Mr. URBAN,

March 6.

Team's answer, I request you to HE following reply to Mr. Belinsert in your Magazine.

Yours, &c. T. ST. DAVID'S.

judge of this controversy, or that he cannot believe what he says.

Of this declaration, however, Mr. Belsham *professes to have "just and heavy reason to complain ;"-to com

themselves Unitarians. UNITARIANISM is so contrary to Christianity, that I can impute your adherence to it to nothing but your confidence in the accuracy of the assertions respecting the doctrines of Scripture, which you meet with in such publications as Mr. Felsham's Calm Inquiry." For such confidence it is my wish to provide a remedy; and I have some hope that you will find it in the following pages. To counteract the influence of Mr. Belsham's opinions, I endeavoured, in my former Address, to convince you, that he is an incompetent reporter of the doctrines of the Gospel, and of the Primitive Church. I now once more beg leave to offer you my "unsolicited" advice" to take heed what ye hear," (Matth. iv. 24.) in a matter that so nearly concerns your salvation as your faith in Christ. You will perceive in the following pages that Unitarianism is made up of misrepresentations and inaccuracies and unfounded assertions.

After stating in my former Address Mr. Belsham's assertion, that Bp. Horsley was baffled and defeated in his controversy with Dr. Priestley," I said, "Mr. Belsham may say this, but he cannot believe it." If any one teils me, It is night, when it is mid-day, and I know him to be in his senses, I am sure that he cannot be lieve what he says. Mr. Belsham's assertions, that Bp. Horsley was defealed, that the Bishop knew this,and that he would have laughed to scorn the ignoramus who should have thought otherwise, are quite as much at variance with the truth; and therefore I contend, that Mr. Belsham is either wholly incompetent to

untruth, when he has charged the whole body of the Established Clergy with an "aversion to, and au abhorrence of, the truth." Yet Mr. Bel-, sham, after being reminded of this unjustifiable language, can venture to say, "he should have been ashamed to use the language" that I do, when' I say, he "cannot believe what he says" of Bp. Horsley's defeat. What Mr. Belsham's sense of shume may be, it is easy to conjecture from his avowed opinion of the Clergy, and of the established religion of his country: especially when we know, that the words, which I have just quoted, were not the hasty effusion of an angry moment, but his old and accustomed language. In his "Review" of Mr. Wilberforce's excellent work, he says, 66 an established Priesthood is, in its very nature, a persecuting order. All breathe the same fiery and intemperate spirit. Truth and honest inquiry they are paid to discountenance and repress t."

He says, that I charge him with using barsh language of the Clergy and their doctrines." Does he deny the charge? If he does, he cannot look at the passages, which I have quoted and referred to, and "believe what he says." But he does not state my charge against his language and opinions strong enough. I said that any one, who could hold such an opinion of Bp. Horsley as he does, and could utter that most uncandid and untrue opinion of the Established Church and Clergy which he did, is

*Gent. Mag. Aug. 1814. p. 125.

+ See this and many similar passages in the Dean of Cork's excellent work on the Atonement, yol. II. p. 415. incom

incompetent (either from want of learning, or from the force of prejudice, or from both) to pass an impartial judgment on the opinions of the antient Fathers, or of the doctrines of the Established Church.

The extent of Mr. Belsham's sense of shame and consistency, we see in his renewed declaration, that Bp. Horsley "knew that he was defeated, and that he would have laughed to scorn the solemn ignoramus who should have thought otherwise," though Dr. Priestley is every where throughout the controversy convict ed of inaccuracies and misrepresentation, and a radical ignorance of his subject. Bp. Horsley's general judgment on the controversy is strongly expressed in the passages quoted in my former address. But, as Mr. Belsham has since repeated his gratuitous assertion to the contrary, I will add here two other passages from Bp. Horsley's Remarks on Dr. Priestley's Second Letters, § 9 and 12. "These and many other glaring instances of unfinished erudition, shallow criticism, weak argument, and unjustifiable art to cover the weakness, and to supply the want of argument; which must strike every one, who takes the trouble to look through these Second Letters; put me quite at ease with respect to the judgment which the publick would be apt to form between my antagonist and me."" As for the outcry which he makes about my intolerance, and my bigotry to what he calls high church principles, I consider it as the vain indignant struggle of a strong animal, which feels itself overcome; the mere growling of the tiger in the toils; and I disdain to answer.

Yet Mr. Belsham persists in his assertion, that Bp. Horsley knew that he was defeated. And what is this but saying, Bp. Horsley "did not believe what he said?" But this is nothing to that gross instance of "defamation against the memory of the dead, of which Mr. Belsham is guilty, in saying that Bp. Horsley would have laughed to scorn the solemn ignoramus who should have thought him not defeated." What can Mr. Belsham be ashamed to say of any one, after such a charge of hypocrisy, duplicity, and contempt of truth? It is indeed no more than he said before, in general, of the Clergy. “In

terested priests and crafty statesmen will continue to support a religious establishment, which answers their private and political purposes, at the same time that they hold its doctrines in contempt *.'

The

On the offensive passage against the Clergy, occasioned by Mr. Horsley's defence of his Father's Tracts, Mr. Belsham has now put the following gloss: "The idea I mean to convey in that passage is, that persons all whose expectations in life depend upon their profession of a particular system of opinions, cannot, in the nature of things, be unbiassed inquirers after truth." How far this gloss can be called the meaning of the text, we shall see presently. But what is the bias that is here meant? bias of professional obligation: a bias not peculiar to the Clerical profession. The Clergy engage themselves at the commencement of their Ministry, by the most solemn vows that man can enter into, that they will inculcate and maintain the doctrines of the Church, of which they are Ministers; and, as far as in them lies, will banish and drive away all contrary doctrines. The doctrines which they promise to teach, are perfectly well known to them before they enter into this engagement. They are the doctrines, which they imbibed with the first elements of their Christian education. They professed them publicly in the face of the Church, when they came to years of discretion. They studied them in their principles and proofs, before they offered themselves candidates for the Ministry. And at the commencement of their Ministry they declared their entire acquiescence in them, and solemnly promised to inculcate and maintain them. And in what way does the professional obligation which binds them to their duty, differ from the obligation which attaches to all important offices of trust, except in the magnitude and sanctity of its object? If "they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar," must the sincerity of their faith be suspected, more than the loyalty of the brave defenders of their country, who are bound by similar obligations? Must the patriotism of the Navy and the Army be doubted, because they are biassed by

**See Magee on the Atonement, as before.

principles of honour and professional emoluments? Will the Members of the Legislature be less likely to be faithful to the rights of their fellowsubjects, because they are sworn to maintain the supremacy of the King against the foreign jurisdiction and preposterous pretensious of the Pope. Mr. Belsham supposes that the Clergy could not be induced to support the commonly-received doctrines of Christianity without some corrupt bias. What could have induced the old Presbyterians, Non-jurors, and others, to profess the same doctrines? What can now induce Methodists and Dissenters of various denominations (who separate themselves from the government of the Church) to maintain the orthodox faith? What motive can the venerable Episcopal Church in Scotland have, poor as she is, and placed beyond the reach of wealth and ambition, for professing her conformity with the Church of England, but sincere faith in those doctrines which the Unitarian denies?

But Mr. Belsham says, "the Clergy are paid to discountenance and repress the truth." A more false and atrocious calumny never was uttered. So contrary, indeed, it is to the truth, that, instead of retracting, I again repeat, Mr. Belsham may say this, but he cannot believe it." And what are those emoluments of our Profession, which excite so much envy and malignity? If you look to the great majority of the Clergy, and compare their duties with their emoJuments, they are not equal to the profits of mechanics and labourers above the lowest rank, or even of a good menial service. There must be in the minds of the poor, pious, and humble men, who perform the common duties of our Church, some principle very different from the corrupt views which, Mr. Belsham thinks, unfit the Clergy for impartial inquiries after truth. What is the bias that attaches Mr. Belsham to the Unitarian Meeting-house in Essex-street? The love of truth? I have already shewn that his love of truth is equal to his sense of shame. But what is the bias, that shuts his eyes against the natural construction, the obvious sense, "the simple teachings" of Scripture; and against the unbiassed testimony of the poor, persecuted, and unestablished Primitive Church?

and makes him prefer the most ungrammatical, forced, incoherent, and enigmatical interpretations, to the common Version of the New Testament? I can mention one bias, which is capable of such effect. A party feeling, and sectarian attachment, give to ardent minds full as strong a bias as the emoluments of a profession. There is another kindred principle, that operates, perhaps, with a more violent impulse upon some minds than any professional obligation; and that is, a rooted aversion to every thing that is established. And in a free country like this, how often do we see such indirect feelings oppose themselves to the " powers that be," as such, and act, even on cultivated miuds, with a more vehement, decided, and permanent force than one would think consistent with rational and thinking beings!

The meaning which Mr. Belsham says he means to convey by the offensive passage before quoted, I will contrast with the text, because it is not an unapt specimen of that laxity of interpretation, by which Unitarians pervert the language of Scripture from its direct and obvious meaning.

If English words can be made to bear so great a difference of meaning as is expressed by this gloss, what a latitude may not Unitarian interpreters allow themselves, in translating the Greek text of the New Testament, when they appeal to their unlettered friends. of" sound understandings and honest minds?" But the gloss does not convey the meaning of the text. The two assertions are perfectly at variance. The text is grossly false; the gloss is true. I lay the more stress on the difference between the text and the gloss, because, like other

Unitarian

Unitarian glosses *, it does not represent the meaning of the text; and I say this the more decidedly, because Mr. Belsham's habitual language concerning the Established Church and Clergy forbids me to accept it as the meaning: and because the words which follow the gloss, shew that he does not, in reality, abate one particle of the text. He says only, "If in the expression of this sentiment undue asperity of language has been allowed, I would readily retract it. In the mean while," &c. that is, before he does retract it. This is nothing like the frankness of an indictum volo. If Mr. Belsham were to retract it by an unequivocal renunciation of his unjust and uncharitable sentiment, it would have one fortuhate consequence. He must, to be consistent with such renunciation, cancel or recast all his former publications, which might happily conduct him back to "the faith in which he was educated."

(To be continued.)

Mr. URBAN,

March 2.

MUCH has been written on the

subject of Slaves; and humanity has been very laudably exerted, to stop the importation of African Slaves into our Islands in the West Indies. Of this trade, as it formerly existed, the most horrible part was the mode of conveyance from Africa to the Islands. It was a disgrace to human nature; and the true detail of it, when first given to the publick, petrified every reader with horror. Next to this was the treatment of the Slaves in the West Indies, not reguJated by salutary laws, and often conducted in the most brutal and horrible manner. This also required interposition, and happily received it. But let it not be supposed, that there is any thing in the condition of Slaves, which necessarily implies such abuses. Let us attend to au account of the treatment of Slaves at Fez and Marocco: a treatment occasioned by a religious feeling, which Christians, if they were what Christians ought to be, would carry to a much greater height of conscientious regard. I

*See Notes and Illustrations to a Tract intituled, The Bible, and nothing but the Bible, the Religion of the Church of England.

copy the account from a very curi ous description of Timbuctoo, the famous city in the centre of Africa, extracted from the Annales des Voyages, in one of the French Journals. Who was the original writer I know not.

"These Slaves are treated in a very different manner from those which are transported from the coast of Guinea, and the establishments at Gambia, to the American Islands. After having suffered the privations to which every traveller is subject who traverses the desert, they are sent to Fez, and Marocco. There they are exposed in the sok, or public market, and sold by auction. Their new master conveys them to his habitation, where, if they conduct themselves with fidelity, they are regarded in future as members of the family; selves with the free women of the estaband are even permitted to connect themlishment. As they constantly hear the Arabic language spoken, they soon obtain a slight knowledge of it: the more intelligent learn to read and write. soon as they are able to read and understand a chapter of the Koran, their masters begin to inculcate upon their

As

minds, susceptible of all impressions,

the fundamental points of the Musulman doctrine. This religion, estabhishing the Unity of God, is easily admitted; and they reject, without much difficulty, their former superstitions. Once arrived at this point, they immediately obtain their liberty; and their master is delighted to have converted an infidel, and, by this good work, to have deserved the favour of Heaven.

"Those Slaves, whose minds do not take this turn, and who do not learn the Mahometan faith, nevertheless obtain their liberty, after eight or ten years of slavery. A true Musulman regards them as servants; and considers the sum which he gave in the purchase, as merely a consolidation of the wages which he would have paid to a free servant. As soon as this sum appears to him to have been worked out, he dissolves the bondage of his slave; and, according to the spirit of his religion, believes that, in so doing, he merits the blessings of Heaven. This act of generosity is entirely voluntary, on the part of the proprietor. and I have known," says the writer, "many slaves

so attached, by good treatment, to their masters, that they refused their liberty, when it was offered."

Here is a picture, at which many Christians may well blush, who in this respect, though not in many others,

others, may learn from Mahomedans, what, if they had duly imbibed the spirit of their own religion, they might have learned, much more perfectly, from the blessed Jesus. We must, not, however, suppose that there are no exceptions to this good conduct. The vices and passions of men, unless restrained by wholesome laws, will always produce, in too many instances, their odious effects. The author thus proceeds:

"It is, however, true, that all the Arabs and Moors do not behave with such humanity towards this unfortunate class of human beings; some of them, and particularly the Moors, treat them with much rigour, and even with cruelty; they speculate upon the children to be produced by their purchased slaves; and rather encourage connections without marriage than with it, that their multiplication may proceed more rapidly.'

Yet may we be ashamed, if accounts of both are to be credited, that the majority of Christians have usually behaved much worse to their slaves, than the majority of MusulR. T.

men.

THE

Mr. URBAN, West-Ham, March 10. HE Epitaphs printed in the Magazines for November, December, and January, having been honoured with general approbation, I ask permission to add four more to the number. To such Readers (and of these the number appears increasing) as, in reading poetry, seek something more than amusement, they may afford pleasure, or impart instruction, for a great observer of hunan nature

III. On a Peasant.

The Swain who own'd yon humble cat,
Lies buried near this lonely spot:
With his industrious faithful Wife,
He trod the secret path of Life;
Nor knew the sorrows which await
Grandeur, pre-eminence, or state.
Here village maids, at ev'ning hour,
Shall strew the newly-gather'd flower:
And Shepherd-lads assemble here,
Whilst on the time-worn stone they spell,
To shed a sympathetic tear;

"Delusive world of woe farewell!
"And welcome, welcome equal state,
"Where all are good, and all are great!"

Mr. URBAN,

Feb. 13.

mons in stones, and good in everything.” Yours, &c. J. C.

LXXXIV. ii. 518. expressed a wish to have the Epitaph on Sir William Browne's Monument.

The other day, in travelling through visited the Church, and took a copy Norfolk, I stopped at Hillington; of the Epitaph, which I now send you.

On the top of the Monument is a representation of the Sun, with this line underneath it.

Coronat cælum perenni gloria.
M. S.

D. Gulielmi Browne, Militis,
Medicorum Londini bis Præsidis,
Studium opusque qui valdè persequens
S. R. S.
Medicinam haud sine Deo fecerat,
Die nocteque nitens pro viribus

* Late Professor of Poetry at Oxford. Salutem