NO. X.-ON THE DOCTRINES OF PARTICULAR RE L Unreasonableness and moral tendency NO. XI.-ON THE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT. Inconsistency of the orthodox views of this doctrine with the doctrine of the Trinity Of the scheme of Vicarious Atonement Scripture-meaning of the word Atonement NO. XII- ON THE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT- UNITARIAN ESSAYIST. JANUARY, 1831 NO. I. MEADVILLE, PA. VOL. I. THE purpose of the Essayist, is to explain, defend, and promote what we believe to be the doctrines of pure Christianity. THE discussion on which we are about to enter, we esteem one of the most interesting that can employ the human mind. It is one which we believe none but the thoughtless, the hardened, or the most frivolous can deem unimportant, for it concerns truths which relate not to passing and perishing interests, but te the eternal well being of man. THE religious opinions which we entertain, we value, because we believe them to be what our Saviour taught. We believe them fitted above all others to sustain man in the trials of life, to encourage him in the performance of its duties, to impress him with a sense of personal responsibleness, and to make him live in all things as one appointed unto an eternal destiny on which every act of life is exerting an inevitable influence. We believe them the sure foundation of present happiness and future hope; as such, we esteem their worth unto ourselves as beyond price, and believe it to be a duty to disseminate the knowledge of them as far as we are able, amongst our fellow men. BUT in this part of the country our opinions, though perpetually spoken against, are to the great majority absolutely unknown, or known only through the medium of prejudice. The consequence is that we are subjected to every kind of unjust judgment and misrepresentation. There is hardly an error among those which we esteem most dangerous, which we are not sometimes accused of believing, nor a truth which we value as among the most precious truths of revelation, which we are not accused of rejecting. Nor are these misrepresentations of opinion, all. Attempts are made to break down Unitarianism by the sly suspicion and cunning charge thrown out against Unitarians. We are made the subjects of ceaseless denunciation and anathema; we are denied even the name of Christians; men are warned from our books and our places of worship as from the contamination of a brothel, and the doors of our churches are described as the entrances to Hell. WE feel not the least disposition to answer railing with railing. Did nothing else prevent this, the sacredness of the subject on which we are engaged would exclude any such disposition from our minds. Nay more; if any deem it consistent with good taste and Christian feelings to denounce us as infidels, blasphemers, the devil's party, or deists in disguise, we would not object to the application even of such epithets to us, if this were all. We never shall quarrel about a mere name, though we may perhaps think that the taste and moral feelings of one who can apply these slang terms of reproach to an opponent, may admit of some improvement. What we object to in the charges brought against us, is of far more importance than mere names; it is the misrepresentation and falsehood and injustice which they contain. They do us all the injury of direct attacks on our moral characters, they draw upon us the cold sidelong glances of exclusion, they divide us from the sympathies of our fellow men, and materially injure our usefulness in society. We are willing to bear all the odium which our real opinions may bring upon us, but these reckless and false accusa tions, these infringements, not of christian charity merely, but of our personal rights, forbid our silence. We are forced to come forward in defence of ourselves and of what we believe to be truth. CAN it be the purpose of these denunciations to draw us back to Trinitarianism? It is well known that a large proportion of Unitarians were formerly Trinitarians, and that they have embraced their present religious views, in spite of all the prejudices and biasses of carly education, through the simple force of evidence. Surely such men are not to be re-converted by denunciation. Or is it intended, by making our opinions odious, to prevent others from examining and embracing them? There may be policy in this, but the men who use such means, cannot have very exalted ideas of their own system of belief, if they think it safe only when defended by such bulwarks. BUT we dwell too long on these things which are comparatively of light moment. We trust that in defence of truth, we should most willingly endure infinitely more than we are ever called upon to endure. DISCUSSION may do away error-it can never injure the cause of truth and true religion. For this reason, now that we are about to present to the public the evidence for our faith, we earnestly invite those who may be dissatisfied with our arguments, to answer them. We desire this, not for the sake of controversy, but that the public may have an opportunity of judging which of our opposing systems accords best with the teachings of our Saviour. The time must finally come when this question must be decided by evidence, and not by denunciation; and for the sake of Chirstian peace and charity, we hope that it inay come quickly. ON THE UNITY OF GOD—NO. I. In entering on the task which we have proposed to ouselves, the first subject which naturally presents itself to our minds, as a proper object of examination and discussion, is the great fundamental dogma of the Divine Unity. On this dogma all true religion is founded, and hence all Christians, of whatever denomination they might be, have still professed to believe, that God is ONE. But among a large portion of them, the belief in the Divine Unity has been accompanied with qualifications and restrictions which, to others of their Christian brethren, (and we confess ourselves to be of the number) look very much like an infringement of this fundamental truth. It is our present purpose, to submit the belief on this important subject as held by Unitarians, and that held by Trinitarians, to the test of those revelations, which our Heavenly Father has vouchsafed to make to us with regard to himself. But before we subject these two contending systems to this ordeal, it is necessary that we should first state with precision what they are.. THE opinions held by Unitarians, with respect to the Deity, are very simple. They believe in One God, a Being of perfect, undivided, uncompounded Unity,, One Eternal Divine Mind. They do not believe our Lord Jesus Christ to be the selfexistent, omnipotent Jehovah, but his Messenger. Although they venerate him as being next to God their best Friend and Benefactor; although they believe him to be highly exalted above all other created Existences; that a name is given him which is above every other name, and that he was appointed to be our Saviour and our Judge; yet they believe also, that he has nothing but what he received from his Heavenly Father, and that with. |