REVIEW.

Two LETTERS TO THE REVEREND MOSES STUART, ON THE SUBJECT OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. By Bernard Whitman. Boston: Gray & Bowen. 1830. pp. 166.

In July last, Professor Stuart published a Letter to Dr. Channing, in which he sets forth the numerous and weighty charges of this latter gentleman against the Orthodox, and calls upon him either to retract or prove them. More than half a year has now elapsed, and the Reverend Doctor has not seen fit to do either the one or the other. In the mean time, a feeble attempt has been made in the Unitarian Advocate, in part to explain away his allegations, and in part to justify them. A more recent attempt of the same sort has been made in the Letters which lie before us. We brief notice of these Letters on their first appearance, gave a stating what we then conceived to be their true import and character. We must now go into a more extended examination of them, not because we think them entitled, on their own account, to further consideration, but because of the zealous efforts of the enemies of Orthodoxy to give them currency and favor with the publict-because of the use which is made of them in certain portions of the country-and because the justice of our first account of them has been directly impeached.

The conductors of the Unitarian Advocate, in their remarks on Professor Stuart's Letter, accuse him of misunderstanding, or at least of misrepresenting Dr. Channing.

"The language of Dr. Channing, and of liberal Christians generally, was never meant to be taken in that broad and gross sense which the Professor seems to attribute to it." "He talks of conspiracies' and plots' in which he would have it thought that we accuse the Orthodox of having embarked, as it

The Articles in the Advocate on this subject were noticed and replied to in our Numbers for Oct. and Nov. 1830.

Repeated and high encomiums have been passed on these Letters in the Unitarian Advocate, the Christian Register, and in several of the political papers, both in city and country. A writer in the Centinel speaks of them "as decidedly the most important publication that has appeared during the past year" !!-as "entirely disproving the solemn asseverations of Professor Stuart," and establishing "the justness and truth of Dr. Channing's charges"!

were, with malice prepense; and to this gross construction of the charge brought against them by Unitarians, the Letter owes whatever of plausibility it possesses. But Professor Stuart knows, as well as we, that no such direct, formal, and wicked plot' or 'conspiracy' is meant to be charged on the Orthodox."

The conductors of the Advocate here couple themselves and "Unitarians," and "liberal Christians generally," with Dr. Channing in this controversy; and they expressly deny, on the behalf of all concerned, that they have ever accused the Orthodox of any "direct, formal, and wicked plot or conspiracy," in the gross sense of the terms. It is very unfortunate for some gentlemen, that they are not blessed with better memories. It would save them not a little self-contradiction, and consequent mortification, if they could remember from one year to another, what things they had said and published. To assist the recollections of these gentlemen of the Advocate, and at the same time to show more clearly the drift and bearing of Dr. Channing's accusations, and the points necessary to be proved in the Letters of Mr. Whitman, in order to a full justification of himself and his brethren, it will be needful to quote a few passages from certain Unitarian authors and publications.

Fifteen years ago, it was said by a noted Unitarian Layman,'

"The Panoplist may ridicule as much as it pleases the suggestion that they (the Orthodox) aim at Ecclesiastical tyranny. We perceive from their spirit that the power only is wanting. These new (Ministerial) Associations, if not watched and made the objects of jealousy, will soon become tremendous engines in the hands of skilful and ambitious men.'

In a more recent publication, the same writer accuses the Orthodox of reviving "a spirit of intolerance which has had no example, from the banishment of Roger Williams, and the murder of Servetus, and the persecution of the followers of Arminius." "If the Orthodox party had now the civil power in their hands, for which they have shown of late a great hankering........ they would not permit a man to vote in civil concerns unless he was a church member."+

The Christian Examiner says, "There is to be a combination among the most powerful sects TO SEIZE THE CIVIL Power, and the use they may hereafter make of it is to be sought in the calamitous history of Christendom for the last fifteen hundred years." In the same work, the Orthodox are charged with making a thousand efforts' to restore "a tyranny over the minds of Laymen, the loss of which to priests of certain sects of Pharisaical pretensions is as galling, as the simple doctrines of the despised teacher of Nazareth were to the high priests and scribes of Jerusalem." Again, the Orthodox are charged, in the same work, with wishing to "overthow the institutions by which the state is upheld, in or

*Are you a Christian or a Calvinist ? p. 65.

The Recent attempt, &c. pp. 9, 17.

der to erect on their ruins a power, which by them may be deemed a blessing, though in all ages it has been found a curse."*

We quote the following passages from the Christian Register. "There now appears among the more ambitious and designing leaders of the (Orthodox) party a disposition to form a POWERFUL CONSPIRACY, to crush the growth of liberal opinions, and to render it impolitic, if not dangerous, for a man to avow himself a dissenter from the new-fangled Calvinism now in vogue." "That they have the disposition and the will to reduce the whole country to a state of religious vassalage, we entertain not the slightest doubt."

"We doubt whether the Inquisition itself was more to be dreaded, than that power...... which does not scruple, even in this free country, to aim at overturning the noble institutions of our people, by an appeal to the votes of a religious majority." "The Orthodox clergy are too generally spiritual lords, grasping at power, and ruling the churches with a rod of iron."

"We published, some months since, a few remarks on an attempt to form 'a Christian party in politics'-in other words, to unite church and state, and bring all the affairs of the country under clerical influence. That this bold design has been formed, there can be little doubt; and we have reason to fear that the abettors and promoters of the plan are making more progress towards its accomplishment than is generally believed."t

In the same paper, the Orthodox are charged with having "an insatiable thirst of power"-with " aiming at an uncontrolled sway in church and STATE”—and with having formed " a BOLD BUT DEEP LAID PLOT AGAINST OUR POLITICAL AS WELL AS OUR CHRISTIAN LIBERTIES. Aug. 23, 1828. In September, 1828, a series of numbers, headed " THE CONSPIRACY," were published in the Register, in which the Orthodox are charged with having conspired against the peace and order of the churches. Again, "the self-styled Orthodox" are charged with "secret plots and conspiracies against the peace and liberty of the church and state." Oct. 4th 1828. And again, "It is important that the religious. public should be apprized of the scheme now in train to effect a union between church and state." Nov. 22, 1828.

And, to add more, the Rev. Bernard Whitman of Waltham assures us, in his Artillery Election sermon, that " many individuals in certain sects (referring doubtless to the Orthodox) are making the attempt to unite church and state; and that we have the evidence of this in their own writings.'

وو

Will the reader now turn back, and review these multifarious accusations. The Orthodox part of the community, and more especially the clergy, are here charged with aiming at Ecclesiastical tyranny;'-with reviving a spirit of intolerance' like that which led to the murder of Servetus ;'-with treacherously combining to abridge and destroy our religious liberties ;'-with designing to form a powerful conspiracy to crush the growth of liberal opinions;'-with wishing to reduce the whole country to a state of religious vassalage ;'-with being unwilling that any man, should

* Vol. V. pp. 279, 298, 505.

+ Numbers for Oct. 27, 1827; Jan. 12, 1828; March 15, 1828; and June 7, 1828.

vote in civil concerns, unless he is a church member;'-with 'making a thousand efforts to restore a tyranny over the minds of laymen;'-with grasping at power, and ruling the churches with a rod of iron;'--with making an attempt to unite church and state,' and having a scheme now in train' to effect that object ;and, again, with forming the bold design to unite church and state, and making more progress towards its accomplishment than is generally believed ;-with wishing to overthrow the institutions by which the State is upheld, in order to erect on their ruins' an odious Ecclesiastical power; and, again, with aiming, in this free country, to overturn the noble institutions of our people.' "There

is to be a combination," we are told, "among the most powerful sects TO SEIZE THE CIVIL POWER; and the use they may hereafter make of it is to be sought in the calamitous history of Christendom for the last fifteen hundred years."

Of a piece with these various accusations, and of a character to be grouped and considered with them, are those alleged in the writings of Dr. Channing, to which public attention was called in the Letter of Mr. Stuart. The Orthodox are charged, in these writings, with 'defamation and persecution'-a' persecution which breathes venom from its lips, and secretly blasts what it cannot openly destroy.' They are said to have forged chains, which eat more deeply into the soul than those of iron,' and to have established, an espionage of bigotry, as effectual to close our lips and chill our hearts, as an armed and hundred-eyed police.' They have combined to cover with reproach whoever may differ from themselves, to drown the free expression of opinion by denunciations of heresy, and to strike terror into the multitude by joint and perpetual menace.' This Protestant liberty, it is said, is, in one respect, more irritating than Papal bondage. It mocks as well as enslaves us. It talks to us courteously, whilst it rivets our chains.' They (the Orthodox) 'menace with ruin the Christian who listens to opinions different from their own, and brand these opinions with the most terrifying epithets, for the purpose of preventing candid inquiry into their truth.' They have menaced our long established form of Congregational church government, and attempted to introduce tribunals unknown to our churches, for the very purpose, that the supposed errors and mistakes of ministers and private Christians may be tried and punished as heresies, that is, as crimes."* Such is

*In this last sentence, Dr. Channing refers to the proposal for consociating the churches, which was agitated in the General Association of Massachusetts in 1815. This subject was fully considered in our number for November, 1830. The Article then published will be found in the Appendix, Letter A.

Mr Whitman complains of Professor Stuart for bringing forward this charge of Dr. C. as one recently made, and relating to the present state of things, whereas it was made in 1815, and refers to events existing at that time. But Professor Stuart says expressly, after having quoted this among the other charges of Dr. C., "Most of them are not the hasty effusions of moments when excitement was urging on the thoughts and the pen, but they are declarations reviewed and re-published to the world after a series OF YEARS." p. 11.

a specimen of the accusations which have been pouring forth against Orthodox Christians, almost in one continuous stream, for the last fifteen years. And who are these Orthodox Christians? Who are these aspiring, intolerant, tyrannical and traitorous Orthodox clergymen, who have conspired against the liberties of both church and state, and are wishing to overthrow the free institutions of their country? We appeal to this community for an answer. We ask no special indulgence to be shown to the characters or the frailties of Orthodox clergymen ; but we do ask, and we are willing those among whom we live should answer for us, whether a fair proportion of this proscribed class of men are not distinguished for their piety and usefulness; and whether, in point of intelligence, integrity, and an exemplary attention to their appropriate duties, they may not, as a body, compare with any other class of our citizens? And who are those who dare accuse them of such abominable crimes? Are they the debased, the profane, the vicious, the profligate? Yes; these uniformly hate and asperse the Orthodox; but men of this stamp are not alone. They are kept in countenance by others of better cloth. The charges we have quoted are from the pens of learned civilians, and Reverend clergymen-of the Hon. and the Hon. -, of Dr. Channing, the Rev. Bernard Whitman, etc. etc.-men who walk at large, and hold up their heads, in face of that community, who have heard their accusations against many of our most worthy and useful citi

zens.

But it is time that we look more closely to these accusations, and ascertain definitely to what they amount.

1. The Orthodox are here charged with being the combined and determined enemies of religious freedom. They are 'spiritual tyrants,'' conspirators' against liberty, forging 'chains more terrible than those of iron,'' menacing with ruin' all those who differ from them, and 'ruling the churches' in the most oppressive manner.

2. They are charged with indulging a spirit of persecution,-a 'persecution which breathes venom from its lips, and secretly blasts what it cannot openly destroy.'

3. The Orthodox are further charged with an insatiable thirst of power.' They are said to be 'grasping at power,' and 'aiming at an uncontrolled sway in church and state.'

4. The Orthodox have formed the bold design to unite church and state, and have made more progress towards its accomplishment than is generally believed.'

5. The Orthodox are charged with being traitors to their country. They would overthrow the institutions by which the state is upheld.' There is to be a combination among the most powerful sects to seize the civil power,' &c.

Such are some of the charges of Unitarians in Massachusetts