materials. I leave Dr. Priestley to look into the writings of modern controvertists, and see if he can find a person of that description.

Another of the Doctor's arts, is to impose upon his readers with unfair samples. Thus, if an adversary should lay upon him a dozen hard names, of which eleven should be true, and the twelfth doubtful; he will pick out the last, and hold it up to the public as a specimen of all the rest. In this way he can answer a large book before breakfast; by taking a few passages without their dependences, and then boasting that he has confuted the whole work.

But Dr. Priestley never displays his sophistry to greater advantage, than when he undertakes to evade the force of a text of Scripture, which is very often necessary, from the part he has unhappily taken in divinity. The scripture asserts plainly of Jesus Christ, that all things were created by him and for him, and he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Col. viii. 16. Now behold the answer to this plain positive Scripture" I would only observe," says the Doctor, "that neither the earth, nor "the sun, moon or stars, nor any material sub"stance, is specified among the things created

66

by him." (See Letters, p. 119.) So all things

signify

signify none of these things, because none of them are particularly mentioned. To rid himself of the argument for the pre-existence and divinity of Christ from the act of creation, &c. he supposes, that as Christ is said to have reconciled the world as well as created it, created and reconciled may well be supposed to be synonimous: so that if a man reconciles two neighbours at variance, he may be said to have created them. I beg the reader to review p. 118, 119, 120 of his letters to Dr. Price, as a specimen of Unitarian logic and divinity; such as the learned Bishop of St. David's might well run away from; but not because he is beaten out of the field.

We prove the divinity of our blessed Saviour, by showing that the same divine acts are ascribed to Him as to God; and as the Almighty is demonstrated by the works of omnipotence, the argument will never be answered. But nothing is too hard for Dr. Priestley; who replies, that this argument will prove God and Satan to be the same being; because it is said of David, that God moved him to number the people; and in another place that Satan tempted him. But the Doctor, who writes very fast, cannot stop on such occasions to make proper distinc

tions: all he aims at is, to make a little appear ance, and get off as soon as he can. Temptation is no divine act; which is the thing always supposed in the argument he is answering. God, or man, or even Satan himself, may be said to tempt, if regard be had to the sense in which it is spoken: but God and Satan are never said either to have created the world or to have saved it. Such, however, is the style of criticism, which Dr. Priestley has opposed to Mr. Jones's Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity. (See his Letters to Students in the Universities.)

When a man is what we call a Proteus, he can transform himself from one shape to another, and assume any temper, to serve the present purpose; he can be audacious when he is in fear; pleased when he is vexed; glad when he

is

sorry ; and compassionate while he is gratified with another's misery. Our Doctor rejoices in the orthodox defences of the church of England, because, as he informs my Lords the Bishops, they will haften its destruction. He is glad that his property and his life were attacked, because this does honour to his writings; his adversaries having found this the only way of answering them. Every thing makes for him, which we should suppose to be against

VOL. XII.

E E

him.

him. He boasts, that the Unitarians are more obliged to Dr. Horsley, than to any Trinitarian: but for what, no mortal can tell, unless it be for detecting and exposing them past remedy to the world. The design of all this is, to make the writers of the church believe, that notwithstanding all their efforts, they do and will write to no good purpose; rather to a bad one; and that they may as well give it up, and leave the Doctor unmolested in corrupting our faith, and deluding the people, till the grand plot of total subversion shall be ripe for execution.

I shall trouble the reader but with one more of his sophisms; which is that of his insinuating so frequently as he does, that the age in which we live is greatly enlightened. Every monitor who advises us to become wiser than we are deserves to be heard: but his meaning is, that we ought not to be contented with the faith of our forefathers, because we know some new things of which our forefathers were ignorant. The argument is altogether impertinent and inconsequential but weak minds, and young scholars, whose vanity grows faster than their wisdom, may be influenced by it. The age, it is true, has found out some new experiments in philosophy; and have acquired some new ideas in na

tural

tural history but what then? what is this to our religion? Have we found out a new bible? If we we get forward in learning, is that any reason why we should go backward in divinity? There are, to be sure, some curious discoveries of late years, and we cannot deny it. Our new vellum paper, which goes by the name of the wove paper, is of a quality and substance much superior to the paper made in former years: but if all Dr. Priestley's improvements in theology, with all his interpretations of the Scripture, were written upon it, the blank paper of the last century would be a better thing in the library of an Englishman. The present reformers of France call themselves the illuminated: but they were a people of more worth and wisdom with their old darkness about them, than with their new light; which, like a coup de soleil upon their brain, has put them out of their wits; and made them, what Dr. Priestley's principles would soon make us, if they should be generally admitted, madmen, scalpers, and cannibals.

V. The Religion of Dr. Priestley.

DR. Priestley's religion must be described differently from that of other men all by negatives; for he has taken great pains to show us what

EE 2