V. As to THEIR TENDENCY TO PRODUCE AND CHERISH THE CHRISTIAN VIRtues.

And here let it be distinctly understood that I am not at all disposed to deny, and certainly have no warrant for denying, that there is among the Unitarians much that is amiable and praiseworthy and of good report. There have been, and still are, among them names which I delight to honour; and that, because they are associated not merely with high intellectual culture, but with noble and generous dispositions, and with extensive, I may say, eminent usefulness. What I have to do under this article is to exhibit the influence of the two systems in the formation of the religious character; and the admission which I have now made will not be found to interfere with any statements which the execution of this design may involve. We will glance at some of the Christian virtues in detail, that we may see the influence which these systems respectively exert in the production and promotion of them.

1. Love to God.

We may love God either for his essential character, or his beneficent communications; for what he is in himself, or for what he is to us. In the former case, the affection partakes more of complacency; in the latter case, more of gratitude; though love to God in the proper sense legitimately includes both. Let us see now whether this Christian grace is more likely to exist and flourish under the influence of Unitarianism or of Evangelical Christianity.

And here I am met at the very outset with a charge from the Unitarian against Evangelical Christianity, which, if it were true, would supersede the necessity of all further remark on this topick ;-viz, that this system supposes that there is little or no compassion in the na

ture of God; or at least that there is so much of vindictiveness that he will not pardon the guilty, or bestow upon them any blessing, until "a gallows has been erected in the centre of the universe," and his own Son executed upon it as a full satisfaction to his offended justice. I reply to this charge, first, that it is a libel upon the system which it is professedly designed to represent;-a bold and impious caricature of the doctrine of atonement, in which no Evangelical Christian ever recognised even the semblance of his own creed. And next, let me carry you back to the consideration to which I had occasion to advert under the preceding article— that, though God is presented to us in the character of a Father, yet he also sustains to us the relation of a Lawgiver; that, as his law was infinitely perfect, so it would be inconsistent with the divine perfections that its authority should not be maintained; and hence arose the necessity either that the transgressor should suffer in his own person the penalty he had incurred, or that some grand expedient should be adopted by which mercy and truth might harmonize in his forgiveness. And God did devise such an expedient:-He "gave his own Son" to die for us; and yet it was, on the part of his Son, a voluntary act; for "He gave himself up for us all." Now who will venture to say that this was a vindictive measure? Who rather will not acknowledge that it was the most gracious measure which the heart of infinite mercy ever devised? Surely it was gracious in its operations towards the sinner; for it was adapted to avert from him the greatest evils,-to secure to him the richest blessings. And even in respect to the Redeemer himself, who "bore our iniquities and carried our sorrows,❞—who will say that its ultimate bearings were otherwise than gracious; for while he was a vo

luntary party in the covenant of redemption, it was promised him that he should "see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied;" that his mediatorial sufferings should find their reward in his mediatorial glory. And this reward he is now actually receiving on his throne; and it is destined to become increasingly glorious till he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God even the Father. Am I not warranted then in saying that, while this expedient for the forgiveness of sins was necessary, so far as we can see, to secure the stability and dignity of the divine government, there is nothing in it, when fairly examined, that even seems to savour of injustice or cruelty; on the contrary, that it bespeaks an infinitely higher degree of love and grace than would have been indicated by the bestowment of pardon irrespectively of any such measure?

I put it now to the enlightened Reason of any of you to decide whether that view of the essential character of God which is presented by Unitarianism, or that which is exhibited by Evangelical Christianity, has more in it that is worthy to be admired, and venerated and loved. Even his paternal character shines far more brightly as it is held forth by the latter system, than by the former; for while the blessings bestowed, are, as we shall presently see, incomparably greater in the one case than in the other, they are bestowed at an infinitely greater expense; and of course indicate a proportionally higher regard for our happiness. And as to his character as a Lawgiver, Evangelical Christianity completely sustains it, and throws around it a burning lustre, while Unitarianism subjects him to the imputation of weakly compromising the rights of the Eternal throne. The former system, in attempting to vindicate and honour his character as a Father, lays his character as a Lawgiver in

:

the dust the latter sustains the honours of both, and exhibits them in such perfect harmony that they mutually reflect glory upon each other.

But there is another view to be taken of this subject to which I have already adverted;-I refer to the consideration that the blessings which God bestows are of infinitely higher value, as they are represented by Evangelical Christianity, than as they are represented by Unitarianism. The latter scheme makes pardon but an inconsiderable blessing, because it views sin as only a light offence: the former makes it a blessing of superlative value, because it views sin as an evil of indescribable magnitude. The latter regards sanctification as a comparatively unimportant matter, as it denies that human nature is radically disordered, and attributes to it nothing more than an accidental imperfection: the former infinitely heightens the value of this blessing by viewing man as polluted in his whole nature; as possessed of an inclination which would lead him to sin, and of course would subject him to suffer, forever, if it were not subdued by the power of Almighty grace. On the principles of the one system, Heaven itself loses, in a great degree, its legitimate attractions; for while that which really constitutes its chief glory is not there,-I mean the Lamb in the midst of the throne receiving the homage due to God only from the whole company of the angels and the ransomed in view of his atoning sacrifice, the economy of that world is represented as differing from the economy of this, chiefly in the fact that it furnishes higher facilities for intellectual improvement. But, on the principles of the other system, Heaven becomes an object of infinite attraction; for there the wonders of redemption are displayed and celebrated; and all the inhabitants have their harps unceasingly attuned to

the same thrilling and ennobling theme; and there is every thing to occupy delightfully all the powers of the soul;-to keep the intellect rising to new improvements, and the imagination soaring to loftier heights, and the heart kindling with fresh rapture, and the whole man approximating toward God's own perfection, through an illimitable course of existence. If you will read the descriptions of Heaven which have been given by the most distinguished Unitarian writers, you will find that they are comparatively tame and frigid;-that there is little in them that is fitted to seize hold of your affections, and endear Heaven to your heart; but when you read the writings of Evangelical Christians on this subject, your mind is touched by a sacred impulse, and your bosom glows with devout fervour, and you are at loss for language in which to give utterance to your labouring and lofty conceptions. Is it not true then that the Christian is a far greater debtor to God's goodness on the principles of Evangelical Christianity, than on those of Unitarianism?

Whether then we consider God as an object to be loved in view of what he is in himself, or in consideration of what he has done for us, I am sure that we are fairly brought to the conclusion that the Evangelical system has greatly the advantage of the other in supplying motives to attract us toward our Almighty Benefactor.

2. Gratitude to Christ.

Both systems professedly recognise this as one of the elements of Christian character: Let us see then which is best adapted to awaken and cherish it.

Unitarianism, (I mean of course that species of it which prevails most at the present day, and which denies that Jesus Christ had any existence previous to his