LETTER IV.

THE ARGUMENT, FROM THE NUMBER OF CONVERTS TO SOCINIANISM, EXAMINED.

Christian Brethren,

IF

F facts be admitted as evidence, perhaps it will appear that Socinianifm is not fo much adapted to make converts of Jews, Heathens, Mahometans, or Philofophical Unbelievers, as of a speculating fort of people among profeffing Chriftians. Thefe in our own country are found, fome in the established church, and fome among diffenters. Among people of this defcription, I fuppofe, focinianifm has gained confiderable ground. Of this, Dr. Prieftley, and others of his party, are frequently making their boast. * But whether they have any caufe for boasting, even in this cafe, may be jufily doubted.

In the first place, Let it be confidered, that, though focinianifm may gain ground among speculating individuals, yet the congregations where that system, or what bears a near refemblance to it, is taught, are greatly upon the decline.-There are, at this time, a great many places of worship in this kingdom, efpecially among the Prefbyterians, and the General Baptifts, where the So

*Discourses on Various Subjects, pp. 93, 94.

cinian and Arian doctrines have been taught till the congregations are gradually dwindled away, and there are scarcely enow left to keep up the form of worship. There is nothing in either of these fyftems, comparatively speaking, that alarms the confcience, or interefts the heart; and therefore the congregations where they are taught, unlefs kept up by the accidental popularity of a preacher, or fome other circumftance, diftinct from the doctrine delivered, generally fall into decay.

But, farther, Let us examine a little more particularly, what sort of people they, in general, are, who are converted to Socinianifm-It is an object worthy of inquiry, whether they appear to be modeft, humble, ferious christians; fuch as have known the plague of their own hearts; fuch in whom tribulation hath wrought patience, and patience experience; fuch who know wнOм they have believed, and who have learned to count all things but lofs for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus their Lord; fuch who, in their investigation of fentiments, have been ufed to mingle earneft and humble prayer with patient and impartial enquiry; fuch, in fine, who have become as little children in their own eyes? If they be, it is a circumftance of confequence, not fufficient indeed to justify their change of fentiments, but to render that change an object of at

G

1

tention. When perfons of this defcription embrace a fet of new principles, it becomes a matter of ferious confideration, what could induce them to do fo. But if they be not, their cafe deferves but little regard. When the body of converts to a fyftem are mere fpeculatifts in religion, men of little or no ferioufnefs, and who pay no manner of attention to vital and practical religion, it reflects neither honour on the caufe they have efpoufed, nor dishonour on that which they have rejected. When we fee perfons of this ftamp go over to the.. focinian ftandard, it does not at all furprife us; on the contrary, we are ready to fay, as the apoftle faid of the defection of fome of the profeffors of christianity in his day, They went out from us, but they were not of us.

That many of the focinian converts were previously men of no ferious religion, needs no other proof than the acknowlegement of Dr. Prieftley, and of Mr. Belfham. It cannot be dc..ied, (fays the former)" that many of those "who judge fo truly, concerning particular tenets "in religion, have attained to that cool unbiass"ed temper of mind in confequence of becoming "more indifferent to religion in general, and to "all the modes and doctrines of it." And this indifference to all religion is confidered by Dr. Priestley as "favourable to a diftinguishing between "truth and falfehood."* Much to the fame

* Discourses on Various Subjects, p. 65.

purpofe is what Mr. Belfham alleges, as quoted before, that, "Men who are moft indifferent to "the practice of religion, and whofe minds there"fore are leaft attached to any fet of principles, "will ever be the firft to fee the abfurdity of a

popular fuperftition, and to embrace a rational "system of faith."* It is eafy to fee, one fhould think, from hence, what fort of characters those are which compofe the body of focinian converts.

Dr. Priestley, however, confiders this circumftance as reflecting no difhonour upon his principles. He thinks he has fully accounted for it. So thinks Mr. Beltham, and fo think the Monthly Reviewers, in their Review of Mr. Beltham's Sermon. †

* Serm. on Import. of Truth, p. 32.

I have not scrupled to class the Monthly Reviewers among Socinians. Although in a work of that kind there be frequently, no doubt, a change of hands; yet it is easy to see that of late years (a very short interval excepted) it has been principally, if not entirely, under Socinian direction; and, so far as religion is concerned, has been used as an instrument for the propagation. of that system. Impartiality towards Calvinistic writers is not, therefore, to be expected from that quarter. It is true, they sometimes affect to stand aloof from all parties; but it is mere affectation. Nothing can be more absurd than to expect them to judge impartially in a cause wherein they themselves are parties; absurd however as it is, some persons are weak enough to be imposed upon by their pretences. Perhaps of late years, the Monthly Review has more contributed to the spreading of Socinianism, than all other writings put together. The plan of that work does not admit of argumentation; a sudden flash of wit is

Surely Socinians must be wretchedly driven, or they would not have recourfe to fuch a refuge as that of acknowleging that they hold a gofpel, the beft preparative for which is a being deflitate of all religion! "What a reflection is here impli"ed," fays Dr. Williams, "on the moft eminent "Reformers of every age, who were the first to "fee the abfurdities of a popular fuperftition, and "the falfity of reigning principles! What a poor "compliment to the religious character of Uni"tarian reformers! According to this account, "one might be tempted to afk-Was it by being indifferent to the practice of religion that "Mr. Beltham was qualified to fee and pronounce Calvinifim to be gloomy and erroneous,

an unamiable and melancholy fyftem? Charity "forbids us to think he was thus qualified; and "if fo, by his own rule he is no very competent "judge; except he is pleafed to adopt the alter

native, that he is only the humble follower "of more fagacious, but irreligious guides."*

generally reckoned sufficient to discredit a Calvinistic performance; and this just suits the turn of those who are destitute of all religion. A laborious investigation of matters would not suit their temper of mind; they had rather subscribe to the wellknown maxim, that, "Ridicule is the test of truth:" and then, whenever the Reviewers hold up a doctrine as ridiculous, they have nothing to do but to join the laugh, and conclude it to be a vulgar error, or a popular superstition."

Discourse on the Influence of Religious Practice, upon our Enquiries after Truth, in Answer to Mr. Belsham's Sermon, p. 6.