and I hope in the way to be not only almost, but altogether what we are." This is what we have always thought, and frequently said. Unitarianism and Infidelity are nearly related indeed. Mr. Wells, who is a hopeful pupil of the Priestleian school, says that they are identical. "Unitarianism," says he, "consists rather in not believing;" and he wishes to make men ❝zealous in refusing to believe." The words printed in Italics were so printed by Mr. Belsham, and were probably underscored by Mr. Wells. On reading this passage, we turned to the Improved Version, saying to ourselves, "Who knows but Mr. Wells may read Scripture thus: He that believeth not shall be saved." We find that this conjectural emendation is probably reserved for some improved edition. Whether it is so reserved or not, it is quite as worthy of credit as several conjectural crit icisms contained in that work. We shall close with a few brief observations on Mr. Wells's letter; a letter which contains, within a small compass, a faithful epitome of the most common cant of the liberal party, as it has appeared in their publications, for ten years past.

It is curious to observe the truly meek and charitable manner, in which Mr. Wells arranges the parties to the Unitarian controversy. On his own side, are "honesty unfettered and unbiassed," "correct sentiments," "virtue and learning and honor," "spirit and ability," "good sense,' "self-respect, the companion of virtue," "truth," and, in short, "every thing which is respectable." On the side of the ortho

dox, are "craft and cunning and equivocation and falsehood and intolerant zeal," "low cunning," "low prejudices," "and every thing which is detestable." So much for abstract qualities. When we come to persons, we find "Mr. Norton, an excellent young man," "the very worthy and learned Dr. Ware," "Dr. Kirkland the president," "most of the Boston clergy and respectable laymen, (many of whom are enlightened theologians,) who do not conceal their sentiments, but express them, when they judge it proper," and "Judge Thatcher, an excellent man and most zealous Unitarian:" these are drawn up in battle-array, in the liberal ranks. On the other side no names are mentioned except that of "Dr. M."* But we find that the orthodox consist of "theological system-makers;" of "the ignorant, the violent, the ambitious, and the cunning;" of "conceited deacons," and "bigoted, persecuting Calvinists." Really! This is an arrangement which, in point of liberality, has seldom been surpassed. Wells ought to be appointed grand marshal of the Unitarian corps.

Mr.

Dr. Osgood and Dr. Lathrop are suffered to stand apart. This favor seems to have been granted them, because, to use the words of Mr. Wells, "they are on the best possible terms with our Boston friends."

Mr. Wells decides, without the least hesitation, that Unitarian sentiments are the only sen

*The manner in which Dr. M. is men

tioned in this letter, and the influence which he is deemed to have, will account for no small part of the zeal, which some Unitarians have shewn to put him down. "Wurthy" conduct in a "worthy" cause!

timents to be found in the New Testament. It is not to our purpose to inquire, whence he derived his authority to dogmatize in this flippant manner. He speaks, however, of Drs. Osgood and Lathrop as "really orthodox," and as "noble and determined supporters of the right of private judgment." Yet, if his decision is entitled to credit, these aged and "venerable" clergymen are the mere dupes of "theological system-makers;" and have been employed all their lives in teaching doctrines, which have nothing to support, them in the New Testament.

Again; Mr. Wells speaks in the most confident manner, as though all the learning in the world was enlisted on the Unitarian side, and had to contend with nothing but ignorance, prejudice, and bigotry. Is it possible that Mr. Wells can believe, in reference to this country, that all the learning is on his side, when nearly all the regular clergy, all the colleges except one, and all the theological institutions, are decidedly opposed to Unitarianism? and when he can number, as in favor of his scheme, only one college, and a few cler gymen in Boston and the vicinity? Is it possible, that he can believe the crude speculations of such a man as Mr. Belsham to be evidences of great learning, while such men as Middleton, Magee, Buchanan, Wardlaw, Chalmers, and the Editors of the Christian Observer, are poor, ignorant, deluded, bigoted creatures?

Again; Mr. Wells says that "the violent party," (by which term he very meekly character izes the friends of the religion

of our fathers,) "have very unwisely preferred to insist upon a subscription to articles of faith." The simple fact is, that the founders of the Theological Institution at Andover have very wisely insisted, that the professors supported by their funds should subscribe articles of faith. Yet a stranger would suppose, from Mr. Wells's representation, that all our ministers and churches were required to subscribe to some authorized formulary of religious doctrines, on penalty of being excluded from the communion of the orthodox churches. We need not say, that such a representation is entirely unsupported by fact.

It is indeed singular, that men professing unbounded liberality, should raise and keep up a violent outcry, merely because a few charitable individuals have endowed professorships with their own money, and have provided that the professors should believe certain doctrines, which, as the founders are fully persuaded, are taught in the Scrip

tures..

Again; "We have to contend here," says Mr. Wells, "for the first principles of Protestantism." "In short, we are now contending for the liberty of being Protestants." Were it not that similar assertions have been' often made by many of the lib. eral party, we should not notice this subject. We must intreat Mr. Wells, and his brethren, to state precisely what those principles of Protestantism are; which are contended for by him and his friends, and denied by the orthodox. Till this is done, we shall take the liberty of asserting, and we do it without the

least fear of contradiction or exposure, that no one fundamental principle of Protestantism iş thus contended for and thus denied. Let us look a moment at a subject, which has given rise to so much groundless clamor. What are the first principles of Protestantism? We have always supposed, that justification by faith alone, was, by way of eminence, the first principle of the early reformers. Another important principle was this; that before regeneration men are totally destitute of holiness, and can do nothing which is acceptable in the sight of God. Other principles were the doctrines of predestination, election, conversion by the Spirit of God, new obedi ence, and perseverance. Which of these doctrines is contended for by the liberal party in this country, or denied by the orthodox? But let us look at another class of principles. Protestants have uniformly held, that the Scriptures are the only and sufficient rule of faith and practice; that Popish traditions are of no authority; and that the decisions of councils are not infallible. Have the orthodox in this country ever denied either of these principles? If they have, it is new to us. Perhaps the orthodox have been unwilling to put the Scriptures into the hands of the common people, in their mother tongue? If so, let the offence be proved. Let the guilty individuals be named; and we will heartily join in their condemnation. But it will be said, perhaps, that the orthodox have a creed, or creeds; in other words, they express, by a short summary, the principal doctrines, which they believe the

Scriptures to contain. This is true; and it is precisely what all the Protestant churches have uniformly done, in perfect consistency with every principle of the Reformation. Let us hear no more of this miserable cant about Protestantism. The complaint is absolutely without foundation. As well might it be said, that the Inquisition of Goa, having travelled across the Indian and Atlantic oceans, (palaces, caverns and all,) has seated itself on Beacon hill; and that father Jo. sephus a Doloribus sits there, on his black marble throne, daily sentencing the "worthy confessors" of Unitarianism to his subterranean dungeons. The liberal party are not contending for the privilege of thinking for themselves. This has never been denied them in this country. But they are contending for the priv ilege of thinking for themselves and the orthodox too; at least so far as to prescribe the manner, in which the orthodox shall regard them. While they mutilate the New Testament, and reject nearly all the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel; while they degrade the Savior to the condition of a fallible, peccable, and ignorant man;-they clamorously insist, that the orthodox should have just as good an opinion of them as they have of themselves, and should acknowledge them to be candid, impartial, enlightened, pions Christians. This is requiring too much. While they demand the privilege of thinking and acting for themselves, let them accord the same privilege to others.

Mr. Belsham predicts, that the time will come when the truth, by which he means Unitarian

ism, will burst forth, in this country, "in all her glory." Fired at the thought, he indulges in the following figurative language, with which the history concludes.

"The dull hollow rumbling at the bottom of the sea, which is scarcely noticed by the inattentive traveller who is gliding carelessly over the solid plate of ice which encrusts the surface, is, to the wary and experienced observer, a sure presage of the speedy and sudden exp osion of the immense superincumbent mass, and of the restoration of the imprisoned waves to their native freedom, to the consternation and often to the utter destruction of those who refuse to listen to the friendly premonition."

This is a fair and generous warning. We have heard "the dull hollow rumbling at the bottom of the sea." We exhort the churches "to listen to the friendly premonition;" lest, when the fountains of the great deep shall be broken up, those who are careless and inattentive should be overwhelmed by "the imprisoned waves" to "their consternation and utter destruction!"

LXXVI. A Discourse occasioned by the Proclamation of Peace between Great Britain and the United States of Amer. ica. Preached on Lord's day, Feb. 26, 1815; and published by request. BY THOMAS WILLIAMS, Minister of the Pacific Congregational Church and Society in Providence. Prov. idence; H. Mann & Co. pp. 23.

THIS Discourse is a very sensible discussion of an important subject. The text is Isa. ii, 4. They shali beat their swords into plough-shares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall

not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any

more.

The preacher illustrates this proposition: "Though war has existed in past ages, yet, in a future period, it shall wholly cease to exist." In pursuance of his design, he considers the exist ence of war in past ages; inquires how it appears, that war shall wholly cease; and shows in what way it shall cease. The two last of these heads are treated in a very interesting manner. To the inquiry, how it appears that wars shall hereafter wholly cease, the preacher replies, that it does not thus appear from the native character of mankind, nor from any events that have yet taken place; but solely from what God has declared in the Scrip

tures.

The way, in which the preacher supposes that universal peace will be established, is described under these two particulars; the publication of the Gospel through the whole earth, and the effusion of the Holy Spirit on all nations. We entirely approve of these sentiments, and are deliberately of opinion, that Christians ought to keep them Constantly in view, in all their plans for doing good to mankind. It is not sufficient to prove, that war is unjust, cruel, unwise, impolitic, and ruinous. Mankind have always known this. The understanding is easily convinced; but, before the world will be reformed, the hearts of men must be changed.

We have no room for extracts; but cordially recommend this sermon to the perusal of our readers.

MISSION TO THE SOUTH WEST

ERN PARTS OF THE UNITED

STATES..

Letter from Messrs. Mills and Smith,

continued from p. 233.

"We arrived at Vincennes, on the 19th of November. While we were at that place, a subscription paper was circulated, similar to the one circulated at St. Louis. One hundred dollars were very soon subscribed. The prospect was, that twice that sum would soon be subscribed. The subscribers appointed a second meeting, when they proposed to adopt the constitution of a Bible Society for the western part of the Indiana Territory, or rather the Wabash District. On the 25th of November, we arrived at New Albany, near Jeffersonville, which is situated at the falls of the Ohio. While we remained in the vicinity of the falls, subscription papers were circulated to ascertain who would aid the proposed Bible Society for the eastern part of the territory. These papers were circulated in Jeffersonville, New Albany, and Charleston. Near 250 dollars were soon subscribed; and a time was appoint ed for the meeting, when it was expected the constitution would be adopted.

"More than 700 dollars have been subscribed, since we came into the territories, to purchase Bibles to give to the destitute. We have no doubt that these subscriptions will be very considerably increased. But a few of the people, disposed to favor the cbject proposed by forming BiVOL. XI.

ble Societies, have had an oppor. tunity to subscribe. Papers will be more generally circulated, when the societies shall go into operation. Some parts of the Territories are settling very fast. Many poor people are among the number of those, who go north of the Ohio. If those good men in the Territories, who are disposed to favor the promotion of religion and morality, by the general distribution of the Sa cred Scriptures among the deștitute, continue to exert themselves, as we believe they will, still resources cannot be collected probably by them, more than sufficient to supply the yearly increasing destitute part of their population. From the best estimate, we could make, with respect to the proportionate num. ber of destitute families in the three Territories, we are led to believe, that 10 or 12,000 Bibles are necessary, in order to supply each destitute family.

"You will readily perceive, Sir,. that living as most of the people in the Territories do, 1,000 or 1,500 miles from any place, where the Bible is printed, very many of them must for a long time remain destitute, unless their necessities can be relieved, at least in a considerable degree, by the Managers of Bible Socities in the different States.*

*Bibles which may be sent on to the Territories for distribution, may, for the pres ent, be directed to the care of the following gentlemen. In Indians, to Thomas Posey the Governor of the Territory, Jeffersonville, or to Joel Scribner, New Albany. In Illinois to Joseph M. Street, Shawaneetown. In Missouri, to Stephen Hemp stead, St. Louis.

35