No. I.

Their scheme commences by teaching, that the whole human race are guilty of the sin of Adam, independently of their own conduct, and for that sin are truly deserving of eternal punishment..

The doctrine of original sin, as just stated, is thus received by its advocates. It has descended from the lumber and trash of the dark times of ignorance and superstition, mysticism and bigotry. The great reformers did nobly, but they did not do every thing. They merit the approbation of men, and met with divine acceptance for what they did; and are certainly to be excused for what they omitted, in their great work. I speak as though the reformers held the doctrine of original sin according to the tenor of the preceding statement. Some of them did, others did not; and the truth is, that a candid examination of the sentiments of the fathers,-of the most learned and judicious divines in Europe before the reformation, and since, will show, beyond all dispute, that the above statement of the doctrine of original sin has never been the general or prevailing opinion of the Christian Church. Yet you shall hear it inculcated from Sabbath to Sabbath in many of our Churches, and swallowed down as a sweet morsel by many a gaping mouth, that a man ought to feel himself actually guilty of a sin committed six thousand years before he was born; nay, that prior to all con

sideration of his own moral conduct he ought to feel himself deserving of eternal damnation for the first sin of Adam. I hesitate not to say, that no scheme of religion ever propagated amongst men, contains a more monstrous, a more horrible tenet. The atrocity of this doctrine is beyond comparison. The visions of the Koran, the fictions of the Sadder, the fables of the Zendavesta, all give place to this :-Rabinical legends, Brahminical vagaries, all vanish before it.

The idea that all the numerous millions of Adam's posterity deserve the ineffable and endless torments of hell, for a single act of his, before any of them existed, is repugnant to that reason which God has given us, is subversive of all possible conceptions of justice. No such doctrine is taught in the scriptures, or can impose itself on - any rational mind, which is not tramelled by education, dazzleď by interest, warped by prejudice, and bewildered by theory.

This is one corner of the Triangle above mentioned.

No. II.

They teach, and strenuously insist, that all men labour under a true and physical incapacity to do any thing which God requires. To this total and universal inability, they deny all figurative or metaphysical import, and contend that men are as truly, and in the same sense, unable to obey the law of God, as they are to overturn the Andes, or drain

the ocean. What do we hear next? They turn immediately round, and exhort their hearers with great pathos, to do every thing which God requires, and denounce their disobedience as meriting eternal damnation.

Had I not already said, that their notion of original sin contained the most monstrous errour ever advanced in any scheme of religion, I should be tempted to say the same of this. But, says the advocate for these truly tremendous and detestable tenets, "This is Calvinism; and dare you dispute Calvin?" To which 1 reply, If Calvin believed in these doctrines, which we deny, he must have derived his light therein, for aught I know, from the flames of SERVETUS; indeed, they more resemble the light of infernal than celestial fire.

No. III.

We come to the third and last great point of their system of theology, which makes out the triangle, from which they do not depart. They tell you there is a remedy for a part of mankind; Christ has died for an elect number. They, and they only, enjoy an offer of salvation; and for them alone is provision made. On the contrary they plumply deny that Christ has tasted death for every man; they will by no means allow, that He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world; they abhor the idea of go ing into all the world and preaching the gospel to every creature. They would tell you, that if they could distinguish who the elect

are in their assemblies, they should preach the gospel only to them; they should tell them that Christ died only for them: but as for the rest, they should preach nothing but the certainty of eternal damnation.

This is what I call strong meat, and the stomach which can digest such food, can, I should think, digest iron and adamant. These teachers have turned their faces towards the ages of darkness, and are travelling back with rapid strides to the jargon of schoolmen, and the reveries and superstitions of Monks.

No. IV.

I will not undertake to say, that all the vices of the city are chargeable to the account of their errours; far from it; but I will undertake to say, that their doctrines are calculated, and tend to drive men to skepticism, deism, atheism, libertinism; nay, to madness. The rash and unwary man, that enters their assembly, is amazed to hear his assent challenged to propositions, from which his understanding revolts with horrour; assertions are arro'gantly, as it were, crammed down his throat, which insult his reason. He is told he can do nothing, yet threatened with endless perdition for his neglect. He is condemned for a sin he never committed; commanded to do what he is told he cannot do; and exhorted to believe in a Saviour who never died for him. -But these teachers will tell him, for his consolation, “No

judge for myself that he has. We are both equally accountable unto God for our opinions.

We have now given a specimen of the nature of the NewYork controversy; and of the manner in which Investigator has treated the three doctrines, which compose the Triangle. Some things have been suppressed in copying these paragraphs; but nothing because it was of a milder cast than what we have quoted. It should be distinctly understood, that these doctrines which the author has treated with so much severity, were once a part of the system of orthodoxy in New-England. Had Investiga'tor been a clergyman in Massachusetts but fifty years ago, and had he then published such views of these doctrines; the probability is, that he would have been stigmatized as a genuine son of Arminius, and driven from the pulpit, with as little ceremony, as Mr. Dewy was expelled from a Theological Seminary.

How happy it is for the present clergy of New-England, that orthodoxy is not the same thing now that it was in the days of their fathers! But the fact, that several doctrines which were formerly heresy are now orthodoxy, should excite in ministers both candour and circumspection. For, to say the least, it is very possible, that some articles which are now deemed orthodox, will be treated by their children with as little reverence and complacency, as Investigator has shown for the doctrines of "The Triangle."

It is, however, devoutly to be hoped, that as the system of orthodoxy shall be improved by the adoption of more benevolent opinions, a correspondent change will be seen in the temper of theological writers. For, after all that can be said of the importance of correct opinions, 66 LOVE IS THE FULFILLING OF THE LAW:" and those opinions which have the greatest tendency to promote christian love, are unquestionably the most important.

THERE is hardly in history an object more worthy of contemplation, than the characters, circumstances, and principles of the first settlers of New-England.

The pilgrims of Leyden lived in an age when the principal topicks of discussion were theological; and the principal rights, vindicated on the one hand and

violated on the other, by those who made a noise in the world, were those of conscience. Our forefathers would have been considered able, as well as independent men in any age or country; but from the age in which they lived, they were clothed with the respect and influence which sanctity gives to experience and ability. The leaders in the

Church then were qualified to be leaders in the State also; for the policy of the times was ecclesiastical, and the ministry of the preachers political.

It has often been cast as a reproach upon our forefathers, that they trace their origin to the BROWNISTS, a sect whose principles were generally regarded as anarchical and turbulent, and whose separation from the Church of England has been regarded as little else than petulance and faction. It is true, that some of the members of the Church, a part of which afterwards emigrated to New-England, were originally denominated Brownists; but it ought not to be forgotten, that that most venerable and excellent man, JOHN ROBINSON, who, if any one, deserves to be called the father of the New-England separation, as he advanced in life relinquish ed many of those rigid points for which he had once contended; and not only disavowed, but most anxiously strove to exonerate himself and his followers from this name of opprobrium.

Though the reasons for which our forefathers left England, were such as would entail no dishonour on any people or on any leaders, yet it must be mentioned as no less to their credit, that instead of retaining in Holland, any antipathy to the country which they had abandoned, or even to the church which had cast them out, they every year grew less and less severe in their notions of separation; and RoBINSON was the first and foremost in acknowledging her as a true

church, and in receiving her members to communion. Nothing spreads such a lustre round the latter years of this great man's life, as the mildness which mingled its genial rays with the glory of his independence and the ardour of his zeal. He far outstripped his age in his notions of toleration, and many of his brethren in his love of peace.

Our forefathers did not emigrate to this country in search of religious freedom alone; for that, they had obtained and might have continued to enjoy in Holland. They were actuated by views and principles still more pure than those which some would petulantly term impatience of restraint and of uniformity. They did not, by living among the Dutch, lose their national attachments. They were still Englishmen, and they wished to live as such. They did not like the loose and careless manner in which the Sabbath was regarded in Holland; and they were concerned for the morals of their youth, whom they saw exposed to ill examples and in danger of contracting dissolute habits. When to all this is added, the effect of the climate on their health, and the many instances of manners and customs to which they could not assimilate, nor oppose with effect, nor expect to reform,-I know not how it is possible to combine a number of more powerful and honourable motives, than those which compelled them to emigrate. It seems also, that even in that early period, they had a glimpse of the mighty conse.