DEDICATION.

To the People of New-York,

THE first of the following numbers was published in the New-York Courier. A note in that paper, the following day, stated, that the editor of the paper declined publishing the remainder of the work, be cause it was likely to give offence. I preferred a public paper to a pamphlet form, for two reasons; one was, that a newspaper is read by many persons who seldom have leisure, or inclination, to labour through the Essays on didactic theology, found in Magazines, Sermons, and Systematic Discourses. The other was, that I entered on the publication not as a theologian or controversialist, but as a spectator and reporter of facts.

To be candid, the work was principally designed for the edification of those who would be willing to be styled high-toned Calvinists. And it may seem, perhaps, to some, a little paradoxical, that the very first number should kindle such a flame of resentment, as to cause alarm to the editor, of whose correct taste and liberal sentiments I have no doubt, when it is a

fact, that that number does no more than condemn a gentiment which Calvin condemns or, at any rate, does not justify-I mean the imputation of the guilt of Adam's sin to his posterity, independently of their own conduct and character. Neither Calvin, Luther, nor Melancthon believed in that doctrine.

People of New-York, I desire you to take notice, that these high-toned Calvinists were so enraged at Calvin's own sentiments, that the editor of the Courier was induced not to proceed. For your satisfaction I give you the words of Calvin. He sums up his opinion of original sin in few words: “Videtur, ergo, peccatum originale hæreditare naturæ nostræ pravitas et corruptio, in omnes animæ partes diffusa." Wherefore, original sin seems to be the hereditary depravity and corruption of our nature diffused into all parts of the soul.

"Neque," subjoins Calvin, "ista est alieni delicti obligatio. Non ita est accipiendum, ac si, insontes ipsi et immerentes, culpam delicti ejus sustineremus." Neither is that an obligation or accountableness for another's fault. It is not to be understood as though we, ourselves innocent, should sustain the blame of his (Adam's) transgression.

I am aware that most people have not leisure to examine authors. Those, however, that will take that trouble, will perceive that the views of Original Sin, Depravity, and Atonement, advocated in these numbers, are not peculiar to New-England, but, on the contrary, have been known and maintained in the church, by many of the ablest divines, since the reformation, and by a majority in the American churches.

But, fellow citizens, it is not so much with their sentiments that I am disposed to contend, although they are sufficiently incorrect and erroneous; it is with their horribly intolerant, bigoted, and persecuting spirit; against which every man should lift his voice, and proclaim his indignation. The holy fathers and friars of the inquisitorial commission were never more vindictive or implacable. It comes in thunders and anathemas from their desks: in cants, whispers, and innuendoes among the throng: it comes larded with much holy grimace, and many sanctimonious sighs, for the credulous and pious; with much logical jargon and biblical criticism for smatterers; with spleen and gall enough, when the company has sufficient pride and malice to bear it; and with firebrands for all the young foxes they can catch. When they have exhausted their topics of argument, and that they can soon do, without a miracle, they resort to sarcasm and ridicule, and here their talents are wonderful: Hercules often comes in "head and shoulders."

These gentlemen surely forget the age and country in which they live, by three hundred years. They ought to feel comfortable whilst others think for themselves. And one object of these numbers is to remind them, that they live in the year 1816. A man in this city does not expect to share the fate of Servetus, though he should differ from Calvin. I will not say what a man ought to expect when he is so fortunate as not to differ with Calvin.

THE TRIANGLE.

No. I.

Ir is an old, and perhaps will be regarded as a trite saying, that the decline of morality, in a nation, precedes and ensures the decline of its prosperity. The tendency of the increase of wealth, numbers, and refinement to a deterioration of morals is exemplified in the history of the greatest nations, and is too obvious to require proof, and too well known to need illustration, Happy would it be for mankind, if the natural tendency of naṛ tions and societies to sink into luxury, extravagance, dishonesty, and all the extremes of immorality, were not, in many instances, aided by the very means and institutions which are professedly established for the opposite purpose.

Even religion, descended from Heaven, arrayed in the beauties of virtue, and her head encompassed with the rays of divinity, has been counterfeited, her institutions perverted, her doctrines corrupted, her glories sullied: so that, instead of presenting any barrier to vice, or any check to immorality, she has often become their most efficient auxiliaries. It has been the boast, perhaps the felicity of this city, that it abounds more than any other city with institutions designed to favour morality; and while I leave it for the reader to judge for himself, of the effect and success of these institutions, I am concerned to say that, in my opinion, some of the most showy and prepossessing, at any rate, the most noisy means used to promote morality and religion in this city, are amongst the most useless, false, and hollow. I refer to nothing less than the strain of preaching continually and incessantly used, in many of the pulpits of this city!

I have no controversy with any one, nor do I enter on this subject in any other than a political point of view. I consider