writings, speak the same language, respecting the Father as the only true God, and Christ as a man, the servant of God, who raised him from the dead, and gave him all the power of which he is possessed, as a reward for his obedience. In Acts ii. 22,` the Apostle Peter calls Christ "a man approved of God," &c. and in Acts xvii. the Apostle calls him "the man whom God has ordained." I. Tim. ii. 5. "There is one God, and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus." Had the Apostle Paul considered Christ as being any thing more than a man with respect to his nature, he could never have argued, with the least propriety or effect," that as by man came death, so by man came also the resurrection of the dead;", for it might have been replied that by man came death: but not by man but by God came the resurrection from the dead. He directed men to pray to God the Father only. Acts iv. 34, Rom. xvi. 27, &c.

This denomination maintains, that repentance and a good life are of themselves sufficient to recommend us to divine favour; and that nothing is necessary to make us in all situations the objects of his favour, but such moral conduct as he has made us capable of. That Christ did nothing by his death, or in any other way, to render God kind and merciful to sinners; or rather, that God is of his own accord disposed to forgive men their sins, without any other condition than the sinner's repentance, is declared by the Almighty himself, constantly and expressly in the Old Testament, and never contradicted in the New. Isaiah iv. 7: "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and he will abundantly pardon." See also Ezek. xviii. 27. This most important doctrine of the efficacy of repentance alone, on the part of the sinner, as sufficient to recommend him to pardon with God, is confirmed by Christ himself, Matt. vi. 12: "If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you." But above all, the beautiful and affecting parable of the prodigal son, (Luke xv.) is most decisive that repentance is all our heavenly Father requires to restore us to his favour.

The Unitarians of all ages have adopted sentiments similar to those of Pelagius, with respect to human nature.

Of late years, the Unitarians have been much upon the increase. They have several societies, in various parts of the world, for the promotion of their principles by the publication of books. In London they have two large and flourishing public societies. The one called "The Unitarian Society for promoting Christian knowledge and the practice of virtue, by the distribution of books." This society has lately published "An improved version of the New Testament, upon the basis of Arch

bishop Newcome's new translation, with a corrected text, and notes critical and explanatory." Among the members of this society, are to be found some men of high literary and political character. The other society, established in London, is called the "Unitarian Fund, for promoting Unitarianism by means of popular preaching." The objects of which are stated to be: "1. To enable poor Unitarian congregations to carry on religious worship. 2. To reimburse the travelling and other expences of teachers who may contribute their labours to the preaching of the Gospel on Unitarian principles. 3. To relieve those Christian ministers, who, by embracing Unitarianism subject themselves to poverty." This society has now several missionaries in various parts of the United Kingdom; and its funds are said to be in a flourishing condition. This denomination is now spreading itself in America. There are also several societies in France, and other parts of the continent, of Unitarian Christians.

CHAPTER XX.

UNIVERSALISTS.

THE name Universalist, was first given to those reformers, who taught a kind of middle doctrine between the systems of Calvin and Arminius.

They were denominated hypothetical Universalists, because they maintained, that God is willing to shew mercy to all mankind; and because they held, that faith in Christ is a necessary condition to render them the objects of divine mercy. These opinions were intended to be opposed to the harsh and cruel notions of Calvin, concerning election and reprobation, on the one hand; and to the opinions of Pelagius, concerning the merit of good works, on the other.

The doctrines of the Hypothetical Universalists were propagated with success by John Cameron, and were further illustrated and defended by Moses Amyrant, a man of great learning and sagacity. The opinions he maintained, and which produced no small changes in the doctrine of the reformed church in France, are briefly summed up in the following propositions.

1. That God desires the happiness of all men; and that no mortal is excluded by any divine decree from the benefits that are procured by the death, sufferings, and Gospel of Christ. 2. That, however, none can be made a partaker of the blessings of the

gospel, and eternal salvation, unless he believe in Jesus Christ. 3. That such indeed, is the immense and universal goodness of the Supreme Being, that he refuses to none the power of believing; though he does not grant unto all his assistance and succour, that they may wisely improve this power to the attainment of everlasting salvation. 4. And that, in consequence of this, multitudes perish through their own fault, and not from any want of goodness in God.

It does not, indeed, appear how this mitigated system of the doctrine of predestination can effectually destroy the heart appalling thoughts, occasioned by the more open and direct notions of Calvin and his adherants; but such were the opinions taught by the Hypothetical Universalists; and they were not without their good effect, in softening down many of the rigours of high Calvinism.

But the term Universalist has now obtained a far more extensive signification; as it is used to designate those Christians, who hold the doctrine of the future restoration of all men to eternal life and happiness.

This sentiment was embraced by Origen in the third century; and in modern times, by the Chevalier Ramsey, Dr. Chyne, Dr. Heartley, and others. The most popular advocates for this doctrine were Dr. Chauncy, and the Rev. Elhanan Winchester.

Dr. Chauncy held, that as Christ died, not for a select number only, but for all men universally, that, therefore, all men shall finally partake of the benefits of his death; if not in this state of existence yet in another.

He held, that as a mean, in order to man's being meet for salvation, God will sooner or later, bring them all to a willing and obedient subjection to his moral government. This doctrine is maintained by many, not so much, as they say, because it appears to be indicated by some passages of scripture, but because it is strictly agreeable to the spirit and genius of the dispensation of universal goodness displayed in the Gospel of Christ. They contend that the doctrine of eternal punishments is not only a cruel and hateful doctrine, but subversive of all proper ideas of the benevolent and wise character of the Almighty, as well as destitute of the true use and design of all punishment.

And as punishment cannot proceed from a vindictive spirit on the part of the Almighty, it must be designed so to correct the offenders against his moral laws, as to destroy the necessity of eternal punishment, and restore the sinners to obedience, and a desire after reformation; which, when effected, must render all further punishment both unmerciful and unjust.

In defence of this reasoning, they say that the scriptural words

rendered everlasting, eternal, forever and, forever and ever, are frequently used to express things of limited duration; and that, when they refer to the future state, they are always to be considered so, they are always to be so understood; because, to interpret those words otherwise, would be to reason contrary to analogy of faith, the ideas of the divine goodness, the design of the gospel, and the plain dictates of right reason.

This doctrine boasts of having among its advocates and defenders, the name of Origen and his disciples; of many of the German Baptists, prior to the Reformation; and in latter times, of Petitpiere, a learned Swiss; of Dr. Rust, Bishop of Dromore, in Ireland; of Archbishop Tillotson, as well as Bishop Burnet and Newton. This doctrine is also maintained by most of the Unitarians, whether Arians or Humanitarians. It has, however, been ably approved by many learned men; though the contro versy is now pretty much at rest.

140

CHAPTER XX.

MORAVIANS, HERNHUTTERS, OR UNITAS FRATRUM.

IN church history, a denomination of Christians, concerning whose history, origin, and character, various contradictory reports have been published. Crantz divides their history into what he calls ancient and modern. The former refers to them before the time of their settlement in Upper Lusatia, in 1722;. the latter after that period. The United Brethren claim the fa-· mous Huss, and Jerome of Prague, as their martyrs. M. Crantz, however, places the beginning of the church of the United Brethren in the year 1457, and says, that it arose out of the scattered remains of the followers of Huss. In the year 1450, this people became re-united to the Greek Church; but on the taking of Constantinople by the Turks about two years afterwards, that union was again dissolved. After this, various attempts were made to form them into a regular constituted Church, but without success. Although after many vexations and commotions among themselves, and sundry persecutions from others, they obtained permission to withdraw to a part of the King's domain, on the boundary between Silesia and Moravia. In the same year, 1457, they formed their church fellowship, calling themselves Unitas Fratrum," or "Fratres Unitatis," the United Brethren. From this period of the reformation they suffered many cruel

and vexatious persecutions; yet they preserved their unity and formed a kind of alliance with the Waldenses, who had for many centuries opposed many of the corrupt practices and doctrines of the Romish Church. After the reformation, they professed to adhere to the Augsburg Confession, yet they continued a distinct body. After various persecutions and discouragements during the seventeenth century, they became in a manner extinct; until about the year 1720, when they began to revive in Bohemia; but as no free toleration could be obtained for them in that country, they agreed to emigrate. Applications were accordingly made to Nicholas Lewis, Count of Zinzendorf, who readily granted them permission to settle on his estates in Upper Lusatia. Thither, in 1722, a company of them repaired, and formed the settlement of Hernhut, from whence they are sometimes called Hernhutters. Their friend and protector, Count Zinzendorf, at length became a convert to the faith and practices of the Moravian Brethren, and commencing preacher, was in the year 1735, chosen to be their Bishop. From this period, the sect of the Moravians began to flourish rapidly. Count Zinzendorf was a zealous and enterprizing man, though enthusiastical and mystical in a very high degree. His exertions were of singular service to the cause of the brethren, though his extravagancies sometimes brought him into contempt with the sober and reflecting part of mankind. It is even acknowledged, on the part of the Count's friends, that much of the extravagance and absurdity that has been attributed to him owes its origin, or at least its publication, to those persons who wrote his extempore sermons in short-hand, and afterwards published them with all their indelicacies and imperfections about them.

The Church of the United Brethren is Episcopal, and their church government is conducted with great form and regularity. Questions of dispute are settled by ballot, and in cases of real or supposed importance are often settled by lot. The lot is deemed a solemn appeal to heaven, and is made use of with great seriousness. They have œconomies or choir-houses, where they live together in community: the single men and the single women apart, widows and widowers apart, each under the superintendance of elderly persons of their own class. At Fairfield, near Manchester, is a Moravian settlement; it is a small village uncommonly neat and clean, consisting of one large open street, having a handsome chapel, and a small public house for the reception of strangers who visit the settlement from Manchester and the neighbourhood, particularly on Sunday and other holidays. The Moravians are very strict in their attention to youth of both sexes, and never suffer them to come together, or to marry, without the