made, to instil heresy into the minds of their pupils. The Hollis professorship is filled by Dr. Ware, an Arian, notwithstanding all the care the pious founder took to fortify it against such a malignant occupancy; and all the strenuous efforts of Dr. Jedidiah Morse to prevent heresy from seizing, contrary to all justice, the funds, which orthodoxy had appropriated for the spreading of evangelical truth. They say, indeed, that no pains are taken to teach the doctrines held by the faculty. But how is it possible for an Arian to lecture on theology without introducing Arianism into his lectures? And all the students must attend on Dr. Ware. From Harvard, missionaries are sent out into every section of the union, who are active and zealous in the dissemination of those deleterious tenets, which they have imbibed in the college.

With all this spreading of Arianism in Massachusetts, it is only at a very late period that the votaries of heresy in Boston have dared to exhibit publicly their opinions. A few years ago the General Repository, a theological magazine, was set on foot in Boston; and it must have gone into operation, with the approbation of most of the congregational clergy in that town. It attacked with virulence all the fundamental doctrines of the Christian system, such as the divinity of Christ, the trinity, the divine decrees, and the atonement. It is a favourable symptom, that for want of support it was relinquished. The common people of New England yet read the works of Davenport, of the Mathers, and other orthodox divines; and are not prepared to abandon wholly the faith of their fathers. After the death of Mr. Lindsey of England, Belsham, a celebrated Socinian, published his life. From this work, Dr. Morse published a selection of such parts as related to American unitarianism; by which some disagreeable truths were brought to light. To spread still farther a knowledge of the facts which this pamphlet contains, it was reviewed in the Panoplist, a very popular theological magazine. The Rev. Mr. Channing, a Boston clergyman, published a reply to the pamphlet and the review. He owns himself an Arian, and inveighs with

U

much earnestness against the review as calculated to disturb the church, and sow the seeds of division among Christians. To this, the Rev. Dr. Worcester of Salem published an answer, in which he contends, that either Mr. Channing and his Arian brethren, or those who are reputed orthodox in Massachusetts, do not preach the gospel of Christ Jesus;that one or the other must be quite off the foundation;—and he establishes his position in the most incontestable manner. Mr. Channing again replied, and the controversy raged with violence, exciting the attention of all New England. It must do good, as it tends to develope before the eyes of the people the real state of the church; and tears the mask from those who have been underhanded in propagating the most destructive heresies. The Socinians say that they have one hundred Unitarian ministers in New England, and that their number is increasing. And who that considers the power of the university can doubt of the correctness of their statement? It is even probable, they have more. The whole congregational church in Massachusetts is in some degree chargeable with these heresies, on account of the countenance which they shew to those who maintain them. A general convention from all the churches in Massachusetts, was held in the summer of 1815, and Dr. Kirkland the principal of the university preached the opening sermon. Thus, though there is a distinct association for Boston, and though chiefly through the influence of the excellent Dr. Morse a general association, including a great portion of the churches of Massachusetts has been formed, yet the general convention in Boston forms a visible bond of union, and we see that in the convention, not only were the Arians acknowledged as ministers of Christ Jesus, but one of the most distinguished of them employed as the preacher to open the session of that body. No general association of the New England congregational churches, has publickly disowned the Arians as ministers of Christ Jesus; nor do we know, whatever individuals may have done, that the whole church has publicly testified against them. Thus

the enemy is let in to the destruction of God's heritage, while the watchmen hold their peace.

As in Europe, so in New England we see, that from the denial of the doctrine of the definite atonement a great body of the church has gone on to Socinianism. Will not the church take warning? We see too, that though Priestley, by his personal efforts, made very few proselytes, yet he has been the instrument of corrupting to the very core a large section of the American church; and that the work of evil is still in progression. God only, who says to the raging of the sea, hitherto shalt thou come and no farther, knows where it will end. At present, the flood of error threatens to deluge and bury in ruins not only the northern churches, but to spread devastation over other parts of the land.

That it has produced a very unhappy effect upon the public mind in the north, is manifest from recent political events. When the Federal constitution was formed, it is well known that many northern members of the convention contended for an acknowledgment of the government of Almighty God, and for a recognition of the Holy Scriptures as the rule of human conduct, as a qualification for office; and that, the effort failed of success. Among the articles proposed for amendment at the late famous Hartford convention, there was no mention made of this subject, to the great disappointment of many, who know the principles of most of the state constitutions of New England. When this fact was mentioned to the late excellent president Dwight, he said "he presumed that the members of the convention, would have been forward to propose such an important amendment, but that they thought the state of public feeling, on this point, among leading southern gentlemen, such as to render the proposition hopeless." We have no doubt, however, that the neglect proceeded from another source-that of many northern gentlemen being "not far from Mr. Jefferson in his unbelief." Many readers will probably think it extravagant to connect with the doctrine of the atonement and the character of Messiah, national movements. But let them

remember, that God has exalted Jesus in his mediatorial governm nt to the administration of the empire of the universe, as a reward of his sufferings in making this atonement; and that he governs all the machinery of creation, in subserviency to the interests of the church, which he has purchased with his blood. The doctrine of the atonement forms the centre about which all political, as well as all ecclesiastical bodies, revolve. Nations who honour Messiah and rejoice in the fruits of his atonement, he will honour; and will degrade those who dishonour him, and reject his

atonement.

While the people in the eastern parts of Massachusetts, were thus marching forward, with rapid strides in the carreer of error, the people in the southern parts of New England owing partly to extraneous influence, were moving in the same direction, but with slower pace. The next distinguished writer on theology among the northern divines, after Dr Bellamy, was Dr. Hopkins of Newport, who advances several steps farther than his predecessor. His system of doctrines was published in 1792. On the doctrine of human depravity and inability he speaks thus:*-"The understanding, or intellect, considered as distinct from the will, is a natural faculty, and is not capable of moral depravity." He repeats the same sentiment, in a variety of shapes, without ever once admitting that the will is as much a natural faculty as the understanding; and that the understanding is as much concerned in our moral action as the will. On the subject of God's being the author of sin, Dr. Hopkins goes farther than Edwards, who says, "If by the author of sin is meant the permitter, or not a hinderer of sin: and at the same time the disposer of the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy and most excellent ends and purposes, that sin infallibly follows; I say if this is all tha is meant, by being the author of sin, I do not deny that God is the author of sin (though I dislike and reject the phrase

* Vol. I. p. 452. Boston.

On Free Will. Edi. I. part IV. Sec. II. p. 254.

as that which by use and custom, is apt to carry another sense.)" Dr. Hopkins, explains much, but after all, a large portion of his system is occupied with attempts to prove that God is really the author of sin. "Hence he says in this view" (that of Edwards,) "he" (God,) “is really the origin and cause of moral evil, as really as he is of any thing which he wills." Edwards rejected the phrase; Hopkins adopts it, but with much explanation.

On the subject too of the good of the whole, on the doctrine of benevolence to being in general, he advances a little beyond Edwards. He says, "disinterested, impartial benevolence, to being in general that is capable of good and happiness, regards and wishes well to every being and creature in the system, according to the degree of his existence, worth and capacity of happiness, so far as all this comes into the view of the benevolent person.-And as he himself is one individual part of the whole, he must of necessity be the object of this disinterested, impartial benevolence-not because it is himself, but because he is included in the whole." He condemns all self love, and, indeed, represents it as the very essence of all sin. As to the sin of Adam, the doctor says," it is not to be supposed that the sin of Adam is imputed to them while they are considered as innocent in themselves." In consequence of Adam's sin his posterity, he says, are depraved, and this is all that should be meant by original sin. The doctrine of imputation he denies.

Of the obedience and sufferings of Christ, he says:"The law of God does not admit of a substitute, both in obeying the precepts and suffering the penalty of it." Again," This atonement therefore only delivers from the curse of the law, and procures the remission of their sins, who are in him; but does not procure for them any positive good: it leaves them under the power of sin, and without any title to eternal life." By his obedience to the law, according to this writer, Christ procured a title to everLasting blessedness for his people. "The vicarious atonement is of such a nature, that the sinner might lawfully be punished, after the sufferings of his substitute."