"We are commanded to acquaint you, that the Prince Regent continues to receive from foreign powers the strongest assurances of their friendly disposition towards this country, and of their desire to maintain the general tranquillity.

"His Royal Highness has the satisfaction of being able to assure you, that the confidence which he has invariably felt in the stability of the great sources of our national prosperity has not been disappointed.

"The improvement which has taken place in the course of the last year, in almost every branch of our domestic industry, and the present state of public credit, afford abundant proof that the difficulties under which the country was labouring were chiefly to be ascribed to temporary causes.

"So important a change could not fail to withdraw from the disaffected, the principal means of which they had availed themselves for the purpose of fomenting a spirit of discontent, which unhappily led to acts of insurrection and treason and his Royal Highness entertains the most confident expectation, that the state of peace and tranquillity to which the country is now restored, will be maintained against all attempts to disturb it, by the persevering vigilance of the magistracy, and by the loyalty and good sense of the people. "Gentlemen of the House of Com

mons

"His Royal Highness recommends to your continued attention the state of the public income and expenditure of the country; and he is most happy in being able to acquaint you, that, since you were last assembled in parliament, the revenue has been in a state of progressive improvement in its most important branches.

"My Lords and Gentlemen

"We are commanded by the Prince Regent to inform you, that he has concluded treaties with the courts of Spain and Portugal, on the important subject of the Abolition of the Slave Trade.

"The Prince Regent has commanded us to direct your particular attention to the deficiency which has so long existed in the number of places of public worship belonging to the Established Church, when compared with the increased and increasing population of the country.

"His Royal Highness most earnestly recommends this important subject to your early consideration, deeply im

pressed, as he has no doubt you are, with a just sense of the many blessings which this country, by the favour of Divine Providence, has enjoyed; and with the conviction that the religious and moral habits of the people are the most sure and firm foundation of national prosperity."

This Speech affords fewer subjects of remark than some of those to which we have been lately accustomed. No bril liant exploits are recorded, and the pub lic attention has not been very actively excited; yet the whole is doubtless, favourable and cheering, and, we imagine, quite consistent with the existing state of things. Passing by the two mournful topics which open the Speech, we feel much pleasure in congratulating our readers on the state of our connexion with foreign powers, and the visible improvement in our domestic circumstances. The tranquillity of the country has induced ministers not only to liberate the state prisoners, but to recommend to Parliament the immediate repeal of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act. We rejoice to find them the first to propose the repeal of a measure, which, though deemed of absolute necessity for the general safety, during the late feverish state of the country, is now no longer requisite; and which certainly ought not to be persevered in one moment beyond the necessity that gave it birth.

The treaties mentioned in the Speech with Spain and Portugal, relative to the Slave Trade, we propose to notice more fully hereafter. For the present, we only state, that Spain has abolished, under severe penalties, the purchase of slaves north of the Line, from December 1817; and the trade universally from May 1820.

The last measure alluded to in the Speech is one of the highest importance to the future moral, religious, and political welfare of the country and to which we are glad to find the attention of Parliament at length directed from the throne itself. It would be premature to say any thing on the subject, till the outline of the measures to be proposed is before the public.

An Address, as usual an echo of the Speech, was likely to be voted in both houses without opposition. May this peaceable commencement of the session be the prelude to a general unanimity and co-operation on all the great topics in which the welfare of the nation is concerned!

No. 194.]

For the Christian Observer. CURSORY REMARKS ON UNITARIANISM, AND

THE ARGUMENTS BY WHICH IT IS USUALLY SUPPORTED.

(Continued from p. 8.)

No. II.

N proceeding with my remarks upon Mr. Wright's Essays, which I take up, not so much for the sake of the work itself, as by way of text-book for examining some of the fundamental principles of Socinianism, I wish to make a few remarks upon the following definition:-"What is in the least contrary to reason cannot be taken as a ground of reasoning respecting other subjects." (p. 54.) With this definition, abstractedly considered, I have no fault to find; for what is contrary to reason cannot, of course, be taken as a ground of reasoning: it cannot be true itself, much less a basis of truth; foralthough the soundest reason may not always enable us to apprehend truth, it can never really contradict it. But when it is implied, as is clearly done in what follows, that the doctrine of the Trinity, of the hypostatical union, or of the miraculous conception, are among the doctrines that are contrary to reason, I cannot but protest against so bold an assumption of the very point in dispute. I deny that any of these doctrines are in the least contrary to reason; nor are they, in reality, more incomprehensible than the union of soul and body, and many other phænomena connected with the . physical history of mankind. It would, therefore, be just as rational tosay, that these facts are contrary CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 191.

to reason, because we cannot comprehend them, as to assert the same of the foregoing doctrines on the same ground.

Every sentence, indeed, in the paragraph of which this definition forms a part, seems open to some objection. But I will only further observe, that there is a fallacy in the process through which this reasoning is conducted by the author. He remarks-"What cannot be comprehended cannot be a first principle; for first principles must be clear and indubitable. What the generality of men cannot comprehend, by the exercise of common sense, must remain to them incomprehensible: and what a person does not comprehend, he cannot build upon as a fundamental truth. It follows, that nothing which remains a mystery, or which cannot be comprehended, can be an essential doctrine of Christianity."

In the conclusion of this argument "an essential doctrine" is substituted for a "first principle," as stated in the first clause; and the inference cannot be admitted by any one, unless he be disposed to concede, that nothing can be an essential doctrine of Christianity, but what is also a first principle. Indeed, through the whole of this discussion the author uses the three phrases, first principles, fundamental truths, and essential doctrines, indiscriminately, although it is evident, that many doctrines may be essential, which are not fundamental; and that even fundamental truths may not always be the same with first principles.

It should be added, that it is not

L

the business of common sense to comprehend, but to apprehend and to distinguish. To comprehend a truth requires more than common sense; which, indeed, may readily apprehend even the abstrusest truths, when the terms in which they are conveyed have once been clearly explained, while yet it may require much patient investigation and severe mental discipline, if not superior intelligence and quickness, to comprehend it; or even though it may at last be found, as a whole, beyond our comprehension.

I have less to object to in the positions which follow.

"We certainly ought not to build a doctrine, much less a fundamental doctrine, of religion, on mere figures of speech. The Gospels contain many parables; and we well know, that the design of parables is to illustrate subjects: consequently, we are not to expect to find first principles in the parables of Christ. To regard what is parabolical as essential doctrine, is to substitute the illustration in the place of the thing intended to be illustrated. In the New Testament, some words are ambiguous, and cannot be properly explained, without comparing them with what is more clear and definite: of course, nothing important ought to be founded on such terms. Leav ing what is figurative and ambiguous, common sense may discover the fundamental doctrines of religion in the plain and positive declarations of Jesus and his Apostles. What is not plainly and positively asserted in the New Testament ought not to be regarded as an essential part of Christian truth." No essential doctrines depend on a single text, much less on the interpretation of a parable. They are all taught clearly and repeatedly, besides being illustrated in a great variety of ways. The true method of determining them, therefore, is to take the plain declarations in their obvious meaning, and to com

pare the apprehensions of them, which we have thus cherished, with the illustrations which are intended to elucidate them. All sober Christians, I imagine, will be contented to abide by this test.

I agree, therefore, also, on the whole, to the following position:"What cannot be supported without the aid of criticism, inference, or commentary, however true and important in itself, cannot be a fundamental truth of the Gospel: for fundamental truths are expressed in the plain words of Scripture. The leading doctrines of Christianity depend not on the construction of particular phrases: they appear on the very face of the Gospel history, and present themselves to the eye of every impartial reader."

But I have something to object to the sentiment by which this declaration is introduced.

"Until first principles are established, no standard exists to which criticism can reduce what is difficult or uncertain: no settled ground of inference appears: commentary may be mere conjecture: for they are the stamina and elements of all further knowledge. We may expect to find them expressed with clearness, not merely in a few detached passages, but in the discourses at large, delivered by Jesus and his Apostles, not sketched in faint colours, but making a prominent figure."

In the first place, I do not think it a safe practice to rest much stress upon what we may expect in a revelation from God. We must take the revelation thankfully, as it is given to us; and must be content often to find it different from our anticipations. The Jews expected no good thing to come out of Nazareth. They expected their Saviour to be a temporal prince; and, because they would not receive what they did not expect, they fell into fatal apostasy. Secondly, I have already assigned some reasons for denying, that, until first prin

ciples are established, no standard exists, to which criticism can reduce what is difficult or uncertain; for though it should never be a settled point, what are first principles, and what are not, every position may still be established or disproved, by applying the received rules of interpretation to the language of Scripture, which may be supposed either to confirm or to confute that position. It is, indeed, of high importance to determine what doctrines are essential, and what are of secondary value, yet not so much in order to discover standards of reference for the establishment of other truths, as symbols of agreement, according to which those who follow the same interpretation may worship and unite together.

But the sentiment, from which I most dissent in this part of the work, is that which follows.

"If every thing in which the followers of Jesus differ was laid aside, they would be found to retain the first principles of Christianity. In fact, their differences relate principally to things which Christ never taught, at least in plain unambiguous terms."

Can it be other than a first principle of Christianity to ascertain what is the character of Christ, its Author; to determine whether or not Deity is to be ascribed to him, whether he is a created being, or the uncreated God, the Creator and Maker of all things? Whatever be the truth in this question, it is, doubtless, a question upon first principles; and those who answer it differently are of different religions: and although much practical excellence may possibly comport with minor misapprehensions of the Gospel, yet certainly the misapprehension of so awful a mystery-a misapprehension attended with this grave consequence, that either one of the contending parties must be involved in the guilt of worshipping a creature with the worship due to the Creator, or the

other in that of denying to the Lord who bought them the glory due unto his name, cannot be a matter of slight moment. I admit, indeed, as our author says, "that superior piety and rectitude of heart and life which the Gospel requires can be produced only by the influence of its leading principles."

But it still remains a question, what constitutes that superior piety and rectitude of heart and life which the Gospel requires. Who shall determine to whom this high distinction belongs, but God who knows the heart? We may indeed trace effects of it in many instances; and "wherever it is produced we may safely conclude that the first principles of Christianity are received and operate; for, as there can be no effect without a cause, the effects peculiar to the Gospel cannot be produced without the influence of its principles."

But we are liable to mistake in this matter, and to imagine that the heart is right towards God, merely because we see the conduct decorous towards men. What, I would ask, is meant by the heart being right towards God? And can this holy disposition exist unconnected with the peculiar truths of Christianity? Can his heart be right with God who regards Christ as God, if he be a created being; or which, if he be God, considers him as less? And consequently, can an inference be justly drawn with certainty from a correct line of conduct or a benevolent character to the soundness of the creed which formed that character and regulated that conduct? Much encouragement may, indeed, be derived from the support afforded to dying Christians, and from the assured and even triumphant anticipations of future beatitude, which they are sometimes permit. ted both to enjoy and to express. Generally speaking, it must be a true faith that produces such an effect; and, in point of fact, Chris