the personage engaged in it? Trinitarians accuse the Unitarians with "degrading the Saviour;" but does not the charge fall heavily on their own heads? Is it possible to degrade him more than by such a notion of him as that of substitution? The important embassy of Jesus implies the closest intimacy and friendship with the Deity. Hence he speaks of himself as having an interest in his Father's property as the son and heir; and to be in this respect one with the Father. John x. 30, xvi. 15, xvii. 10. He is represented as the highest object of the Father's affections also; his elect, in whom his soul delights-" his beloved Son"-" approved," &c. Is. xlii. 1; Matt. xii. 18, Matt. iii. 17; John v. 20. Contrary to all this, substitution supposes him the object of divine wrath and vindictive justice! Did the Father really delight in him? Was he really his “beloved"?-Was he really "well pleased" in him? Then he certainly could not have been really angry with him, neither could his vengeance have been poured upon him; and therefore his sufferings were not vindictive punishment, nor the substitutional penalty of sin, but a wisely-appointed means to an end more consonant with the moral perfections of God. Many other particulars, had I room, could be adverted to, descriptive of the exalted character and pre-eminently efficient agency of this Mediator of the new covenant, to exemplify the import of the terms, by, through, and in, as expressive of something totally opposed to substitution, in application to him; but enough has been adduced, it is presumed, to satisfy every candid and unprejudiced reader. With these remarks, therefore, I, for the present, close the discussion; and while I would apologize to the reader for having, by my prolixity, so much engrossed his attention, I would request him to overlook those defects in style and composition which necessarily attend self-taught acquirements, and which the advantages of a classical education might have obviated. As a farther palliative to my literary errors, I have also to plead my daily avocations in life, as allowing me little leisure for writing, excepting the Sunday on which day, finding it incompatible with my convictions to join in the worship of a God divided into three persons, (there being no other worship here,) I have, for the most part, devoted a few hours to this object. Some may be disposed, however, to think I have written by way of ostentation; but this I can sincerely and conscientiously say is not the case. So far from it, indeed, that it is not without subsequent regret that I have given my real signature to my letters; and this I hesitated to do, till I had consulted a highly respected friend, of the Unitarian denomination, on its propriety. In fact, if a sense of duty under the impression that, situated as I am, if I could not do good in one way, I ought in another-as far as my ability qualified me, had not prevailed over my scruples as to the irksomeness of the undertaking, I should wil lingly have declined the task. With respect to the beneficial result, I make no calculation thereon; but if only one prejudiced and contracted mind should be thereby liberated and led, in the spirit of free inquiry, to investigate the subject, and discover the fallacy of assumed orthodoxy, I shall not have written in vain. I have, however, some gratification in learning, that in strengthening the convictions and confirming the minds of some of my Unitarian readers, my efforts have not been lost. At some future time, it is my intention to resume the topic, by entering into an explanation of those texts of Scripture which are usually construed to favour the popular sentiment. This I should do successively with my present communication, but for the supposition that I am become tedious to the reader, and have intrenched too much already on the pages of the Reformer. With thanks, Mr. Editor, for your respectful attention to my correspondence, and best wishes for the cause which you advocate, I conclude. R. MILLS. G. SMALLFIELD, PRINTER, HACKNEY. SERMONS ON THE FOLLOWING SUBJECTS: Viz. THE TRUE NATURE OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, AND THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF ITS BEING IN DANGER; THE SCRIPTURE IDEA OF HERESY; MYSTERIES MADE PLAIN; THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT; THE PLACE, OBJECT, AND MANNER, OF BY GEORGE ROGERS, M. A. RECTOR OF SPROUGHTON, IN SUFFOLK, AND LATE FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. A NEW EDITION. LONDON: PRINTED FOR THE BRITISH AND FOREIGN UNITARIAN ASSOCIATION, 3, WALBROOK BUILDINGS, WALBROOK; SOLD ALSO BY R. HUNTER, 72, ST. PAUL'S CHURCH YARD. |