God, Tri-Unitarians; while the latter should be named simply Unitarians. But, for the sake of convenience, it has been adopted as a custom to style the former Trinitarians simply, their belief in God's unity, in the sense they put upon it, being all the while understood. It is likewise usual to style the latter Unitarians simply, always meaning by that term those who maintain the strict unity of the Supreme Being. man. Both classes are Christian believers, though in different senses. Both classes maintain that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Saviour of men, the Lord and Lawgiver of the Christian Church, the Mediator between God and But on each of these terms they respectively put different constructions. The Trinitarian conceives that the term "Son of God" is to be understood as conveying the idea of a strict identity of essence or nature with God, so that Christ is on a perfect equality with the Supreme Being, or, in fact, is the Supreme Being himself. He considers that the term "Son of God" has an equivalent or synonyme in "God the Son." The Unitarian, on the other hand, conceives that the term "Son of God" denotes a being distinct from that God whose Son he is, proceeding from him, and therefore posterior to him in point of time, and subordinate to him in point of rank. The Trinitarian conceives that Christ was the Saviour of men by virtue of his Supreme Deity, in consequence of which he was enabled to offer an infinite sacrifice on the cross, to expiate the sins of mankind. The Unitarian, on the other hand, conceives that Christ was the Saviour of men by virtue of his office as a teacher of divine truth, by the sinless and perfect example he set before us, by the pro foundly interesting spectacle of his death upon the cross, endured on account of our sins, and by which the heart should be moved to reverence, repentance, obedience, and love. Unitarians generally consider that Jesus is the Saviour of men by establishing a system of motives, means, and influences, to act upon the human mind and heart, to turn man from sin, and thus save him from the consequences of sin, to bring him into the way of holiness here, and thus, through the great mercy of God, secure him a heaven of happiness hereafter. The Trinitarian conceives that Christ is Lord and Lawgiver of the Christian Church by virtue of his own inherent and underived authority. The Unitarian, on the other hand, conceives that Christ is Lord and Lawgiver of the Christian Church in consequence of the power and "commandment he received from his Father." He conceives that "God made Jesus both Lord and Christ." The Trinitarian conceives that Christ is Mediator between God and men; but that his office and individuality as such are to be regarded as distinct from his alleged Supreme Deity. Hence he speaks of his mediatorial character and capacity as something different and distinguishable from that superior nature which he assigns to him. The Unitarian, on the other hand, recognizes no such distinction of two natures in Christ. As he believes God to be one uncompounded being, so likewise he believes Christ to be one uncompounded being. He regards Christ as the Mediator between God and men, because God raised him up as a divine messenger, and qualified him by extraordinary gifts to perform an important work for humanity. According to the Unitarian view, God and man were at variance. VOL. XIX. — NO. CCXXIX. 1* God had compassion for the world, and wished man to become reconciled to him. Christ was the medium through which God put himself in communication_with_man. Through him, as the Mediator, came all the spiritual blessings to the human race; and through him again, as the Mediator, are all offerings of praise and prayer to ascend from man to God. Both parties, then, receive Christ as he is offered to them in the Gospel, but they put different constructions on the terms found there in connection with him. By thus receiving Christ in sincerity, and to the best of their knowledge, as he is revealed to them, they become his professed disciples. In addition, then, to the names already given to them on account of their belief in a God, and their particular views of the Godhead, we attach the name Christian to them. The Trinitarian becomes a Trinitarian Christian; the Unitarian, a Unitarian Christian. As to which party is right in its interpretation of the Scripture, that is just the point in contro versy. Ever since the period of its first authoritative promulgation by the Council of Constantinople, in A. D. 381, the doctrine of the Trinity has had a powerful and extensive hold upon the mind of Christendom. The dreadfully rigorous measures of the Emperor Theodosius effectually checked the discussion of the question, and paved the way for the complete triumph of the Trinitarian doctrine.* * Here is a sample of the style in which Theodosius addressed the Arians, A. D. 383, two years after the Council of Constantinople :— "I will not permit throughout my dominions any other religion than that which obliges us to worship the Son of God in unity of essence with the Father and Holy Ghost in the adorable Trinity, -as I hold The strong arm of imperial power severely exercised, had given it a firm hold, and secured its prevalence in the Church before the night of the Middle Ages set in upon the world. When this dark period came, the human mind was hushed in slumber, or engaged in speculations which were calculated to augment, rather than diminish, the errors which had already become incorporated with the simple doctrines of the Gospel. In the sixteenth century, an open and successful revolt was made against the corruptions and abuses of the Church. It was not to be expected, however, that the Reformers of that period could discover and set aside the accumulated errors of fifteen centuries. Their work was the first step towards a glorious consummation, and a giant stride it was. But they did not rise completely above the evil influence of their times. Those who narrowly escaped the fagot for denying the doctrine of Transubstantiation could look without compunction on a brother Reformer in the flames because the empire of him; and the power which I have to command you, he likewise will give me strength, as he hath given me will, to make myself obeyed in a point so absolutely necessary to your salvation and the peace of my subjects."— Waddington's History of the Church, p. 99. ... "Theodosius considered every heretic [that is, every one who differed from himself] as a rebel against heaven and earth. . . . In the space of fifteen years, he promulgated at least fifteen severe ediets, more especially against those who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity; and to deprive them of every hope of escape, he sternly enacted, that if any laws or rescripts should be alleged in their favor, the judges should consider them as the illegal productions either of fraud or forgery."-Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. V. p. 31. he denied the doctrine of the Trinity. The fate of Servetus, and the part Calvin took in the affair, are wellknown matters of history. No doctrine was ever more favored and aided by the iron arm of temporal power than that of the Trinity. It is but little more than thirty years since the penal laws against those who ventured to deny it were erased from the statute-book of Great Britain. It is no wonder, then, that it should be so extensively held and professed in the world at present. Nor should it be thought strange, that those who set it aside are now greatly in the minority. The power and the fashion of the world, the interests and the prejudices of the multitude, have all been in its favor. In a community or country where the denial of this doctrine is a new thing, those who venture on such a course will be regarded with distrust. And this is natural enough. To all around them they appear as innovators on things most sacred. In this light all religious reformers have been viewed at first. If the community be of an intelligent and inquiring character, it will be ready to ask, and willing to hear, what reasons Unitarians have for departing from so prominent a point in the popular faith. Such a disposition is proper and praiseworthy. Presuming that there are many persons in this community of that stamp, we propose to offer a few reasons in justification of Unitarians for adopting the course they have taken. There are several reasons which compel us to decline the triune theory of the Godhead, and adhere to a belief in the simple unity of the Deity. In our opinion, the argument from common sense is against the doctrine of the Trinity; the argument from sound reason is against |