soften the boldness of your charges by the formality of a few plain statements and direct proofs. Examine the history of unitarianism with minuteness and severity; trace its progress through every channel; bring to the light of open day the secret mischiefs which it has been working; let the lineaments of immorality, with which you aver it to be so odiously disfigured, be exhibited in their boldest relief; in short, give a true picture as highly wrought as you please, and then place it by the side of a similar sketch of Presbyterianism, and I venture to affirm, that no unitarian will desire to have his cause presented in a more favourable light, or wish the public to possess a better confutation of your charges.

After thus declining to go into the examination, which was so essential to the merits of the cause, you return again to the tendency of principles, and appeal to the records of past events for proofs of the good effects of calvinism. You express yourself in the following interrogations. "Now I appeal to all impartial readers, who have the least knowledge of ecclesiastical history, whether those who have embraced the general system of christian doctrine, designated by the name of Calvinism, have not been in all ages distinguished as 'the stricter sort' of professing christians? Have they not always been reproached by the laxer classes as 'austere,' 'puritanical,' and enemies of even many 'innocent indulgences?'" An appeal so formal and confident cannot be met with more fairness I presume, than by bringing distinctly before us some of the prominent particulars to which it refers. As my limits are narrow, a very small number must suffice, but they shall be such as have marked the strong features of calvinism.

Let us begin with, the founder of this system. What does history report respecting the influence of his prin

ciples on his own mind, temper, and character? Has there ever been a more violent or unrighteous persecutor, than Calvin? What page of history is stained with darker blots, than those which narrate some of the events of his life? Look at his violent abuse and cruel persecutions of his friend Castalio, a man of great learning, moderation, and piety, against whom he uttered the grossest language, and procured a decree of banishment for no other reason, than that he had the independence to assert and maintain opinions, which differed from his own. The unfortunate, though less worthy, Bolsec shared a similar fate. Every one, indeed, who presumed to doubt his infallibility, whether friend or foe, was made to feel the effects of his turbulent passions. But the darkest and deepest stigma on his character, was his treatment of Servetus, and it is one, which his ardent admirers have laboured with total want of success to remove, or even to diminish. Servetus had for many years been his confidential friend and correspondent. He could not subscribe the creed of Calvin, and as Calvin could not convince him by argument and persuasion, he resorted to stronger means. He accused him of heresy, procured his imprisonment, commenced against him a criminal process, and was thus the original and chief cause of his sentence of death, and his murder at the stake. He afterwards declared his warnest approbation of this event in letters to his friends, and expressed himself in the most intemperate language. Even in his commentaries on the Bible, he calls Servetus a "profligate fellow, a knave, and an obscene dog."*

* The rage of Calvin seems first to have been excited on account of certain questions in theology, which Servetus had proposed to him, but which Calvin did not answer to his satisfaction. Calvin could not bear opposition, and Servetus was not to be convinced without a rea

Such was the character of him, who first matured and embodied the doctrines, which now go under his name. Do these historical facts argue much in favour of the moral tendency of the principles you defend? Calvin was the more inexcusable, as he had himself deserted the church of Rome, and professed to be an advocate for free inquiry. It is certainly unfortunate for your appeal to history, that few names have descended to posterity, bearing feebler testimony of the persons to whom they belonged having been under the purifying influence of religious principles, than that of Calvin.

The commotions in Holland, which preceded and followed the Synod of Dort, and which brought the virtuous and inflexible patriot, Oldenbarneveldt, to the block, and consigned the illustrious Grotius to perpetual imprisonment, were excited by the Calvinists. The spirit of intolerance, which arose to so fervent a heat in Calvin, raged at this period with scarcely less violence in his followers. The Arminians had struck out of their creed the doctrine of absolute decrees, because they could neither find it in the Scriptures, nor believe it. This was the

son. One of the unworthy acts of Calvin in procuring his condemnation, was the producing of a manuscript at his trial, which Servetus had sent to him long before for his examination and judgment, but which had never been printed.

To show the spirit with which he meditated and prosecuted this business, it is enough to quote what he said in a letter, which Bolsee and Grotius saw in the original, "that if this heretic should fall into his hands, he would order it so, that it should cost him his life." And after the unholy act was done, he boasted of "having exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard.”

The authority for these facts, and others equally disgraceful, may be seen in a very circumstantial and interesting account of the life, writings, and death of Servetus, contained in the Monthly Repository, vol. i. and v. See also the Cambridge General Repository, vol. iii.; Wright's History of Persecutions, p. 345; Mosheim, vol. iv. p. 433, 488.

offence that kindled a flame of persecution in the Calvinists, which lasted for years, drove many of the Arminians into exile, immured others in prisons, silenced their preachers, suppressed their religious assemblies, and inflicted universally every species of severity. Even at the Synod of Dort, which was pretended to be summoned for the purpose of a mutual conference, the Ar, minians were treated as heretics, and rudely denied the privilege of explaining and defending their sentiments. They were dealt with as criminals, and condemned as such.

The history of Holland during these disastrous times affords the most striking illustration of the influence of ealvinistic principles, when allowed to act without opposition. The Calvinists were the stronger party; they professed to act wholly from motives of religion; and all the enormities practised on their opponents are justly ascribed to this source.*

It will not be easy, perhaps, to trace the effects of calvinism with much precision in England. Civil and religious causes have been so much blended in that country since the origin of calvinism, as to render it a difficult task to distinguish between them. What with the Puritans, the favourers of the English Prelacy, and of Papacy, during the high commotions of church and state, it is impossible to tell how much should be put to the account of selfishness, party zeal, bigotry, the tendency of bad principles, or of a correct faith, and genuine piety. One thing, however, amidst this chaos of uncertainty, stands forth prominent and indisputa

* See Mosheim's Church History, vol. v. chap. 3. North American Review, vol. vi. p. 185. Oldenbarneveldt opposed the convocation of the Synod of Dort, and maintained, that the States-General had no authority on matters of religion. See Maclaine's Note in Moshiem's History, vol. v. p. 451.

ble. When the calvinists had dominion, they showed a spirit of intolerance not a whit inferior to that of their Genevan master, or their brethren at Dort. Wit ness the ordinance of the Presbyterian parliament against heresy, in which it was decreed, that any one, who should be guilty of certain opinions, which were defined and declared to be heretical, "should suffer the pains of death, as in case of felony, without benefit of clergy." This was walking in the precise steps of Calvin. It is a case of importance, because it discovers the feelings of the most intelligent and influential men among the calvinists, and is thus an accurate index to the impressions and inclinations of the less informed multitude.

It is hardly necessary to call your mind to the first settlers of New-England. The odious effects of their intolerance and persecutions are not to be forgotten by any one, who has looked at the history of those times. For the honour of religion, and even of humanity, we should be willing to have them forgotten. But when appealing to history for the influence of certain doctrines, justice and truth demand a fair report. The laws made against the heresies of Quakers by the early colonists were, if possible, more unhuman than those of

* This act was passed May 2, 1648. Neal says, "This was one of the most shocking laws I have met with, and shows that the govern ing Presbyterians of these times would have made a terrible use of their power, if it had been supported by the sword of the civil magistrate." Neal's History, vol. iii. p. 497. Among the heresies which were to be punished with death, was the denying, "That Christ is not God equal with the Father, or that the Godhead and Manhood are distinct natures." Imprisonment was threatened to such as main. tained, "That man by nature hath free will to turn to God,-that the soul of man sleeps, when the body is dead,-that man is bound to believe no more than by his reason he can comprehend." Ibid.