III. Before I enter upon the subject, I must be permitted to make a general reflection, and it is this, that it would be no small error to imagine, that Unitarianism is a new system, a masterpiece of the astonishing improvement of the human intellect for it is a fact, that this sect has not even the merit of invention or novelty, (if novelty, in matters of religion, can be called merit,) and that it has existed before either my reader or I were thought of in the world: for in running over the above sketch of the Unitarian doctrines, it is obvious, that Unitarianism is, with very little shades of difference, nothing more than a revival of ancient heresies, which, (even in the Apostolic age,) began to break out, and which, at that time, were boasted of, not unlike the said system, as wonderful improvements of the human mind, because devised by the very same grand principle, on which the Unitarian builds his system, I mean, reason. For the truth of what I am here advancing, the reader has nothing else to do, than to turn to the account, which the primitive Fathers of the church, and, among others, Tertullian, St. Irenæus, and St. Epiphanius, have left us of the errors of the Simonians, Cerinthians, the Ebionites, the Valentinians, &c. &c. and there he will find, that most of those heretics rejected the very same mysteries of religion which the Unitarians reject, and on the very same ground, too, on which the Unitarians do, viz: because they appeared unintelligible to their understanding. Arius, in the third century, denied the divinity of Jesus Christ; Eunomius, in the following century, the divinity of the Holy Ghost; Pelagius, the existence of Original Sin and of Supernatural Grace ; Eutyches, the distinction of the two Natures, or two Wills, in Christ, and so on; and when all these opinions had long since been forgotten, Socinus, in the sixteenth century, arose to amalgamate them all into one body, and to obtrude them on his followers as the most rational and consistent creed of the reformation: his system was exactly that of the Unitarians: his grand principle, (and such is the Unitarian's,) was, that, whatever is unintelligible to human reason, is to be rejected: rejected, of course, were all those mysteries which the Unita

rians reject: and when Socinianism itself had nearly vanished away, the dying sparks of this expiring sect were caught by the British infidels and French sophisters, who undertook, (with what success, the world well knows,) to shake the foundations of Christianity itself by the very same engines of sophistry, which, both Socinus and the Unitarians make use of to erase from the divine system of Jesus Christ the above mysteries, which are its very basis and ground work.

IV. There is another reflection which must naturally offer itself to every reflecting mind, and which will ever form a strong and almost insuperable presumption against the Unitarian system. "Is it possible, (it is thus, that every sober man will reason with himself,) is it possible, that the whole Christian world, for the space of not less than eighteen hundred years, should have been involved in more than Egyptian darkness, in the grossest idolatry, in adoring a mere man as the true God? Is it possible that Jesus Christ, the Divine Messenger of the Father, authorized and empowered to make a Divine Revelation to the world,' should have so utterly forgotten his solemn promises to his Church,* and, contrary to them, should have permitted her to fall into a worse kind of idolatry than that, from which he came to rescue mankind? What, on that supposition, must we think of Jesus Christ himself? What of his wisdom, of his veracity, of his fidelity in keeping his promises? Is it possible, that Christ suffered millions of martyrs to be butchered for the sake of an idolatrous worship? Is it possible that a handful of men, men of yesterday, men, who are neither Saints nor Thaumaturguses, should, within the eighteenth century, be better informed of the Divine Religion of Jesus Christ, and of the true meaning of the Scriptures, than the Church of God, instructed by the Apostles and their immediate successors? Is it possible, that these few men can be wiser than the whole Christian world; wiser than the glorious Martyrs; wiser than the Holy Fathers, those prodi

St. Matthew, xviii. "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against her." And St. Matt. xxviii. "And behold! I am with you, all days, even to the end of the world.”

gies of learning as well as of sanctity; wiser than those eighteen venerable Assemblies in which the whole Church of Christ was collected?" Any man, capable of reflection will readily answer in the words of the Roman bard, "Credat Judaus Apella, non ego." Apella, the Jew, may believe this,

but not I."

66

But stop, may say the Unitarian, this is not yet touching the question to do any thing to the purpose, you must be able to show, by fair argument, that our doctrine is false, inconsistent with scripture and reason, and, of course, inadmissible.

Perfectly right let us, therefore, come directly to the point, and, in order to proceed methodically, let us proceed to the grand principle, on which the whole structure of the Unitarian system is hinged, "Man cannot reasonably believe what is above the sphere of reason; and, of course, all myste ries are to be expunged from the code of Christianity."

As this principle is all-important, and, as essential to the establishment of their system, as the foundations are to an edifice, it is, in the nature of things, to expect that they will fight for it as "pro aris et focis," conscious as they are to them. selves, that, if this one principle be overthrown, Unitarianism must needs fall, and Christianity triumph; the reader must, therefore, be prepared to encounter all, that human ingenuity and philosophic wit could possibly invent in support of a principle which is the primum mobile, and the conditio, sine qua non, of the Unitarian cause. Their process of reasoning on this subject, like an impregnable battery, is found in the following syllogism:

V. "The Scriptures, being expressly intended for our instruction, edification, rule of life, and means of happiness, must have every where a consistent and intelligible meaning."* Unitarian major.

But the mysteries of original sin, of the redemption of mankind by Jesus Christ, of the Trinity, of the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, the necessity of

See the above Abstract of Unitarian Belief.

supernatural grace, are unintelligible to the human under standing: Unitarian minor.

Therefore they are not revealed in the Scriptures, and, of course are not to be believed. Unitarian conclusion.

If the major proposition be correct, Unitarianism triumphs: if false and groundless, Unitarianism must needs be crushed under its ruins. Acquainted as we are with the position and ground, which the enemy has taken, let us try, if we cannot storm his batteries and drive him out of his entrenchments. In reconnoitering the place, it will require, methinks, no great degree of learning, to make it appear to the most ordinary capacity, that the above major proposition, understood in the sense and meaning of the Unitarian system, is utterly false, irrational, and absurd.

VI. Before I proceed to my demonstration, it is proper, for the sake of avoiding confusion, clearly to state the point in question between the Unitarians and the Christians: for, if by the position, "The Scriptures must have every where an intelligible meaning," nothing more is meant, than, that God in the Scriptures is to speak to men after such a manner, and in such language, as to make them sufficiently understand what he has revealed and what they are to believe, without, however, giving them a right to dive into the intrinsic nature of the revelation; after nearly the same manner, as a servant has a right to know clearly the commands of his master, (as otherwise he could not comply with them,) without having a right to know the reasons which his master may have to impose them on him; if, I say, no more is meant than this, the Unitarian will speak plain, good sense, and the whole world will agree with him: for, it is obvious, that, unless men have some idea of what God reveals, they cannot be bound to believe it. But if this principle, "the Scriptures must have every where an intelligible meaning," is understood to imply, that men have a right to examine the very intrinsic nature of the object revealed, to compare it with the natural ideas of their reason, and that, if found to be unintelligible, this alone is a sufficient reason to reject that mysterious and unintelligi

ble meaning, and, of course, all divine mysteries, which are essentially incomprehensible to human reason; the position, thus understood, is utterly false, irrational, and absurd.

I do not presume, that any Unitarian will call it in question, whether this latter meaning be the identical position of the Unitarian creed: for this is undeniable, from the very abstract of the Unitarian belief above quoted; next, from all the writers that have stept forward in vindication of that belief; and, in fine, from the total rejection of all mysteries, which the Unitarians reject, on no other ground, but, because they are unintelligible to their understandings.*

* Since the known enemies of Christianity, such as Bolingbroke, Hobbes, Shaftsbury, Toland, Bayle, Voltaire, Rousseau, Thomas Paine, &c. &c. have always considered this principle, "Men cannot reasonably believe, what they cannot comprehend," or, what is nearly tantamount, "What is above reason, is against reason," as the most powerful engine against Revelation, we need not be surprised when we find our Unitarian friends utterly averse from acknowledging, that they have adopted the said principles. But let Mr. Sparks, (minister of the First Independent Church of Baltimore,) in his sixth Letter to the Rev. William E. Wyatt, D. D. page 200—202, and his other Unitarian friends, openly disclaim the adoption of the above maxims, as long as they please, still it will not be less a fact, to any one that is conversant with their writings, that the principles under consideration are, in reality, the very basis, of the whole Unitarian system. The reader will scarce have perused a page, either in Mr. Sparks' Letters, or in the Christian Disciple, or in the Unitarian Miscellany, when he will be made sensible, that, in the Unitarian language, unintelligible, absurd, irrational, inconsistent, and contradictory, are all synonymous expressions; and that mysteries and absurdities, inconsistencies, contradictions, signify one and the same thing. The same is clearly apparent from their mode of investigating the mysteries; for, instead of inquiring into the motives of extrinsic credibility, as reason directs, when we set about to ascertam Divine Revelation; or, instead of inquiring, whether God has actually revealed them or not, they, on the contrary, follow a method quite the reverse their first and only care being, not to examine whether God has actually revealed them, and whether, of course, they are to be believed without further ado, whether intelligible to reason, or unintelligible, but to examine into the intrinsic nature of the mysteries, in order to discover, whether they be concordant with the natural ideas of reason, or, what is the same, whether they be intelligible to reason, and, in case they are not, as it always falls out in mysteries, they are sure, to reject them as inconsistencies, absurdities, contradictions, irrational notions, for no other reason, but, because reason cannot comprehend them. What is said here, shall be substantiated, if necessary by copious extracts from Unitarian productions.