will not deny; but Mrs. Barbauld goes farther. She acknowledges, in effect, that the seriousness which is to be found among focinians themfelves, is accompanied by a kind of fecret attachment to our principles; an attachment which their preachers and writers, it feems, have hi"Thefe therto laboured in vain to eradicate.

"doctrines (fhe fays) it is true, among thinking "people are lofing ground; but there is ftill "apparent in that clafs called ferious chriftians,

a tenderness in expofing them; a sort of leaning towards them, as in walking over a precipice one fhould lean to the fafeft fide: an "idea that they are, if not true, at least good "to be believed; and that a falutary error is "better than a dangerous truth."* By the "clafs called ferious chriftians," Mrs. Barbauld cannot mean profeffed calvinifts; for they have no notion of leaning towards any fyftem as a fyftem of falutary error, but confider that to which they are attached as being the truth. She must therefore intend to defcribe the ferious part of the people of her own profeffion. We are much obliged to Mrs. Barbauld for this important piece of information. We might not fo readily have known without it, that the hearts

* Remarks on Wakefield's Enquiry.

and confciences of the ferious part of focinians revolt at their own principles; and that, though they have rejected what they esteem the great doctrines of the gofpel in theory, yet they have an inward leaning towards them as the only fafe ground on which to reft their hopes. According to this account it fhould feem, that ferious chrif tians are known by their predilection for calviniftic doctrines; and that thofe "thinking people among whom thefe doctrines are lofing ground," are not of that clafs or defcription, being diftinguished from them. Well, it does not furprife us to hear, that "thofe men who are the

66

moft indifferent to practical religion are the "firft, and ferious chriftians the laft, to em"brace the rational fyftem," because it is no more than might be expected. If there be any thing furprifing in the affair, it is, that thofe who make thefe acknowledgements fhould yet boaft of their principles, on account of their moral tendency.

I am, &c.

LETTER VII.

THE SYSTEMS COMPARED, AS TO THEIR TENDENCY TO

PROMOTE LOVE TO GOD.

Christian Brethren,

OUR

UR opponents, as you have doubtlefs obferved, are as bold in their affertions, as they are liberal in their accufations. Dr. Prieftley not only afferts that the calviniftic fyftem is "unfavourable to genuine piety, but to every "branch of vital practical religion."* We have confidered, in the foregoing Letter, what relates to morality and piety in general: in the following Letters we fhall defcend to particulars, and enquire, under the feveral fpecific virtues of christianity, which of the fyftems in question is the most unfavourable to them.

I begin with LOVE. The love of God and our neighbour, not only contains the fum of the moral law, but the spirit of true religion: it muft therefore afford a ftrong prefumption for, or against a fyftem, as it is found to promote or diminish thefe cardinal virtues of the chriftian character. On both thefe topics we are principally engaged on the defenfive, as our views of

*Consider, on Differ. of Opin. § III.

things ftand charged with being unfavourable to the love of both God and man. "There is

fomething in your fyftem of chriftianity,' fays Dr. Prieftley in his Letters to Mr. Burn, "that debafes the pure spirit of it, and does not "confift with either the perfect veneration of "the divine character, which is the foundation "of true devotion to God; or perfect candour " and benevolence to man." A very ferious charge, and which, could it be fubftantiated, would doubtlefs afford a ftrong prefumption, if not more than prefumption, against us. But let the fubject be examined. This Letter will be devoted to the firft part of this heavy charge, and the following one to the laft.

As to the queftion, Whether we feel a veneration for the divine character? I fhould think we ourselves must be the best judges. All that Dr. Priestley can know of the matter is, that he could not feel a perfect veneration for a Being of fuch a character as we fuppofe the Almighty to fuftain. That, however, may be true, and yet nothing refult from it unfavourable to our principles. It is not impoffible that Dr. Prieftley fhould be of fuch a temper of mind as incapacitates him for admiring, venerating, or loving God in his true character: and hence he may be led to think, that all who entertain fuch and fuch ideas of God, muft be void of that perfect

veneration for him which he fuppofes himfelf to feel. The true character of God, as revealed in the feriptures, muft be taken into the account, in determining whether our love to God be genuine or not. We may clothe the Divine Being with fuch attributes, and fuch only, as will fuit our depraved tafte; and then it will be no difficult thing to fall down and worship him: but this is not the love of God, but of an idol of our own creating.

The principal objections to the calvinistic. fyftem, under this head, are taken from the four following topics: The atonement; the vindictive character of God; the glory of God, rather than the happinefs of creatures, being his laft end in creation; and the worship paid to Jefus Chrift.

First, the doctrine of atonement as held by the calvinifts, is often reprefented by Dr. Prieftley as detracting from the goodnefs of God, and as inconfiftent with his natural placability.-He feems always to confider this doctrine as origi nating in the want of love, or at leaft, of a fufficient degree of love; as though God could not find in his heart to fhow mercy without a price being paid for it. "Even the elect, (fays he) accord

ing to their fyftem, cannot be faved till the "utmost effects of the divine wrath have been