Jamieson, &c.; Messrs. Parkhurst, Fletcher, Whitaker, Burgh, Jones, Kett, Fuller, Wardlaw, &c. See above, p. 45-6.

MISCELLANEOUS REMARKS.

If we have too often seen professing Christians disputing de lana caprina-about nothing; here we behold them contending pro aris et focis-for every thing; for Trinitarians cannot help regarding the opinions now considered, to be fundamentally subversive of what appears to them to be the peculiarities of the Christian system, so that there can be no compromise between the two parties. If the Socinian Unitarians are right, Trinitarians are gross idolaters; but if Trinitarians are right, the members of this sect are heretics; and we have no scriptural authority that either idolaters or heretics are heirs of salvation. Considering, therefore, the subject of this article to be most interesting to Christians of every description and denomination; and, indeed, as the most important ground of controversy now, or at any time, agitated in the Christian world, I have already extended it far beyond its due limits, and must still add some further observations.

Whatever opinion should be formed of the principles now considered, and by whatever name their professors should be called, I can see no good reason for calling their sincerity in question, with Mr. S. Jenyns and others; nor can I doubt, that they firmly believe theirs to be the cause of God and of true religion. Yet, as the excellent Cowper has well observed, it sometimes happens that men are

“Most confident, when palpably most wrong.” Some of them have doubtless given strong proofs of their sincerity; and others assure us, that they will not be backward to exhibit equal proofs of it, were it to be put to the test. That it has not been more severely tried, may be ascribed to the mild spirit of the times and of the government under which they live; and it is desirable that they should now strive to evince their gratitude for the repeal of those " unreasonable and unrighteous laws" which fettered their exertions, by their refraining from all appearance of disrespect towards the religion of their country; by their not holding up its doctrines to public odium, as unscriptural, idolatrous, palpably absurd, and the like; and, by their no longer telling the world, that "Christianity in this country, is not only not established, but not tolerated by legal authority."

I have been often and forcibly struck with such expressions, in the perusal of their voluminous and multifarious writings; and, being not more a friend to expulsive than to compulsive measures, had I any right to advise in this case, I should drop

a verbum sapientibus : "sed ego frustra ad eos sermonem converto, qui forte non tantum mihi tribuunt, ut consilium a tali auctore profectum admittere dignentur."

In other respects, I have remarked much genuine candour, and various amiable traits of character in each of the three modern pillars of Unitarianism-Dr. Priestley, Mr. Lindsey, and Mr. T. Belsham; between whom a good understanding and mutual affection seem to have subsisted all along, notwithstanding some difference of opinion in lesser matters. This happy "concordia discors" must no doubt have tended to further the common cause in which they were engaged; and yet, to observe it cannot be unpleasing even to those who widely differ from them in religious matters; and it should command not their attention only, but also their imitation.

To say nothing of Dr. Priestley's being a strenuous, and at the same time an able advocate for the truth of Christianity against infidels, I cannot close this article without expressing my opinion that both for his conduct and his counsel, he deserves applause *; and without remarking that he not only warmly recommended, but always maintained in his own household, the very important and becoming, but in our days much neglected, duty of family prayer. The pleasure also which he took in the religious instruction of youth, and the importance and weight which he seemed to attach to that duty in the several congregations with which he was connected as pastor, cannot be too highly applauded; nor can this his example be too generally followed. What a pity is it, that instances of such attention to two most important duties should be so unfrequent in the world, and particularly among those whose talents and distinction, as in this case, would give weight and currency to their example!

"Difference in opinion shall never, I hope, cause me to detract from any man's just commendations, or lessen my esteem of him in any thing wherein he deserves it t†.”

At the same time I am ready to admit with Mr. Belsham, "that a religious party may be very numerous, very pious and benevolent, very zealous and successful, and yet its distinguishing tenets may be erroneous and unscriptural." How far the tenets of the party now considered may be erroneous and unscriptural, it is not the author's province to say: his

"Scorning the crafty concealment and cunning equivocation of his predecessors, he (Dr. P.) frankly told the world his creed, and warmly exhorted every other Socinian, if he would be an honest man, to follow his example."-Bogue and Bennett's History of the Dissenters, vol. iv. p. 318.

+ Dr. Brett's "Remarks on Dr. Waterland's Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist." p. 176.

duty in regard to it is discharged for the present, and he now leaves the reader to judge for himself, and to determine between it and the Established Church, upon whose tenets these and such like epithets are so unmercifully hurled.

"I believe in God, and Mohammed his prophet," says the disciple of the celebrated Oriental impostor. "I believe in God, and Jesus Christ, a Prophet and Teacher," is the creed of the Unitarian. But the member of the Church Established will not reduce his faith to a level with that of Mohammed; nor will he look for salvation in the Manual of Epictetus, or in the Offices of Cicero. No: he finds a fuller faith in Scripture, which is the "anchor of his soul, both sure and certain;" a faith, which has God for its object, in the most perfect state of Unity, but in whose Essence are Jesus Christ, the Son of his love, without whose meritorious death and sufferings sinners never could have been reconciled to the Almighty and All-just; and the Holy Spirit, without whose inspiration the best of men could neither think a good thought, nor perform a good action. The language of Scripture is rendered consistent by thus considering the great Object of religious adoration. The true state of man's condition is laid open; his utter incapability of redeeming himself from the penalty of sin is rendered clear and perspicuous; his sole dependence on a Saviour is made manifest, in whose person are united both the human and divine natures, that he might at once, though sinless himself, represent that nature which has sinned, and at the same time afford an adequate propitiatory sacrifice; and his gratitude is inflamed by a revelation of that holy Divine Comforter, who descends into his heart with gifts and graces, the precious fruits of faith, and the blessed assurance of immortal happiness.

"What have heathen morals, what have the corrupted doctrines of Christianity, to offer equal to these great and invaluable blessings? Man, who knows his own weakness, relies not on his own merits, but on the merits of his Saviour; man, whose carnal hearts sinks under worldly oppressions, and worldly temptations, rises superior to them all, in the confidence of spiritual assistance. 'If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye, through the Spirit, do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage, again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.' Rom. viii. 13-15*."

VOL. I.

* Brewster's Secular Essay, p. 267, &c.

H

CALVINISM, AND CALVINISTS.

NAMES.

THE terms Calvinism and Calvinists, are derived from John Calvin, a zealous and eminent Reformer, and contemporary with Luther. They occur in 1564, or sooner; and it was the controversy on the Eucharist, which began so early as 1524, that first rendered them characteristical appellations.

The title of Calvinist was also affixed to our Reformers, and the English Protestants in general, by the adherents of the Church of Rome, as a term of reproach. As such, it was afterwards revived by one class of Protestants against another; and, indeed, it is one of those terms which have been much misapplied; for, "instead of having been restricted to the peculiarities of the Calvinistic system, it has been applied to all those essential doctrines of Christianity, which Calvinists hold in common with all other professors of evangelical truth; and many persons have been reproached with the name of Calvinists, whose opinions have had no nearer connexion with the exclusive tenets of Calvin, than those of the persons who cast the reproach*." Hence the necessity of attending to Bishop Horsley's advice, in his last Charge; "Take especial care," says he, "before you aim your shafts at Calvinism, that you know what is Calvinism, and what is not."

When disputes ran high between the Calvinists and the Arminians in Holland, the former were there called Gomarists and Anti-Remonstrants; but the title of the Reformed +, which was first assumed by the French Protestants, has long been the common denomination of all the Calvinistic churches on the continent of Europe.

RISE, PROGRESS, &c.

Calvin was born at Noyon, in Picardy, in 1509, and educated at Paris under Corderius, with a view to the church; but, conceiving a dislike to Popery, he entered upon the study of the civil law, in which he is said to have made considerable

* Cooper's "Letters to an Inquirer after Divine Truth," p. 45.

+ This also is one of those terms that should be laid aside; for there does not appear to be any good reason for it, as applied to those churches in particular.

progress. Afterwards, finding it unsafe for him, as a Protestant, to remain in France, he retired to Basil, in Switzerland, where he again turned his thoughts to divinity; and, in 1536, published his "Institutions of the Christian Religion" in Latin, with a bold and elegant Dedication to Francis I. king of France. In the same year, he became professor of divinity at Geneva. But being soon after obliged to leave that place, he withdrew to Strasburg, where he officiated in a French church of his own establishment, and was also chosen professor of divinity. In the mean time the Genevese earnestly invited hin to return; and he, accepting their invitation in 1541, set on foot a rigorous system of ecclesiastical discipline, and continued at Geneva, actively employed as a preacher and a writer, till his death, which happened in 1564*. Even his enemies admit that he was a person of great talents, indefatigable industry, and considerable learning; and it is generally allowed, that he wrote, both in French and Latin, with great purity+.

But the tenets which are commonly called Calvinistic, ought not to be considered as originating wholly with Calvin; for many of them appear in authors long anterior to him, especially in the works of St. Austin, whom, and the Latin Church, it would appear, he had nearly followed. "The opinions of Austin, which are the basis of Calvinism, have had their strenuous assertors in the Church of Rome itself. Indeed, for a long time they were the prevailing opinions of the Latin Church" particularly among the Augustines and Domi

nicans.

Calvin soon opposed not only the abettors of the Church of Rome, but in some measure Luther also, particularly on the subject of the Eucharist; and the disciples of the one became in a short time distinguished from those of the other.

* See Beza's Life of Calvin, prefixed to his Works, and also to his Epistles; Bolsec likewise wrote a life of him. The former wrote as a friend, the latter as an enemy: the truth may perhaps lie between them.

+ His Theological Works were published in 9 vols. folio. The Amsterdam edition, apud Schipper, of 1667-1671, is considered, I believe, as

correct.

Bishop Horsley. See also Bishop Prettyman's "Elements," vol. ii. p. 312; and Dean Tucker's Letter to Dr. Kippis, on this subject, p. 80, &c. See also Milner's History of the Church, vol. i. p. 155.

Many of those opinions, which are usually called Calvinistic, appear, we are told, in the works of Austin, Hilary, Prosper, Fulgentius, and other fathers of the primitive church, who handled the Pelagian controversy; and most, if not all of them, in those of Gotteschalcus, of the Waldenses, Huss, Jerome of Prague, the Venerable Bede, Grosseteste, Wickliffe, Bradwardine; and even iu those of the schoolmen, Peter Lombard, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Duns Scotus,-all long anterior to Calvin.