tures have declared them fundamentals; if not, I am sure we have no power to make them so; and to attempt to do it is to usurp Christ's authority; which he knew human nature too well to entrust with any man or body of men upon earth. What the scriptures make necessary to a christian's faith and practice will be found to be very plain and simple, and not to consist in many articles."

To the same purpose much might be produced from the excellent writings of Baxter, but a single passage shall suffice. "All that," says he, "without which a man cannot be a good and holy christian, is plain and easy in itself; and Christ did choose therefore to speak to the capacity of the meanest." How, indeed, could it ever have been thought otherwise? To the poor and ignorant, more especially, was the gospel originally preached. It must therefore have been designed for them, and adapted to their comprehension. Among the poor and ignorant of the present day, protestants of every denomination boast of sending the bible, "without note or comment. But where

fore should it be so sent, if they may not of themselves learn from its pages all that is fundamental, or essential to make them christians?

Thus you must perceive that the fundamental doctrines of the gospel are not hidden from the common eye, but are made plain to every capacity, plain as the vision of the prophet, which “he who ran might read." Such is the judgment of the most learned in the scriptures, such is the universal sense of those who are engaged in spreading them through the world, and such is the decision of the Westminster confession itself. Hence it clearly follows, in the first place, that this church, with the bible for the man of our counsel, is competent to understand these doctrines; and, in the second place, that if your church has adopted certain doctrines which we are unable to learn from the bible, whatever else they may be, they cannotpossibly be the fundamental doctrines of christianity.

We see not how you can avoid this conclusion, if you allow us

* Sermons, v. 4, p. 443.

common honesty in the use of the scriptures. It is possible, however, that you refuse to allow us this, and would be understood to mean by "a dereliction from the great doctrines of christianity," a wilful apostasy from the faith. It is possible that you may have such an assured feeling of the truth of certain doctrines, as stated in the Westminster confession and catechism-the trinity, for instance, though a term as foreign from the language of scripture as transubstantiation-that you cannot think us sincere and honest inquirers after truth, if we adopt not the same views and phraseology respecting it. If this be the case, we beg you to consider seriously whether such an assured feeling, even should you think it grounded upon divine illumination, can, of itself, be evidence of truth; since those of every religious persuasion, not excepting deists, have had it, and as they sometimes thought, to a supernatural degree.* And we beg you also to reflect, with an excellent Scotch divine, how widely "we depart from the meekness and humility of the gospel spirit, when we allow ourselves to think and to speak hardly of others, because they do not see every thing just in the same light with us, or have not freedom to express themselves in our phrases, which are, perhaps, not only unscriptural, but were unknown in the christian church for many centuries, and can claim no better nor higher original, than the dregs of the scholastic philosophy."†

Still, whatever you may think of us, or of our religious conduct and phraseology, if you admit that any honest, intelligent inquirers could be led by a study of the bible to embrace our views on this subject, the argument and conclusion respecting your supposed fundamentals remain the same. But if you deny the possibility of this, and judge us to be insincere or dishonest in our inquiries, merely from the result of those inquiries, from the religious opinions we conscientiously adopt, you have to consider the extent of your judgment, and the nature of the responsibility attending it. Together with us you must condemn, as unfaithful and insincere inquirers after divine truth, all those great and good men, and enlightened christians, who have adopt

*See Life of Lord Herbert.

+ Dr. Leechman.

ed views similar to ours respecting this leading doctrine of the Westminster confession of faith.

Are you prepared to pass such a sweeping judgment, and to assume such a tremendous responsibility? Are you prepared to denounce as apostates from the faith, or as unworthy of the christian name, men who have distinguished themselves in studying the word and works of God, and practising the precepts and exemplifying the spirit of his son ? Can you in your consciences say of any men, who have devoted the highest powers of mind to the defence and elucidation of the christian faith, and adorned its profession with the brightest virtues and graces of the christian life, that they were not honest in their inquiries, not truly christians, and therefore unfit for your christian intercourse and communion? Would you say this of Newton, who could unfold the laws of the material universe, and yet investigate the evidences and doctrines of christianity, and whose simple faith and sincere piety shed such a lustre over his character as a philosopher? Would you say this of Locke, who so successfully explored the laws of the intellectual world, and applied all his great powers to a study of the scriptures, and who was no less remarkable for the christian purity of his life and manners, than for the apostolical simplicity of his views of the gospel? Would you say this of Lardner, who gave himself wholly to the religion of Christ, devoting a long and laborious life to the collection and exposition of its evidences, to the illustration of its genuine doctrines, and to the manifestation, by his own example, of its purifying spirit? Where else can be found such an accumulation of ́ proofs showing the divine original of christianity, as in his works? They form, indeed, a storehouse of the choicest treasures of theological learning for the support and extension of the christian faith, through all succeeding generations of men. And shall he, who thus lived the christian, and who has done so much by his learning and piety to make others christians, and enable them to sustain the cause of Christ in the world, be denied the christian name and character, because he could not find the orthodox trinity in the inspired volume, and would not take it from any other?

M

And, to come within the circle of your own observation, have you not witnessed in the lives of some, whose faith was similar to Dr. Lardner's, proofs of christian excellence too powerful to allow you to call in question their claim to the christian character? Did not he, whose century of years has recently closed, exhibit abundantly to you and your fathers the fruits of a christian faith and spirit, "walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless ?" What professor of christianity was ever known to you, who more constantly adorned his profession by active goodness and a holy example? Did you not honor, too, the christian virtues of that venerated man, who passed his last years in the communion of this church, but who, early in life, made a profession of his faith in your church, or in that from which yours was afterwards formed, and throughout a long course of public duties and trials, in war and in peace, undeviatingly maintained the purity, simplicity, and sacredness of the christian character? Was he not, indeed, for a longer period than you have existed as a church, what St. Paul enjoined upon "his own son in the faith,-an example of the believers in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity?" Was he not careful to let no man despise his youth? Did he ever neglect the gift that was in him? Did he not meditate upon these things, and give himself wholly to his duties? And would you have hesitated to say of him, what our saviour said of Nathaniel, "behold, an Israelite indeed in whom there is no guile ?" such a man be not a christian, where on earth is a christian to be found? Must his name be struck from the christian roll, because his love of truth was stronger than the prejudice of education, and he could not in conscience retain his trinitarian views?

If

Both these eminent christians were nurtured in the bosom of calvinism, and initiated into all the doctrines of the Westminster catechism. But their profound love of truth, and reverence for the word of God, led them to examine by that unerring standard the doctrines which they had been taught, to prove all things and hold fast that which is good. Whatever would not abide this test, they could not hesitate to renounce, however important a place it might hold in human systems of divinity, the authority

of which had no weight with them, when opposed to the divine word. To go through with such an examination honestly, and surrender to truth long cherished opinions, requires peculiar energy of mind and conscience; and deserves applause, not obloquy. "It is a hard thing," says Baxter, "to bring men to that self-denial and labor, as at age thoroughly and impartially to revise their juvenile conceptions; and for them that learned words before things, to proceed to learn things now as appearing in their proper evidence. And indeed none but men of extraordinary acuteness and love of truth, and self-denial, and patience, are fit to do it."*

The distinguished men of whom we are speaking, faithfully accomplished this task. And can you be certain that if you, in like manner, had brought your early opinions to the test of the scriptures, and made the same impartial and conscientious inquiries which they did, you would not have arrived at the same result, and enjoyed those clear views of christian truth and duty, in which, for so many years, they rejoiced on earth, as we trust they now do in heaven? However this might be, are such men to be repelled from your communion, as heretics, under pretence, too, of apostolic authority; men who are, in the language of Robert Hall, "illustrious examples of piety; men who would tremble at the thought of deliberately violating the least of the commands of Christ, or of his apostles; men whose character and principles, consequently, form a striking contrast with those of the persons whom it is allowed the apostles would have repelled? Are we to separate ourselves from the best of men, because the apostles would have withdrawn from the worst ?"

If any of the eminent christians whose characters we have now pointed out to you, or any, indeed, of the many thousands of those who have been conscientiously led to embrace similar views of christianity, could have honestly studied the scriptures in forming their religious opinions, which, we think, you will hardly deny; the conclusion before drawn, that your supposed fundamental doctrines cannot be really such, remains in all its force,