dare not imitate the bold and positive language in which the darkest doctrines are sometimes urged as undoubted and essential."* But in other connexions, this modest diffidence, this shrinking distrust, in regard to the correctness of received opinions, is exchanged for tones of the highest confidence. Unitarians" always declare, that Scripture, with one voice, disowns the doctrine of the Trinity and that, of all the fictions of theologians, the doctrine of three persons in the one God has, perhaps, the least countenance from the Bible."+"We ought to speak of religion," it is well said in another place, "as something which we ourselves know."‡ Unitarians sometimes represent the truths, the doctrines of religion as of very little consequence; and then again as of the utmost importance. "You will expect from me," says a Unitarian minister, addressing his flock on the Sabbath following his ordination, "You will expect from me no detail of my speculative opinions. They are really of too little consequence to be brought forward at a period so interesting as the present. You know that I am a Christian." Another gentleman, after having specified particularly most of the doctrines of the gospel, adds, "My individual belief in respect to the truth or error of these points can be of but little importance, and my subject no way requires that it should be given. Neque teneo neque refello. I believe that an innumerable company of Christians, who never heard of these articles, have fallen asleep in Jesus; and that innumerable of the same description are following after." But this same gentleman, only a few years previous, delivered an ordination sermon on the inestimable value of truth, as the only means by which men are sanctified. "We naturally infer," says he, " in the first place, the great importance of the truth. It is the means that God, in his wisdom and mercy, has provided and employs for the sanctification of men. To be indifferent whether religous truth or error, light or darkness, prevails among our fellow men, is to be indifferent to their best interests, present and future. T It is sometimes insisted by Unitarians, that sincerity in our religious belief and character is all that can properly be required of us. "It is of little importance what a man believes or disbelieves, if he is only sincere." This was a favorite and oft repeated sentiment several years ago. "One rule," says Dr. Thayer, "shall measure the decisions of the great day. Sincerity will be the test of character."** But we are as positively told, on the other hand, that sincerity is not sufficient. "It is to be remembered," says *Remarks on Dr. Worcester's first letter, p. 12. Rev. Samuel Cary. || See Dr. Eliphalet Porter's Convention Sermon, pp. 19, 20. ** Dedication Sermon, p. 25. Mr. Richardson, "that the sincerity of any one's faith gives no evidence that it is founded in truth, or is safe to be adopted." It was fully shown in my last, that the Unitarian clergy, in former years, were accustomed to conceal their peculiar sentiments. "We seldom, or never," says Dr. Channing, "introduce the Trinitarian controversy into our pulpits." "We have never entered into discussions of the doctrine of the Trinity." "They touched not disputed doctrines." "Though Boston was full of Unitarian sentiment and feeling, there was no open profession of it." Clergymen maintained 66 a cautious reserve," so that "neither from their sermons, their prayers, nor their private conversation," could it be inferred that they were Unitarians. They even considered themselves as slandered, if the epithet, Unitarian, was applied to them.† But more recently, a very different language, and an equal difference in practice, are observed. Concealment and disguise are strongly reprobated, and it is represented as of great importance that Unitarian doctrines be fully and plainly preached. "A cunning messenger," says Dr. Ware, "will temporize; and a timid one will palliate . . . . . and each may be expected to practise somewhat of concealment and disguise ;-will be tempted to inquire, not what is true, but what will be acceptable; not what duty demands, and the exigences of mankind require, but what they will bear, what may be said with safety, what will be heard without offence." This spirit the Dr. disapproves, and says that the minister must "deliver, without fear, and without reserve, the whole scheme of doctrine and duty which is revealed in the gospel."+ Unitarians have insisted much on the happy tendency of their system, as a convincing argument in favor of its truth. Mr. Sparks published a volume, entitled "An Inquiry into the compar ative moral tendency of Trinitarian and Unitarian doctrines," with a view to show the vast superiority of the latter; and the Chris+ tian Examiner, in reviewing this publication, says, "The point, on which the whole of the argument is made to turn in this book, is that which must, after all, decide the controversy with the bulk of mankind; namely, the comparative moral tendency of the two conflicting systems." "Vol. i. p. 223. This, it will be recollect * Sermon on Conversion, p. 27. For the authorities on which I make these quotations and assertions, see Spirit of the Pilgrims, vol. iii. pp. 117, 122, 123. Sermon at the Ordination of Mr. Brooks, at Hingham, pp. 5, 9. Dr. Ware was undoubtedly a Unitarian, at the time of his election to the Professorship of Divinity in Harvard College; yet, during the ten following years, it is presumed he never preached, frankly and openly, the peculiarities of Unitarianism. Did he, at this time, "deliver, without fear and without reserve, the WHOLE scheme of doctrine and duty revealed in the gospel," as he understood it? or was he "tempted to inquire," "What will men bear? What may be said with safety? What will be heard without offence ?" I might refer to several ordination sermons in which the importance of a full and fearless exhibition of doctrine is inculcated. See particularly Dr. Channing's sermon at the Ordination of Mr. Gannett, and Mr. Nathaniel Whitman's sermon at the Ordination of his brother at Waltham. ed, was the subject of Dr. Channing's Dedication Sermon at New York,-" The fitness of Unitarian Christianity to promote true, deep, and living piety." But when a gentleman of Boston, some years since, renounced Unitarianism, on the ground of what he supposed its unfavorable tendency and effects, this grand argument was suddenly relinquished, and the American Unitarian Association issued a Tract to show, that the happy influence and effects of a doctrine, in promoting seriousness, deep feeling, prayer, a strict observance of the Sabbath, and zeal and effort in the cause of religion, were "no test," no sure evidence, of its truth.* Unitarians have, in some instances, announced themselves as a distinct denomination of Christians. In the first annual report published by the American Unitarian Association, it is said, "The want of union among Christians of our denomination, is felt to be a great evil by those who have directed their attention to this subject." "The contributions of many of our friends have been thrown into the treasuries of other denominations of Christians, from the want of some proper objects among ourselves, upon which they could be bestowed." pp. 14, 15. The Christian Examiner also says, "With the exception of our own, there is hardly a denomination of Christians, which does not support its newspaper, and its other periodical works, and support them well." Vol. iii. p. 84. But on another occasion, the Examiner repels the suggestion that Unitarians are a distinct denomination, with great warmth. "What are we to understand by this? That the liberal Christians are a new denomination? They are Congregagationalists.' Vol. iv. p. 131. A few years since, Unitarians were accustomed, almost invariably, to speak of themselves as a sect, a party, a distinct class of Christians. In the introduction to his Ordination sermon at Baltimore, Dr. Channing says, "I have thought it to be my duty to lay before you, as clearly as I can, some of the distinguishing opinrons of that class of Christians in our country, who are known to sympathize with this religious society." p. 3. "A minister who attaches himself to that class of Christians to which we of this religious society are known to belong," &c. "This house has been built by that class of Christians who are called Unitarians, and the gospel will here be taught, as, interpreted by that body of believers." More recently, however, Unitarians seem averse to *See Tract. No. 17. The Clergyman, who replied to "the Letter of a Gentleman of Boston," says, that to decide "in regard to the truth or excellence of religious tenets" from their beneficial effects,"" is a very mistaken ground of judging." And again; "This argument for a system from the character of those who hold it," is founded altegether in a mistake, and is of no weight at all." pp. 15, 19. + Referring to a remark in the Result of a Council at Groton. Sermon at the Ordination of Mr. Gannett. p. 17. Dedication Sermon at New York, p. 2. For instances of a similar mode of expression, see Mr. Thatcher's Sermon at the Dedication of the New South Church ; Dr. being known as a class or party. They will suffer no opinions to be imputed to them, as a body; and their preachers are very careful to announce, that they speak as individuals, and of their own mind. "I am not giving you," says Dr. Channing at the Installation of Mr. Motte," the opinions of any sect or body of men, but my own. I hold myself alone responsible for what I utter. Let none listen to me for the purpose of learning what others think." p. 2. "Is While Unitarians were willing to be known as a party, contradictory representations were not unfrequently made, as to the size and extent of the party. Sometimes it was represented as very small; and then again as very large. "Is it not notorious," says Dr. Channing, "that we have espoused an unpopular cause?" it not notorious, that beyond a narrow sphere, our names are loaded with reproach ?"* "Where," says a writer in the Christian Examiner, "where are the vast resources of Unitarianism?" "The resources are not vast, nor even respectable. When a purpose, strictly Unitarian, is to be accomplished, they, into whose hands it is committed, know full well, that the interest in Unitarianism, as such, is small indeed, and that its resources are soon exhausted." Vol. iii. p. 116. But the conductors of the Christian Examiner, in another place, insist that their party is not small. "Will this Council" (the Council at Groton) "as Christian ministers, dare to say, that in the Congregational church the liberal Christians are a very small party? They know it to be otherwise." Vol. iv. p. 132. Unitarians have represented, long and often, that the Orthodox system was decaying and falling to pieces-that it had literally waxed old, and was ready to vanish away.' In 1806, it was a "frail and crumbling fabric."+ Twenty years elapsed, and it was fast"wearing out. The human errors in which" it originated "had died away." Its "roots were perishing." And though not yet entirely prostrate, it is represented as now "crumbling, in presage of a final overthrow.”||| But from other accounts it may be inferred, that this wonderful system, so long in dying, is hardly likely to die at all. It is represented as full of life and vigor, and spreading itself far and wide. "The whole banded power of the country is Orthodox." "All the institutions for religious education in the country, with a single exception, are decidedly, and some of them assumingly, popishly Orthodox." A man "cannot travel toward any point of the compass, without being surrounded Ware's Sermon at the Ordination of his son in New York; Mr. Lamson's Ordination Sermon at Danvers; and Sparks on the "Comparative Moral Tendency" of the two systems. * Remarks on Dr. Worcester's first Letter, p. 13. Christian Examiner, Vol. iv. p. 66. VOL. III.NO. VIII. more enduring hopes. But whatever the effect may be upon them, we have obligations to fulfil to the cause of Christ, and to this community, with which we are not at liberty to dispense. An interested public should have the means of knowing where the way of truth and of safety lies, and to whom they may trust for direction in pursuing it. INVESTIGATOR. REMARKS ON ISAIAH VII. 14. "Behold a virgin shall conceire and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” THAT Matthew quotes this passage, and represents it as receiving its fulfilment in the miraculous conception of Christ, is universally admitted. And the greater part of Christians, in every age, have understood it as a direct and explicit prediction of that mysterious event. It is well known, however, that the enemies of christianity, from Celsus down to the present day, have objected to such an application of the prophet's language, and asserted that it has no reference whatever to the birth of Christ. And some, whom it would be unjust to class with the enemies of religion, have so far harmonized with them, as to maintain that the prophet referred to a child that was to be born soon after he delivered the prediction; and that Matthew is to be understood as quoting his language by way of accommodation; or, at least, as applying to Christ what had a primary reference to a child that may be regarded as a type or symbol of him. I propose, therefore, to examine what has been alleged against the primary and exclusive reference of this prophecy to Christ. I. It has been asserted, that the Hebrew word, here rendered virgin, may properly denote any young wonian, married or unmarried, chaste or unchaste. But this assertion is in direct opposition to the authority of the ancient versions, to the etymology of the word, and to its indubitable signification in other parts of the Hebrew Bible. For in every other place where it occurs, it manifestly has the meaning which our translators have given it in the text. As II. There are others who, admitting this, maintain that the prophet's meaning is, that a young woman who was then a virgin, should, within a definite period, be married and bear a son. this is probably the ground taken by most of those, who, at the present day, deny that this prophecy had a primary reference to Christ, I shall take the liberty to state some objections to it. |