him to a gentleman with whom he is well acquainted, whose mind is somewhat of the colour of his own, unhappily tinctured with scepticism, but who when conversing with me on this subject, remarked-"How unjustly the biographer of Mr. Ro"binson had treated his character";-" For" added he, "Mr. Robinson to the close of his life would with "earnestness endeavour to convince me of the

truth and importance of christianity." But it is unnecessary to spend a moment in refuting loose, unsupported assertions and insinuations, that are as opposite to truth as darkness is to light. At the same time, justice to Mr. Dyer requires me to add, that I am persuaded he did not entertain the most distant idea of doing what he thought an injury to the character of Mr. Robinson, although it is certain that the reflections, on which painful duty has compelled me to animadvert, are calculated to afford a triumph to his most bitter and implacable enemies.

The Northern critics to whom I have before alluded, speaking of Mr. Robinson observe-" In "our opinion he acquires but little credit from "the frequency with which he changed his reli

gious creed: we have reason to believe he died a "Socinian."* We forgive these anonymous timeserving writers for giving so little credit to Mr. Robinson for the impartiality and disinterestedness which accompanied his inquiries; their souls

and his being of a very different order. To talk of his creeds, and the frequency of his changing them only serves to discover their own ignorance. Their opinion, in itself considered is of little consequence, but the assertion "that he died a So

cinian," having been read, by half a million of people, the majority of whom have, probably, been taught to consider the terms Socinian and Infidel synonimous, deserves some notice. Justice required these writers to produce evidence for the truth of their assertion; but as they have not, I must beg leave to state, that I have "reason to "believe" that he did NOT die a Socinian. What follows may enable the reader to judge which of the above opposite opinions is most deserving of credit.

In Mr. Robinson's Ecclesiastical Researches, he has in the History of the church of Poland, given an account, equally distinguished for its justice and candour, of the peculiarities of Socinianism: he has likewise assigned the true reasons why the system can never be generally received by those persons to whom the gospel is more particularly addressed,-not to a few learned men of a speculative turn of mind, but to people of plain sense, and honest hearts, and who although destitute of critical knowledge, rèceive the word gladly. Mr. Dyer expresses his dissatisfaction with Mr. Robinson's account.* I have neither leisure nor

Memoirs. p. 394.

inclination to contest the point. I merely state the fact, from which this conclusion must be drawn; That the author when he wrote this account, which from a letter to his old friend Mr. Turner of Abingdon,* appears to have been about four years before his death, was not a Socinian. It is not pretended that he afterwards made any alteration in this part of his history, but that he left it at the time of his death, in the state in which the editor has faithfully published it: we have therefore the presumptive evidence, that no change took place in his sentiments on this article.

But let us attend to later and more direct evidence. In a letter written by Mr. Robinson to his friend, Mr. Lucas of Shrewsbury, dated Sep. 16. 1789, in which he appears to have unbosomed himself, he writes as follows:

"Believe me I am neither a SOCINIAN, nor an Arian. I do not know among what class of he"retics to place myself: sometimes I think I am "a Paulianist or Samosatanian, for I think Jesus a man in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwells, and I give him more dignity than they "do, who ascribe to him only a third part of

66

Deity. Years ago reverence for great names "misled me. I said after Clarke, there was a Scripture Trinity, and I would say so still if I "could tell what I meant; but as I cannot, I cast that phrase also to the bats and moles. There is,

* Vol. IV, p. 233.

Jesus is his

"there can be only one first cause. "Son, his representative, and if you please, your "God, the vicegerent of the Supreme, whom you "honour by honouring him. I do not think God "ever proposed the question of the nature of Jesus

·

to us to determine; it is a child of the schools, "born in litigation, and subsisting by it to this day, to the utter ruin of genuine piety and chris"tian benevolence. Pray, says one. Do "you believe the Atonement? Not your gross "description of it; yet I cannot think all the passages that speak of the death of Christ are to be "taken figuratively. In brief, I believe the scriptures, the record that God hath given of his Son, "but as for the rash questions, which the schools " in their great wisdom have started, be so good as "to settle them among yourselves, and allow one "disciple of Christ, to sit at his feet, and be con"tent with hearing his word, and no more. Disputants have wanted me to take a side, and because I refuse to do so, they represent me as a

86

man void of all principle, to whom truth and "error are alike indifferent. What I say of scho"lastic theology, that they apply to the gospel of "our Lord, as if a man who held their brangles "indifferent, held the sacred truths of revelation so......I adore God for so loving the world, 46 as to send his Son. I embrace him as an un"speakable gift. I believe his doctrines, trust his "promises, copy his life, imbibe his disposition, "and live in hope of the glory he has promised

"all his disciples. I HAVE NO DOUBTS, and I "want none of the reputation that this host of men lavish upon one another."*.

I trust the reader will excuse me for making so long an extract from a letter which they may so easily refer to; but it is of considerable importance, and deserves particular notice in these Memoirs, as it was written within nine months of the author's death, and contains the latest declaration of his sentiments on the points in controversy, which I have, after niany inquiries, been able to procure.

The opinions expressed by Mr. Robinson in this letter appear to be nearly, if not entirely the same as those expressed in his Village Discourses. Amongst many passages which might be produced, one may suffice for the present occasion.

"The Scripture gives us no more information concerning the nature of Christ, than it doth concerning the nature of other beings men"tioned by incident, nor was it necessary; for "truth of fact according to appearance, and not

description of properties, which perhaps we could "not comprehend, is the only important article "to us in the present state. Three men inqui"ring the nature of Jesus Christ agreed to be set "down by the Apostle John. The first took his "gospel and read, the word that was made flesh "was God, that is, said he, by office. The se

* See the letter at length. Vol. IV. p. 287-291.