The remarks of "A Presbyter" in your valuable periodical, "On the duty of directing worship to Christ," reminded me of a passage in the "Diary" of an eminently holy man, whose spirit has long since been estranged from the imperfections which attach to our most perfect acts of homage on earth, and prostrated itself, in blissful adoration, at the feet of the glorified Redeemer in heaven, I mean the late Mr. JOSEPH WILLIAMS, of Kidderminster. "I have been frequently in doubt, of late," writes this sainted individual, "whether I should pray to the Lord Jesus Christ, or not. It has been my prevailing opinion that I should; and accordingly I have done it frequently, for many months, in my secret retirements, with lively emotions of soul; and I think I should do it more in family prayer, and more in public; but it is with some difficulty I bring myself to it, and I still find in myself a shyness of doing it." Amongst the causes which operated to impose a restraint upon this specific kind of devotional exercise, he refers to the fact that no ministers, in the circle of his acquaintance, were accustomed to pray expressly to the Lord Jesus, with the exception of the late Mr. BRADSHAW, who, on one occasion, in discoursing of the manner of transacting a covenant with each of the persons in the Sacred Trinity, urged the following formula: "Blessed Jesus! assert thy right, erect thy throne in my soul, and bring every power thereof, and every member of my body, into subjection to thy law." Besides this, he could not call to mind a single instance of direct address to him in prayer. Now it is extremely probable, sir, indeed, the writer's past consciousness and observation attest the fact,

......

that others have entertained a similar doubt respecting the propriety of such direct appeal. . . . . . . Were it not for fear of trespassing too much on your pages, and of incurring the charge of presumption (which, perhaps, I have already done) in assuming the character of a teacher of my brethren and fathers in the ministry, there is a kindred theme, to which I would venture to call the attention of your readers: I mean the claims to divine worship of the blessed Spirit, the regenerator and sanctifier of the human soul. I am aware that this, as well as that under consideration, are clearly recognized in some of the sweetest strains of the Congregational Psalmody at present in use among us; .. but there is reason to believe, that the special mode of supplication, embodied in these devotional hymns, does not obtain, either in the pulpit, at the family altar, or in the closet, to the extent which it ought on the supposition of its being a scriptural formula. — A. E. P. of Lozells, Birham; in the Cong. Magazine for April, 1841, pp. 247–50.

--

I am perfectly agreed with your correspondent on the propriety and duty of addressing religious worship to Jesus Christ. . . . But, while this is my firm conviction, I also think with a distinguished advocate of the Divinity of our Lord [Dr. J. P. SMITH], and with, I presume, the generality of Christians, that "the revealed order in the economy of redemption and grace, and the authority of Scripture, lead to the persuasion, that the most usual mode of our devotional addresses should be to the Father, with explicit reference to the mediation of the Son and the influence of the Holy Spirit." The language of the New Testament, and the entire structure of the Christian system, so completely harmonize with this position, that the difficulty is rather to select than to find proofs of its correctness. "But the hour cometh," said our Lord, when referring to the dispensation he was about to introduce, "and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth." When he had nearly completed its introduction, when he had nearly opened the new and living way to God, he said, "Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you;' ""At that day ye shall ask in my name." It is also quite evident, that the apostles understood our Lord as directing them to pray to the Father. Whatever occasional religious homage they paid to Jesus Christ, (and who that views himself as redeemed by his blood can fail to pay religious homage to him?) their usual worship was addressed to the Father. For the Ephesian Christians the apostle prayed, “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto them the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him." He says, "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." The apostles doubtless addressed thanksgiving to the Redeemer; but their more frequent thanksgivings seem to have been addressed to the Father. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ; " "Giving thanks unto the Father, who hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light;" "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which, according to his abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." The religion of the New Testament does not terminate in Jesus Christ. It is a great and glorious scheme to lead us through Jesus Christ to the Father. "Through him we have an access by one Spirit unto the Father." We may hence conclude, that although the worship of Jesus Christ is both the duty and the happiness of the

Christian, that his usual worship should be addressed to the Father; and that the worship of the Father, through the mediation of the Son, and by the aid of the Holy Spirit, is the grand, distinguishing character of Christian worship. If "the most usual mode of our devotional addresses should be to the Father," there may seem to be a difficulty in ascertaining the proportion which the worship of Jesus Christ should bear to that of the Father. This seeming difficulty will, however, vanish in Christian practice. . . . The worship of our blessed Redeemer, except in the form of singing his praise, is perhaps more adapted to personal than social, to private than public, worship. If, however, his worship be introduced into our public assemblies, and in the manner of the Te Deum associated with praises or with prayers to the Father, there will be required no small skill in the use of language to mark the transition from the worship of the Father to that of Jesus Christ, or from the worship of Jesus Christ to that of the Father; and to prevent the confusion which such a transition would otherwise occasion. ANOTHER PRESBYTER; in Congregational Magazine for April, 1841, pp. 250-1.

Verily, the dogma of a Triune God leads to endless doubts and perplexities, some of its theories implying the recognition of a truth which is diametrically opposed to Trinitarianism itself; namely, that of the unrivalled Supremacy of one divine person or being, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Unnumbered times has it been declared, and in every possible variety of phrase, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are each God, the same in substance, and equal in power and glory, though they constitute in all but one God; and yet, as we learn from the quotations just made, a most respectable body of Christians the English Independents or Congregationalists, who are professedly hostile to Unitarianism -are accustomed, not to address this Triune God, or to pray to the Son or the Holy Ghost, but to put up their supplications and thanksgivings to the Father alone, through the mediation of the Son. So strong, indeed, is the feeling of hesitation, in the minds of many Christians, as to the propriety of addressing their Master in prayer, that it appears the good Mr. JOSEPH WILLIAMS, of Kidderminster, frequently doubted whether he should pray to him or not; and, though it was his prevailing opinion that he should, confessed that he still felt in himself a shyness of doing it; referring to the fact, as one of the causes of the restraint imposed on him, that no ministers, in the circle of his acquaintance, were accustomed to pray expressly to the Lord Jesus Christ, with the exception of Mr. BRADSHAW, who, in a discourse on one particular occasion, directly addressed him. This disuse of Trinitarian worship this practice of addressing the Almighty Father, almost, if not altogether, to the exclusion of any other person or being is, we conceive,

an unconscious but a distinct acknowledgment of the truth of Unitarianism, and the best and most scriptural of all homage to the Anointed of God, who expressly commanded his disciples to pray to the Father, and who never once enjoined the worship of "the Trinity," or of "God the Son" and "God the Holy Ghost."

It is worthy of notice, that one of the writers, "A PRESBYTER,” conceives that the cause of the almost universal lapse of the old Presbyterian congregations into Unitarianism has arisen from the practice of addressing the Father alone in prayer. We doubt not the correctness of the remark. Abolish dogmatism from the pulpit, particularly in addresses to the Deity; let the humble petitioner, casting aside the phraseology of councils and of schools, use that simplicity of language which characterizes the Bible,— and the truth of the Unitarian doctrine cannot be otherwise than eventually felt and recognized. Unscriptural hymns and liturgies, associated as these are with human creeds and confessions of faith, continually present to the mind of the worshipper the idea of a Trinity, of a suffering God-man, and of another agent called the Holy Ghost, with personal attributes and operations differing from those of the one only Paternal Spirit before whom the Christ bowed in all his acts of obedience, submission, prayer, and praise. But for these means of sustaining it, the popular theology would, we think, more speedily become purified, and more closely approximate, in its form and sentiment, to the simple, rational, and elevated religion of the New Testament, all denominations of Christians, however they may differ in other respects, agreeing in no distant future to unite their voices and their hearts in ascriptions of praise to "the Lamb that was slain;" but reserving their profounder homage, their supreme adorations, for " Him who sits upon the throne," the one Lord God Almighty, the single Cause of all existence, the unequalled and absolute Father of angels and of men.

407

CHAPTER VIII.

JESUS CHRIST INFERIOR TO GOD, THE FATHER.

SECT. I. -IN HIS NATURE AND HIS ATTRIBUTES, CHRIST INFERIOR

TO GOD.

Whatsoever essence hath its existence from another is not God.

BISHOP PEARSON.

IN Chapters V. and VI. a great amount of proof, yielded by the liberality, the learning, the unconsciousness, or the inconsistencies of Trinitarians, was adduced to show that the doctrine of a Triune God is either altogether unintelligible or absurd, and that it is not plainly and expressly declared in any one passage within the compass of the Bible; if indeed, without the aid of tradition and the church, it can at all be established. But many of these writers, particularly such as belong to Protestant ranks, while acknowledging the fact that there is no clear, explicit mention of a Trinity in Unity in the Scriptures, and that the dogma itself is far beyond the reach of human discovery, or even of human comprehension, contend that, by a certain process of reasoning, it may be deduced by the collecting and comparing of various passages relating to Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost; that divine titles, attributes, and works are ascribed in the Sacred Books both to the Son and the Spirit, equally as to the Father; and that, as nature and revelation alike declare the unity of the Divine Being, these three intelligences cannot be three separate and infinite Gods, but only three persons in one God. We have, however, already shown, by the aid of our Trinitarian brethren, that the notion of three essentially divine persons or agents must, from the very conceptions that we are obliged to form, imply the idea of three Gods, equal or unequal; and, with all reverence, we may venture to say, that, if the inferential mode of proving the Trinitarian dogma were legitimate, it would not establish its truth, but the obvious contradictions of the Volume in which it is contained. But Unitarians are not reduced to the necessity of believing that Holy Scripture teaches any doctrine so irrational. They find the clearest and most marked distinctions made by the sacred writers between God and Jesus Christ; between the universal Father and his best-beloved Son; between the Anointer and the Anointed; between the Sender and the Sent; between the primary Source of human