Sir Isaac Newton's theological opinions, some plausible excuse for the language which you employ might perhaps be found in the declining state of Arianism among one class of Christians, by whom it was once generally embraced; I mean the Protestant Dissenters of South Britain. It will be rather difficult, however, to reconcile your language, even according to this interpretation, with the reference which you now make, rather superciliously, to the degree in which the infection of Arianism has spread itself over the north of Ireland. While, on the other hand, if you really knew that Sir Isaac Newton was a Unitarian, in the restricted sense of the word, viz. a believer in the simple humanity of Christ, then I am at a loss to conceive how you could have described as a sect now "nearly dwindled away from public observation" a class of the community which has been so extensively increased within a few years, and which has become so formidable, in various places of this island, as to cause the incessant apprehensions of pious but mistaken Christians for the welfare of our common Christianity, with which they conceive their peculiar tenets to be necessarily interwoven.

I own that, when I perused that passage of your preface, I was myself rather inclined to give you credit for a correct acquaintance with the principles of Sir Isaac Newton's creed, and merely supposed you ignorant of the progress which the Christian religion has been making, during the last century, in the southern part of this island, where it has been happily freed from many gross abuses under which it long laboured, and now lies open to the view and the study of all men, as the primitive gospel of the ever-blessed God. I was the more confirmed in this view of the case, because you were then, for the second time, referring to Sir Isaac Newton's religion; and because I attribute to you a suf. ficient love of truth, and a sufficient accuracy of research, to enable you to learn, from certain well-known publications, what Sir Isaac Newton did think with respect to the person of Christ.

In that brilliant and highly interesting passage of your Second Discourse*, Sir, in which you were raising the

Having spoken of Sir Isaac Newton's Commentary on the Book of [the] Revelation, Dr. Chalmers proceeds: "We see in this intel

credit of the Christian profession by instancing a man, profound in philosophy and humble in character, who adorned it by his talents and labours-a passage which I myself heard delivered with rapture, and well recollect the feelings of honest and devout gratitude to God which seemed to be impressed upon the countenances of your crowded auditory-in that passage, Sir, you elevated Newton to the highest rank as a theologian, and distinctly praised the doctrines of his theology; although, in your Preface, you find yourself disposed to explain away this just commendation, so as to make it signify nothing more than praise bestowed upon Newton's Christianity, without including any Christian doctrines*.

lectual labour of our great philosopher the working of the very same principles which carried him through the profoundest and the most suc-. cessful of his investigations; and how he kept most sacredly and most consistently by those very maxims, the authority of which he, in the full vigour and manhood of his faculties, ever recognized. We see in the theology of Newton the very spirit and principle which gave all its stability, and all its sureness. to the philosophy of Newton. We see the same tenacious adherence to every one doctrine that had such valid proof to uphold it as could be gathered from the field of human experience; and we see the same firm resistance of every one argument, that had nothing to recommend it but such plausibilities as could easily be devised by the genius of man," &c.

"He saw the wisdom of God pervading the whole substance of the written message, in such manifold adaptations to the circumstances of man, and to the whole secrecy of his thoughts, and his affections, and his spiritual wants, and his moral sensibilities, as even in the mind of an ordinary and unlettered peasant can be attested by human consciousness.""And when I look at the steady and unmoved Christianity of this wonderful man, so far from seeing any symptom of dotage and imbecility, or any forgetfulness of those principles on which the fabric of his philosophy is reared, do I see, that, in sitting down to the work of a Bible commentator, he hath given us their most beautiful and most consistent exemplification.”—Astronomical Discourses, p. 84, 88.

"In the course of this Sermon, I have offered a tribute of acknowledgment to the theology of Sir Isaac Newton, and in such terms, as, if not further explained, may be liable to misconstruction. The grand circumstance of applause in the character of this great man, is, that, unseduced by all the magnificence of his own discoveries, he had a solidity of mind which could resist their fascination, and keep him in steady attachment to that book, whose general evidences stamped upon it the impress of a real communication from heaven. This was the sole attribute of his theology which I had in my eye when I presumed to eulogize it. I do not think that, amid the distraction and the engrossment of his other pursuits, he has at

But for this singular evidence, I could not have believed that an acute reasoner and a man of science would have made a distinction without a diffe: ence. But if a difference may be discovered, and the substratum of Christianity can be separated from its inherent properties, and exhibited to public view, it surprises me that the orthodox Dr. Chalmers should bestow such unqualified praise upon the theological labours of a man, in whose reputation the Unitarians of the present day have undoubted reason to feel complacency. For the example and writings of Newton have certainly helped to bring on that state of religion among the Protestant Dissenters of England, which, Šir, in common with a departed worthy, whose praise is in all our churches*, I regard as a new era in the Christian Church, the commencement of a reformation as remarkable and important as the reformation from Popery, and which will, in the course of time, eclipse the glory of that event; the one rescuing us from the errors of the Church of Rome only partially, this entirely; the one being the dawn of day, the other the meridian light.”

66

You refer, Sir, to the state of Christianity among the Dissenters of England and the Presbyterians of the North of Ireland with evident regret. So different are your views and mine, that the cause of your regret is the cause of my exultation. I rejoice that, by abolishing subscription to the articles of a bigotted, an unenlightened age (for this, more than the cause to which you refer, has contributed to the happy result), so many of our fellow Christians have been disposed to appeal, for the determination of points in controversy, to the only divine authority, the Bible; and that, relinquishing the Thirty

all times succeeded in his interpretation of the book; else he would never, in my apprehension, have abetted the leading doctrine of a sect or a system which has now nearly dwindled away from public observation."-Preface, p. 7, 8.

No Protestant would pretend to claim for Newton an infallibility of interpretation; but there surely is strong presumption, that "a leading doctrine," embraced by one who " tenaciously adhered to every one doctrine that had valid proof to uphold it," can alone stand the test of reason and examination.

The late Rev. Timothy Kenrick, of Exeter, author of "An Exposition of the Historical Writings of the New Testament," 3 vols. Svo, and of two volumes of Sermons.

nine Articles of one great National Establishment, the Confession of Faith, and the Catechisms of another, they have so beautifully exemplified the maxim of the immortal Chillingworth, "The Bible, the Bible only, is the religion` of Protestants* ;" and that, as a natural result, they believe eternal life to consist in the knowledge of the Father, the only true God, and of Jesus Christ, whom he has sent; and with the Apostles, with Paul among the number, bow their knees to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

* Some may be of opinion that the following nervous appeal contains in it an argument of sufficient weight against the extravagant respect which is paid, in the present day, to the creeds and articles drawn up in an age of comparative darkness and ignorance :-" We may not bend the knee in any sensible chamber of imagery at the remembrance of favourite saints; but do we not bend the understanding before the volumes of favourite authors, and do a homage to those representations of the minds of the men of other days which should be exclusively given to the representations of the mind of the Spirit, as put down in the book of the Spirit's revelation ? It is right that each of us should give the contribution of his own talents, and his own learning, to this most interesting cause; but let the great drift of our argument be to prop the authority of the Bible, and to turn the eye of earnestness upon its pages; for if any work, instead of exalting the Bible, shall be made, by the misjudging reverence of others, to stand in its place, then we introduce a false worship into the heart of a reformed country, and lay prostrate the conscience of men under the yoke of a spurious authority."-Dr. CHALMERS's Sermon for the Hibernian Society, p. 28, 29.

+ John xvii, 1, 3. This passage may justly be denominated the Polar Star of Christian Theology, which can alone guide the mariner, with safety and success, through the troublous ocean of religious controversy. See also I Cor. viii, 6, and 1 Tim. ii, 5. While these passages remain in the Bible, and Christians observe their duty in studying its contents, it is not too much to assert, that the sect of the Unitarians will never, in the language of Dr. Chalmers, be "nearly dwindled away from public observation."

The proofs of my assertion will be found in the prayer which our blessed Saviour gave to the Apostles for their use; and in the following passages of the history of their labours, and of the Epistles written by them:-Acts iv, 24-30; Rom. xv, 6; Eph. iii, 14; and Col. i, 3, where the original Ευχαρισῦμεν τω θεώ και πατρι του κυρίου ἡμῶν ιησου Xerou, it will not be disputed, should be rendered, "We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." A similar change in the public version should be made ch. iii, 17 of the same Epistle. See, as further evidences, James iii, 9, and 1 Peter i, 17.

So far from thinking, Sir, that your religious creed, whatever it may be, is the standard of scriptural truth, I cannot avoid expressing my decided opinion, that the legitimate creed of the Establishment in which you officiate is as far behind the truth as it is in Jesus as A.D. 1560 (the time when John Knox completed the Reformation in Scotland) is prior to the present time. Nor can you, Sir, deduce any argument from this, tending to shew Unitarianism to be a novel doctrine, which would not, in the time of the first Protestant reformers, have equally well applied to the system which they preached. So long as we can prove to general satisfaction that Unitarianism was, to say the least, prevalent in the apostolic age, we have no need to fear that the antiquity of our creed can be reasonably called into question.

You speak, Sir, of many of the orthodox congregations of England having relapsed into Unitarianism. I need not inform you, that this word is generally used in English to express a change from a present condition back to a former one. Is Dr. Chalmers, then, disposed to admit that the first Christians were Unitarians?

[To be continued.]

AN ORIGINAL LETTER OF DR. PRIESTLEY'S. Dear Sir,

Calne, 28th Dec. 1777. IF I had not experienced your goodness on former occasions, I should be absolutely ashamed to write to you after so long a silence, and having had your letter so long before me. But really I am a very bad correspondent in general. I wish, however, very often that you were nearer to me, because of all my acquaintance I consider you as most likely to enter deeply into Hartley's theory*, and contribute to the farther investigation of that important subject, and should like to converse with you about such matters. I am satisfied from what you say, that you clearly understand his theory, which few do, and are apprized of the very extensive application of it. By this time you may observe the use that I have made of it in the business of criticism, tho' it is very probable that you

*Hartley. See Priestley's Works, vol. xv, p. 423.