of Man; at least, all that we know of his nature, the design of his mission and the efficacy of his mediation, his sufferings and death, is derived from revelation. And let me ask, does not the general language of the New Testament obviously justify, what I have just now said of the honor, love, and gratitude due from us to that benevolent Master, who loved us and gave his life for us; and, who for the suffering of death is crowned with glory and honor, and has received from his Father a name, that is above every name, that is named in heaven, or earth? Shall we be slow to honor him, shall we hesitate to give him all the glory, which he authorizes us to give? If we may judge from the manner in which the writers of the New Testament speak of the author of our religion, or indeed from the manner, in which he speaks of himself, his relation to, and intimacy with, the supreme God and Father of all, we can hardly avoid the conviction that he is clearly distinguished from, and is elevated vastly above, all the other messengers, all the other servants, all the other Sons of God. And when we reflect that God, his Father, has made him head over all things to the church, that, as he himself declared, all things were delivered unto him of his Father; that all judgment was committed to the Son; in a word, that he is exhibited to our minds by the general tenour of the christian scriptures, as the representative and vicegerent of the eternal majesty; when we consider all these things, we must feel ourselves in very little danger of holding the Saviour in too high estimation, of feeling too deeply, or expressing too strongly our grateful sense of his goodness and love, or of giving him undue, or forbidden honor. There can be little or no danger of this, while we remember and freely declare 10*

VOL. IV.NO. III.

our belief that his Father is greater than he; while our veneration, love, and gratitude, do not stop in their ascent at the Son, though an object so highly deserving of them; but rise to the original and undivided source of all the blessings, which have flowed to us through him; so long as we have an ultimate regard to the Father's honor, in all the respect which we pay to the Son, or so long as we acknowledge Christ to be Lord, not independent, but by the appointment and to the glory of God the Father.

After these remarks I would suggest the inquiry whether cautiously abstaining from the use of expressions relative to the Saviour, to the dignity of his character, the importance of his offices, or the design and effects of his obedient sufferings and death, expressions, fully authorized by the scriptures, and, to which Unitarians themselves, are able to affix a consistent meaning, merely because they have been used to support doctrines, which they consider as irrational and unscriptural, really tends to promote the cause of christian truth? For will not anything in our conduct, which, in the view of many, will probably have the appearance of our undervaluing the scriptures, or distrusting the correctness of the information, which they give; will not such a caution, which seems to indicate a suspicion that those who wrote the scriptures, notwithstanding all the aid and direction which they received from above, were not sufficiently on their guard against being misunderstood, be more injurious to the cause of truth, than the more free use of the expressions in question, attended by a frank avowal of the sense, in which we understand them?

We ought in this case, as well as many others, to regard and apply the Apostle's advice, 'Let not your good,

be evil spoken of.' We should be careful not to give our christian brethren any just cause for supposing that we believe less than we really do: or that we think the scripture passages in question have either no meaning, or none that is consistent with truth. Let it not be said that I am recommending hypocrisy, or prevarication. I am recommending modesty and a proper regard to the opinions and feelings of our brethren; for after all, it is impossible for us to know with certainty that these passages or expressions, have not a further and a higher meaning than we have given them. It would be but arrogance to pretend that all the difficulty of reconciling their respective tenets with the language of scripture is found on the side of Trinitarians, and that Unitarians have no share therein. Neither of the theories of the latter, relative to the nature of Christ, is entirely free from objection, drawn either from reason, or scripture. And the more obvious meaning of numerous passages in the New Testament, is in favour of the common orthodox doctrine of atonement. While, therefore, we justly condemn those, who would deny us the name of Christians, because we believe in the strict unity of God and cannot believe that Christ is equal to, or the same being with the Father, let us not think of or represent them, as wanting the understanding of men, because they cannot assent to all our interpretations of the scriptures on the above mentioned subjects. While they, who style themselves Liberal Christians, take heed that they are not surpassed in liberality and candour, let them equally beware that they, who oppose their sentiments, do not exceed them in real respect for the sacred scriptures. Let us remember that so far as regards the authority of the scriptures, we are as much obliged to believe in the

exalted dignity, as in the humanity of Christ; that all judgment is committed to the Son, and that all power is given him in heaven and earth, as that the Father is greater than he. To believe that we have redemption through his blood, or that we are reconciled unto God by the death of his Son, as that we shall be finally saved by his life; or that he gave us an example that we should follow his steps. Let us not then be backward to give every honor to the Son, which the scriptures authorize. This we must do, if we would honor as we ought, nay, if we would not positively dishonor the Father, who sent him.

Although I would not recommend the addressing of prayer directly to the Son, even occasionally, as the manner of some is, yet I would not discountenance the speaking or singing of the Redeemer's praise; that is, expressing our grateful sense of the benefits, which we have received from, or through him, and of that exalted benevolence and affecting kindness, which prompted to the bestowment of them.

We need not surely hesitate to pay him the same kind of honors, which we give to distinguished benefactors, patriots, and philanthropists, who have no pretence to a higher than human origin. Such doxologies as are made use of by the Apostles cannot be improper for our use. I will only add that whatever be our ideas of his nature, the dignity, with which he is invested, or the obligations, under which he has laid us, we shall not, we cannot sufficiently, or acceptably honor him unless we have his spirit, unless we practically regard the design, for which he was sent into the world, and while we call him Lord, are careful to do the things which he says.

N.

SPIRITS IN PRISON,

A CONFERENCE-MEETING DISCUSSION.

Minister. I rejoice, my inquiring friends, to meet so many of our number this evening.

First Inquirer. I feel assured, that we all sympathise with you in this emotion. These meetings for religious inquiry we find no less delightful than improving.

Minister. You all persevere, then, in your researches? Second Inquirer. I endeavour to search the scriptures as the only records of eternal life. On working days I am able to snatch but a few moments for this purpose; but the Lord's day, both at home and at church, I appropriate to advancement in christian knowledge.

Minister. Believe me, the Omniscient will bless your every sincere exertion, however limited, to understand his word, to ascertain and perform his will.

First Inquirer. In perusing the first epistle of Peter this morning, I found an assertion in the third chapter, which struck me as remarkable. I allude to these words of the nineteenth verse; He went and preached unto the spirits in prison. This assertion, and the whole passage connected with it, I could not but consider as involved in deep obscurity.

Third Inquirer. It is an obscurity, which to me has ever seemed altogether impenetrable.

Minister. The assertion is one of the most remarkable in the inspired volume. It is, however, I am persuaded, susceptible of a very lucid developement.

First Inquirer. It gives me a peculiar gratification to hear you say so; for although I have read and reread the whole period many times, my examination has been entirely unsuccessful.