who may read this book, find their sensibilities wounded, it will not be done through malice, and must not be laid to my charge, but attributed to the monstrous dogmas I oppose.

I feel grateful to our common Father that I am at liberty to freely speak and publish my sentiments, and expose and oppose, the unwarranted and unaccountable arrogance of my opponents. And it is a source of devout thankfulness that I see around me gentlemen of profound science and wisdom, who are heart and hand agreed in throwing off the mask from Orthodoxy and presenting its hideous and deadly form naked to the world. Unitarians are not alone in this work. I am happy in owning and acknowledging the great and efficient aid of our Universalist brethren, though I cannot agree with them in all things; especially in confining all punishment to this life; and my reasons for this difference will be found in another place.

It is, I presume, well known to the enlightened and inquiring part of community, that the Calvinists and Orthodox, as a part of society is called, have for many years been numerous; and it is equally well known that some of the leaders in this party have desired the entire control and sway over the country, and have for this purpose adopted and put in operation, a grand system of Exclusion against all who will not acknowledge their power, and refuse to bow down to the idols which they have endeavored to establish and confirm, under the name of doctrines taught in the Bible. Their success has been so great that some appear to arrogate infallibility; and through this vain confidence and presumption, have become so conceited and puffed up, as to pass the sentence of condemnation on all who see cause to oppose their unholy work. Who does not know that the Calvinist Baptists and Orthodox and Presbyterians, exclude from the rights and privileges of Christianity all those who object to their system of doctrines? Indeed, the audacity of some of these self-styled Orthodox has been so great, that they have refused (and continue to do it) to admit other gentlemen of different sentiments into their pulpits, even when a majority of their society have requested this privilege; thus depriving an otherwise free and independent people, of one of the first and great blessings guaranteed to the whole people by the Constitution of the United States, and secured to them by the excellent and wholesome Constitution and laws of the several States. If this act of exclusion is not a great violation of the rights and privileges of the common people, and a gross imposition upon the public, I will thank any gentleman to tell me what it is. Under the iron hand of this usurped authority and exclusion, our fellow citi

zens are driven to the necessity of building different houses for worship, and to pay high taxes in support of their privileges. In large cities and towns this exclusive system operates very differently in its effects on the people than is to be found or expected in smaller towns and villages. In the former, it is a source of wealth and great speculation-while to the latter it is spiritual tyrranny, depriving our fellow citizens of their rights and privileges, or subjecting them to pay high taxes, or not attend public worship. These are great and crying evils, imposed upon us by Triaitarians. In Massachusetts the evil is greater, in one sense, than in NewHampshire; in that State the people are required by law, to pay taxes in support of ministers; and men are obliged to pay for preaching which contradicts their senses, and support a system which deprives them of the greatest hopes and consolations of the Gospel. This exclusiveness of Trinitarianism, must be abolished, and not suffered to be palmed upon a free people by the advocates of its horrid and shocking doctrines, who tell us none but the elect are saved; that all men are totally depraved, and that our Father in heaven is partial.

I lament my inability to do justice to this subject; and shall therefore bring to my assistance the wisdom and superior knowledge of more able writers. A learned and highly esteemed author, thus speaks:

"For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake." 2 Cor. iv. 5. The text supposes that there were those who preached themselves, in room of preaching Christ Jesus the Lord; for if there had been none of this description, there would have been no necessity of the Apostle's declaration, that he and his brethren in the ministry were not such. If there were such preachers in the first age of Christianity, it is not unreasonable to suppose there may be such in later times, and even in our own. If it be a fact that all who do not preach the truth, as revealed in Christ, preach themselves, there can remain no doubt that we have such preachers not a few." *

*

*

"We have now arrived at a query, in the discussion of which, much caution as well as candor is required. The question is, by what rule, or by what means are hearers to judge and determine who preach themselves, and who preach, not themselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord? It is very evident that it is unsafe to take the preacher's word in this case, for the two following reasons-first, he may be a dishonest, crafty deceiver. Such impostors have been, in days of old,

and are now, unquestionably in the church, and of all denominations. No disposition is indulged of imputing dishonesty to one denomination, more than to another; but both candor and charity, in their humility, are obliged to confess, as well as to lament the fact, that hypocrisy is too often discovered in sacerdotal vestments. But secondly, the preacher may be honest, he may be sincere, and yet he may profess to preach Christ Jesus the Lord, and preach himself. Such is the condition of human nature, that even sincerity is not a security against error. We have good authority for believing that St Paul, before his conversion to the faith of the gospel, was sincere in his unreasonable and violent opposition to Christianity. He had been brought up in the superstitions of the Pharisees, and had always been in the habit of yielding implicit assent to all the dogmas which were taught by Jewish doctors. He verily thought that he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus. What men were liable to in former ages, under similar circumstances they are liable to, in all ages. Take an individual for an example. In childhood, he is taught an erroneous creed, by his pious parents. He as much believes in this creed, as he does in the being of God, or in any other religious truth. His parents design him for the ministry; and to the extent of their means, they instruct him in the tenets of that faith, which, though erroneous, they believe is the truth. Of this faith, they earnestly and devoutly pray that their hopeful son may be a zealous and successful preacher. At the school where he is prepared to enter college, the tenets of his creed, are with equal zeal and with more learning, impressed on his mind. And now he begins to consider it his duty to defend his faith against heretical opposers, and profane unbelievers. As yet, no question respecting the propriety of his own creed, has ever occupied his mind for a moment. Confident in his belief, and with flattering prospects, he enters college, and with commendable zeal and application, pursues his studies, none of which ever suggests a thought in conflict with any part of his creed. Every religious book he is permitted to read, confirms him in his faith; and he wonders at the stupidity of all who oppose it. Having obtained the honors and advantages of a liberal education, his next remove is to a theological institution, where he is to prepare himself for the sacred office. Is this institution a suitable one to correct the errors he imbibed in childhood, and which have become more fixed as he has advanced in years and in learning? So far from this, it was established for the very purpose of teaching youth how to avoid learning the truth, and how to reconcile

the scriptures to all the errors, which he and his theological instructers have unhappily imbibed. The tedious term of these studies ends, and he appears in the desk, a public preacher. But what does he preach? the gospel of Christ? No; he preaches what he has been taught, and what he honestly believes, though it be altogether the invention of men. Now if we rely on this preacher's honest testimony in favor of his being a preacher of Christ Jesus the Lord, and not a preacher of man, we are sure to fall into the same errors which he has imbibed, and which he is now endeavoring to disseminate.

*

*

*

That the mind be not burdened with too many particulars, three only will be stated. And these three shall be of such a character as to give entire satisfaction to every honest heart. No doctrine can be false that is free from the three characteristics about to be named; nor can any doctrine be true which partakes of them. It is furthermore worthy of notice, that whatever doctrine embraces any one of these particulars, will, on due investigation, be found to ambrace them all. The reader is further assured, that the rule now to be put into his hands, is not fashioned for the accommodation of one sect more than another; but is of such a peculiar character as to be acceptable to all men of every sect, whose hearts are honest, and whose understandings are clear.

I. The first particular we shall notice is that of inconsis tency, or contradiction. Contradiction, being an incontestable proof of falsehood, is of itself sufficient to condemn any doctrine which contains it. The testimony of a witness, though it be given under the solemnity of an oath, if it contain contradiction, refutes itself; and he who should bear such testimony in court, would forfeit his honor as a man of truth, and be dismissed with disapprobation, if not punished. It would be of no avail for the deponent, in such a case, to inform the court that what appeared to them as contradiction was a mysterious truth, which their natural understandings were not capable of discerning. If the natural understanding of man be not capable of judging in this case, it seems altogether improper to lay the testimony before it. Now, as we are compelled to pronounce that false which contains contradiction, relative to the temporal concerns of society, so ought we to do in relation to religious doctrines. Let him, therefore, who hears preaching, listen with all the caution and attention which he would feel bound to exercise, were he hearing the testimony of a witness in a case which was to be decided by his own judgment; let him be able, by such

cautious attention, to compare all parts of the sermon, so as to detect any contradiction which the preacher may advance, and if he discover inconsistency in the discourse which he hears, he may, with perfect safety, conclude that the preacher has been laboring to set up no other doctrine than such as the wisdom of this world has invented, in opposition to the wisdom and doctrine of God: On the other hand, if consistency, and harmony of parts, characterize the sermon, it is perfectly safe for the hearer to conclude that the wisdom of God is in it. Truth alone is consistent with itself. There never was a false doctrine, invented by man, that did not contain contradiction, and inconsistency.

II. The second peculiar characteristic of false doctrines, is partiality. All the erroneous doctrines which have ever been taught in the world, contain this peculiar mark, and by it may be known to be false. A false doctrine has favors for some, which favors it cannot extend to others. It is true, it will profess to have good reasons for its gracious liberality to its favorites, and also for withholding all mercy from others. If it be asked, by what authority we assert that all doctrines are false which are partial, we offer the following testimony of an acknowledged apostle: The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.' We are here assured, that in the wisdom or doctrine of God, there is no partiality. All the doctrines, which men have invented, are, or pretend to be, full of mercy and good fruits, for such as are friendly to them and their requirements, and who love and support them; but equally full of wrath and vengeance towards such as do not receive them, nor conform to their precepts. Directly contrary to this is the language of the wisdom of God: If ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? But say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the ehildren of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. Be ye, therefore, perfect, even Father which is in heaven is perfect.' Is it possible that any one, who possesses a common understanding, should not; by this infallible rule, be able to discern the difference between the wisdom which is from above, and the wisdom

I

as your