sumption of facts, which never existed, and his deduction of consequences, which never could follow.

The argumentative part of this work, which, indeed, was a very small part of the whole, was confuted in two short treatises, one by Dr. Toulmin, and the other by Mr. Kentish. To the declamation, rhapsody, and rashness, no reply was made, as none was necessary. The subject has been more recently touched in an eloquent sermon by Mr. Fox, but without any direct bearing on the controversy at large.

In this country you are the first person, it is presumed, who has imitated the example of Mr. Fuller. You have taken up the subject on the same grounds, and pursued it in nearly the same track. Starting with similar positions, you make similar inferences, in both of which I think you are under mistake. I believe you err in supposing Unitarianism to be the fountain of all evil, and Calvinism of all good. My reasons will appear in the sequel.

By maintaining, that Unitarians are not christians, that their religious faith is false, and that it sanctions and encourages a wicked life, you have done as much as could be done to compel them to speak in their defence. He would be strangely indifferent to the value of his own character, as well as of his religion, who should be reluctant to defend himself against such charges. The controversy, it is true, carries with it somewhat of an invidious aspect. is no pleasant duty to search out the weaknesses of our brethren, nor to show how imperfectly their professions agree with their practice; and much less to

It

look around and select a few persons, whom, with ourselves, we pronounce to be more holy than oth

ers.

Το prove, that any system of faith has a bad tendency is much the same as proving, that he who receives it is bad in consequence of his faith. And who would delight in such a work? work? We may hence learn, that, in this discussion, principles should be kept as distinct as possible from men, and that whatever may be proved to be the tendency of any doctrine, its actual effects should not be estimated except in connexion with other doctrines, and the peculiar circumstances of every person, who is judged by his opinions.

My chief purpose will be to make it manifest, that the faith and morals of Unitarians are not worthy of the odium, which your charges were calculated, and, as far as appears, designed to cast on them. The best manner of prosecuting this purpose undoubtedly is, to compare these with the faith and morals of Calvinists, or of other christians, at the same time that we apply the strength of argument to abstract principles. The subject naturally appeals to such a comparison, as the question is not, which party is perfect, but which is the most defective in consequence of its faith, and whether any one is to be pointed at, and denounced, and condemned, by all the rest.

An investigation of this sort, conducted with a proper spirit, cannot fail to terminate in beneficial results. How far the following treatise will bear

this character, must be left for those to decide, who are willing to read with candour, and judge by the christian rules of forbearance and charity. It is hoped, that nothing will be found inconsistent with à due respect for the serious opinions of every christian, nor with the liberty and independence with which every one ought to assert and defend his own sentiments. But on this point it would not be safe to promise much. All experience has proved, that theological zeal is not contented with the sober standard of wisdom and moderation. It sometimes

burns with a scorching flame, rather than with a mild light and gentle warmth. Το say, that this zeal shall always be subdued to a just temperament, would be presumptuous in one, who makes no pretensions to infallibility, nor claims any exemption from the infirmities of human nature. In exe'cuting the task before us, no other qualifications are held out, and no other exertions pledged, than such as flow from a love of truth, sincere motives, good intentions, and a warm interest in the subject. I may at last fail to convince you, that your charges are incorrect and misapplied; I may not succeed in making it clear to your understanding, that they, who build their highest hopes on the Gospel, and the divine character of Christ, are christians, and are to be treated as christians; but, should I be thus unsuccessful, I shall not think my labour unprofitably bestowed in defending what I deem to be the truth of the Gospel, in rescuing my religious belief from ungenerous imputations, in doing justice to the

character of many good men, and in pleading the cause of rational piety, religious liberty, toleration, and charity.

The course which the nature of the subject requires me to pursue, comes wholly within the third division of controversy. The truth of opinions will be no farther brought into notice, than is necessary to state them fairly. Nevertheless, the ultimate object of all honest inquiry is truth. This is an eternal and unchangeable reality, essentially good in itself, and salutary in its influence. When we arrive at truth, we are at the end of our journey; and if all the doctrines of faith, and positions in morals, could be demonstrated to be absolutely true, it would be an idle waste of time to look after their consequences. But since we know, that such a demonstration is not always possible, and that a chain of proofs, which carries conviction to one mind, frequently communicates no impressions to another, it is allowable to try different methods of investigation, and to turn our inquiries into any channels, which will conduct us to the main object.

As a general rule, it is much easier to judge between good and evil, than truth and error. We can with more confidence say, that a man's conduct is bad, than that his faith is false; and hence we cannot always affirm, that his creed is true or false in proportion to his good or evil deeds. Many faithful christians, no doubt, have occasion to lament numerous defects of duty, which they would be unwilling to have charged to their unbelief. It cannot be

So far as

will be a

The

denied, however, that there is a close connexion between faith and practice. A man will act according to his convictions, and an irreligious practice can never be the consequence of a right faith. such a practice depends on faith at all, it faith in error, for truth is the parent of good. conclusion is obvious, that we can refer no man's conduct, either good or bad, to his faith, unless we can prove such a connexion between them, that one will necessarily proceed, or does actually proceed, from the other; and, moreover, that no one's creed is to be set down as false, merely because he does not act as he professes to believe. By analogy, reason, argument, deduction, and other methods, we may show the evil tendency of an opinion, and its natural consequences; but when we come to conduct and character, we must be guided by definite principles, speak from facts, and judge with charity.