DR. TAPPAN, Hollis Professor of Divinity in Harvard University." The unsearchable riches of Christ" may denote the "personal excellencies of the Redeemer. Thus understood, they point us to the wonderful assemblage of divine and human perfections in that mysterious Person, whose name is Immanuel, who is the image and effulgence of his Father's glory, in whom dwells all the fulness of the God-head, to whom the titles and attributes, the works and hotors of divinity are ascribed; who yet was made flesh and tabernacled among us; who, amid the natural infirmities and temptations, exhibited all the virtues of humanity, in their full and steady lustre. What treasures of majesty and meekness, of dignity and condescen sion, of glory and humility, of justice and mercy, are united in his character! In his person and actions, combined with his discourses, the invisible God is brought down to man, that man might rise to the true knowledge, imitation, and enjoyment of God."

"To a creature burdened with conscious guilt, and acquainted with the perfect character and law of his Maker, how congenial, how welcome, is the Christian scheme of mediation. How consoling to hear that the Son of God has become the High Priest of offending man; that by his obedience unto death, he has completely vindicated and honored the divine government, and procured the full and everlasting forgiveness of every penitent sinner. It is the part of the evangelical preacher* to state this doctrine in its most simple and practical form; to point out its importance in the system of revelation, its correspondence with the present situation of man, with the general course of providence, and with the essential attributes of God. It becomes him to show, how admirably this expedient unites the pardon of relenting guilt, and the reward of defective virtue, with the public condemnation of sin, the improved order of the universe, and the most pure and exalted display of the divine glory. It becomes him to defend this doctrine from every imputation of absurdity, of injustice, or cruelty, by showing that the Father appointed, and the Son consented, to the death of the cross, from motives of the most tender, wise, and comprehensive love; that the good resulting from it will be unbounded and eternal; and that the pardon of offerders through this medium displays the divine benevolence in a mar ner far more extraordinary multiplied, and impressive, than if God had cancelled our guilt by one single and sovereign act of grace.”

"This doctrine of the mediatorial obedience and sufferings of an innocent and glorious person for the benefit of the guilty, is not only a conspicuous feature in the gospel plan, but highly approves itsel to those who have right apprehensions of God and themselves, and of the general constitution of nature and providence.-If, therefore, we believe in God, . . . . . shall we not believe the propriety and reality of vicarious suffering, as exhibited in the Gospel, the truth and importance of which are so amply attested, and which indeed is expi citly interwoven with the whole scheme of Christianity, and is sup ported by the same proofs with the system at large? Shall we no

* The Discourse from which this was taken was preached at the ordination of 24 Rev W. E. Channing, in Boston, June 1, 1803.

gladly receive, and even triumph in, the atoning sacrifice of Christ, when we have such evidence that God himself has appointed and accepted it, and when our own situation and feelings, as guilty, obnoxious offenders, concur with the general sense of mankind, in eagerly looking and crying for such an expedient? Shall our ungrateful and foolish pride spurn the benefit of this atonement, merely because we cannot comprehend all the reasons and ends of its appointment, or the precise manner in which it procures our forgiveness? Shall we dare, with atheistical blasphemers, to reproach this contrivance, as absurd and unjust, merely because it holds up God the Father as subjecting his meritorious and beloved Son to torment and death in the room of guilty mankind? Does not this reproach equally implicate the known and common proceedings of Divine providence? Is it not completely obviated by the voluntary consent of the Son of God to these vicarious sufferings, and the consequent glorious reward which he received for enduring them?

While the gospel thus provides a complete atonement, and pardon for our guilt, it offers and communicates the sanctifying and comforting Spirit, to purify and strengthen our natures, depraved and enfeebled by sin, and to restore them to moral rectitude and tranquillity. If we acknowledge God as the prime efficient, even in our common actions and enjoyments, shall we proudly disown our dependence on his gracious influence for those unspeakably greater blessings, which are implied in a truly virtuous and happy state of our souls? Shall we reject or ridicule the offered grace of the Holy Spirit, merely because we cannot comprehend the mode of his operation, when we are confessedly ignorant of the manner of Divine agency in the world of nature ?*

From the numerous quotations here given, the intelligent reader will perceive, that the men from whose writings they are extracted—men eminent among the late clergy of Boston and the vicinity-were an entirely different class from leading Unitarians of the present day; and that the attempts of the latter to confound and identify themselves, as to principles, with the former, must be the result either of ignorance or artifice. The writers we have quoted believed, all of them, in the inspiration of the sacred Scriptures, and all (with the exception of two or three, who were high Arians) in the supreme divinity of the Son of God. They all believed in the apostacy and depravity of our race; in the necessity of regeneration by the special influences of the Holy Spirit; and in the great doctrines of atonement, of redemption by Christ, and of justification through faith in his blood. With what propriety, then, do those now represent themselves as their admirers and followers, who openly reject every one of these doctrines, and decry some of them as impious and even blasphemous? ¦

* Works Vol. ii. pp. 250-252 and 315--319.

+ With the quotations which have been given on the subject of atonement, our readers may compare, or more properly contrast, the following, from distinguished Unitarians of the present day.

DR. CHANNING.-"Suppose that a teacher should come among you, and should tell you, that the Creator, in order to pardon his own children, had erected a gallows in the centre of the universe, and had publicly executed upon it, in room of the offenders, an Infinite being, the partaker of his own Supreme Divinity; suppose him to declare, that this execution was appointed, as a most conspicuous and terrible manifestation of God's justice, and of the infinite wo denounced by his law; and suppose him to add, that all beings VOL. III.NO. XI. 84

We call upon the inhabitants of Boston and the vicinity, who sit under the preaching of Unitarians, to look into this subject, to consider and ponder it. You are accustomed to hear such men as Pemberton and Elliot, Chauncy and West, Thatcher and Lathrop, Appleton, Gay, and Haven spoken of with great respect, as men of learning, piety and liberality, who understood and adorned their sacred profession, and taught the way of God in truth. They are the men by whom your fathers and mothers were instructed, and under whose instructions they were prepared, we doubt not, in many instances, for heaven. But do you know what the instructions of these men were? Do you know what doctrines they believed and taught? We do not say that they all agreed, in every point, with the Orthodox of the present day; for such is not the fact. But we do say, that they taught and enforced many of the essential doctrines of the Gospel.* We do say-and in proof of the assertion we refer you to their writingsthat they taught a system of religion which, in all important particulars, you are now taught to reject and despisc. They taught that all Scripture is given by divine inspiration, and is entitled to be regarded as the word of God. They taught that man is a fallen, corrupted, depraved creature, and needs to be renewed by the power of the Holy Spirit, in order to be admitted to the heavenly kingdom. They taught that Christ came down from heaven, assumed our nature and our flesh, and died upon the cross to make expiation for our sins; and that his atonement is the great object of faith, and the sole foundation of hope for fallen man. Are you taught these important doctrines now? Is this the way from earth to heaven which you are now directed and urged to pursue? Indeed we fear not. We fear that the foundation on which your fathers rested, the great truths, in the belief of which they lived and died, are not placed before you. We hear the atonement decried from the high places of your sanctuaries, as an abominable doctrine. We hear it asserted that "man is not created in a condition which makes an infinite atonement necessary;" and that "to build the hope of pardon on the independent and infinite sufficiency of Jesus Christ, is to build on in heaven and earth are required to fix their eyes on this fearful sight, as the most powerful enforcement of obedience and virtue. Would you not tell him, that he calumniated his Maker? Would you not say to him, that this central gallows threw gloom over the aniverse; that the spirit of a government, whose very acts of pardon were written in such blood, was terror, not paternal love; and that the obedience, which needed to be upheld by this horrid spectacle, was nothing worth?" Works, p. 423.

A. LAMSON."The spectacle of a sinless being stretched on the cross, to expiate the crimes of the wicked, or prepare the way for their forgiveness, far from inspiring a reverence for God's moral attributes, is fitted effectually to weaken or destroy it. It would furnish as strong an argument of his injustice and cruelty, as could possibly be offered to our minds."-"You talk to me of a substitute, &c. But, meanwhile, what a conception you have taught me to form of God! What a MONSTER you have held up as an object of my reverence and trust! Surely you do not ask me to repose confidence in such a being. I can view him only with shuddering and horror. The belief that he formed and governed the universe would... ... be an abhorred persuasion, from which I would wilfingly take refuge in the LESS CHILLING CREED OF THE ATHEIST."

Sermon at Danvers, pp. 15, 28.

* We have in this remark, and in the quotations by which it is supported, a full answer to the pretence so often urged, that because ministerial exchanges were promiscuous in this region, until within the last thirty or forty years, therefore they ought to be so now. In the days of our fathers, ministerial exchanges were indeed promiscuous, and with the utmost propriety. For although there were differences of opinion among the clergy, and some had swerved not a little from the faith of the Gospel, still they had not, at least in their preaching and profession, abandoned it. They continued to preach many essential, evangelical doctrines; and to have separated from them and withholden fellowship might, at that time, have been premature and unwarrantable. But the case is now so widely altered as to have become perfectly clear. The Orthodox and modern Unitarian systems of religion are essentially, radically, totally diverse; and for those who teach them to exchange services, must be regarded by all intelligent, impartial persons as incongruous

and absurd.

Early Propagation of Unitarianism in Massachusetts. 665

an unscriptural and false foundation." Your fathers certainly were not instructed after this manner; and if they were led in the right way, and (as you fondly hope) have gone to heaven, is there no reason to fear that yourselves and your children may be led in a wrong way, a dangerous, downward path, and so fail of the grace of life? This subject, we must be allowed to remind you, is too important to be lightly treated, or to be decided on the ground of party prejudices and feelings. It takes fast hold on eternity, and is momentous as the interests of the undying soul.

FACTS RESPECTING THE EARLY PROPAGATION OF UNITARIANISM IN

MASSACHUSETTS.

The following extract from a communication in the London "Monthly Repository" (Vol. iii. p. 302) exhibits the state of feeling and the progress of Unitarianism in Boston and the vicinity, at the time of its avowal by Dr. Freeman and the congregation worshipping at the stone chapel.

Mr. (now Dr.) Freeman was a young man, when he was chosen by his church to be what they then called their reader. As he cherished a generous love of truth, and was courteous, sociable, and friendly, and always open to conviction, he became a member of the Bostonian Association of Ministers, who regularly assembled every Monday and freely conversed upon all subjects, every one declaring his sentiments without offending or being offended. Doctors Chauncy, Mather and Lathrop, and Messrs. Clarke, Everett, Eliot, and Smith, formed the principal part of that venerable band of brothers, who were true whigs of the old stamp, and who, whilst they displayed the most amiable manners in their mutual intercourse, were firmly united in Christian fellowship. They individually agreed to differ, and maintained this moral and truly religious principle, that every man should be fully persuaded in his own mind. Some of them, therefore, studied the writings of Priestley, whilst others of them to whom these writings were not so familiar, expressed no sort of enmity, when they incidentally heard what were the leading doctrines which he taught. Such was the state of things at Boston, in the year 1783. In that year, Mr. Freeman's congregation, who had been trained up in all the tenets of high-churchism, were solicitous to have him receive episcopal ordination. But he would not subscribe the 39 Articles, nor could he submit his conscience to the domination and capricious dictates of a bishop. The bishop therefore refused to engage in the service, to which Mr. Freeman, upon his own terms, would have gladly acceded. This conduct of the overseer led Mr. Freeman to think more deeply upon the subject than he had usually done. The affair became the topic of general conversation. Most of the Bostonians were advocates for Mr. Freeman. But, Mr. Parker, a high priest belonging to the first episcopal Church, exerted himself to the utmost against him, though with little success, as there was no establishment there, nor any Doctors' Commons, to punish him according to their arbitrary decisions."

About this particular crisis, a gentleman from this country [probably the Rev. Mr. Hazlitt] embarked for America with his family.

t Channings Work's pp. 573, 575.

666 Early Propagation of Unitarianism in Massachusetts.

After spending some months in the southern States, he arrived at Boston the 15th of May, 1784: and having a letter to Mr. Eliot, who received him with great kindness, he was introduced on that very day to the Association. The venerable Chauncy at whose house it happened to be held, entered into a familiar conversation with him, and shewed him every possible respect, as he learned that he had been acquainted with Dr. Price. Without knowing at the time any thing of the occasion which led to it, ordination happened to be the general subject of discourse. After the different gentlemen had severally delivered their opinions, the stranger was requested to declare his sentiments; who unhesitatingly replied, that the people, or the congregation who chose any man to be their minister, were his proper ordainers. Mr. Freeman, upon hearing this, jumped from his seat in a kind of transport, saying, "I wish you could prove that, Sir." The gentleman answered, that few things could admit of an easier proof and from that moment a thorough intimacy commenced between him and Mr. Freeman. Soon after, the Boston prints being under no imprimatur, he published several letters in supporting the cause of Mr. Freeman. At the solicitation of Mr. Freeman, he also published a scriptural confutation of the 39 Articles. Notice being circulated that this publication would appear on a particular day, the printer, apprized of this circumstance, threw off above a hundred papers beyond his usual number, and had not one paper remaining upon his hands at noon. This publication, in its consequences, converted Mr. Freeman's Congregation into an Unitarian Church; which, as Mr. Freeman repeatedly acknowledged, could never have been done without the labors of this gentleman. A committee was appointed to reform the book of Common Prayer, and to strike out all those passages which savoured of Trinitarian worship. This object being pursued with great deliberation, the ordination of Mr. Freeman by his congregation did not take place before the end of the year 1788, and this congregation is now as flourishing, since it has learned to say sumpsimus, as it had formerly been under its old mumpsimus. Thus, then, 700 or 800 people, who had been accustomed to worship three Gods, and to believe one of these, as consisting of two persons, to be in reality two Gods, are now become so enlightened as to worship only the One God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

While the gentlemen referred to in this communication was at Boston," he preached repeatedly there the Thursday's Lecture, and to many congregations in that city. He also preached at Dorchester, Jamaica Plain, Weymouth, Marshfield, Scituate, Providence, Salem, Hallowell, &c. At Old Hingham, where the venerable Mr. Gay was the Pastor, he preached above forty times, and the noble-minded general Lincoln was one of his 1200 hearers. The friendly and enlightened Mr. Shute was the minister of New Hingham, and Dr. Barnes the minister of one of the Marshfield Churches who was also a liberal man. Many other Churches might be mentioned, from which the Calvinistic gloom is gradually dispersing. But I must particularly notice Salem. There was there one thoroughdox congregation, which was not in a very flourishing state.