sions of mortality, to the proofs of their incorrectness, which may be found in almost every Unitarian congregation; and one example of which may be read, even in our present Number, to the charter of our emancipation, the New Testament, and to the sentence of our final and righteous Judge.

It was not to be expected, that the Christian Pioneer should escape the notice of the Christian Instructor, and along with any notice, it was to be expected, that "acrimony and abuse," would be accompanied. "The event has verified these anticipations."

It

It

"There is also a Unitarian periodical in Glasgow, which rails at the Edinburgh statements as savouring of priestly domination, and many other bad things, and bepraises the Apocrypha as a most interesting and useful volume. And of course it regards the operations of Earl-Street with complacency. This is not at all strange in the authors of such a work. Whatever sets the Canon of Scripture afloat, must be favourable to their speculations. assists them in making inroads on the integrity of Scripture. may be instrumental in accomplishing those changes in the New Testament for which they have already made such sacrifices of candour and consistency; and thus it may act as a Pioneer, to clear the way to the most licentious Unitarianism, to construct works from which the enemies of Christianity may more easily assail it, and to dig mines for blowing it up as a system of grace and truth, that they may build upon its ruins a temple where even the infidel will not be ashamed to worship."

In reply to these assertions, coming, as they do, from "a quarter where the feelings and characters of others have been held scandalously cheap," as Dr. Wardlaw has well remarked, we refer our readers to the various articles on the Apocrypha, which have already appeared in our Magazine. Had those articles been met by argument, we should have conceived it our duty to answer; but abuse and falsehood, we consider unworthy of any other notice than mere exposure. The conflict between truth and error, is not to be stayed by the use of such missiles. We shall pursue our course, of upholding "the sufficiency of Scripture, the right of individual judgment, and of fearless free inquiry," whatever obloquy may be heaped upon us, or however our name may be cast out as evil.

THE Newspapers of the day, in giving a sketch of the history of the unfortunate man, White, lately executed in London, have attributed the crimes of which he was convicted, to his study of the works of " Helvetius, Descartes,

Voltaire, Dr. Priestley, and other writers of the same stamp.” We are not, of course, acquainted with the facts of the case; but we do know, that the classing the last named writer with those previously named, is a misrepresentation. We gladly give insertion to the following letter; and think it quite right, that when calumnies of this kind are sent forth to the world, some friend of injured virtue should interpose, to shield from defamation the memory of the dead.

"SIR,

"To the Editor of the Maidstone Journal.

"FEELING confident that you would not knowingly lend your aid to the dissemination of an atrocious calumny, I trust you will excuse my calling upon you to retract an assertion, which I doubt not was copied inadvertently from some of the London papers into yours. In giving an account of the execution of the unhappy culprit White, you say he acknowledged that he had studied Helvetius, Descartes, Voltaire, Dr. Priestley, and other writers of the same stamp.' Now, Sir, the writer of this narrative, whoever he was, either knew, or ought to have known, that Dr. Priestley was by no means a writer "of the same stamp" with Helvetius and Voltaire. As to Descartes, I believe he never published any thing on theological subjects. But, with respect to Dr. Priestley, he has certainly written a great deal on such topics; but so far from having said, or even hinted any thing to the prejudice of Divine Revelation, the whole of his writings, relative to such subjects, have a directly opposite tendency. He wrote much and well in defence of Christianity, though his views of its nature and design differed materially from those which are generally received. As an antidote to this vile aspersion, permit me to quote a short passage, relative to this writer, from a celebrated divine of the Church of England, and another from an orthodox dissenter.

"The late Dr. Parr, in his letters to the inhabitants of Birmingham, says, 'Let Dr. Priestley indeed be confuted where he is mistaken. Let him be exposed where he is superficial. Let him be repressed where he is dogmatical. Let him be rebuked where he is censorious. But let not his attainments be depreciated, because they are numerous almost without a parallel. Let not his talents be ridiculed, because they are superlatively great. Let not his morals

be vilified, because they are correct without austerity, and exemplary without ostentation.'

"The Rev. Robert Hall, in a controversy with Mr. Clayton, speaking of Dr. Priestley, says, 'I should be sorry to suffer any difference of sentiment to diminish my sensibility to virtue or my admiration of genius. From him the poisoned arrow will fall pointless. His enlightened and active mind-his unwearied assiduity-the extent of his researches the light he has poured into almost every department of science, will be the admiration of that period, when the greater part of those who have favoured, or those who have opposed him, will be alike forgotten.' "I am, SIR, with respect, your very obedient Servant, "MAIDSTONE, 13th Jan. 1827. R. A."

Two periodical works on religious subjects, have lately commenced in this City, "the Gospel Communicator, or Philanthropist's Journal;" and "the Religious Observer." The former Magazine is devoted to the promotion of the belief of the doctrine of Universal Restoration, and is the continuation of a work which has been suspended, from various causes, for seventeen months, and of which two volumes have been previously published. With the object which the editor states he has in view, "the improvement of the human mind in the investigation of Scripture truth, connecting the glory of the Creator with the final felicity of the intelligent creation," we heartily coincide, and wish him God speed. The Universalist Societies in Scotland, entertain the views, we believe, which distinguished Elhanan Winchester. American Universalism, on the contrary, limits the punishment of the wicked to the present state. Both views we consider unscriptural; the one, in not founding the doctrine of the restoration of the whole human race to purity and happiness, on the basis of the free, unpurchased mercy of Jehovah: and the other, in its opposition to the present state, as a scene of probation, and of every man being apportioned in a future one according to the deeds done in the body, whether they have been good or whether they have been evil." "The Religious Observer," we presume we may conclude, has been set on foot to counteract the operations of "The Christian Pioneer." Its" Projectors," in their " Address," "confess, that their immediate purpose is to rescue, if possible,

the capital of the West of Scotland, and the surrounding districts, from the discredit, under which they have for some time laboured, of being without a single legitimate periodical to support, to guard, and to defend the Cause of Gospel Truth, and the Divine Character and Authority of Christian Revelation. They blush with shame and indignation for Glasgow and her truly Christian population, when they reflect on the fact, that the only publication which appears periodically, professing to be of a religious character, is from the spurious press of the Unitarians. It is with grief they have observed, that in a religious age, and in a religious community, the enemy hath the whole field to himself; and that, while he saps and undermines insidiously with a view to destroy, the real watchmen of Zion sleep supinely and unmindfully upon their posts. How little worthy of Glasgow and her sons is such cold-hearted indifference, such frigid faith, such lukewarm attention to the interests of true Christianity! To wipe away the stigma or the disgrace, as it is in the meantime one of the main objects, so it may ultimately be the triumph, of the projectors of The Religious Observer."

Passing over the assumption of infallibility, which this Address exhibits, more in accordance, we think, with Rome, than with the "Presbyterianism of the New Testament," and leaving the "Projectors" in undisputed possession of the feeling which dictated it; we are happy in seeing the increase of works, in which religion is discussed. For though we do not augur much that is friendly to free inquiry, from a publication whose "projectors," not satisfied with announcing themselves as "uncompromising adherents of that system of doctrinal religious truth, which recognises the Bible alone, as the only admissible standard of faith," nevertheless, conceive it indispensable to add, that "they also stedfastly maintain the principles taught in the Westminster Assembly's Shorter Catechism;" yet we rejoice, that a chance is thus given of keeping religion constantly before the minds of the public; satisfied as we are, that Truth must gain from the collision of opinions, and that the utmost latitude of investigation, can ultimately lead only to the discomfiture of error.

CHRISTIAN PIONEER.

No. 7.

MARCH, 1827.

Vol. I.

Plain Thoughts addressed to a Country Congregation.

"AND, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"-Luke x. 25.

The intention of the lawyer, in putting this question, seems to be different from that of the young man mentioned in chapter xviii. The same question is proposed in both instances, and the answer to both is the same. The young man appears to be sincere in his inquiry; but the lawyer's question seems to be captious, and designed to ensnare. "A certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him." He starts a question, in order, if possible, to find some flaw in the answer-some error in doctrine, of which he might take advantage, and turn the words of the teacher against himself. To this question, our Saviour very properly replied, "What is written in the law, how readest thou?” As if he had said, thou who art a teacher of the law, must know what it enjoins-how readest thou? "And he answering, said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbour as thyself; and Jesus said, Thou hast answered right; this do, and thou shalt live." The answer of Jesus, shows that the lawyer was well instructed in his duty, for he assures him, that in the performance of the duties required by the law, he would not fail of obtaining life everlasting; but he, willing to justify himself-perhaps wishing to display his talents, perplex the subject, or entangle Jesussaid, "And who is my neighbour?"

Had Jesus replied, that every man ought to be considered in the light of a neighbour and a brother, the answer, though just, might have given room and scope for cavil. What, am I to treat an enemy like a friend? shall I associate with publicans and sinners? can I have any dealings with a vile Samaritan? But, to this second question of the lawyer, Jesus, instead of giving a direct answer,