012

REMARKS, &c.

THOSE who have read the second letter addressed to me by Dr. Worcester, will not be surprised at the appearance of these remarks. I intended to leave the controversy to the decision of the publick, who, I thought, were in possession of all the materials requisite to the formation of a correct judgment. But Dr. Worcester has called on me to retract what

he pronounces a "flagrant misstatement" of an important part of his letter; and he has done this with a solemnity, which hardly permits me to observe the silence on which I had resolved. These remarks will relate primarily to that point, but I shall not restrain myself from offering observations on other parts of his letter.

Dr. Worcester has complained with much earnestness, that I have imputed to him, in my former remarks, a "bad spirit and intention." To this I answer, that I really did consider his letter as very unworthy of him as a christian and a christian minister. I did think, that if the principles of his letter could be reduced to practice, every Unitarian would be driven from the church, and every minister of Unitarian sentiments would be driven from the pulpit. I did think, that he discovered a strange insensibility towards his brethren, whose moral purity had been so wantonly assailed in the Review of the Panoplist. I also acknowledge, that I did not discover any marks of that affection and respect towards myself, of which he speaks in his second letter. Believing that his remarks directly tended to divide the church, and to expose a respectable body of christians to reproach and injurious treatment, I

spoke of this tendency with plainness, but without bitterness or anger. Whether my interpretation of Dr. Worcester's letter, in these respects, was unauthorized, I cheerfully leave to the decision of those who have read it. My own impressions have coincided with those of all around me; and I cannot believe, that I have not one friend of a candid mind, and of sufficient ability to decide on the obvious import of a letter written in our native tongue.

Dr. Worcester, however, disclaims the feelings and intentions which I have ascribed to him. He professes to have been governed by respect and affection towards me, and by a spirit of forbearance, kindness, tenderness, and undíssembled good will towards his brethren. That Dr. Worcester is sincere in reporting what now appears to him to have been the state of his mind during the composition of his first letter, I am far from denying. But on a subject like this, memory is sometimes treacherous ; and I confess I cannot shake off the conviction, that some improper feelings, perhaps unsuspected by Dr. Worcester, occasionally guided his pen. But I mean not to pursue this point. I have not the least disposition to attribute to Dr. Worcester any intentions which he disclaims. I had much rather believe, that his style is unhappy, than that his temper is evil. Most sincerely do I wish, that his heart may be a stranger to every unworthy sentiment, that his life may be adorned with every virtue, and be crowned with every blessing.

THE CHARGE OF "FLAGRANT MISSTATEMENT.”

I now come to my great object. In my former remarks, I observed, that Dr. Worcester "has so"lemnly and publickly given all his influence to the opinion, that we, and all who agree with us on the "subject of the Trinity, are to be disowned by the

66

church of Christ. The obvious import of the con "cluding part of his letter, (and it is the obvious "import, and not a strained and circuitous interpre"tation which I regard,) may be thus expressed. "Every man who cannot admit as a doctrine of "scripture, the great doctrine of three persons in one God, which I and other orthodox christians embrace, believes an opposite gospel, rejects the "true gospel, despises the authority of Jesus Christ, is, of course, a man wholly wanting in true piety, and without christian virtue, and may, in perfect "consistency with christian love, be rejected as unworthy the name of a christian." On this representation of his sentiments, Dr. Worcester thus remarks, "Your statement of the import of the "concluding part of my letter is most palpably incorrect and unjust. And though I attribute this incorrectness and injustice not to any injurious in"tention, but to that habit of thinking and feeling of “which I have before taken notice; yet, after what "I have now stated, I think I have a right to call "upon you, and I do solemnly call upon you, to retract "this flagrant misstatement. I know, indeed, you "have given it to be understood, that you shall not "write again; but, Sir, the publick disputant, who "makes this resolve, ought to be careful, not merely "not to put down aught in malice, but to write "nothing which justice to his opponent and to the "cause of truth-nothing which the sacred princi"ples of christianity will require him to retract."

This is the charge, which has again brought me before the publick, the charge of palpable incorrectness and injustice, and of flagrant misstatement. I now intend fairly and fully to meet it. I intend to show, that in giving this interpretation, I followed the natural meaning of Dr. Worcester's words, that I put no violence on his language, and that no other sense