66

The

quate reason. The love ef truth is to swallow up all other considerations. Fashion, interest, or love of popularity, is not to be for a moment looked at. soul in all its inquiries is to preserve its purity. That an honest man is the noblest work of God, is a fact never to be lost sight of. He beautifully illustrates his position by instancing Paul as a person, who whether the persecutor of the Christians, or their undaunted advocate, could always say, men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day." Our author next shews the inevitable consequence of conscientious individual examination to be sectarianism. Sectarianism in itself is not necessarily an evil. Those who happen to agree intellectually together will natually seek each others company, and form themselves into a society. There would be nothing wrong in this, if all agreed to differ in the spirit of charity. But it unfortunately happens, that the convictions arrived at by a majority of Christians, necessarily engender the spirit of persecution, and narrow-mindedness. Their faith they look upon as a talismanic influence, which, let them live as they may, will infallibly conduct them to Heaven. Those who do not possess this charm, although their characters should be moulded after that of Christ, are doomed to perdition. The religion of love and a sound mind is thus transformed into a system of pernicious jugglery. We have often been provoked to hear some Unitarians talk, as if there were no material difference between them and the Calvinist. Such parties must either have an erroneous conception of Calvinism, or wilfully blind themselves to the real facts of the case. They usually say, let the Calvinist alone, he is well enough off as he is, let us quietly enjoy our own opinions, let us keep in our own small citadel, and merely protect ourselves from aggression. How different this from the conduct of their acknowledged Master, who lived and died for truth? We have observed that where zeal thus grows lax, and indifference strong, Christianity has in some measure departed, compressed it may be in the almost annihilating folds of a German mysticism, or some other equally absurd form of infidelity of foreign importation. No one, we

believe, can hold Christianity to be the truth of God, without striving to impart that truth to others. We are rejoiced to find that a person of Mr Wicksteed's talent agrees with us in holding the sentiment that Christian Unitarianism is the only cure for sectarianism. With pleasure, therefore, we make the following quotation: "It is the creed he holds, it is the opinions that he maintains, it is truth which makes him free. By infusing those sentiments, then, he will infuse that charity into the breasts of his fellow men; he will not only preserve his own conscience inviolate, and spread what he believes to be a diviner truth, but he will take the only steps that can be taken with success, for plucking out its sting from our sectarianism. For while other men, he must confess, have hearts as warm and kind in all other matters as himself, why is it that they cannot, on this one topic of religion, feel as kindly and charitably, and with as meek religious trust, that all things work together for good as he? While other men he sees are as virtuous, as good, as humble, perhaps more so, than himself, why is it that they become all at once so full of denunciation, and so dictatorial on topics so solemn and so serious as these? What stands between them and a tolerant Christian trusting spirit of charity, that hopeth all things, and thinketh no evil? It is their creed, their opinions-their opinions which teach them that there is but one way to salvation, and that is their own, that those who differ from them will be damned, and those who lead others to do so are guilty of a hateful moral enormity." (P. 31.)

"It is

In page 11, Mr Wicksteed writes as follows, not our differences on the doctrine of the Trinity, or on that of Original Sin, or even on that of the Atonement, which cause, as such, the evils of our sectarianism. They spring from man's presumptuous attachment to these differences of eternal salvation or eternal woe."

We differ from our author here. The spirit of exclusiveness we have never viewed as an accretion to the doctrines held by the orthodox, but as essentially and inherently belonging to the doctrines themselves. The honest Calvinist can never be otherwise than we find him to be, till he renounce his faith, for that which

can alone make him a freeman of Christ Jesus. It will be seen from our first quotation, that Mr Wicksteed corrects himself. We would gladly make more extracts, but our space forbids. The style throughout is vigorous and manly. There is no straining after effect, and this is no small praise to give in an age of affectation. We commend this publication to the careful perusal of our readers, and shall be pleased if they rise from its perusal with the conviction of the all importance of disseminating our principles; the first motive for so doing being that they are true, and, second, that Christian Unitarianism is the only cure for sectarianism.

Presbyterianism more Scripturai than Independency, as admi

nistered by Dr Wardlaw. Proved from a correspondence between the Doctor and one of his own members, whose resignation he accepted before it was sent. Being Nos. 1 & 2 of a series of letters addressed to Ralph Wardlaw, D.D., and the members of West George Street Chapel. George Gallie, and William Collins, Glasgow; Charles Zeigler, and Quentin Dalrymple, Edinburgh. 1842.

THE perusual of these pamphlets has confirmed within us an idea we have long entertained, that those orthodox sects who prate most about liberality, are of all sects the most illiberal. This controversy amply proves the independent clergyman Dr Wardlaw to be as dictatorial and tyrannical as the most rabid non-intrusionist could possibly be. The author of these pamphlets having intended resigning communion with the church of which Dr Wardlaw is pastor, wished previously to address the members of the congregation. Dr Wardlaw is an anti-teetotaller. He thinks the total abstinence system opposed to Scripture, and derogatory to the character of the Saviour. Hearing through some third party, that the author intended introducing the subject in his address, he peremptorily refused him the liberty of its delivery. The advocate of temperance thoroughly exposes this piece of tyranny, clearly shews that this independent clergyman, this noted voluntary, and loud declaimer for civil and re

and

ligious liberty, is himself in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity of priestcraft; that he has as high notions of priestly power as the Puseyite whom he abuses, and that he wears those very chains he is urging others to cast off. We refer our readers, who may feel interested in the subject to the pamphlets themselves. They will not fail to convince them, that all self styled orthodox sects, whether called Independent, Secession, or Relief, are not a whit more liberal than the Established or the Romish Church; that as long as falsities and absurdities are believed in by a sect, and put forth as its cardinal doctrines, to the enswathing and darkening of Christianity, that that sect's internal government will be in accordance with such errors. While, then, we commend the author for exposing Dr Wardlaw's inconsistencies, we think he has acted inconsistently in joining the Presbyterian church. He has failed in

proving to us, that priestly domination is not part and parcel of her constitution also. He has certainly made out, that the Independent sect is the most priest-ridden of the two, and that to its great disgrace. It has no right to charge others with an evil, which so glaringly attaches to itself. We would advise him, therefore, to penetrate deeper than forms, and reach to high and leading principles, of which forms are but the outward expression. We give this advice in all friendliness, and with a feeling of respect for the individual. He has shewn himself to be an honest and independent man. We venerate virtue, whatever be the creed of its possessor. Unitarianism Vindicatsd; in a Letter to the Rev. J. Kingsmill, M. A. By Francis Bishop. London, J. Green; Warrington, T. Hurst.

MR BISHOP, the respected and energetic Unitarian minister of Warrington, having delivered a course of Sunday evening lectures, explanatory of Christian Unitarian principles, the incumbent of St Thomas's Church, Appleton, Cheshire, felt himself moved to issue a pamphlet, which he entitled, "What is Unitarianism ?” Had the pamphlet been written in the spirit of truth and charity, for the purpose of cautioning his flock and

the public against what he considered the errors of the Unitarian faith, he would have been labouring in his vocation, and no fault could have been found with his labour. But when a professed minister of the Gospel of Christ, in his zeal against heresy, forgets both truth and charity, he merits exposure, condemnation, and chastisement. Mr Bishop has administered this wholesome correction to the false accuser with the promptitude, energy, and faithfulness which such malversation richly deserved. No apology was necessary for this vindication of Christian truth. Heartily do we agree with Mr Bishop, that "as long as ignorance spreads its misrepresentations, and bigotry utters its calumnies respecting the Unitarian faith, so long does it appear to him [and to us] that its advocates are bound to correct the one and silence the other, by putting forth in their several spheres of labour, reiterated statements of what Unitarianism really is, and what it is not." In too many quarters has there been great laxity in this particular. An unhealthy craving after something new, exciting, mystical, has been pandered to, to the neglect of plain and repeated statements of the true and the practical. Who, among the thousand inhabitants of any of our large towns have read the writings, or even heard of the names of Emlyn, Priestley, Lindsey? It is not sufficient that these men laboured in their day and generation, and that a few here and there have been enlightened by their labours. The thousands are still in woful ignorance on these great subjects. These thousands should be enlightened too, notwithstanding a fastidious minority should be unwilling to listen to the repetition of truth with which they, but not the masses, have been long familiar. Christian Unitarian principles have not been thoroughly and practically embraced, where any indisposition exists to constant, untiring effort to diffuse the blessings. We thank Mr Bishop for his work. He has vindicated Unitarianism ably and triumphantly. With great terseness and force he has shewn the sophistry, inconsistency, and bad faith of his opponent. He thus concludes: "If I have charged you with caricaturing Unitarian sentiments, I have proved it. If I have charged you with misquot