1

to what you propose to teach. First agree among your selves as to what Christianity is; and then I may let you go on the work of conversion.-Aye, say they, but we all agree as to the morality of the Christian system. Gentlemen, you cannot separate the morality from the dogmas; and while the Indians hear you abusing each other; accusing each other of folly, and of deception; while they hear you, who are all come to them upon the same errand, calling each other all manner of vile names, is it probable, nay, is it possible that they will listen to your morality, even supposing it to be better than that which they now have amongst them?

"Suppose, for instance, that Mr.. WILBERFORCE and Mr. BELSHAM were to go, and were to choose, as the scene of their operations, some Indian village, and, in a friendly way, were to take turns in teaching the same audience. Mr. Wilberforce tells us, and of course he would tell the Hindostanians, that Mr. Belsham is half an infidel, and that his doctrine tends to a laxity of morals; while Mr. Belsham would, doubtless, retort upon his antagonist, as he is doing here. Mr. Wilberforce would tell them that Jesus Christ was, and is, God. Mr. Belsham would tell them that he was a mere man. If the Hindostanians believed Mr. Wilbe rforce to assert the truth, they must believe Mr. Belsham to be guilty of falsehood. There, then, is the morality of the latter done for at once. If they took the side of Mr. Belsham, away would go "vital christianity" in the character of its preacher. But, the probability is, that some of the audience would believe one, and some of them the other. There are then, two hostile sects to begin with; and as people are usually violent in proportion to their ignorance, quarrels and bloodshed might reasonably be expected.Now, then, I ask, can there be any good arise from yielding to the prayers of these petitioners?-Infinitely worse would it be, when the contending parties came to talk of the Bible. Mr. Wilberforce would say that it is the word of God. The Unitarians would deny the fact. This passage, says Mr. Wilberforce, means thus and thus; and the other would tell them that it meant no such thing. This is spurious, says one; that is an interpolation, says another. And, yet. this is called teaching of Christianity!

"The worst sect of all, however, is that of the Methodists, and, for that very reason, they are increasing the fastest. It is a religion which dispenses with every virtue. It preaches up grace, as the sovereign healer of all wounds; as the coverer of all sorts of wickedness; and is beyond all measure more mischievous in its effects than the Catholic

doctrine of forgiving of sins, because it dispenses with oral confession. The Catholic must tell his priest the truth of his crime before he can be forgiven, and, in case of theft, or other reparable wrong, he must make restitution before forgiveness. But the Methodistical robber or murderer may keep the secret and the wages of his sin, and still obtain fuli remission for all by the means of grace, which every ruffian, who is terrified into a praying fit, easily imagines that be has got. To proclaim, that good works are of no avail; that faith alone is of any use in the ensuring of salva tion; that the greater a man's sins are, the greater hope there is of him when he repents; that the blood of Christ instantly washes away all crimes from any one who chooses to call upon his name, without any restitution or previous open confession of such crimes; what is this but to invite all the ignorant part of the people to commit robbery and murder? -And these, amongst others, are the sects, that wish to go to convert the Hindostanians!

"The Methodists call it "coming to Christ," when any one, after no matter what crimes, begins to turn up his eyes, and groan in their meeting-houses. His blood they have at hand to wash out all stains in an instant; and, as far as religion has any influence on the actions of men, there can be no doubt that this doctrine must have a terrible effect. It is remarked, that the Methodistical congregations con sist of those, generally, who have been amongst the most profligate and wicked of men and women. In an hour of fear, they fly thither for salvation; and, in a short time if they do not get the better of their fears, and relapse into their former practices, they usually become Saints, setting themselves down as of the number of the elect.-Such notions as these must produce effects. They must encourage robbery and murder. And yet, this sect would fain go to convert the Hindostanians!—This, too, is the sect, in which a man, who cannot read, may become a teacher, and by that means, escape from his fair share of service in the militia! Amongst all the rest of mankind, that I have ever heard of, every one takes as much care as possible to keep out of sight the sins of his past life. He is content to behave well now, without talking of the change in his deportment, Not so the Methodist. He openly boasts of his wicked acts, except, indeed, such as would put him in jail. He re lates what a state Christ, as he pretends, found him in. Whence his hearers are to infer, that he has been fa voured with a large portion of grace, and are to look up to him accordingly. I once heard a Black man preaching at

66

Fredericktown, in New Brunswick, who treated us to a cas talogue of his sins, under their several heads of theft, forni cation, adultery, and desertion; and told us that his soul was blacker than his face, till Christ came with his precious blood, and washed it till it was as white as the river St. John, which was then covered with snow. An old Yankee

farmer, who stood near me, said, in a low tone of voice, “I would not trust you in my barn for all that, Cuffee.”—Cuffee told us the particulars of all his amours; and I have heard the same of some of the impudent pretenders to hea venly gifts in this country.

"It is notorious that this sect are less honest, less sincere, and less industrious than other working people. They are taught to believe (a belief very flattering to their pride), that they are vessels selected for salvation: whence they very easily go on to believe that it is little or no harm to cheat the reprobate vessels, whose sufferings they think may as well have a little beginning in this world.-And this is a sect, is it, to be sent out to convert the Hindostanians ?

"I have thus stated, in plain terms, my objections to granting the prayer of these petitioners. I do not know precisely what is the religion or what the morality of the inbabitants of Hindostan ; but, I am quite sure, that they can never be mended by sending amongst them missionaries from these numerous hostile sects, who would be more anxious to defeat each other than to overcome any injurious prejudices that they might find existing in the country.-Missionaries from some one sect might possibly do good; but, from them all, mischief of some sort must be the conse quence. I feel no interest at all in the matter as affects our political power, thinking the possession of India to be an injury to England; but, in addition to all the rest that we have done to that unoffending people, I do hope that we shall not sow the seeds of everlasting religious discord.-I want to see no laws passed to down by force any of these sects in England; but, as I said before, it is one thing to tolerate, and another to create, a nuisance.

"I am well aware of what a correspondent reminds me, namely, that to publish these and the like remarks is to expose myself to the "animosity and execrations of great 'nu ubers of knaves and fools;" but being convinced of the truth and of the public utility of such remarks, 4 am resolved to make them whenever the occasion appears to me to call for them. There are, I know, persons who look upon the Meth mists, for instance, as finds of freedom. It is impossible they should be. They are either fools or tricksters, or

so nearly allied thereto, as to be worthy of no consideration. Their heavenly gifts, their calls, their inspirations, their feelings of grace at work within them, and the rest of their canting gibberish, are a gross and outrageous insult to com mon sense, and a great scandal to the country. It is in vain that we boast of our enlightened state, while a sect like this is increasing daily. It would seem, that, at last, men had fallen in love with ignorance of the most vulgar kind. The very sound of the bellowings of one of these pretended sons of inspiration is enongh to create disgust in a hearer of sense. The incoherent trash, the downright balderdash, that these gifted brethren send forth, surpasses all description; and it really is a stain upon the national character, that they should find such multitudes to follow at their heels.

Now, Sir, your readers are requested to observe, that the point in dispute between Mr. C. and myself is not the truth of the Doctrine of the Trinity, but the truth of the Christian Religion; for, he it is evident, neither believes the one nor the other. The Doctrine of the Trinity, he asserts to be the great and vital doctrine of Christianity; and the obvious in. ference from his reasoning is, that as this doctrine is a gross and palpable absurdity, therefore Christianity is unworthy of rational belief. The Doctrine of the Trinity I maintain is no Doctrine of Christianity, and consequently its absur dity can be no deterioration to that system. On this point and on this alone, we are at issue; and I entreat your readers to bear this in mind through every stage of the busi ness; for my subtle opponent contrives to blend and confound together those matters on which we agree and on which we differ. He treats me, and those who think with me, as though we would wish to deny to others that liberty of speech and writing which we claim for ourselves, when I have distinctly stated that this is not the fact; and now I beg to repeat that I consider every law as unjust, oppressive, and impolitic, which purposes by pains and penalties to prevent the free expression of opinion, or to suppress either the raving of the enthusiast or the drivelling of the sceptic! Let a Carpenter or a Cobbett say what they please on the subject of religion, is the language of the Freethinking Christian-if they are worthy of our notice, we will direct against them the weapons of truth and argument alone, however unwilling they may be to meet us in this honourable warfare. The prosecution also of Mr. Eaton is more than once referred to, for the publication of the third part of Paine's Age of Reason. Who, I ask, Mr. Editor, viewed the whole of that

affair with more indignation and contempt than your friends. the Freethinking Christians? Who expressed their abbore rence at such persecution more pointedly and unequivocally, than the writer in your Magazine who reviewed the trial at the time? And the individual who now addresses you, is not ashamed of acknowledging that, when the old man stood in the Pillory, he was not the least active in the mob, in dissuading those about him from violence, and in execrating the principle of supporting Christianity by means of the pillory! But in reality it was not CHRISTIANITY which required to be thus supported-it was Mr. Cobbett's church -it was the Trinity-it was the Incarnation, which dreaded free discussion, and skulked from public investigation!!

Again, Mr. Cobbett, who seems determined to set all candour and honesty at open defiance, treats me as an UNITARIAN, though he must know from my letter (I mean the letter which he is pledged to insert in his Register) that I do not belong to that body. But however, it was to his purpose to keep this out of sight--there are certain glaring inconsistencies in the public conduct of the Unitarians, and consequently I who am no Unitarian must be answerable for them. To say nothing about the conversion of the Indians, Mr. Cobbett holds up the Unitarian as "joining with other sects in printing and circulatiug without any commentary the whole of this same Bible," part of which they know to be spurious. Now if Mr. Cobbett did not please to publish my letter in his Register, which he had promised to publish, he might at any rate have informed his readers that I had directed his attention in that very letter to this piece of inconsistency in the Unitarians, and that I had reprobated them most pointedly for it. This, Mr. Editor, is what every honest man woul have done, and on that account Mr. Cobbett has not done it!

But, Sir, let me call the attention of your readers a little more closely to this production of Mr. Cobbett's. He sets out with the acknowledgement of having received my name and place of abode. "This is right," says Mr. Cobbett. And is it not right that my letter should be inserted in your Register? is it not right that you should say something about performing your part of the engagement, which was so explicitly given?-have you forgotten in one little week the terms of your promise? if you have, I will refresh your memory" if he will give us his real name and place of abode, as I give mine, HIS LETTER SHALL 'BE INSERTED.”

→ Vol. ii. pp. 185 to 192; 232 to 241,

But