3. Whether, on this ground, the sinner, "while using the means of regeneration," can feel any "conviction of sin;" 4." Whether the scheme of the reviewer does not dispense with the necessity of divine influence in regeneration;" 5. Whether it "does not represent the sinner as laboring under a natural inability to do his duty;" 6. Whether it is not inconsistent with "the doctrine of sovereign, distinguishing grace;" and 7. Whether, "if drawn out in detail, and inculcated by the teachers of religion," it "has not a direct tendency to stifle conviction of sin, and produce spurious conversions."It would be impossible, in this brief notice, to give our readers so much as the plan of the work before us. It is written throughout with great clearness and candor, and should be read, if possible, by all who have read the articles in the Spectator. It does not become us, at this stage of the discussion, to attempt deciding any seeming differences betwixt our brethren. We presume the reviewer will think that he has been misunderstood, and of course that he has not been justly represented; and, as Dr. Tyler observes, should the effect of the Strictures be to "call forth from him explanations, satisfactory to the minds of his ministerial brethren, no unimportant object will be gained." If the discussion is to be continued, we hardly need express the hope that all concerned will endeavor to be explicit, treat one another as brethren, and set an example of affectionate inquiry after truth, instead of an impetuous struggle for victory.-At the close of the work before us, the author has summed up, in several propositions, what he considers as essential to the doctrine of regeneration; and we presume that most of his Orthodox brethren, without excepting the conductors of the Christian Spectator, will cordially assent to the statement he has given:

"1. Man is a moral agent, and capable of obeying every divine command. "2. He is a rebel against God, and loves his rebellion.

"3. God commands him immediately to repent and return to his allegiance. "4. He is able to repent, if he will. The duty is easy and reasonable. But he will not repent, but resists every motive that is presented to his mind. Consequently,

"5. Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

6. A Dictionary of important Names, Objects, and Terms, found in the Holy Scriptures. Intended principally for youth. By HOWARD MALCOM, A. M. Boston: Lincoln and Edmands. 1830.

This will be found an interesting and useful volume, to parents, to Sabbath School teachers, to all who wish either to understand the Scriptures themselves, or to impart a knowledge of them to others. It is not, indeed, a complete dictionary of the Bible-far from it; but it includes most of those names and objects mentioned in the Bible, respecting which instruction is felt to be needed by the youthful reader. The explanations of terms denoting doctrines are decidedly evangelical, and the work is calculated, in this respect, to leave a good impression. We were particularly pleased with the explanation of the term Sabbath, in which the perpetuity of the

institution, notwithstanding the change in the day of its observance, is briefly but satisfactorily maintained. Were we to take any exception, it would be to the positiveness with which certain small matters, usually considered as doubtful, such as the questions respecting the reality of witchcraft, the immolation of Jepthah's daughter, &c., are determined. As a specimen of the work, we quote the explanation of the term, raiment.

"Raiment was at first made of the skins of beasts, but the art of spinning and weaving was soon invented, and embroidering became common in the days of the Judges. The most common garment in the days of Christ, was a sort of shirt or tunick, reaching to the ancles generally, with sleeves, but sometimes having only armholes. A girdle confined it at the waist. Over this, were worn various garments, according to the quality of the person. All classes wore something in the form of a large shawl, called a cloak or upper garment, Matt. xxi. 8. When, a person had nothing on but the tunick, he was said to be naked. John xxi. 7. Persons could carry various articles in the folds of their shawls, Luke vi. 38, and at night, in that climate, they rarely needed any other bedclothes, Ex. xxii. 28. Round this outer garment the ancient Jews were accus. tomed to have a border or fringe, sometimes marked with texts of Scriptures. The Pharisees, through ostentation, inade theirs remarkably large, Matt. xxii. 5. When engaged in laborious work, this outer garment was laid aside, as our Saviour did, when he washed his disciples' feet, John xiii. 4, and Peter, when he fished, John xxi. 7. This explains, also, Matt. xxiv. 18. These upper garments would of course fit persons of any size, equally well. To give raiment, was therefore common; and especially, when opulent or eminent men gave rich entertainments. In such cases, not to accept and put on the proffered robe, was a great affront, Matt. xxii. 12.

4. A Sermon delivered at the Ordination of the Rev. Asa Hixon, at Oakham, October 7, 1829. By JACOB IDE, Pastor of the Second Church in Medway. Brookfield: E. and G. Merriam. 1829. pp. 36.

This ingenious and excellent discourse is founded on Ex. xvi. §. And what are we? Your murmurings are not against us, but against the LORD.' The object of the preacher is to show that those who murmur against the servants of God, in the faithful discharge of their duty, murmur against God himself."

"There is much murmuring against faithful ministers of the Gospel, because they believe and preach the doctrines" of “depravity," of "regeneration," of the " Trinity," of "God's eternal purposes," and "the future punishment of the wicked."-But they preach these doctrines not at all more frequently or plainly than they are taught in the word of God.

"What Trinitarian did you ever hear assert the divinity of Christ in plainer terms than those of John? In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God,' This is the true God, and eternal life.' Or than those of Paul, Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.' I insist upon it, this is as plain, and as strong language, as any body uses on this subject; and if this is not to be understood as asserting the proper divinity of Christ, we are not bound to consider the language of any one as asserting it. I know it will be said that this may be explained so as to bear another meaning. So may the language of any Trinitarian whatever be explained, so as to bear a meaning which he never intended to express. But the question is, not what meaning may be put upon a man's words; it is rather what meaning do they most obviously convey."

LETTERS ON THE INTRODUCTION AND PROGRESS OF
UNITARIANISM IN NEW ENGLAND. NO. VI.

DEAR SIR,

My original purpose in these letters, though unavoidably delayed for several months, has not been forgotten. I propose now to resume the subject, and to finish what I have to offer, in as little time and space as circumstances will permit. When Unitarianism had gained footing among us, in the manner already pointed out, its growth and prevalence were greatly promoted by concealment. It is obvious that concealment, if successfully practised, must have essentially aided the progress of Unitarianism; as by this means excitement would be prevented, suspicion avoided, and the deluded churches would receive those as pastors, and ministers (in their ignorance) embrace those as brethren, whom otherwise they would have rejected. The poison would in this way be taken without alarm, and the infection spread through the religious community, before apprehension should be excited, or the friends of truth were apprised of their danger. That such would be the tendency and effects of concealment, is too obvious to need explanation. In what follows, therefore, I shall produce the evidence that this tendency was duly appreciated by the early Unitarians of Massachusetts, and that, until the controversy in 1815, a studied, and, to some extent, a successful concealment was practised.

It should be observed, however, that in this respect the Unitarians of Massachusetts have not been singular. It is mentioned by one apostle as a characteristic trait of damnable heresies,' that they shall be brought in 'privily' (2 Pet. ii. 1.); and by

6

6

another, that those who deny the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ,' are wont to creep in unawares.' (Jude 4.) Unitarianism, whatever may be its character in other respects, will be found uniformly to have borne these marks of error. Wherever introduced, it has been brought in 'privily'—has 'crept in unawares.'

In this manner it was introduced and propagated by the ancient Unitarians. Irenæus describes them as "using alluring discourses in public, because of the common Christians; as "pretending to preach like us" (the Orthodox ;) and as "complaining that, though their doctrine be the same as ours, we abstain from their communion, and call them heretics." But he adds, "When they (Unitarians) have seduced any from the faith by their disputes, and made them willing to comply with them, then they begin to open their mysteries."*

When Paul of Samosata, a Unitarian of the third century, was "charged with holding certain opinions which he had preached, he solemnly denied the charge, nay, denied it on oath. Yet, in a little while, he preached the same doctrines again, and was again charged, and again found to deny and equivocate; " until, at length, his true character was exposed, and he was excluded from the sacred office.*

Arius, the father of the Arians, a short time before his death, was summoned to the Imperial palace, and asked whether he agreed to the Nicene faith. He without hesitation answered in the affirmative. The creed was then offered him, which he readily subscribed; and when, to remove all doubt, the emperor required him to swear that he believed as he had written, he solemnly swore that he did. At the time of this oath, (as Socrates, a cotemporary historian, intimates,t) Arins had concealed under one of his arms a paper, on which he had just written his real sentiments; and the meaning of the oath, according to his intention, was, that he believed as he had written on this secreted paper !!

The elder Socinus, after his settlement at Zurich, "adopted the Helvetic confession of faith, and professed himself a member of the church of Switzerland." He was "artful in concealing his wayward opinions," broaching them sometimes "under the form of questions to be discussed," and sometimes in private letters to those "whose judgement he respected, and in whose friendship he could confide." His nephew, Faustus Socinus, who inherited his papers, and propagated the system which he had matured, resorted to the most unworthy arts (if historians are to

* See Miller's Letters on Unitarianism, pp. 238, 239.
↑ Lib. i. cap. 38. See also Milner, vol. ii. p. 72.

be believed) in order "to conceal, or to varnish over, the most offensive features of his system."*

The German Unitarians, in the beginning of their career, were careful to disguise and conceal their sentiments. Their publica" In tions were, for the most part, "equivocal and deceitful." various instances," we are told, "it was not only difficult, but absolutely impossible, fairly to unmask the author, and to convict him of unchristian sentiments; so well he knew how to hide himself under a show of piety and orthodoxy."+

And Unitarianism in England, boldly as it is maintained at present, was by many, for a long time, studiously concealed. Whiston, speaking of himself and Emlyn in 1724, says, "We have had some few, and but a very few followers here; while almost all those who are privately of our judgement, temporize, or prevaricate, or use political management, to avoid persecution, or the loss of preferment." Dr. Clarke strangely equivocated, when his work on the Trinity was brought before Convocation; and whether he was more properly a Trinitarian, Unitarian, or neither, is to this day uncertain. Messrs. Peirce and Hallet, the first promoters of Arianism among the English Dissenters, long after suspicions were excited against them, denied expressly that they were Arians or had "taught anything like Arianism." It is said of the early English Unitarians generally, in the History of Dissenters, that their opinions were "cautiously concealed;" and Dr. Priestley is spoken of as among the first, who, "scorning the crafty concealment and cunning equivocation of his predecessors, frankly told the world his creed." Dr. Priestley himself "declared that there were great numbers in England, even among the clergy, who, while they privately held Unitarian opinions, did not scruple, in public, to countenance a mode of worship which they would not deny to be, according to their own principles, idolatrous and blasphemous."**-And Mr. Belsham avers, that "there are thousands" of Unitarians in England, who "are deterred by secular considerations, and the harsh spirit of the times, from avowing their real principles."++

It will be seen in what follows, that American Unitarianism has proved itself a shoot of the old stock, and that the same concealment which, at different periods, has been practised so successfully on the other continent, has been attempted and practised here.

1. In the first place, a variety of facts may be mentioned, indicating the existence of such a practice. It was this, undoubtedly,

* Mosheim, vol. iv. p. 469. Waterman's Life of Calvin, p. 61. Miller's Letters, p. 240. + Spirit of the Pilgrims, vol. iii. p. 58.

See Biographia Brittanica, vol. iii. p. 602. See Spirit of the Pilgrims, vol. ii. p. 587. ** Miller's Letters, p. 241.

Memoirs, vol. i. p. 312.

¶ ibid, pp. 671, 673.

Review of Wilberforce, p. 227.