other than the one true God, is applicable to all creatures without any distinction. A Unitarian may as consistently join in the worship of the mass, or the virgin Mary, or any heathen deity, as the worship of Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit. It matters not who is the person, or what is the object, if it be any other than the King of kings, the Lord of lords; of him, and through him, and to him, are all things, to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

(To be Continued.)

To the Editor of the Christian Pioneer.

SIR, "FOR where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."-Mat. xviii. 20.

If I understand the communication of Philo-Veritas, in No. 5, page 172, this passage is produced, on the assumption, that it proves the Omnipresence of Christ, because Christians may be met in numberless places of the world, at the very same point of time, and separated by thousands of miles, and yet, according to this passage, Christ is in the midst of each of these meetings, which is not possible if he was or is a local being; therefore, he must be Omnipresent. Such is the Trinitarian view of this passage, and such would be the fair, just, and only conclusion, if the personal presence of Christ was meant.

But, if Christ was omnipresent, he would be with one, as much as with two or three, and would be in the midst of Jewish, Mahometan, or Pagan assemblies, as well as Christian. Then, why does it require two or three Christians, before Christ be in the midst of them? Take the connection of the preceding verse, and the reason appears plain:-in verse 19th, our Lord assures his followers, "that if two of them agree to ask any thing, his Father would do it for them." And why would the Father do it for them? The 20th verse says why," FOR (or because) where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Now, on the Trinitarian view of this verse, where is the propriety of the reason assigned for answering the request? Would the invisible, personal presence of Christ be a guarantee against an improper request being made, or would it ensure an answer to an improper request? most certainly it would do neither; therefore, in this view, there is no affinity between the assurance given and the reason assigned,

and consequently this cannot have been the meaning of our Lord. But if we understand that his virtual presence is meant, that it is the Spirit of Christ-that it is Christianity which would be in the midst of them-then we see how he would be in the midst of two or three, more than one, because, the most perfect Christian has some defect, and an individual might be inclined to prefer an improper request; but where there are a number, although defective individually, it will most likely be in different points-and where one is weak, another will be strong-where one is bound by prejudice, or tempted by peculiar circumstances, another will be free: and thus, by taking the virtues of the whole, Christianity will be more perfect than in any one: and thus, an improper request proposed by an individual, would be modified according to the spirit of Christianity, by his brethren; and this is the reason why the Father would answer it-this is the guarantee tacitly inIcluded in verse 20, viz. this, That where two or three agree to ask, their request will be in the spirit of Christianity, and thus Christ is in the midst of them, in the same sense, as the Apostles preached Jesus Christ, otherwise Christianity, Acts v. 42,-and Paul, 2 Cor. iv. 5, and Gal. i. 16;—and in the same sense, as Christ himself says to his Disciples, John xv. 4, "Abide in me," otherwise Christianity, "and I," viz. Christianity, "in you." It would be insulting the understanding of the reader, to suppose, our Lord meant they were to abide in his person, or his person in them, or that the Apostles preached his person.

This view explains why Christ is not in the assemblies of Jews, Mahometans, and Pagans. This view establishes a harmony between the 19th and 20th verses, and harmonizes with the current language of the Bible; and instead of wresting this passage to a sectarian purpose, I think it may be more profitably employed by attending to the impressive lesson of charity, which, in my opinion, it is so eminently calculated to teach: for, how many Christians deny the truth contained in this passage; almost all sects (except Unitarians) say, that not only two or three, but that hundreds, ay, thousands, ay, even millions, have gathered, and do gather themselves together, in the name of Christ, but that he was and is not amongst them. Catholics say so of Protestants, and Protestants of Catholics, and of one another. Far be the uncharitable thought from our bosoms. Notwithstanding the gross errors which

have been and still are incorporated with Christianity, I trust, that, even in its grossest forms, it was a blessing to the world, compared with the Pagan systems it supplanted —and that, in all ages, and among all sects of the Christian church, there have been and still are multitudes, who sincerely gathered, and gather themselves together, in the name of Christ, and that, in the words of our Lord, he was and is in the midst of them.

In the Christian Pioneer for October, page 70, occur the following observations:

"We have pleasure in stating, that the Lancashire and Cheshire Unitarian Missionary Society, who are desirous of engaging a competent person, as a Missionary, have, lately, secured the services, for three months, of Mr. John Ashworth of Newchurch, Rossendale, Lancashire. This praiseworthy man has long been engaged in preaching, with other meritorious fellow-labourers, to the Congregations at Newchurch, Rochdale, Oldham, Padiham, Rawtonstall, and Todmorden; and is the author of a most interesting account of the rise and progress of the Unitarian doctrine in these Societies, formerly in connexion with the Wesleyan Methodists. They became Unitarians, solely from the perusal of the Bible, and judging for themselves."

This statement seems to have excited no little attention, and has led, amongst other things, to the subsequent correspondence.

"DEAR SIR,

"To the Editor of the Christian Pioneer. GLASGOW, 2d Feb. 1827. "IN consequence of your having insinuated, in your Journal for October, that the Methodists in Newchurch, Rochdale, Todmorden, &c. had become Unitarians, I felt it my duty to write to one of our Ministers in Rochdale, to ascertain how far your statement was correct; and in answer, received the inclosed Letter, which I submit to you for your own information; and shall then be greatly obliged, by your inserting the whole in your next Journal, or at least, the paragraphs marked with red ink. And I hope, Sir, your regard for truth, and love of "fearless free inquiry," will induce you to comply with my reasonable request. Should this be done in a satisfactory manner, I shall not further notice the incorrect statements in the Pioneer;' but on your refusing to correct those mistakes, I shall then give publicity to the whole case (with additional information) through another medium. "Wishing you every mercy,

"I remain, Dear Sir, respectfully yours,
"J. HOBSON."

We feel obliged to the Rev. J. Hobson for his good wishes, and sincerely reciprocate them. We can assure him, we needed no threat to induce us to publish ́either his own or the Rev. Barnard Slater's letter. Our object is the promotion of Truth, and, we are satisfied, that object will be best effected, both in this and in every other instance, by "fearless free inquiry" and the most mature investigation. It is evident, we think, that Mr. Hobson has misunderstood the paragraph which has called forth his remarks; and that it is this misunderstanding, coupled with the genuine and remarkable facts of the case, which has roused the ire of his Rochdale brother. Mr. Hobson asserts, that we had "insinuated" in our Magazine, "that THE Methodists in Newchurch, Rochdale, Todmorden, &c. had become Unitarians." We neither asserted nor insinuated any such thing. What we did say, was, that Mr. Ashworth was "the author of a most interesting account of the rise and progress of the Unitarian doctrine in these Societies, formerly in connexion with the Wesleyan Methodists." And this statement we still believe to be substantially correct. We might, perhaps, have more properly said, "these Societies, formerly in connexion with the Rev. Joseph Cooke," and the mass of whose members were, formerly, Wesleyan Methodists; but we never imagined that any person could think, that we were asserting that the present Methodist Societies had become Unitarians. We are glad, however, that the paragraph has occasioned the additional notice that will now be given to the history of the Methodist Unitarians, for we are confident that no person can reflect on the circumstances attending their conversion, without having his mind deeply impressed, and led, we should hope, to a more serious and dispassionate inquiry after "the truth as it is in Jesus." We cannot, perhaps, indulge the expectation, that Mr. Hobson will be satisfied with the insertion of these Letters, but we assure him he cannot, if he wishes to promote Unitarianism, do better than "give publicity to the whole case."

"The Rev. John Hobson, Methodist Chapel, Glasgow. ROCHDALE, 16th Jan. 1827.

"MY DEAR BROTHER,

"In reply to your's of the 11th inst. I would observe,-The extraordinary statement made by Mr. Harris, in the Christian Pioneer,' that the Socinian Congregations and Societies in Rochdale, Todmorden, Newchurch, &c. &c. consist of persons formerly in connexion with the Wesleyan Methodists, in the sense in which he would be understood, it is absolutely untrue. The fol

lowing statement, as far as it respects Rochdale, will be found

correct.

"From August 1803, to August 1805, the late Joseph Cooke was stationed as a Wesleyan Minister at Rochdale. Suspected, on sufficient grounds, of not being sound in the faith, he was tried at the Sheffield Conference, August 1805. I was present at the trial; and, I must say, a more fair, candid, and Christian examination, it was impossible to have witnessed. Joseph Cooke was rather an acute and subtle young man; but extremely pert and self-conceited. The fathers of the connexion took the lead in this examination. The Reverend Messrs. the late T. Coke, Jos. Benson, Jno. Pawson, Jno. Barber, W. Griffith, C. Atmore, &c. and the present penetrating A. Clarke, H. Moore, Jos. Sutcliffe, J. Edmondson, J. Entwistle, &c. were treated by this aspiring reformer, as so many novitiates in divinity. Yet, while a decision that would have done credit to St. Paul, marked the conduct of those profound theologians, it was blended with an affection that would not have disgraced St. John. I remember the discussion to this day; it left an indelible impression on my mind, and amazingly raised the character of the Preachers in my esteem, as men of astonishing Biblical knowledge, of great perspicuity in stating their views on divine truth, and as stewards of Divine Mysteries that needed not to be ashamed.

"The misguided young man, who treated the advice of near two hundred well-instructed Divines with extreme indifference, not to say contempt, in conclusion, made a promise to make the controverted topics a matter of close study for one year; but solemnly engaged before us all, not to agitate the points, directly or indirectly, in the pulpit, or in private, among our people. On this condition, we appointed him to the Sunderland circuit. He had not been many weeks in his new station before he violated his engagement with the Conference: he furiously preached, and soon after published his erroneous sentiments. At the Conference in 1806, we expelled him from the connexion. Rochdale having been his station the two preceding years, he came here August 1806; blew the trumpet of dissension; declared he was persecuted for preaching primitive Methodist doctrines; and that he was a real Methodist. Insinuating in his manners, pleasing in his address, and unwearied in his visits from house to house, he engaged many to leave our body. Very soon, however, the people began to see, what they at first little expected-the seeds of Socinianism, in their incipient stages, peep out; and many of them returned back immediately. In a very few years, Mr. Cooke died. His successor, not so cautious in concealing his antichristian creed, was the occasion of by far the greater part of those who left, returning to the Wesleyans.

"Since the death of Mr. Cooke, now more than 16 years ago, not one member of the Wesleyan Society in Rochdale has joined the Socinians; but many have left the Socinians and have joined the Independents and the Wesleyans.

"To evince the absolute falsity of Mr. Harris's assertion, I would further state, that the Rochdale Society, at the time of Mr. Cooke's