thofe principles unadapted to induce us to trust in Chrift; but directly tend to turn off our attention and affection from him. Dr. Pricftley does not appear to confider him as the way of a finner's falvation in any fenfe whatever, but goes about to explain the words of Peter, (Acts iv. 12.) Neither is there falvation in any other, &c., not of "falvation to eternal life, but "of falvation or deliverance from bodily difeafes. "* And another writer (Dr. Harwood) of the fame caft, in a volume of Sermons lately published, treats the facred writers with ftill lefs ceremony. Paul had faid, Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jefus Chrift; but this writer, as if he defigned to affront the apoftle, makes ufe of his own words in order to contradict him. "Other foundation than this can no man lay, ' fays he, "other expectations are vifionary, and

groundiefs, and all hopes founded upon any thing elfe than a good moral life, are merely "imaginary, and contrary to the whole tenor of "the gospel." Whether thefe things be not aimed to raze the foundation on which the church is built; and whether this be any other than fumbling at the stumbling-ftone, and a and a feting him at nought, in the great affair for which he came into the world, let every chriftian judge. It particularly deferves the ferious confideration,

* Fam. Letters, Let. XIV. † Page 193.

not only of the above writers, but of those who are any way inclined to their mode of thinking: For if it fhould be fo that the death of Chrift, as a propitiatory facrifice, is the only medium through which finners can be accepted of God; and if they should be found fighting against God and rejecting the only way of escape, the confequence may be fuch as to caufe the cars of every one that heareth it to tingle. Meanwhile, it requires but little penetration to discover, that whatever takes away the only foundation of a finner's confidence, cannot be adapted to promote it.

Brethren! Examine thefe matters to the bottom, and judge for yourselves, whether you might not as well expect grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles, as to fee repentance towards God, or faith towards our Lord Jefus Chrift, proceeding from Socinian principles.

The foregoing obfervations ferve to fhow what may be expected from the Socinian doctrine, according to the nature of things; let us next make fome inquiry into matters of fact. We may judge from the nature of the feed fown what will be the harveft; but a view of what the harveft actually is, may afford ftill greater fatisfaction.

First, then, Let it be confidered whether Socinian congregations have ever abounded in converfions of the profane to a life of holiness

and devotednefs to God.-Dr. Pricfiley acknowledges that "the gofpel, when it was first preached by the apoftles, produced a wonder"ful change in the lives and manners of per"fons of all ages. * Now if the doctrine which he and others preach, be the fame for fubftance as that which they preached, one might expect to fee fome confiderable degree of fimilarity in the effects. But is any thing like this to be feen in Socinian congregations? Has that kind of preaching which leaves out the doctrines of man's loft condition by nature, and falvation by grace only, through the atonement of Chrift; and fubftitutes, in their place, the doctrine of mercy without an atonement, the fimple humanity of Chrift, the efficacy of repentance, and obedience, &c. . . . Has this kind of preaching, I fay, ever been known to lay much hold on the hearts and confciences of men? The way in which that "wonderful change" was effected, in the lives and manners of people, which attended the first preaching of the gospel, was, by the word preached laying hold on their hearts. It was a diftinguishing mark of primitive preaching, that it commended itself to every man's confcience. People could not in general fit unconcerned under it. We are told of fome who

were cut to the heart, and took counfel to flay the preachers; and of others who were pricked and faid, Men and brethren, what

in the heart,

fhall we do?

the mark at

But in both cafes the heart was which the preacher aimed, and which his doctrine actually reached. Has the preaching of the Socinians any fuch effect as this? Do they fo much as expect it should? Were any of their hearers, by any means, to feel pricked in their hearts, and come to them with the queftion, What shall we do? would they not pity them as enthufiafts, and be ready to fufpect that they had been among the Calvinifts? If any counfel were given, would it not be fuch as fhould tend to impede their repentance, rather than promote it; and instead of directing them to Jefus Chrift, as was the practice of the primitive preachers, would they not endeavour to lead them into another courfe?

Socinian writers cannot fo much as pretend, that their doctrine has been used to convert profligate finners to the love of God and holinefs. Dr. Prieftley's fcheme will not enable him. to account for fuch changes where chriftianity has ceafed to be a novelty. The abfolute novelty of the gospel when firft preached, he reprefents as the caufe of its wonderful efficacy; but in the prefent age, among perfons who have long heard it, and have contracted vicious habits notwithftanding, he looks for no fuch effects. He con

feffes himfelf "lefs folicitous about the conver"fion of unbelievers who are much advanced in "life, than of younger perfons, and that be"caufe he defpairs of the principles of chrifti

anity having much effect upon the lives of "thofe whofe difpofitions and habits are already "formed. "* Sometimes he reckons that the great body of primitive chriftians must have been well-difpofed with refpect to moral virtue, even "before their converfion to chriftianity; elfe, "(he thinks) they could not have been fo ready "to have abandoned their vices, and to embrace "a doctrine which required the ftricteft purity "and rectitude of conduct, and even to facrifice "their lives in the caufe of truth. "t In his treatife on Philofophical Neceffity, he declares, that, " upon the principles of the Neceffarian, "all late repentance, and especially after long "and confirmed habits of vice, is altogether "and neceffarily ineffectual, there not being "fufficient time left to produce a change of

* Letters to a Phil. Unb. Part II, Pref. It is true, Dr. Priestley is not here speaking of the profligates among nominal christians, but of those among avowed infidels. This, however, makes nothing to the argument. The dispositions and habits of profane nominal christians, are as much formed as those of avowed infidels; and their conversion to a holy life is as much an object of despair as the other. Yea, Dr. Priestley in the same place acknowledges, that, "to be mere nominal christians is worse than to be no christians at all."

+ Lett. to a Phil. Unb. Pt. II. pp. 167, 168.