* * * * *

Jam dictum est (est de pœnis persolvendis primum agamus) pœnam quam

uniusquisque nostrum propter delicta sua pendere tenebatur, mortem

æternam esse. Hanc profecto Christus non subiit; et si cam subiisset,

universi salutis nostræ et liberationis a peccatorum pœna spes, et ratio

funditus eversa fuisset. Immo si jam Christus non resurrexisset, vana,

ut inquit Paulus. 1 Cor. xv. 14, 17.; esset Evangelii prædicatio, et nos

adhuc essemus in peccatis nostris. Et tamen, si idcirco nos servasset

Christus, quod pœnas nostris peccatis debitas ipse sustinuisset, et nobis

ejus rei fides quoad ejus fieri poterat facienda fuisset; eum nunquam

resurgere, sed in morte perpetuo manere oportuisset: Op. Vol. p. 197,

fol. Edit.

Ac dicitis, ut conjeci potest, animadvertendum esse, aliam in ipsa

essentia divina personam patris esse, aliam personam filii: et Patri

potuisse a Filio satisfieri seu ut satisfierat, vim suppeditari: nec

tamen aliquid quod satisfactioni per solutionem facienda adversetur,

committi. Sed dicite obsecro, nonne ipsius filii personæ non minus quam

patris satisfaciendum fuisse affirmatis. Si filius patri satisfacit, hoc

est, quod illi debetur solvit: quis ipsi filio, quod ipsi debetur, dabit?

Respondebitis, ut arbitror, si patri satisfactum fuit, filio quoque

satisfactum esse; cum eadem sit utriusque voluntas . . . Quomodo patri a

filio quidquam ullo parto solvi potuisset si quod unius aut est, aut fit,

alterius reipsa esse necesse foret? . . . At vero quis deinde ambigere

queat filium patri nihil dare posse: cum quidquid filius habet patris

revera sit, et ipse Christus disertè dixerit, Joh. xvii. 10, omnia quæ

sua erant patris esse? Annon ex ipsa disciplina vestra, hoc est Dei

essentiam non distinguere, sed partiri: si præter personarum

proprietates, aliquid unam personam habere velitis quod alia non habeat.

Filii autem personam proprietates suas patris personæ pro peccatorum

nostrorum satisfactione solvisse, cui unquam in mentem venire poteret?

Ib. p. 202.

* * * * *

FINIS.

* * * * *

* * * * *

CHARLES WHITTINGHAM, CHISWICK.

* * * * *

Footnotes.

{3} αγαπη which is the word generally translated _charity_ in the New

Testament means _affectionate regard_. The distinction between charity

and almsgiving is well laid down by St. Clement of Alexandria.

“Charity,” says he, “leads to the sharing our good things with others;

but this is not in itself charity, but only our outward sign of that

feeling.”

{4} See 1 Cor. ix. 19, 20.

{5a} Rom. xii. 10.

{5b} “No national prejudices, no religious differences could hinder our

Saviour from doing good. We should consider that men’s understandings

naturally are not all of the same size and capacity, and that this

difference is greatly increased by different education, different

employments, different company, and the like. No man is infallible. We

are liable to errors perhaps as much as others. The very best men may

sometimes differ in opinion, as St. Paul ‘withstood St. Peter to the

face;’ and if there was such a difference between two of the chiefest of

the Apostles, well may there be between inferior mortals. About modes of

faith there will always be dispute and difference; but in acts of mercy

and kindness all mankind may and should agree.”—_Newton_.

{8} “In fact, all the religious persecutions in the world, all the

penalties and inflictions upon those who differ from ourselves, however

conscientiously, take their rise from an imperfect and erroneous notion

of what really constitutes the glory of God, and the manner in which we

best can assist its display and extension. The angels at the birth of

Christ sang that the glory of God was in unison with ‘Peace on earth, and

good will towards men.’—‘No!’ said the Schoolman, ‘the glory of God

consists in thinking of the Deity as we think.’—‘No!’ said the

Inquisitor, ‘the glory of God consists in worshiping as we

prescribe.’—‘No!’ said the Covenanters, ‘the glory of God consists in

exterminating those whom we call his enemies.’ Mistaken men! who _thus_

propose to honour the God and Father of the universe, the merciful God,

and the gracious Father of all his rational creatures! Instead of

perusing with delight and conviction the plain declaration contained in

our Sacred records, too many Christians have in almost every age passed

over the characteristics of kind design throughout nature: they have

mistaken or forgotten the clear delineations of Divine Mercy and Goodness

in the Book of Grace, and have had recourse to the narrowed circle of

their own prejudices.”—_Maltby’s Sermons_.

{10} It would be well if Rom. xiv. were more attentively studied and

more universally practised among Christians.

{14} They have in consequence been sometimes called “Seekers.”

{15a} Gough’s History of the Quakers. Vol. i. p. 139.

{15b} Probably their resolute refusal to pay tithes and other dues

brought on them some of these punishments.

{20} “Keep the Sabbath holy,” says Luther, “for its use both to body and

soul; but if any where the day is made holy for the mere day’s sake; if

any where any one sets up its observance upon a _Jewish_ foundation, then

I order you to work on it, to ride on it, to dance on it, to feast on it,

to do any thing that shall remove this encroachment on the Christian

spirit and liberty.” This is language which may be easily misunderstood

and perverted from Luther’s meaning; but it was uttered by him from a

jealousy of Sabbatical superstition.

{21} Matt. v.

{22} “There is an unreasonable, uncharitable, and superstitious notion

that a soldier, so far as his profession is concerned, is ‘of the world;’

and that a man who dies in the field of battle is _necessarily_ less

prepared for his change than one who dies in his bed. These feelings,

which have sadly tended to degrade and impoverish the mind of modern

Europe . . . to make armies what they are told they _must_ be; and

therefore to make them dangerous by depriving them of any high

restraining principles, have been greatly encouraged by the tone which

religious men of our day have adopted from the Quakers.” _Maurice’s

Kingdom of Christ_.

{24a} Moral education, in spite of all the labours of direct

instruction, is really acquired in hours of recreation. Sports and

amusements are, and must be the means by which the mind is insensibly

trained: ‘Men are but children of a larger growth;’ they will have their

pleasures; and unless care be taken, the sermon of the church or chapel

will be neutralized by the association of the tavern and the raceground.

There must be safety valves for the mind, i.e. there must be means for

its pleasurable, profitable, and healthful exertion; those means it is in

our power to render safe and innocent; in too many instances they have

been rendered dangerous and guilty.” _Dr. Taylor_.

{24b} Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it be

received with thanksgiving. (1 Tim. iv. 4.) Extend this maxim, apply it

to the several means of enjoyment, either supposed or real, that the

world presents to us. Those pleasures from which we cannot unreservedly

arise, and thank our Maker; those pursuits which mar our devotions, and

render us unwilling or afraid to come before Him, cannot be innocent. It

would be no easy matter to lay down, as applicable to all, a rule as to

how far conformity with the world is admissible, and where the Christian

must stop: for as the habits and tempers and propensities of men differ,

so also do their temptations and their danger. Thus through the rule by

which one would stand securely, another would as certainly fall.

_Lectures on the Church Catechism_.

{26} See 1 Tim. iv. 4.

{29} “A reverend Doctor in Cambridge was troubled at his small living at

Hoggenton (Oakington) with a peremptory Anabaptist, who plainly told him,

‘It goes against my conscience to pay you tithes except you can show me a

place of Scripture whereby they are due unto you.’ The Dr. returned,

‘Why should it not go as much against my conscience that you should enjoy

your nine parts for which you can show no place in Scripture?’ To whom

the other rejoined, ‘But I have for my land deeds and evidences from my

fathers, who purchased and were peaceably possessed thereof by the laws

of the land.’ ‘The same is my title,’ said the Doctor, ‘tithes being

confirmed unto me by many statutes of the land, time out of mind.’”

_Fuller’s Church History_, _Book II_.

{30a} John iii. 16.

{30b} 2 Cor. v. 19.

{30c} 1 Tim. ii. 4.

{31a} 1 John iv. 9, 10.

{31b} Rom. ii. 15.

{31c} John i. 9. See also 1 John ii. 1, 2. 2 Heb. ii. 9.

{32} Luke xii. 48.

{33a} Mosh. Ecc. Hist. Cent. xvi. Sect. iii.

{33b} Ib.

{35a} Some of the passages of this Catechism are quoted by Mosheim,

which differ very little from the doctrine of the primitive church: all

that can be noticed is, that they omit a distinct recognition of the

divinity of Christ.

{35b} “Fausti Socini Senensis Opera omnia,” vol. i. p. 561. These works

form a part of the “Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum qui Unitarii

appellantur.” Irenopoli post anno dom. 1656.

{36} It is remarkable that _persona_ should so often be confounded with

individual. _Persona_ in its original sense was the mask of the actor,

_through which the sound_ came. The same actor might wear many

_personæ_. If Socinus had recollected this, he might have spared himself

the trouble of controverting a notion never maintained by the orthodox,

i.e. that the Deity was _individually divided_.

{37} Vide Appendix.

{39a} Small Books &c. No. VII. p. 21, &c.

{39b} πρἰν Άβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγώ είμι.

{39c} John. x. 30.

{39d} John xiv. 9, 10.

{39e} 2 Cor. v. 19.

{39f} 1 Tim. ii. 5.

{40} Athanasian Creed.

{41} John v. 30.

{42} The following are extracts from the “Book of Common Prayer

reformed,” professing to have been a selection made by “the late Rev.

Theophilus Lindsey for the use of the congregation in Essex Street”—and

as a liturgy is generally allowed to be a fair exponent of the doctrines

of those who use it—perhaps we may assume that the violent and

reprehensible expressions made use of by some few persons of this

persuasion, are not such as would be acknowledged by the congregations of

Unitarians in general.

Form of baptism. “I baptize thee into (εἰς) the name of the Father and

of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

“Almighty and ever blessed God, by whose providence the different

generations of mankind are raised up to know thee and to enjoy thy favour

for ever; grant that this child now dedicated to thee as the disciple of

thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord, may be endued with heavenly virtues . . .

and that we may daily proceed in all virtue and goodness of living, till

we come to that eternal kingdom which thou hast promised by Christ our

Lord.”

Order for the administration of the Lord’s Supper. Confession, the same

as in the liturgy of the English church as far as “we do heartily repent

and are heartily sorry for these our misdoings, the remembrance of which

is grievous unto us. Have mercy upon us, have mercy upon us, most

merciful Father; forgive us all that is past: and grant that we may ever

hereafter serve and please thee in newness of life to the honour and

glory of thy name.” The absolution is the same with the trifling change

of _us_ for _you_. The sentences following are the same till “Hear also

what St. John saith,” where the text 1 John i. 8, 9, is substituted.

Prayer before the minister receives the communion. “Almighty God, our

heavenly Father, by whose gracious assistance and for our benefit, thy

beloved Son our Lord Jesus Christ, was obedient even to the death upon

the cross; who did institute, and in his holy gospel command us to

continue, a perpetual memorial of his death until his coming again; hear

us, we most humbly beseech thee; and grant that we may receive this bread

and wine in grateful remembrance of his death and sufferings, and of thy

great mercy to mankind in sending him, thy chosen messenger, to turn us

from darkness to light, from vice to virtue, from ignorance and error to

the knowledge of thee, the only true God, whom to know is life

everlasting.”

Form of administration. “Take and eat this bread in remembrance of

Christ”—“Take and drink this wine in remembrance of Christ.”

In the daily service many prayers are omitted, so as to make the service

much shorter. The exhortation and confession are the same; for the

absolution is substituted “Almighty God, unto whom all hearts are open,

all desires known and from whom no secrets are hid; purify the thoughts

of our hearts that we may perfectly love thee, and worthily magnify thy

holy name through Christ our Lord.”—It would be useless to multiply

extracts—enough has been given to show the doctrine of the Unitarian

congregations who use this liturgy.

{47} Priestly’s “Discourses on Various Subjects,” p. 419. See also p.

14, &c. and Prefatory Discourse, p. 93.

{48} Channing’s Discourse on preaching Christ.

{49} Channing’s Works. On the great purpose of Christianity.

{50a} Channing’s Character of Christ.

{50b} Channing’s Sunday School.

{50c} Channing’s Charge at the Ordination of Rev. R. C. Waterston.

{51a} Channing On Infidelity.

{51b} Channing’s System of Exclusion.

{52} John Wesley was born in 1703.

{54} “I rode over to a neighbouring town,” says Wesley, “to wait upon a

justice of peace, a man of candour and understanding; before whom I was

informed their angry neighbours had carried a whole waggon load of these

new heretics.” But when he asked, “what they had done,” there was a deep

silence, for that was a point their conductor had forgot. At length one

said, “Why they pretend to be better than other people, and besides they

pray from morning till night.” Mr. S--- asked, “But have they done

nothing besides?” “Yes, Sir,” said an old man, “an’t please your worship

they have _convarted_ my wife; till she went among them she had such a

tongue, and now she is as quiet as a lamb.” “Carry them back,” replied

the justice, “and let them convert all the scolds in the town.”—(Wesley’s

Journal.)

{55} Watson’s Life of Wesley, page 484.

{56} Lackington.

{59a} “Who does as he would be done by, in buying or selling?

particularly selling horses? Write him a knave that does not, and the

Methodist knave is the worst of all knaves.”—_Wesley’s Large Minutes_, Q.

13.

{59b} Snuff-taking and drams are expressly forbidden.

{59c} In May 1776, an order was made in the House of Lords, “That the

Commissioners of His Majesty’s Excise do write circular letters to all

such persons whom they have reason to suspect to have plate, as also to

those who have not paid regularly the duty on the same.” In consequence

of this order the Accountant-general for household plate sent a copy of

it to John Wesley. The answer was as follows:

Sir,

I have _two_ silver teaspoons in London and two at Bristol: this is

all the plate which I have at present, and I shall not buy any more

while so many round me want bread.

I am Sir, your most humble servant,

JOHN WESLEY.

{61} “I used my prayers,” says the author of the ‘Bank of Faith,’ “_as

gunners do swivels_; _turning them every way_ as the cases required.”

Wesley relates in his Journal that “By prayer he used to cure a violent

pain in his head,” &c.

{62} This writer, the celebrated Lackington the bookseller, relates the

following occurrence soon after he turned Methodist. “One Sunday morning

at eight o’clock, my mistress seeing her sons set off, and knowing they

were gone to a Methodist meeting, determined to prevent me from doing the

same, by locking the door; on which in a superstitious mood I opened the

Bible for direction what to do, and the first words I read were these,

“He shall give his angels charge concerning thee, lest at any time thou

dash thy foot against a stone.” This was enough for me, so without a

moment’s hesitation I ran up two pair of stairs to my own room, and out

of the window I leapt to the great terror of my poor mistress. My feet

and ancles were most intolerably bruised, so that I was obliged to be put

to bed; and it was more than a month before I recovered the use of my

limbs. I was then ignorant enough to think that _the Lord had not used

me very well_; and I resolved _not to put so much trust in him_ for the

future. My rash adventure made a great noise in the town, and was talked

of many miles round. Some few admired my prodigious strength of faith;

but the major part pitied me as a poor ignorant, deluded, and infatuated

boy.”

{64a} Wesley’s Works, vol. xii. p. 49. Some of Wesley’s expressions,

when confronted with each other, appear incompatible; in such cases the

main drift of the writer must always be considered; for it is much more

usual to fail in expressing our meaning than to express contradictory

opinions: since the latter implies a cerebral defect verging on insanity,

the former merely results from a faulty style. Scripture does not any

where warrant us in saying “_the moment_ a penitent sinner,” &c.; but

requires from us a proof of this belief by actions conformable to it.

God has promised us immortality through his Son, only if we not merely

believe, but “do that which is lawful and right.”

{64b} Wesley censured some of his preachers for pushing the doctrine of

perfection too far.

{65} Wesley’s Works, vol. viii. p. 219. and vol. xi. p. 415.

{66} So called from their habit of rebaptizing those who entered their

communion. They were afterwards called _Antipædobaptists_, from their

objection to _pædo_ or infant baptism; and finally, the English habit of

abbreviation of words at all commonly used, contracted the word into

_Baptist_.

{67} Mosheim. Ecc. Hist. Cant. XVI. Sect, iii. Part 2.

{68a} Milton belonged to the class of Anti-Trinitarian General Baptists.

{68b} That the body of Jesus was not derived from the substance of the

blessed Virgin, but created in her womb by an omnipotent act of the Holy

Spirit.

{68c} V. Mosheim’s Ecc. Hist.

{69} All who baptize infants may be termed pædo-baptists; the word is

derived from the Greek πάις a child or infant, and βὰπτω to baptize.

{70a} Yet the bishop ought to have known that baptism by immersion was

practised in the church for many centuries, and the rubric of our common

prayer leaves the option of immersion or aspersion.

{70b} Condor’s View. p. 380.

{75a} Marriage is enumerated in one of the Moravian hymns amongst the

services of danger, for which the United Brethren are “to hold themselves

prepared.”

“You as yet single are but little tried,

Invited to the supper of the bride,

That like the former warrior each may stand

Ready for land, sea, marriage, at command.”

{75b} See Latrobe’s edition of Spangenburgh’s Exposition of Christian

Doctrine.

{79} Litany of the New Church. Office of ordination, p. 151.

{80a} Rom. xxi. 27.

{80b} 1 Cor. i. 3.

{81a} John i. 18.

{81b} John vi. 46.

{82} Liturgy of the New Church Office of Baptism, p. 58.

{84} “Jesus the Fountain of Life and Light,” p. 12.

{85} In some places it is not till the end of a fortnight.

{87a} Examination of the opinions of the Plymouth Brethren.

{87b} The following is a sample from one of their published works: “The

first eclogue of Virgil has always appeared to me to express most

felicitously the pleasures of a _pastoral_ life as we too frequently see

it in these days. With what force the following lines describe the

grateful feeling of a _young clergyman_, who is recounting the benefits

conferred on him by his patron:

O Melibœe, Deus nobis hæc otia fecit.

Namque erit ille mihi semper Deus—

Ille meas errare boves, ut cernis, et ipsum

Ludere, qæe vellem, calamo permisit agresti.

My patron shall always be a divinity to me, for he put me into this life

of ease when he gave me this _gem_, _the prettiest living in England_.

He gave me this _easy duty_, so that I can let my flock wander

wheresoever it may please them, as you see they do; while I myself do

just what 1 like, and occasionally amuse myself with a _pianoforte_ by

Stoddart, that cost eighty-five guineas.”

“He (the congregational minister) is now, in his own opinion, the ONE MAN

of the whole body of believers in all the services of the sanctuary. He

utters all their sentiments of faith and doctrine, and offers up all

their prayers! How can he justify the position he has assumed as _an

usurper_? yea as a _grievous wolf_! in that he has swallowed up _all the

gifts of the Holy Ghost_ in the _voracity of his selfishness_,” &c. It

is not thus that the “unity of the church,” which they profess to desire

is likely to be cemented.

{90} Bishop Jewel, in his “Defence of his apology for the Church of

England,” says, that “the term _Calvinist_ was in the first instance

applied to the Reformers and the English Protestants as a matter of

reproach by the Church of Rome.”

{91} Whatever difference may have subsisted between Luther and Calvin on

the subject of Divine decrees, no language can be stronger than that in

which Luther insists upon the moral impotence of man’s depraved nature in

opposition to the Pelagian doctrine of freewill.

{93a} It is difficult to reconcile this doctrine with 2 Cor. v. 14, 15.

1 Tim. ii. 6. 2 Pet. iii. 9. Rom. viii. 32. 1 Tim. iv. 10. &c.

{93b} The best account of their system is to be found in “The Assembly’s

Catechism,” which is taught their children. To this sect belongs more

particularly the doctrine of _Atonement_, or, “that Christ by his death

made satisfaction to the Divine justice for the _Elect_; appeasing the

anger of the Divine Being, and effecting on his part a reconciliation.”

That thus Christ had, as they term it, “the sin of the Elect laid upon

him.” But some of their teachers do not hold this opinion, but consider

Christ’s death as simply a medium through which God has been pleased to

exercise mercy towards the penitent. “The sacrifice of Christ,” says Dr.

Magee, “was never deemed by any (who did not wish to calumniate the

doctrine of atonement), to have made God placable: but merely viewed as

the means appointed by Divine wisdom by which to bestow forgiveness.” To

this it may be further added, that the language used throughout the

Epistles of St. Paul with regard to the redemption of man, is that of the

then familiar slave market. Man is “bought with a price” from his former

master, Sin, for the service of God. The scholar who will consult Romans

vi. will see immediately that all the metaphors used are those of

purchase for military service; “Your members,” says he, ver. 13, “shall

not be the arms (ὄπλα) of unrighteousness used for the service of sin;

but the arms (ὄπλα) of righteousness for God.” And ver 23, τὰ γὰρ ὀψώνια

τῆς ὰμαρτίας, θάνατος· τὸ δὲ χαρισμα τοῦ θεοῦ, ζωὴ, αἰώνιος ἐν Χριτῷ

Ιησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἠμῶν. i.e. The rations of sin are death, but the donative

of God is eternal life, by means of Jesus Christ our Lord. It is

impossible to express more clearly that it was not the wrath of God which

required to be appeased by the great sacrifice—the slave was _bought by

Him for Himself_—the price was of course paid to another. Much

misunderstanding has arisen from the careless interpretation of these and

the like passages, whose phraseology has become obsolete along with the

practice of buying and selling slaves, at least in this country.

{95a} Matt. xvi. 27.

{95b} Matt. xviii. 14.

{96a} Vide Exod. xxxiii. 14, et seq.

{96b} According to the Calvinistic doctrine above stated, character has

no concern whatever with their call; ergo, if this is right, St. Paul is

wrong, and mankind _are_ called with respect of persons.

{96c} “This system (Calvinism) by setting aside the idea of a human

will, leaves the doctrine of Divine Will barren and unmeaning; the idea

of a personal ruler disappears, and those most anxious to assert the

government of the Living God have been the great instruments in

propagating the notion of an atheistical necessity.” _Maurice’s Kingdom

of Christ_.

{98a} Hopkins on the New Birth.

{98b} 1 John iii. 7–10, see also v. 21 of the same chapter, where our

confidence towards God is shown to depend on the judgment of our own

consciousness of wrong or well doing. The whole chapter is well worth

the study of every Christian.