cnliar views of the sense of Seripture? What one Missi. onary reckons spiritual GOOD. another may reckon spiritual EVIL. Of this we have an example in the extract that has been quoted. The writer represents a respectable Moghul inquirer as unhappi. ly objecting to the doctrine of the Trinity and erroneously seeking to be saved" merely on the score of mercy." Now if the Secretary's Circular had been addressed to a Unifarian Missionary, and if he had happened to meet with the same Moghul inquirer, how different the statements his reply would have contained. He would have expressed to the Bible SeCretary the pleasure he had experienced in conversing with a respectable Mussulman who was willing to receive and read the Scriptures, and who had no other objection to Christianity except what was created by the doctrine of the Trinity-an objection which of course was at once removed by informing him that this was no doctrine of Christianity, but a gross and palpable corruption of one of its fundamental principles. He would also, no doubt, bave stated the gratification which he had received from observing his truly Christian state of mind, since he professed to hope for salvation, not through his own

merits, or through the me rits of any other being, but simply and entirely through the undeserved and unperchased mercy of God. Woold a reply containing these or similar state. ments have been admitted into the Appendix and referred to with approbation in the Report ? Such a reply would certainly have been of a much more "pleasing nature," in the estimation of some of the Subscribers, than that actually communicated. But no. The Bible Secretary, and Committee, and Association, would, at a single glance, have perceived that all this was exceedingly irrelevant to the object of a Bible Society. Why can they not, with equal clearness, perceive that what is written in favour of the Trinity &c. is just as irrelevant to that object as what is written against it?

ter in the same sense in which the Apostles used it, and if,therefore, the "many" spoken of are those who, reject Christianity altogether, then how serious the responsibility of those who support a doctrine which, not only its enemies contend is unscriptural and unreasonable, but which even its friends admit is attended with the most fatal

consequences in driving "many" into infidelity. But if the language here employed is meant only to describe those Christians who reject the Trinity, then, whilst we are glad to learn from such a quarter that there are so "many" of this description, we can consider it in no other light than as holding up this confessedly numerous class of fellow Christians to public odium, and that too where all party distinctions' 'should be unknown and all party feelings banished.

The only other passage upon which we will stop to animadvert is an explanatory note by the Translator of Dr. Van Ess's Cucular already mentioned, found in the Appendix, No III, p. 22. The Catholic Professor having expressed his hope that those Protestant Christians who differ from each other in more than external matters will re unite them

selves to the one God and Saviour revealed in the Bible, his translator explains this rather obscure phrase in the following

manner:~

"He alludes bere to the and prevalence of Socinian Deistical principles inGermany among such as call themselves Protestants."

If this is a just interpretation of the allusion, and we see no reason to question it, then it is one other proof that the zeal for which this Roman Catholic clergyman bas been so much lauded in Bible Society Reports is directed not merely to the dissemination of the Scriptures, the only legitimate object of Bible Societies, but also to the spread of his own peculiar views of the Christian system.

We would be the last to do any thing to prevent him from using bis utmost endeavours in diffusing what he believes to be divine troth; but we think that these endeavours would be more honourable to himself if they were not made under the covert of tho Bible Society's name and in the character of a Bible Society agent; and that the Bible Society, if it would secure to the Christian world the entire and analloyed advantages which it is fitted to impart, should discourage in those whom

it aids every such aberration genuine princi

from its
ples and spirit.

But it is with the Translator of Van Ess's Circular, who we understand to be the Rev. D. Schmid, and with the Association which has incorporated his explanatory note into its Report, that we are at present principally concerned. The lan. guage of the Circular was sufficiently general to have escaped the notice of most readers, and therefore to rescue this hidden allusion from neglect, aud to give full point to its sectarian meaning, the Translator, a Bible Society Secretary, must needs append a note which coutains as much misrepresentation on the one hand, and concession on the other, as could reasonably be expected in so brief a notice. We happen to know a little more of the state of religion in Germany than can be learned from this note; but let us suppose that we know nothing more than it informs us. What then, is the amount of the information we receive? We are told that there is a

to be Christians, PROTESTANT Christians. These are very plain and important concessions. And in what way is this numerous bo dy of Protestant Christians described? It is in the first place insinuated by the Translator that they call themselves Protestants but that they are not so in reality. That is, they hold certain sentiments which some other Protestants do not hold, or they reject cer. taip doctrines which some other Protestants believe, and therefore they are not Protestants. Admirable reasoning it must be con fessed; for on the same principle these self-called Protestants might with equal justice deny the name to those who deny it to them. But if they are not Protestants, what are they? They are Deists or at least infeeted with "Deistical principles." Distical principles are such as lead either, first, to a belief in natural reli gion, or secondly to a rejection of revealed religion. In which of these senses this phrase is here used it is impossible for us to divine. Perhaps in neither of them,” but probably in a sense dif. ferent from both. Every one who does not think, and believe, and profess with the multitude is a Deist, or Athiest,or something worse, if worse can be. We our

selves have undergone vari. ous metamorphoses of this kind, without being conscious of them. At the pleasure of our orthodox friends we have been Atheists, and Deists, Mussulmans, and Hindoos by turns. Now we are inclined to think that it is in this sense that the selfcalled Protestants of Germany are stated to be under the influence of "Deistical principles;" and we are confirmed in this interpretation by the epithet which is added. There is not only, it appears, a prevalence of Deistical but al so of Socinian principles in Germany. In other words, these self.called Protestants are Unitarians; and honoris causâ are here styled Socini. ans and Deists. It would be a breach of truth and charity to allow the claim of Unitarians to be either Protestants or Christians; it is no breach of either the one or the other to impose on them the names of Socinian and Deist which they uniformly disavow and which are only fitted to render them the objects of un

We wish we could per suade ourselves that the

passages upon which we have remarked are not contained in a Bible Society Report. The inconsistency of the place which they hold in that Report with the known principles of such a Society, the more we reflect on the subject, fills us with increased astonishment at the temerity and inconsi deration of those who have given insertion to them. We beg, however, earnestly to assure our readers that it is not the Bible Society we oppose but its abuses; and that it is only the right and duty of self-defence which belongs to every man and to every Christian,

that has called us forth now, and will, if necessary. call us forth again, to resist an attack upon Unitarians and Unitarianism even when made under the auspices of a Society, which, we should rejoice, if we were permitted to regard with feelings of unmingled veneration.

66

sive discourse, on the Important Uses of Affliction, if accompanied by Genuine Religion, and correct and worthy Notions of the Dei. ty." H. Clarke, of Haslingden, conducted the devotional part. After the service, a large party, male and female, sat down to au economical dinner at the. Nelson's Ball Tavern. The cloth being drawo, Mr. Harris took the Chair, when reports of the state of the Societies in connexion

were given. Mr. Wilkinson said the cause in Oldham was upon the whole improving.

A good SundaySchool was connected with the chapel, and the debt had bcen somewhat lessened. He was of opinion, that

could means be devised to enable a minister to reside in the town, the interests of the Society would be very materially promoted, and the cause much more rapidly advanced. Mr. Taylor stated that the cause in Rochdale was in as favourable a state as could be expected. Their Sunday School went on well. Lanehead a village two miles distant, they had about one hundred scholars, and they were about to build a school.room there which was also to be used for religious worship, Mr. Ashworth reported that since last Association the chapel

At

at Newchurch had been considerably enlarged, aud yet it was as well filled as before. About three hundred children were educated in the Sunday-school, and every member of the congregation, male and female, that could possibly do so, assisted in the good work. Mr. Clarke stated, that the cause at Todmor den presented a very flattering appearance. The congregation had commenced building a chapel, 17 yards by 12 yards, which was estimated to cost about seven hundred pounds, towards which they had raised among themselves four hundred. "It might be asked," said Mr. C., "why they build so large a chapel in so small a town, where, too, there are four or five other places of worship. To this I reply, that from past experience of and observation upon the march of free inquiry, they have much-reason to hope that at Do very distant period numbers will see the errors of Trinitarianism, and flock to the temple dedicated to the worship of the One God the Father, and they are anxious to be provided with room for their reception." Mr. Ashworth said the people at Padiham had at length ventured to erect a chapel, which was now nearly ready for opening.