which is distinctly ascribed to him, by his immediate disciples and followers, in the Christian Scriptures, and particularly his authority as a divinely commissioned Teacher. We have endeavored to show that his peculiar mode of teaching, its direct effect, and the authentication of miracles to which he appealed, all concur to confirin his claim, as an authoritative and infallible Teacher sent of God. We have referred to the facts of the importance and need of such an authority to recommend and enforce the truths he taught; that it is only by authority of some kind, considered as distinct from the ordinary modes of moral suasion, that the minds of the great mass of men can be operated upon at all; that this mode of teaching is precisely analogous to that pursued by God in teaching most things else to man; and that we all experience the deep necessity of such a kind of instruction, both for our guidance and support, in such a world as this. And we now add, in taking leave of the subject, what indeed is an inevitable inference from these positions, that this Authority of Jesus is the all-concerning Fact of his religion; that without this, its peculiar force and significance are destroyed, and all its revelations, precepts, and sanctions are little more than a solemn trifling. Yes, we repeat it, the divine Authority of Jesus Christ, as a Teacher sent of God, is the all-concerning Fact of the religion of Christians. If he be nothing else than a good and wise man, with only a little more of that natural light which belongs to us all, then, indeed, may all the Heralds of his Gospel say, with the apostle, "is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." If men may reject his peculiar claims, correct his presumed mistakes, instruct him in his ignorance, rejudge his judginents, repudiate his teachings, just so far as they do not happen to coincide with the intuitions and suggestions of their own minds; if they, in fine, virtually Christless, may thus make themselves to be Christs, then we must say, with Mary, "they have taken away from our Christianity the Lord, and we know not where they have laid him." They have taken from our faith its great and distinctive principle; its power, its vitality are gone; its spirit is departed; and nothing remains of it but a dead letter. But "we have not so learned Christ." We have been taught in another school. We have sat at the feet of another Teacher. We have long been glad, in gratitude and meekness, to listen to Jesus, as one having authority," and rejoice to believe, that for this high purpose, among others, "God hath highly exalted

him, and given him a name, which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

J. B.

ART. II. History and Prospects of Unitarianism considered with regard to the general Laws of a Religious Reform.*

IT has been of late a common opinion among Unitarians, that some changes were about to take place in the denomination. Those, who have expressed this opinion, have for the most part declared themselves unable to foresee precisely in what these changes were to consist, except that they were to be accompanied with manifestations of greater religious sensibility and warmer devotional feeling. These expressions have come from persons differing widely in education, habits, and opinions, of the most opposite characters, of all occupations and professions, of all degrees of temperature in religion from zeal to indifference, and often in localities so distant from each other, that the opinion or feeling could scarcely have been propagated from one to the other, but seemed wholly original in each, and wholly independent of any contagious influence whatever.

There may be something in the state of a denomination, differing from the usual and natural state of Christian denominations, to be attributed to peculiar and temporary circumstances, and to pass away with them. This may be distinctly perceived by some, and indistinctly felt by others. Thus, for instance, Christian sects have generally a certain amount of religious enthusiasm, which seems necessary to their existence, and manifests itself in certain modes of action. The absence of this in any denomination may be accounted for by situations and circumstances, which render its absence as natural as its presence would be in other cases. While its absence is natural, the want of this enthusiasm is not felt; but when

The substance of this article was a report to a meeting of gentlemen in April, 1840.

the causes of this absence have ceased, the absence is unnatural, the want is felt, and a change is expected. So also, temporary circumstances may render modes of thought and expression almost wholly conventional. While this is a natural state, the evil is not felt; but when the causes have ceased, it becomes unnatural, produces weariness and dissatisfaction, and a change is expected and demanded by the common feeling. Other and more particular facts may exist, at variance with the health and prosperity of a denomination, in themselves unnatural, or else indicating an unnatural state. The remedy for these may be a more general change, the facts themselves may be such as will produce a change, or they may be the symptoms of a change already begun. In the last case they are the effects and not the causes of the change.

We propose, first, to notice some of the facts and circumstances, supposed by some to indicate, that certain changes have commenced and are going on in the Unitarian denomination; then, to inquire into the general laws and principles, which govern the progress of all denominations professing to reform the opinions of others, for the purpose of ascertaining whether they are not the same, which have controlled our progress as a reforming denomination; and, lastly, to see if they will not account for the existence of the facts enumerated, and indicate the nature of the changes, which have already taken place in our denomination, and of those which are to come.

We begin by enumerating a few facts, supposed to be the symptoms of a change. And before we enumerate these, we must anticipate an objection, which may be made to the use, which we intend to make of them. This objection is, that they are not peculiar to Unitarianism, that every one of them is to be found in some other denomination, that most of them exist to as great an extent among the Orthodox as among us, and may therefore be as well accounted for by the history of Orthodoxy as of Unitarianism. This objection amounts to nothing, unless they can be accounted for only in one way. If we succeed in showing what the causes of these facts really are in our own denomination, and thus account for them among ourselves, we leave it for any one else to show, that the causes of a similar state of things are similar, or different among other denominations, and thus account for them there.

The number of young men, who desire to enter the ministry, is understood latterly to be diminished, and those, who have

this desire, are generally dissuaded by their friends. It seems, as if it would be necessary for Unitarians to depend for the supply of the ministry upon the means used by other denomina

tions.

Parishes appear to have more difficulty than formerly in the selection of candidates for their pulpits, trying every candidate, and when no more can be obtained, sometimes hearing them over again. And, when clergymen are at last settled, in most cases, the connexion has little permanence. Many, who have not reached middle life, have been settled in two or three parishes, and there are comparatively few, who have remained ten years in a parish. Many more persons than formerly abandon the Ministry; the number of the latter resident in the neighborhood of Boston is quite considerable. Each of these difficulties occurs in such a manner, as to show that it arises from general causes, and not from any source peculiar to itself.

There has also been a considerable manifestation of uneasiness and dissatisfaction among the laity, the exact nature and causes of which are not always well known to the parties themselves. They wish for a change, without indicating, in most cases, what is the change which is sought; thus showing that they had not gone about to find a cause of uneasiness, but that the uneasiness had found them. In some it was, so far as it could be defined, a dissatisfaction at the religious coldness and indifference around them, and a desire for more devotional and social Christian warmth, and greater manifestations of feeling. By a slight variation from this, others complained, that the forms in which religion appeared were very conventional, and that the pulpit merely reflected ideas before conventionally agreed on by the congregation. These complaints were most frequent and earnest, not where the causes of them existed in the greatest force, but where they had been partially or wholly removed; as the pains in a frozen limb are felt most during the recovery. They seemed in no way connected with any particular doctrines. To most of the parties the preaching of the Orthodox appeared equally cold and conventional; and to some more so, although the coldness and conventionality were of a different kind. Some attributed the causes of their dissatisfactions to defects in preaching; others to want of religious intercourse and sympathy among the laity; others to an absence of mutual understanding between the clergy and laity of their

common wants and situation. Some think that more frequent meetings, and a more intimate acquaintance among the members of a congregation, would be a remedy; others would seek this in an alteration of the rights of property in churches; - in having the pews in common, and open to all. Some seek a

remedy in some alterations in the forms of religious worship; others think that Unitarianism has put forth certain principles, doctrines, and arguments, which will go on to operate, and to reform error more and more, without any new effort from Unitarians, and that it has thus performed its work, and need not be longer continued in the shape of a distinct sect.

The absence of all efforts for foreign missions, and this coolness, moderation, and conventionality, apart from the dissatisfaction it occasions, are symptoms to be accounted for in the history of our denomination.

It is supposed by some that the growth of our denomination, at least in the neighborhood of Boston, is not so rapid, as it was from ten to twenty years since, and that it is less than that of some other denominations.

A few of the complainants, whom we have mentioned, have, as it is said, without any change in their original doctrinal views, frequented Orthodox churches, to see if they could find there any relief for their uneasiness.

We have thus noticed all the suggestions, which we have heard, of matters which may indicate any change in the state of the denomination, without undertaking to say to what extent they are true. So far as we know anything of these matters, they are, without doubt, all of them effects of the same set of causes. A mere glance over the list makes this so apparent, as to render any argument unnecessary to show, that common causes ought at least to be the first objects of our search. We think that it will be found, that the theory proposed in this article will show what these causes are, and account for the existence of facts precisely similar to these, and exactly at the juncture, when these appeared. The subject is certainly important; and it would seem as if the inquiry could not be without interest. It might add to this interest, as a matter of curiosity, and perhaps be useful for purposes of comparison and illustration, if we were also to investigate the causes of similar facts among other denominations; but this would lead us too far and occupy too much space, considering that the inquiry can be conducted to a satisfactory result without it.