reproaches against Christians, since the Trinity became a doctrine of the church.

XCIV. Because there are, in the N. T. seventeen passages, wherein the Father is styled one or only God, while there is not a single passage in which the Son is so styled.

XCV. Because there are 320 passages, in which the Father is absolutely, and by way of eminence, called God; while there is not one in which the Son is thus called.

XCVI. Because there are 105 passages, in which the Father is denominated God, with peculiarly high titles and epithets, whereas the Son is not once so denominated.

XCVII. Because there are 90 passages, wherein it is declared that all prayers and praises ought to be offered to HIM and that every thing ought to be ultimately directed to His honor and glory; while of the Son no such declaration is ever made.

XCVIII. Because, of 1300 passages in the N. T. wherein the word God is mentioned, not one necessarily implies the existence of more than one person in the Godhead, or that this one is any other than the Father.

XCIX. Because the passages, wherein the Son is declared, positively, or by the clearest implication, to be subordinate to the father, deriving his being from Him, receiving from Him his divine power, and acting in all things wholly according to His will, are in number above 300.

C. Because in a word, the supremacy of the Father, and the inferiority of the Son, is the simple unembarrassed, and current doctrine of the Bible; whereas, that of their equality or identity is clothed in mystery, encumbered with difficulties, and dependent, at the best, upon few passages for support.

HUMAN DEPRAVITY.

BY EDMUND Q. SEWALL.

THIRD EDITION.

PRINTED FOR THE

American Unitarian Association.

BOSTON,

PRINTED BY ISAAC R. BUTTS AND CO.

Price 5 Cents.

DISCOURSE.

ECCLESIASTES VII. 29.

Lo! this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

It is obvious that the term "man" occurs here in its generic sense, denoting the race collectively. The word rendered "upright" may with more precision be translated "right." It implies no qualities positively virtuous, but simply the absence of all obliquity. And the whole passage conveys this important sentiment, God hath made man right; with a proper nature, possessing such powers as are requisite in the place he fills, and for all the designs of his being. When we begin to live there is nothing in our moral frame which is itself wrong, or must necessarily produce sin. Whatever be the amount of wickedness in the characters of men, it is not the proper fruit of the human nature, but results entirely from a voluntary abuse and perversion of that nature.

This doctrine is opposed to some opinions commonly inculcated on the subject of man's condition, but not opposed to Scripture; not opposed to facts, as they lie around us in society; not opposed to conscience and to reason. From each of these sources are drawn the ar

guments we employ for its support. The discussion I propose on this occasion will bear chiefly on the point of native hereditary depravity, which gives us a false account of the cause of that moral evil which is seen and felt in the world. But before I enter on this main design, let me suggest a few remarks on another branch of the general subject; I mean, total depravity, which gives us as false a view of the degree of sin found among men, as the other does of its origin. The two dogmas are inseparable in the popular notions of human character, and both have a bad tendency so far as they operate without modification from other principles.

If the word "total" have any meaning in the phrase "total depravity," it excludes every good feeling, desire, purpose, and action, and makes the character of mankind consist solely of bad dispositions, passions, and deeds. To be totally depraved is to be evil in every part, and evil always. Where now is the being on the face of the earth, who has done nothing but sin; whose every act has been wicked, and all his thoughts, emotions, and desires, corrupt? Where is the man, concerning whom, it is true that since he was born he has had in his mind nothing pure, and in his conduct nothing right? You cannot find such a being; this may be the description of a devil, but not of a man. We may imagine such a sinner, but we never saw one. We are greatly deceived by the popular theological division of our race into two classes, between which is drawn a line straight and inflexible, as between two distinct orders of beings having no alliance, and unable to pass from one to the other. That division is a mere fiction. That line is nowhere apparent among the