must be impressed with nearly an equal sense of its importance. Every such believer will study the Scriptures earnestly and devoutly to know wherein Christ is a Saviour, or in what salvation through him consists; that is, to know the terms on which Jesus and his Apostles have declared, that the sins of men shall be forgiven, and final acceptance with God shall be gained. In the strength of this faith, in the desire of this knowledge, and in the ardour of inquiry, it has not been made to appear, nor can it be made to appear, that Unitarians are in any degree behind the orthodox.

They are often charged with denying the doctrine of atonement, and assailed with great warmth by their opponents for this supposed defect of faith, or perverseness of will. The persons, by whom this charge is preferred, no doubt deserve the credit of sincerity and zeal, and their solicitude ought to be considered praiseworthy, when it makes no trespass on the christian virtues of humility and charity. But most unfortunately, this trespass has too often been the besetting fault of those anxious guardians of the true faith, whose benevolent concern has prompted them to so unwelcome a task, as that of passing censure and lifting up the voice of reprobation against others. Moderation, respect for the understanding of others, charity for their weakness, and proper regard for their motives and sense of duty, seem scarce

to mingle with the virtues which our opponents allow themselves to harbour and practise, when they are once embarked in this undertaking. They as

sume a tone, and take a liberty, which, in fallible men, can hardly be accounted for without supposing them really to believe all truth, wisdom, and honesty to be on their side. Under such circumstances, it is not surprising, that zeal should frequently overleap the bounds of knowledge, and the current of imagination and feeling, heightened by the pride of self estimation, should carry away the landmarks of good sense and sound judgment. Let it be allowed as possible, that Unitarians have the use of their understanding, and entertain opinions on this subject, which they value as most sacred truths, the grounds of present consolation and of future hope; let this be allowed, and there would certainly be some room for moderation even amidst the bright burnings of zeal, some space for considerate thought and gentle forbearance even in the troubled tide of feeling and passion.

But without daring to hope for so happy a result, it may not be amiss to glance for a moment at the actual grounds and consistency of this charge of crime, which has been brought forward with so much confidence, and pressed with so much heat against Unitarians, for not believing what the orthodox call the atonement. To what, in its most aggravated shape, does it amount? In what respect does it affect the christian character ?

In the first place, the charge rests on the principle, that the doctrine of atonement is of such a peculiar kind, as to render a belief in it absolutely essential to salvation, Now it cannot be supposed, that serious

Unitarians feel less concern about the salvation of their souls, and the means of attaining this salvation, than serious Trinitarians; yet, by no depth of search are they able to find, either in the reason of the thing, or in the Scriptures, that such a faith, as an abstract article of belief, is essential to a saving knowledge of the christian truths. What shall they do? Would you have them violate conscience, pervert the word of God, blot out the sense of right, and refuse assent to their judgment, that they may admit a position, involving sacred and important consequences, in defiance of reason and every moral and religious principle? The charge implies the necessity of such an act on their part, and I submit to you, whether this would be more likely to increase or diminish the measure of religious attainments, which they already possess,

Again, if no one can be saved, who does not believe in the atonement, must it not be settled what this faith in the atonement is ? Must not this be single, or the same in every individual? Or has this kind of faith various degrees and certain limits, within which whosoever comes will be secure? If so, where are these limits? If not, which is the identical kind of faith on which you would impress the stamp of safety? When you come to particulars, nothing is more obvious, than the total disagreement of the orthodox themselves. They agree in telling you, that they look for salvation through the merits of Christ; but when inquiry is made about the nature of these merits, the means and manner of

this salvation, you discover almost as many notions and theories as individuals. Every one has a faith peculiar to himself, marked in some respects with very broad distinctions. Yet there can be but one true belief in the atonement, and if any one be essential to salvation it must be this. It follows, that no such importance belongs to faith in the atonement, as the advocates of this doctrine attach to it; or if it do, as difference always implies error, no one even among the orthodox can justly hope for salvation, since it is by no means probable, that God has made a belief in error a requisite to the rewards of his glory. The inference is, that our opponents are unreasonable in the alarms, which they raise; and if there be any truth in the principle on which they act, it is much more important for them to bestow their concern on themselves, and endeavour to correct their own faith, than to bewail the unhappy lot of Unitarians for not believing things, to which their conscience and understanding cannot be forced to

assent.

I know not why a rule should be followed in regard to this doctrine, which will not apply to every other article of faith; and certainly, till the moral attributes of God, and the moral agency of man be destroyed, it can never be made a condition of favour with the Almighty, that a man shall believe what he cannot believe. We have derived from our Maker the faculties by which we are enabled to think, investigate, and draw conclusions; we are accountable to him for the right use of these facul

ties, but not for their strength, nor the degree of natural light which they afford. Whoever seeks truth conscientiously, will be rewarded for his search, although he may fail of his object; and this is no less true of the atonement, than of other points of faith. When it can be proved, that Unitarians do not thus seek, that they have less concern for their own spiritual welfare than others have for them when it can be proved, that in them the principles of human nature are inverted, inducing them to prefer misery to happiness, fatal error to saving truth, the blind paths of ignorance to the open fields of knowledge, the threatening terrors of perdition to the glorious prospects of heaven; when these things can be proved, then may it be accounted a crime in them not to believe what they cannot believe, and to rely on the mercy and goodness of God, rather than the frail supports with which their brethren would prop them up. All they ask in respect to their faith is, to be judged by their sincerity, their humble efforts, their righteous intentions. When these do not appear, let them be condemned; when they do, let the breath of slander be hushed, the pride of imagined infallibility humbled, the tone of haughty rebuke subdued, the voice of censure silenced.

In the remarks about to be made, it will not come within my purpose to examine the arguments on which the doctrine of atonement, as it is understood in any particular sense, is supposed to be founded. My attention will be chiefly directed to the nature, rea