in prejudice and exclusion of the other persons, God forbid that I should ever concede. I deny not that there is an honour personally due to him as the Father. There is also an honour personally due to the Son, as the Son, and to the Spirit as the Spirit, but our knowledge of the personal distinctions is so obscure, in comparison of our apprehension of the general attri butes of the godhead, that it should seem that the divinity (the To Seo) is rather to be generally worshipped in the three persons jointly, and indifferently, than that any distinct honours are to be offered to each separately. Prayer, however, for succour against external persecution, seems addressed with particular propriety to the Son."

το

Now, Sir, as this is a thing that relates to practice, I should have imagined that, if each of the three persons had been to be addressed separately, we should have been distinctly informed concerning the circumstances in which we were to pray to one of them, and not to the others; considering how difficult it must be, from the nature of the thing, for mere men to distinguish the separate rights of three divine persons. That you yourself have made some mistake in this business, will not, I think, be difficult to show. In order to this, let us consider how your supposition or theory, corresponds to the fact. For if it be not supported by corresponding facts, how ingenious or probable soever it may seem to be, a priori, it must fall to the ground. You will agree with me, I imagine, that the apostles and primitive christians knew whether the Father or the Son was the more proper object of prayer in the time of persecution. Let us see then both

what directions they gave, and also what they themselves actually did in this case.

The apostle James, writing to christians in a state of persecution, says, ch. i. 2. &c. My brethren count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations, or trials, &c. If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God. You will hardly say that in this he advises them to apply to Christ, or to the trinity, for direction in these circumstances. If you do, I will venture to assert, that your hypothesis has no countenance either in the scriptures, or in any christian writer before the council of Nice. For they all understood the Father alone to be intended whenever mention is made of God absolutely.

Peter, writing to christians in the same situation, says, 1 Pet. iv. 19, wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful creator. This is certainly meant of God the Father; but more evidently must we so interpret, 1 Pet. v. 10, The God of all grace, who has called us into his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, establish, strengthen, settle you. I do not find here, or any where else in the scriptures, any direction to pray to Christ in time of persecution, or indeed, in any other circumstances.

Let us now attend to some particulars in the history of the apostles. When Herod had put to death James, the brother of Jolin, and imprisoned Peter, we read, Acts xii. 5, that prayer was made without ceasing of the church to God, not to Christ, for him. When Paul and Silas were in prison at Philippi, we read, Acts xvi.

25, that they sung praises to God, not to Christ. And when Paul was warned of what would befal him if he went to Jerusalem, Acts xxi. 14, he said, the will of the Lord be done. This, you must suppose, was meant of God the Father, because Christ himself used the same language in this sense, when, in praying to the Father, he said, Not my will but thine be done.

These, you may perhaps say, are only incidental circumstances, on which no great stress is to be laid. But in Acts vi. 24. &c. we have a prayer of some length addressed to God the Father, at the very beginning of the persecution of christians, when Peter and John had been examined before the high priest, and his court, and had been threatened by them. As I As I suspect that you may not have given much attention to the tenor of it, I shall recite the whole, which is as follows: "And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God, with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, who hast made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is; who by the mouth of thy servant David, hast said, Why did the heathen rage and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together, against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child" (or servant)" Jesus whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. And now, Lord, behold their threatenings, and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, by stretching forth thy hand to heal; and that signs and wonders

may be done by the name of thy holy child" (or servant) "Jesus."

We have now examined some particulars both of the instructions, and the examples of scripture, with regard to the proper object of prayer in time of persecution; from which it appears, that, even in this case, we have no authority to pray to any other than that one God, to whom Christ himself prayed in his affliction; and if we be not authorized to pray to Christ in time of persecution, there is, by your own acknowledgement, less propriety in praying to him on any other occasion.

As you profess a great regard for those who are called apostolical fathers, let us attend to the prayer of Polycarp when he was tied to the stake, ready to be burned alive. Now this prayer, which is a pretty remarkable one, is addressed to God the Father and not to Christ; so that this disciple of the apostle John did not think the example of Stephen any precedent for him. The prayer begins as follows: "O Lord, God Almighty, the Father of thy well-beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the knowledge of thee, the God of angels and powers, and of every creature, and especially of the whole race of just men," &c.

You see then, Sir, how greatly you have been misled by your speculative theology, by your attention to particular texts, single incidents, and imaginary proprie ties, without attending to the general tenor of scripture, the plain directions that are there given for our conduct, and the constant practice of the apostles, which supply the best interpretation of their doctrine. To conclude, as you have done from the single case of

Stephen, that all christians are authorized to pray to Christ, is like concluding that all matter has a tendency to go upwards, because a needle will do so when a magnet is held over it. When you shall be in the same circumstances with Stephen, having your mind strongly impressed with a vision of Christ sitting at the right-hand of God, you may then, perhaps, be authorized to address yourself to him as he did; but the whole tenor of the scriptures proves that, otherwise, you have no authority at all for any such practice. I am, &c.

LETTER XV.

Of the Unitarian Principles with respect to Mahometanism and Infidelity.

REV. SIR,

We are not, I hope, to judge of your acquaintance

with the opinions of the ancients (which we have dignified with the name of learning) by the correctness with which you state the opinions of the moderns, even those which you undertake to controvert, and therefore ought to have studied. Here, Sir, you certainly have no choice but of the grossest ignorance, and consequently presumption, or the most perverse and wilful of all misrepresentations. Your ignorance of the state of the dissenters, of which a sufficient specimen has been given, shows that you are far from being at home even in your own country; but the account you give in your sixteenth letter, of the prin