any of our acquaintance, or at least a very good man and a prophet, was in reality God, or the maker of the world. Let us confider then, how we fhould feel, how we fhould behave towards such a perfon, and how we fhould speak of him afterwards. No one, I am confident, would ever call any perfon a man, after he was convinced he was either God, or an angel. He would always speak of him in a manner fuitable to his proper

rank."

"Suppofe that any two men of our acquaintance, fhould appear, on examination, to be the angels Michael and Gabriel; fhould we ever after this call them men? Certainly not. We fhould naturally fay to our friends "thofe two perfons whom "we took to be men, are not men, but angels "in difguife." This language would be natural. Had Chrift, therefore, been any thing more than man before he came into the world, and efpecially had he been either God, or the maker of the world, he never could have been, or have been confidered as being, a man, while he was in it; for he could not diveft himself of his fuperior and proper nature. However difguifed, he would always in fact have been whatever he had been before, and would have been fo filed by all who truly knew him."

Least

"Leaft of all would Chrift have been confidered as a man in reafoning, and argumentation, though his external appearance fhould have fo far put men off their guard, as to have led them to give him that appellation. Had the apostle Paul confidered Chrift as being any thing more than a man, with respect to his nature, he could never have urged with the leaft propriety or effect, that, as by man came death, fo by man came alfo the refurrection of the dead. For it might have been unanswerably replied, This is not the cafe; for indeed, by man comes death, but not by man, but by God, or the creator of man, under God, comes the refurrection of the dead." (w)

8. All the honour and happiness which our Lord enjoys in heaven, is reprefented in the New Teftament, as fubfequent to his death and refurrection; which is totally repugnant to the idea that he poffeffed that prior ftate of dignity which the advocates for his deity and pre-existence fuppofe. Thus the apostle Paul informs us, that it was not till God raifed Jefus from the dead, that he jet him at his own right hand, in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named. See Eph.

i. 20-22.

How, may it be asked, is this, and fi

milar

(w) Dr. Priestley's Hiftory of early Opinions, Vol. 1.

P. 17-19.

milar declarations, to be reconciled with the idea, that he was poffeffed of this authority and domi nion before, either as God, or as a great preexiftent being, the creator of the world under God?

For all these reafons do we believe Jefus to have been a man, and a man only. But we do not, on this account, think lefs highly of his character: Nor do we fuppofe that, on this account, he is lefs worthy our gratitude and love. No; we ftill confider him as the chofen meffenger of God to mankind, as invested by him with the highest qualifications, and the most extraordinary powers, as the wifeft and beft of created beings, as the brightness of his Father's glory, and the exprefs image of his perfon. We love him as our brother and friend. We honour him as our master and Lord. We revere him as the man appointed by God to be our judge. As our God, or as our Creator, we cannot confider him, we dare not worship him; for he himself, and all his apoftles, have given us the moft pofitive affurances that he is not. But next to God his Father we love and honour him most.

CHAPTER

CHAPTER XV.

Of the Importance of Chriflianity upon Unitarian Principies.

IT

T feems to have been an object with Mr. Hawker throughout his fermons, and particularly in the laft, to intereft the paffions of his readers, in embracing and maintaining that system which he has taken upon himself to defend, by reprefenting it as a fyftem more honourable to God and to Christ, and more conducive to the virtue and happiness of mankind. Unitarianifm, according to him, makes chriftianity to be of little or no importance. I will quote a few of the most striking paffages; and the remarks, which I shall make upon them, will perhaps be found to apply to the reft.

"I have already," he fays, "more than once obferved, and now finally wifh to leave the full force of the observation upon your minds, that, together with the divinity of our bleffed master, must stand or fall, all the peculiar and momentous doctrines of his golpel. Every thing interefting in christianity is founded on the greatnefs of its au

thor's

thor's character. Even the moral precepts of his religion lofe much of their dignity, and their authority is debafed, if the founder be no more than man." (w) He obferves alfo, "that the higher ideas we entertain of the great author of our faith, the higher muft arife in proportion, the duty and obedience we owe to him." He continues, "Let those profeffors of chriftianity, who confider Jefus but as a man, regard, but as the ministry of a man, all the interesting doctrines of his religion. For the whole of his gospel being enervated by this perfuafion, they cannot, they ought not, indeed, to feel it in the manner it fhould affect us." (x)

To all this it may be anfwered, that the doctrines and precepts of christianity, whatever Mr. Hawker may have faid to the contrary, actually do appear to Unitarians in a light equally as important, as though they believed Jefus to be God. For they moft firmly believe that he was a meffenger fent from God, and that all the doctrines and precepts his religon contains, came from God; fince, properly speaking, it was not he that fpake, but as the writer of the epiftle to the Hebrews informs us, God who spake by him, confirming the word by figns

Аа

(w) P. 340.-(x) P. 349.