to religious opinion and duty exclusively. Though we shall still rejoice to have it done by others, we do not intend ourselves to bring topics properly literary, into alliance with religious subjects. Our aim is to present the general reader, who has little time and means to spare for studious investigation, with all the information on religious subjects which he may want as an inquirer interested in the controversies of the times; and also to furnish something which shall awaken and cherish those devout and benevolent sentiments which are of eternal concern. We shall not attempt to strike out new paths, but be content with pursuing more closely such as are already opened.

While we write always as Unitarians, loving the truths we receive, we are determined to do no wrong by our prejudice or passion to those who reject and gainsay what we value. But let it be remembered, that a plain statement of the errors we oppose is our duty. This will not fail to give pain to such as hold them in the same esteem which we pay to the truth. There is no way by which you can thoroughly satisfy one who differs from you on subjects so interesting as those we shall discuss, but either by receiving his views as yours, or by saying nothing about them. We can do neither conscientiously. If we are then careful to represent opinions in their true light, without exaggeration and false mixtures, we may offend, but we cannot justly be deemed uncharitable. They are most unreasonable, who will set down all which is said against a doctrine as so much malice toward the friends of that doctrine. We intend never to confound the character of the believer with the fault in his creed. We hold it as indisputable, that excellence of the purest

and highest kind may and does exist among those whose sentiments we regard as unscriptural.

Happily for the Unitarian, his peculiar views of Christianity do not forbid, but require him to manifest the kindest regard for other denominations, and leave him at full liberty to do justice to piety wherever it is found, and however associated with erroneous opinions. Some who stand opposed to us in creed have seen fit to brand us with harsh epithets for our creed's sake, and to class Unitarians with Pagans, Mahometans, Deists, the enemies of the gospel. They strike at what is most dear to us, our christian name, and disavow, not only all our pretensions to a correct faith, (which is very tolerable) but even the most sincere claims to a pious character, which to an honest man who is conscious that he fears God from the heart, must be hard to be borne. Let not the Unitarian retaliate in kind. Let us be scrupulous, in our judgments of their character, not to overlook any fair proofs of goodness, nor too eagerly to catch at any signs of what is evil. We have no ends to answer by such retorts as a hasty temper might cause an injured party to resort to. Let us the more cautiously guard against these, as they would, more than any thing else, hinder the success of every effort to convince our brethren of their fault in thus dealing with ourselves. The truths we hold are fast prevailing by their own light and power. God forbid we should employ other means than those which the spirit of our holy master warrants, to advance them.

As friends to Christian liberty we cannot but look with some distrust on those measures of other sects, which by their magnitude, their being so fitted together as parts of a plan, and their connexion with the exclusive spirit man

ifested toward Unitarians, seem like attempts to establish an ascendency which must endanger the rights of all besides, both civil and religious. No one can doubt that a party, in religion as in politics, may be led by a feeling of their own strength and great confidence in the goodness of their cause, to acts of usurpation. We are not alarmists, nor do we now impute to those who claim the title "evangelical" as their distinctive appellation, the blame of any projects which some zealots, over forward in their behalf, may have broached. But we would beg them to have a watchful eye upon their leaders, and to consider with the utmost prudence, the tendency of those schemes which, under the idea of evangelizing America and the World, they may be called upon to favor.

There is one encouragement of which we feel at liberty to avail ourselves, that we wish more particularly to avow. It may be well stated in these words, used by the Edinburgh Reviewer long since, when speaking concerning a very different matter. "Every numerous party, under the appearance of unanimity contains great diversities of sentiment; many of those, who, on the whole, prefer one side, are by no means prepared to plunge into the excesses of the noisiest and most conspicuous leaders; and in process of time, great changes of opinion take place in the interior of every party before any open division is apparent among its members." It is our belief, and we speak not unawares, that a large number among the truly conscientious persons in the orthodox party, do not cordially approve the harsh and uncharitable measures adopted toward other christians. They are made sad and unhappy by the supposed necessity of rejecting all fellowship with them. They begin to be weary of the denun

ciatory strains which fall from the pulpit. They secretly long for something more conciliatory and gentle. Brought into contact with Unitarians in social life, their hearts insensibly soften towards them, because they are compelled to acknowledge that there is not among them that hatred to Christ and the gospel which have been laid to their charge. Some have intimates, relatives, associates endeared by a thousand ties too old to break, and they find it hard to think God will make " vessels of wrath of those whom they cannot help loving. These and many other similar reasons we might offer as proofs, that we do not judge justly when we deem the orthodox in a body, the hearty abettors of all which their party may see fit to do. It is also a fact, that a perceptible variance in opinion on the essential points in dispute with other sects, exists among themselves. The Trinity is not the same as held at the south and as it flourishes at the north. The Atonement is an altered doctrine, even in different churches of the same district, and among learned teachers at the same school. Revivals of religion are no longer judged by a common standard; as the Convention at Lebanon may testify. There is indeed a great deal more unanimity in the exclusion of supposed heretics from communion, among those who agree in fellowship and covenant, than in doctrinal discussion. We shall hope, that at length, a candid hearing will be accorded to our plea for a union of affection and christian intercourse, without any more attempts to compel a union in creed, so unreal when it seems to exist. We shall hope that the changes within parties may lead to a breaking up of parties, so far, at least, as that all who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity will embrace one another, and all who 1*

YOL. I.-NO. I.

receive Christianity as God's best gift will agree to employ it together for man's highest improvement and happiness.

PROPER UNITY OF GOD.

THE term one is numerical and therefore definite. We say one man, one lion, one tree, and there is no mistake. Nobody understands us to mean more than an individual. Singleness and unity are inseparable. A combination of two and one is not one. We do not think of several united, but of an individual alone, when we use the term one.

It is solemnly affirmed in Scripture, "Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." By this we understand there is one Jehovah in distinction from many, and that Jehovah is one being, which being we call God. We give the term one its numerical value precisely in this as in other cases. And ought we not? Have we any warrant to say that the term here means triple or triune ? We dare not alter the proposition by thus changing the meaning of terms. We abide by the letter. We believe one here as elsewhere is one and not many. In addressing Jehovah, the Psalmist exclaims "thou art God alone." In addressing the Father we say "thou alone art Jehovah." And are we not right? Is not the Father Jehovah ? And is there more than one Jehovah? We have read in the writings of men the name Jehovah-Jesus-but not in the Bible.

If you affirm the Son is Jehovah; the Spirit is Jeho