot be far from us, and I hope in the way to be not only almost, but altogether what we are." The above extracts are all made from Unitarians themselves. Some other proofs of my positions can be adduced. In the above extracts is a proof that the use of Trinitarian doxolo gies was laid aside by many of the ministers of Boston, at the solicitation of a Unitarian. The reason is obvious. The frequent use of a doxology, which was an act of worship to the Son, and the Holy Ghost, as well as to the Father, was adapted to keep the doctrine of the Trinity before the minds of the people. By silently omitting such a doxology, as well as omitting to acknowledge that doctrine in every other form, it gradually passed out of notice; and the way was prepared for its entire rejection. By this means many became Unitarians, as Mr. Wells observes, "without any distinct consciousness of being so." The truth was forgotten, and error took its place. For the same reason the psalms and hymns in common use were altered, so that the distinguishing doctrines of the gospel, which had been exhibited in them, were left out of sight. But notwithstanding these essential alterations in them, they were still published under the same names as before. This was doubtless intended to answer a double purpose. The avowed rejection of the hymns of Watts, Doddridge, and others, might create some alarm. It might lead to enquiry, and the real design might be suspected. But when a new edition was introduced, without any notice of alterations, or even with a notice that some slight alterations had been made, the great mass of the congregation would probably make use of them without suspicion. out suspicion. It would also be an advantage to have the names of such men as Watts, Doddridge, &c. to sanction the sentiments contained in their books. In the Panoplist for September, 1808, is a review of a hymn book compiled for the use of the church in Brattle-street, Boston. Many of the hymns are published under the names of Watts, Doddridge, &c. but though much altered, the reviewer says, 66 we are no where advertised that any alterations are made." Of the nature of the alterations, we may judge by the following sentences from the review: "It is reasonable to expect, at the present day, when well-composed hymns are so numerous, that a selection of 175, the number contained in the present volume, should comprise the capital doctrines, duties, and graces of the Christian religion. On opening the volume before us, we confess with regret, that we were much disappointed. Most of the capital doctrines of the gospel are left entirely out of view. We feel some solicitude to enquire, if among 175 hymns there was no room for one which should acknowledge the Holy Spirit, in his scriptural character, and the necessity of his Divine influences to bring sinners to repentance? We might proceed to ask other questions. Why are the doctrines of original sin, total depravity, our need of regeneration, the denunciations of the Divine law, the danger of impenitent sinners, the eternal hell which awaits all who die unregen |