the fourth century. Several sects early sprung up in the first ages, who entertained various sentiments respecting the nature and character of Christ; but during the three first centuries, there is no trace of any doctrine, like that adopted by the episcopal church, in which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are considered to be three distinct persons of equal power and dignity.

The Apostles' creed is a remarkable proof of this fact. Although it cannot be ascertained when this creed was first made, yet it is undoubtedly very ancient. At whatever period it was formed, it must be supposed to have been intended to contain what were then considered all the important doctrines of the christian religion. It, nevertheless, gives no countenance to a trinity, and contains very little, if any thing, on this subject, to which every unitarian will not assent.*

I have reserved this opportunity to make some further remarks on your quotations from the epistles of Ignatius. Enough has already been said on the suspicious character of these epistles to make it appear, that they are not entitled to the least degree of credit

* Those, who wish to see the doctrine of the trinity traced by historical deductions to its true source, may find it done in a very concise and perspicuous manner in professor Norton's "Statement of Reasons for not believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians respecting the nature of God, and the Person of Christ," written in reply to professor Stuart's Letters to Mr. Channing, p. 31.

A more full account is also contained in the General Repos. and Rev. vol. iii. p. 13. Cudworth's Intellectual System, Book i. chap. 4. Priestley's Hist. of Early Opinions. And some remarks may be found to the purpose in Le Clerc's Ars Critica, Pars Secunda, § 15.

as authority in points of controversy. Many epistles, which have gone out under the name of Ignatius, are universally acknowledged to be fictitious; and those, which are admitted by some to be genuine, are as universally allowed to be mangled and interpolated. And it is a well known fact, that many of the interpolations, which have been detected, relate particularly to the trinity.

I will quote two or three of those, which were detected by archbishop Usher.

"Our Lord and God Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God."

"One only begotten Son, the Word, God and Man."

"God the Word dwelt in a human body."*

Now whatever Ignatius may have written, it is certain he did not write these passages; although, if they had not been discovered to be spurious, they would now be defended with as much zeal as any other parts of his reputed writings. Whatever he wrote, these passages were added by some later hand. From these insertions two things are evident; first, that when they were made, these writings were not thought sufficiently strong in favour of the trinity; and secondly, that no confidence can be placed in any other passages of a similar character. If the original writings taught explicitly the doctrine of the trinity, why should these additions have been deemed necessary?†

* Usher's edition of Ignatius' Epistles, Oxford, 1644, p. 42, 96, 202; as quoted in Lind. Sequel, p. 446.

† Speaking of the seven epistles, Less, who believes them to be genuine, observes, "These are tolerably well purified from modern

Among the extracts, which you make from Ignatius, are the following.

"Continue inseparable from Jesus Christ our God." p. 40.

"Follow your bishop, as Jesus Christ the Father." Ibid.

It will be seen, by a single glance of the eye, how striking a resemblance there is between these quotations, and those above, which were proved by archbishop Usher to have been inserted by design; and there is the strongest presumptive evidence, that they all have a similar origin. You must allow me again to express my surprise, that you should quote passages of this character, which are so very important in their consequences, without at least intimating to your readers, that they are of doubtful authority, and should be received with very great caution.

interpolations. I say tolerably well, for even the smaller edition appears in certain places to be suspicious." Less on the New Testament, p. 71.

Notwithstanding the suspicious character of these epistles, and the very great probability that they were written by some designing person to impose on the world, they are thought to be of so much account to the episcopal church, that they have lately been published in England as a tract for general circulation, by a "Society for the Distribution of Tracts," &c. and in this form they help to make up the book called "The Churchman Armed." See vol. i. p. 145.

In this same book is inserted the learned treatise of bishop Burgess to prove, that "St. Paul was the founder of the church in Britain." Vol. ii. p. 316. "The church of Britain was established before the church of Rome." p. $89.

But the church has hitherto been contending, that it has descended through the church of Rome. How is this point to be settled? Or how is it to be explained, that the church has been so long in an error?

Not

I have thus finished the general view, which I proposed to take of the doctrine of the trinity, as contained in the articles of the church. I have attempted to compare it with reason, with scripture, and with itself; and on my mind the conviction is irresistible, that, as it is there stated, it is irrational, unscriptural, and contradictory in its parts. only so, its origin may be traced to a period much later, than that of our Saviour, or his apostles. These things considered, I cannot persuade myself, that such a doctrine is to be received as in any manner connected with the pure, the consistent, and holy religion of the Lord Jesus Christ.

LETTER VI.

REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,

IT only remains in this letter to explain the texts of scripture, which you have adduced in proof of the "divinity of the Saviour," and some others usually brought forward in support of the doctrine of the trinity.

After reading the extracts from scripture, which are contained in the preceding letter, no one probably will deny, that the unitarian doctrine of the supe. riority of the Father, and the inferiority of the Son and Holy Spirit is in some sense true. Trinitarians argue, that these texts are to be modified and explained in accordance with others, which they think teach the deity of the Saviour and of the Holy Spirit, and their equality with the Father. On the contrary, unitarians hold, that the plain and obvious sense of the whole scriptures, both of the Old Testament and New, forcibly inculcates the unity and supremacy of God, and the inferiority of Christ; and also, that every text, which is thought to be favourable to the trinitarian hypothesis, may, by fair and rational