214 On Coleridge's Attack on the Unitarians contained in kis Second Lay Sérmon. God, regard his first begotten son as something more than mortal. And, if it simply implied the humanity of the Messiah, our orthodox brethren would maintain their right to the terin; and contend that while they worshiped him as Divine, they still delighted to feel with him as human. We coine now to matters of more importance. You proceed, "It is the interest of these men to speak of the Christian religion as comprised in a few plain doctrines, and containing nothing not intelligible at the first hearing to the narrowest capacities." And you then proceed after some further observations on the scantiness of our faith, to inveigh against the supposition of the plainness and simplicity of the gospel. St. Paul, you observe, though he teaches us, that in the religion of Christ there is milk for babes; yet informs us at the same time, that there is meat for strong men! and, to the like purpose, one of the Fathers has observed, that in the New Testament there are shallows where the lamb may ford, and depths where the elephant must swin." You eloquently dilate on the great treasures of knowledge and of wisdom which the Scriptures contain-on mighty truths which are to fill and dilate the understanding-on the riches of Christ which no research can exhaust. Still it is exceedingly difficult to comprehend any definite object to which you refer, and still less to discern the path by which we are to climb to the sublimities you dimly unfold. 66 We understand a grandeur in the words but not the words." It seems that you mean to assert that there are truths in the Scriptures which the unlearned cannot discoversecluded springs of more holy inspira tion which the philosopher alone can visit. Supposing this theory to have any truth-or rather this rhapsody to have any meaning-how can it pèspossibly affect the truth or falsehood of the Unitarian creed? Those doctrines which the opposer of the Trinity rejects, supposing them to be true, are neither hid from the vulgar nor understood by the learned. A child, who is versed in his catechism, knows as much respecting the Trinity as the most laborious divine. To receive as * P. 58. mere matters of faith all the docrines of the Church of England no enlarged understanding is requisite. The humblest of the orthodox who, believes in the union of two natures in: the Saviour's person-in. the vicarious efficacy of his death-and in the super natural influences of his spirit-be cause he thinks the word of God asserts them, has just the same portion of knowledge with yourself respecting these mysteries. Those who have hitherto defended them have asserted that they were matters which, inthis world, at least could not be understood by imortals. They gloried: that the ignorant and the wise were, in respect of these things, nearly in the same relative condition. They have rather spoken of them with a solemn reverence as subjects which the most powerful mind could not grasp nor the acutest understanding explain. They have even been ac customed to regard the understanding, as too cold and earthly a power to appreciate them, and have appealed rather for their testimony immediately to the heart and the affections. For the evidences of these doctrines they have sometimes condescended to apply to the reason; but for their heighth and depth and measure for all be-yond a simple belief in them as: revealed-they have rather checked than impelled inquiry. In point of fact, there is nothing in orthodoxy to understand which the Unitarian does not believe. All that we reject consists of objects which, to those who receive them, are materials not of knowledge but of faith and hope,' excitements to the believer not to penetrate into the hidden things of God, but, at distance, to love and adore him. If I rightly understand your acco-1 sation against Unitarianism, it is, that it excludes those doctrines of our religion which the most profound understandings alone can compre hend, or in the figurative language you prefer," the depths where the ele phaut must swim." And the plain auswer I make is that there is not one? of the doctrines it denies of which! the highest intellect can understand any thing; that in respect to the depths you allude to, the elephant and the lamb are precisely in the same condition; and that consequently there is no food for the rational powers in the most orthodox creed which our calumniated faith is not equally capable of affording. only a small number with the organ of vision. Happy indeed is it that of such a fancy there is not the smallest trace in the word of God. I speak the language not of the Unitarian in particular, but of almost every intelligent Christian when I affirm that the great principles of our faith are written so plainly that "he who runs may read." They are inscribed in living and immortal characters which all the mysticism of Germany cannot obscure. True it is that in their divine relations, in so far as they refer to things that are unseen, they can never be comprehended on earth. But are not the wisest and the most ignorant, in this case, nearly on a level? The poor cottager who "knows and only knows her Bible trae," believes on its authority, in an immortality of joy; and can you, with all your philosophy, do more? She knows, indeed, nothing of the nature of that blessedness which is treasured up for her in heaven; and has it "entered into your heart to conceive" it? She believes in 'the' Father of mercies as her protector în life and her guide through the valley of the shadow of death; and what can you add to the hope and the comfort which this assurance breathes? Can you add to this feeling one ray of delight when you have taken Plato to expound St. John? She is contented to rest on an Almighty arm, withontinquiring into the modes of its operation or existence; and "Canst thou by searching find out God; canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection ?" You seem, Sir, to be very indig nant at the sentiment that "religion requires but the application of a common sense which every man possesses to a subject in which every inan is concerned."* You even hint that to constitute the complete Christian some kind of genius is requisite; and are quite astonished that while musicians, orators, painters and mechanics require peculiar gifts, a mere common understanding should suffice for the comprehension of the religion of Jesus! It is true you concede that a highly cultivated intellect is not indispensable to salvation. I am happy your charity extends thus far, or some of the apostles themselves might be excluded from your select assembly of the just. Still I must suppose you to mean that the richest treasures of the gospel are accessible only to men possessed of certain intellectual properties. Surely you cannot be serious. A talent for religion! A genius for the gospel! I can find no intimation of these gifts in holy writ. The good tidings of great joy" which our Saviour came to promulgate were peculiarly intended for the poor. They were designed as the "balm of their hurt minds," the guides of their path, the solace of their afflictions. They were given as a portion to those who had no inheritance on earth, a rich consolation to the lowly when heart and flesh should fail them. They were scorned by the learned of the schools, and propagated by the fishermen of Galilee. Through their ministry the " poor of this world" became "rich in faith and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven." Nor were the sacred principles which they embraced hung about them as an amulet or a charm; they were approved to their understandings and received into their hearts; in their light they delighted to walk, and in defence of them they were ready to die. It is a libel on the Almighty to suppose that he has given a religion for the benefit of all mankind, and yet has bestowed the capability of enjoying it only on a few. It would be as though he had created the sun to enlighten all men and had endowed P. 56. They are Far be it from me to undervalue metaphysical discussion or to deprecate the freest inquiry. They are among the noblest employments which heaven-born minds can delight in If they bring us no accessions of actual knowledge, they discover to us our own internal resources and afford us a glorious proof of the aspiring tendencies of our nature. the beatings of the soul against the bars of its earthly tabernacle, striving before its time to expatiate in its' native regions-which, though for the most part vain in their immediate object, prove the spirit of immortality to be strong within us. It is good to be sometimes rendered dizzy by the elevation of our own thoughts, to he posed with the casuitry of high reasonings, to be lost in the subtleties of speculation too ethereal and divine. This is a preparatory exercise of the soul for employments which it may pursue for ever. It abstracts us from the vanities and selfishness of life, from low passions and ignoble aims, and feeds it for a while with the food of angels. It enables us to look with a comprehensive and, therefore, with a gentle eye on the frailties of man, and fills us with glowing hopes for h's elevated progress. And if we should dwell too long in the abstractions of a genial philosophy-if we should have gazed on the " lovely scenes at distance" till we fancied Ourselves and the world already near them if we should throw some of the brilliant colouring of our own hopes on the places where we actually move-if we should look at man through a medium by which his errors are softened down and his virtues rendered fairer-if we should shape out gorgeous visions of liberty and peace and joy which the present age cannot realize the error will be goodly as it will be sweet! It will be but the overleaping of a little period, but a union in spirit with future years, with the good hereafter to be born, and with prophets who have long been silent. But these noble speculations and delicious dreams of the intellect form no essential part of the religion of Jesus. The sweet light of love and of hope which it sheds on the dreary scenes of life is common to all, however contracted the powers of their mortal vision. It often throws its holiest tints over the cottage. In the paths of pleasantness and of peace to which the finger of celestial wisdom directs us, wayfaring men though "of the narrowest capacities" cannot err. O no, Sir! the consolations and the joys of the gospel are no matter of science. They spring up, like the most flagrant flowers beneath our feet, and all who will stoop may gather them. The pure river of the water of life is not like the streams of Castaly, accessible to few. "The elephant and the lamb" may alike taste of it, and alike stand in need of its freshness. How often, indeed, do the bright anticipations of heaven bless those who have no earthly joy. How often while the learned dispute on the truths of Christianity, till they lose them, do the ignorant in this world's wisdom, “feel after them and find theat!" How frequently do we discover the fairest virtues clustering amidst the shades which conceal and shelter the lower walks of existence! In those scenes there are living examples before which the new aristocratical order you would establish in religion must fade away, and which prove beyond all powers of mortal expression, that the highest treasures of divine wisdom are not alone accessible to genius. Methinks I see such a testimony in the image of a venerable and sainted female-sur rounded by her little and revering descendants-still eagerly fixing her dim eye on the page where through life she has found support-and then turning to borrow aid from the lisping tongue of a child. Time has neither shaken her hopes nor chilled her affections. She turns back her view on the earlier days of her life with grateful joy, and prays only that the children may walk in the steps through which she has trodden. While she fondly embraces and blesses them, she seems already to speak in the language of heaven. She trembles, but it is with antici pated joy; she totters on the verge of paradise. What more exalted happiness can you hope to enjoy, though you" understand all mysteries and all knowledge," and "speak with the tongues both of men and of angels?” S. N. D. P. S. In my next letter I shall examine your statement of the Uni-tarian creed and the remaining charges which you bring forward against it. SIR, London, March 19, 1817. 29), I observe an article relating N your Number for February (p. to a Sermon I published at Cork, in July last, extracted from a Cork newspaper, and headed with the title of Orthodox Alarm in Ireland." Had you been aware of the true nature of this contemptible ebullition of personal malice, you would not I am persuaded, have given it by your republication of it an importance which it so little deserves. Lest its appearance in your pages, and the very unappropriate title which you have prefixed to it, should mislead any of your readers, I beg leave to state that it was (as far as I could learnya generally despised by all religions parties in Cork, and that the respectable editor of the paper in which it appeared afterwards called upon me to express his regret at its having been inserted, and to say that it had been done without his knowledge. From the sentiments it avows having been little known or discussed in Ireland, my sermon naturally excited a considerable sensation, and attracted much more attention than any thing it contains could in other circumstances have procured it. I may per haps feel disposed to complain that my numerous opponents have betrayed great ignorance of what has before been written on both sides in the Unitarian controversy, but they have not in general shewn bitterness of spirit; and I recollect no instance, except the trifling one to which you have given increased publicity and importance, in which any of them have indulged in virulent abuse or malignant misrepresentation. SIR, WILLIAM HINCKS. Dec. 17, 1816. HAVE been much edified and I somewhat amused, by the account given in your Repository for Novemher, [XI. 634], of the remarkable deliverance of C. Crellius, with his children and attendants from the peril of robbers and men-slayers in the wilderness. I receive serio what is there related as to the kind assistance of Providence, in the laudable use of means, in his escape from the murderous pit, and the man of Belial whom he met on the margin of the wood; but confess I cannot tell what to make of the little gentleman in the "grey coat, with a stick in his hand." He appears to me, in one view, so like unto the imps and fairies of old time, only perhaps, somewhat of a more reasonable size, and in another view so much in the similitude of flesh and blood, that I am at a loss under what class of beings to rank him, and am therefore induced humbly to crave some elucidation of this part of the occurrence either from the learned Editor (which indeed I expected at the close of the story), or his reviewer, or some of his ingenious correspondents. I trembled when I found the good confessor and his waggon in "the slough of despond;" but how was I rejoiced to find that he had met with a wayfaring man in the dreary region, who, though he did not indeed promise much at first sight, proved in the result a perfect Hercules. How delightful must it have been to witness the silent operations of his magical wand, when by ouly gently placing it under each wheel, and appearing to lift them," with the help of a little manuduction, and an euphonious sound transmitted from his lips, which, I think, the narrator much depreciates, by the vulgar phrase calling to the horses," the cumbrous load was instantly disengaged "without any apparent difficulty," and once more fixed upon solid ground! After some kind directions by the stranger, we find that as the grateful traveller was preparing, as well he might, to offer him some solid remuneration, Heigh! pass!— the little man had vanished in an instant! and, though it was only in the dusk of the evening, could no where be found! To be sure a wood is an admirable place for a person to conceal himself in, who desires a game at bo-peep, or, in a way of charity, does not wish to let his left hand know what his right hand docth;" yet still, I verily think, he must have heard the traveller cry out lustily, and in common civility, which should always accompany acts of charity, should have turned back to receive his acknowledgments. However, as he is gone, we cannot help it; but I should certainly wish, if possible, (I mean in an historical way, for I suppose unless he were a being of another world he hath long passed away to receive his reward,) to become better acquainted with this truly respectable personage, his lineage and ancestry. Most assuredly, if we are to take this narration in the lump, we can entertain no serious doubt of the singular occurrence related of Col. Gardiner, by his pious biographer, as justly entitled to the character of a vision, and not a dream; and shall perhaps be suitably prepared for a partial, if not a full" assent and consent" to the truth of some of the supposed heathen miracles, or popish legends: or, are all such relations, when predicated of the orthodox, always false or suspicious, and only true when reported of the rationalists and reformers? tion. Perusing this account, a fourth time, incomprehensibly all possible perfecI read that it was related by "the pious driver, Paul Sagosky, when he was far advanced in age!" Perhaps this may be a sufficient clue with some of your readers if any of them can furnish me with a better, I shall be much obliged to them. SIR, "The different appellations of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are nevertheless not to be used indifferently or indiscriminately one for another, because (in the general) they are properly and consistently used only as this one supreme self-existing Essence is considered in different points of view. For when considered as the Fleet Street, February 11, 1817. Great First Cause of all things, from CUI BONO? LOOKING the other died in The small publication, entitled "The Annual Monitor and Memorandum Book, for the Year 1816," published by a Quaker in the North of England, and evidently intended for the use of the society, I met with a passage which appears to me to justify the assertion so often made, that in general if Quakers would explain themselves, they would be found not far from Unitarianism. The Editor observes, p. 124: "The following explanation of the Divine Being was found in manuscript, a few years ago, bearing the marks of not being a very modern production, but without any clue to discover the author. Its coincidence with the sentiments of the Editor, induced him to request a copy of the individual among whose papers it was found; and he trusts it will not be less pleasing to many of his readers. "The words, in the general, are placed in brackets, being an addition which he has ventured to insert; as he does not conceive, by the tenour of the whole piece, that the author intended so unqualified a restriction of the several appellations, as his words may otherwise possibly imply. "On the Unity of the Godhead, under the different Appellations of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. "The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are not three distinct persons or essences, but essentially and identically one and the same, each signify ing the one true God; and not collectively implying a composition or aggregate in the essentiality of the Divinity. For he is a pure, simple, perfect Being, independently supreme, without parts and without mixture, incapable of addition or diminution, having in himself inherently and whence the whole universe of animate and inanimate creation solely derives its origin and existence, he is very expressively and significantly called the Father. "When he is considered as acting in, and actuating his creatures, and administering to them such suitable help as their situation in the scale of existence requires, more especially in this spiritual and substantial dispensation, he is then with equal propriety termed the Son. "Again, as he measurably acts in the hearts of men individually, in reproving and correcting them for every impurity of action and intention, in manifesting in them with convincing self-evident and undeniable clearness, the path that leads to eternal blessedness with himself, and in' enabling them by the influence of mercy, love and strength, to walk and persevere steadily therein during this scene of mutability and change, he is justly denominated the Spirit, with the emphatical epithet Holy." Such is the explanation given, as I have above stated, in a publication designed for the use of the Friends. I have only to ask, whether the original composer or the approving Editor can be considered as Trinitarians? IN P. Q. SIR, Feb. 17, 1817. N Lord Herbert's Life and Reign of King Henry the Eighth, I find an extraordinary imputation upon Wolsey, as an encourager of the Lutheran heresy. It forms one of the forty-four articles of accusation brought against the Cardinal, December 1, 1529, by a Council of Nobles which Henry appointed to sit for that purpose, in the Star Chamber-More, as Chancellor, being President. The 43d article is as follows: Also, whereas in the Parliament Chamber, and in open Parliament, |