Kendal Fellowship Fund. and German Universities, and others were invited to fill similar stations in England; whilst some who went beyond the Swiss and German Reformers in their secession from the doctrines of the Church of Rome, found it necessary to emigrate to Poland and Transylvania, where they became in strumental in promoting the cause of Unitarianism. The history of the Reformation in Italy presents one fact which is worthy of particular observation. It is not a little singular, that in this country so large a proportion of the more distinguished of those who seceded from the Roman Church should, at so early a period, have been carried to so great a length in calling in question and in rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity. It seems to be generally admitted, that those who formed the society at Vincenza, including in their number Lælius Socinus, were Antitrinitarians; and it may be inferred, that their opinions were pretty general among the Italian Reformers, from 93 making every allowance for these mis. representations, which were generally the work of the enemies of the parties, who wished to heap upon them all the odium they could; and a deeper stain, they well knew, they could not at that time throw upon them, than that which the very imputation of Unitarianism conveyed; there is abundant evidence to shew, that a very large number of persons gave up their Trinitarian creed before they quitted Italy. This circumstance affords a good proof, that they prosecuted their theological inquiries with a manly freedom and fearless intrepidity of mind, and with a becoming anxiety to follow the truth wherever it might be found, and whithersoever it might conduct them. R. S. Erratum.-The reader is requested to correct the reference to Mosheim in note*, col. 2, p. 5: it should be to Vol. III. p. 387. Kendal, SIR, the suspicion of Unitarian heresy to the Unitarian public, the esta which appears to have attached to almost every person of learning and distinction who quitted Italy on account of his religious sentiments. This suspicion was, indeed, in many cases, wholly unfounded. It is extremely doubtful, whether Valdesso, one of the first Reformers in Italy, dissented from the popular faith on the doctrine of the Trinity. In his "Divine Considerations," there is certainly nothing to impeach the orthodoxy of his creed on this head. Coelius Secundus Curio has also been charged with holding Antitrinitarian sentiments, but without the shadow of evidence. Bernard Ochini has likewise been misrepresented in relation to this point. He has commonly been enumerated among the members of the society at Vincen za. But it does not seem likely that he could ever have belonged to it, and it is certain that he was not a member in 1546, when it was dispersed, as he had quitted Italy four years previously to that period. It appears, moreover, evident, that he was at this time a Trinitarian, and had no difficulty in uniting with the Trinitarian churches, both in Switzerland and in England. Towards the close of his life, however, he changed his sentiments, and became an Unitarian. But blishment of a Fellowship Fund in the religious society with which I am connected. Upon the regulations for nianaging the institution, and the objects to which it is to be devoted, it is unnecessary to enlarge, as they are conformable to the well-known plan originally suggested by the late Doctor Thomson, and coincide with those which have been so frequently detailed in your pages. The great end we have in view, is to join with our brethren in aiding the progress of the truth as it is in Jesus, and we hope, that we shall strengthen our own hands by contributing to strengthen theirs, in this great and good cause. It gives me additional pleasure to state further, that at the time when this establishment took place, it was unanimously resolved to have an annual collection, the amount of which should be alternately given to the College at York and to the London Unitarian Fund. The collection for this year will be appropriated to the use of the latter. In following up both these plans, I have no doubt we shall soon be joined by the whole of our society, when they see that the pecuniary exertions are individually below the notice of those whose means are the most limited, but collectively efficient and available to such valuable purposes. I am induced to mention another subject of importance to a few neighbouring congregations, in the hope that the information we want may be supplied by some of your correspondents. The last Lord Wharton left, by will, a number of Bibles to certain Dissenting societies, (of which ours was one,) to be distributed, at the discretion of the ministers, among the young. For a considerable time this was done in conformity to the conditions stated in the bequest, but about thirty years ago the distribution was transferred to the clergy of the Establishment, without any reason assigned, or any known authority for such a deviation from the will of his Lordship. This statement was made to the commissioners sent by Parliament to inquire into the abuses of Charities, but they knew nothing of the subject, and did not seem to consider it as within the scope of their powers. If inserted in your miscellany, it may possibly meet the eye of one better informed; and should this be case, any explanation of the business, through the medium of the Repository, will be acceptable to many of its readers in this part of the kingdom. SIR, JOHN HARRISON. Manchester, Feb. 13, 1822. T is with considerable diffidence I that I'intrude upon the notice of the readers of the Monthly Repository; but being convinced that the subject to which I wish to draw their attention, is one which, if it were more universally considered, would be productive of much good, I have been thus induced to act, no less influenced by a principle of duty, than a desire to promote the interests of Unitarianism. A few months ago, a religious society was formed by several ardent friends to the cause of pure and uncorrupted Christianity in this town, for the purpose of promoting a spirit of free inquiry, by the liberal discussion of the leading doctrines of Christianity. The meetings are held once every week, and the discussions carried on in a candid and impartial manner, under the superintendence of a conductor who officiates as chairman for the evening. There are a few short rules prepared for the government of the society, which are subscribed by the members, each of whom is allowed to introduce his friends. From amongst the gentlemen constituting the society, a number of persons are chosen to act as conductors; whose duty it is, in rotation, to deliver a short discourse on some religious subject, of which a week's previous notice has been given, so that every person may, in the interval, acquaint himself with the subject, and come prepared to give his opinion. The meetings are opened by singing and prayer, and concluded, after the debate, with a short prayer. By these means are the great and leading doctrines of Christianity brought before their view, and become not only more thoroughly understood, but more deeply impressed upon the mind. Some are, thereby, led to inquire into the truth of those doctrines which they have, perhaps, adopted without inquiry, and profess ed to believe without understanding. Its members are led into a more minute examination of the evidence upon which their belief is founded; and that must naturally tend to a better acquaintance with the Scriptures, and to the elucidation of many parts of those writings which had before appeared to them "hard to be understood:" thus, too, are they better prepared "to give to every one that asketh of them, a reason of the hope that is in them." It also promotes an interest in that most pure religion which too many of the world are inclined to think they sufficiently estimate by an attendance at a place of public worship one day out of seven, and by now and then contributing towards the accomplishment of some desirable object or support of a charitable institution. It tends to the instruction and improvement of each individual, by all imparting their own information and knowledge for the benefit of the community. And, lastly, it excites a degree of fellowship and brotherly-kindness amongst the members, and knits them more closely together in the support of that doctrine which they profess: an object, I fear, more to be wished than realized in the congregations of Unitarian Christians. It is to me a matter of regret, that they do not "exhibit the Ben David on the Mosaic History of the Creation. pleasing picture" held out in the example of our great Master and his immediate followers, in cordially uniting both rich and poor in the labours of love, and in offices of Christian charity. These, indeed, do not appear to me all the advantages which may be de. rived from societies of this description; for if every Unitarian congregation in the empire were to form themselves into similar societies, they would not only derive the benefits before pointed out, but they would thereby most effectually promote a more extensive knowledge of the doctrines of Unitarianism: a religion which, however it may have met with the censure of many well-meaning, but mistaken Christians, only requires to be known, in order that it may be duly estimated. Such societies, if properly encouraged by the Unitarians themselves and their ministers, would not long be in existence without exciting the attention of the world; and that attention once excited, would lead to inquiry as to our doctrines. Inquiry is all we wish, is all we ask for: we do not urge, we do not desire any one to profess our faith unless perfectly convinced of its truth. Belief without conviction is a blind faith which can produce no good effects. The wish of the Unitarians is, that the gospel (and that alone) may be the standard of every man's faith; feeling convinced as they do, that the more the Scriptures are searched, the more their religion will flourish. Societies of this nature, though at first they may not appear of much consequence, yet they are calculated to produce many important advantages to the community at large. But even admitting for a moment, that there is no probability of their ever attaining such importance, yet ought they to be encouraged for the good they must naturally produce amongst their members. Many institutions which, at their commencement, appeared under more unfavourable auspices, are now flourishing in vigour, and why may we not indulge the hope that these, like others, may increase and flourish, if they are adapted to answer any good end? Should your opinion coincide with mine, that such institutions are worthy of public attention, you will much 95 oblige me by the insertion of these SIR, [N my last letter (p. 24) I endeaVom da to remove Mr. Belshan's objection to the authenticity of the Mosaic history. I next attempt to prove that it is not chargeable with the vulgar errors which this writer imputes to it. In justice to himself and to Moses, Mr. B. has specified these errors. To deal in vague charges, dictated by a love of paradox, by an affectation of novelty, or a regard to popular prejudice, is not the character of this intrepid inquirer. Reason and conviction alone guide his enlightened mind; and though he may occasionally fall into error, and to err is human, the diffusion of moral and religious knowledge, the substitution of genuine in the room of spurious views on the subject of revelation, are the sole object of his animating toil. And what man is there who can boast of more ardent zeal, of greater talents, of more abundant success in the same honourable field? Moses, according to Mr. Belsham, regarded the firmament as a solid arch, but the sacred writer, it is certain, held no such opinion; in proof of this I copy a note from Essenus, a little publication which Mr. B. seems not to have perused: "The original of expanse is regua, a word that signifies mere space or extension. The terms by which the firmament is expressed in Greek and Latin, and in many modern tongues, exhibit a remarkable instance of the influence of philosophical opinion on language. Early in the second century, an Egyptian philosopher taught, that the firmament or heavens consisted of solid orbs, each star being supposed to be fixed in a solid, transparent sphere, like crystal. This notion was doubtless not new: it prevailed in Egypt ages before, though from Ptolemy, who, with some additions and modifications, no doubt first systematically taught it, it went by the name of the Ptolemaic system. It is from the prevalence of this opinion, that apewa in Greck, and firmamentum in Latin, came to be applied to the heavens, though these nouns imply something firm and solid. Hence, too, the epithets χαλκοβατης, κραταιος, are used by Homer and other poets, to characterize the heavens. Moses, on the other hand, has employed a term which denotes mere expansion or extension; and this circumstance shews, either that he was untainted with the vain theories of the Egyptians, or, which is more probable, that he lived in an age antecedent to them. The seventy translators thought it wiser to follow the Egyptians than their Lawgiver in this respect. They wrote their translation in Egypt, and, in conformity to the prejudices of that people, used Epεwμa, which signifies a solid mass. This warrants us in concluding, that the system, which in after days was taught by Ptolemy, prevailed in Egypt before the authors of the Septuagint." Mr. Belsham further imputes to Moses the puerile notion that a reservoir of water exists in the heavens, supported by the firmament as a solid arch, and that from this celestial reservoir are dispensed the rain and the dew. The Jewish Lawgiver well understood, as appears from his own words, that rain and dew are caused by evaporation from the ground. "Before this," says he, "no plant of the field existed; no herb of the field grew for the Lord God caused no showers to descend, but thick vapours issued from the ground, and drenched the whole surface of the earth." The verse on which Mr. Belsham's misconception is founded, is thus rendered in Essenus: "And God said, Let there be an expanse amidst the fluids, that it may separate one fluid from another; and God made the expanse and separated the fluids below the expanse from the fluids above the expanse, and so it was done." To this the following note is subjoined by the translator: "The term fluid comprehends water and air, and Moses uses meim with the same latitude. This appears indisputable from the two following facts: the divine historian has not mentioned the air by any appropriate name; and if it be not included in meim, he has not mentioned it at all, which is incredible." The same writer represents the fluids, signified by meim, as producing birds as well as fishes: "And God said, let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life; and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." This is the Common Version, and strictly conformable to the original. The meaning then is, Let the waters bring forth the fishes and let the air bring forth the fowl. That the water, indeed, produced the birds, as well as the fishes, is thus asserted in 2 Esdras vi. 47: "Upon the fifth day thou saidst unto the seventh part, where the waters were gathered, that it should bring forth living creatures, fowls and fishes." When we read, then, that God separated the fluids below the expanse from the fluids above in the expanse, we are to understand the waters below the expanse on the surface of the earth, and the air in the expanse above the surface of the earth. Thus Moses, by a fair interpretation of his own language, is rescued from the vulgar notion, if a notion so vulgar ever could prevail, that waters exist above the firmament, similar to those below it. The philosophers of Greece, and probably those of Egypt and Chaldea before them, were uniformly of opinion, that air and water were distinct elements, utterly incommunicable with each other. Moses, on the contrary, whom Mr. B. supposes not to have been exempt from the grossest errors, thought these elements so analogous, that he comprehends them under the same general term, and I leave it to the reader to determine whose notion is most conformable to the discoveries of modern philosophy. "It is evident," adds Mr. B., p. 21, "that this writer believed that light might exist in the absence of the sun, as it appears to do in the morning and evening twilight, when the sun is below the horizon, or in a cloudy day, when he is invisible; and of course he believed that the principal use of the sun was not to create, but to increase the day-light." I wonder that a writer so sagacious as Mr. Belsham did not suspect that he was doing great injustice to the character of Moses; as he ascribes to him errors, from which al descriptions of men, the ignorant as well as the wise, appear ever to have been exempt, for so uniformly is the Ben David on the Mosaic History of the Creation. approach of the sun connected with the light of day and his departure with night, that every person capable of reflection from the beginning of time to the present hour, must have associated them in his mind as cause and effect; and to suppose that Moses did not form the same association, is to suppose him a child or an idiot, when he composed his narrative. It is reasonable to conclude, that creation, as the effect of Omnipotence, was a simple, undivided act, and the words of Moses favour the conclusion. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." This statement, be it observed, represents the works of God, the sun and the light, the moon and the stars, the land, the sea, the air, together with all animated nature as now in being; but it is too summary for an author who wished to divide creation "into steps and stages, and to enable the slow eye of human imagination to accompany the motions of Omnipotence." This renders a detail necessary, and all that follows, from the first verse to the end of the chapter, is but a detail. In perusing this detail, indeed, the reader is apt to impose on himself, by regarding those as acts of creation, which are but the developement of things already created. The narrative, however, is altogether anthropomorphitical, and has no more reality than the motion of a body which, though really at rest, appears to change its position merely because the eye which beholds it is itself in motion. In this very chapter oceurs an example which renders my assertion obvious and conclusive. Moses represents man as made in the image of God; and though Adam and Eve were already created, we meet in the sequel with two successive accounts which, detached from the preceding history, would imply that they were not yet in being, but which are, in reality, intended to be fuller and more adequate details of their creation. Now, when Moses, after stating the general proposition that God created the heavens and the earth, enters on the detail: he begins with the last and lowest step, thus conforming to a figure which is called hysteronproteron, and which frequently occurs in ancient writers. By this inversion of 97 his ideas, he separates the light from the sun, its primary source; depending on the good sense of his readers for comprehending their necessary connexion, and the occasion of their being thus detached and inverted in the narrative. It may, however, be observed, that as Moses began his detail with the light, so, after going through the round of inanimate creation, he ends with the sun; thus leading the imagination to recognize their connexion, and to join them as cause and effect, like the two extremes of a circle, coalescing in one common point. This process appears to me to have been dictated by the most exalted wisdom; and surely it must be deemed extremely incongruous to consider the Jewish lawgiver, (as Mr. B. does consider him,) as having delivered the sublimest truths of natural religion, with a simplicity and majesty unri valled amidst the productions of the human mind, and at the same breath to charge him with vulgar errors, which, if true, sink him below the level of common sense. Whoever is acquainted with ancient compositions, must be aware, that to understand them in many parts it is necessary to know the circumstances of their respective authors; and to investigate the opinions and practices to which they allude and on which they are grounded, is the principal object of enlightened criticism. It is not easy to find a passage more illustrative of the truth of this assertion, than the following words of Moses: "And he made the stars." From this Mr. B. takes occasion to say, that "the stars he (Moses) regarded as ornamental spangles, the formation and collocation of which was hardly worthy of his notice." I wonder, that as Mr. B. makes Moses to suppose that the firmament was a solid arch, supporting the waters above, he did not proceed a step farther, and make him suppose them to be icicles hanging from the lowest surface of the celestial reservoir; the waters escaping being liable, from their great elevation, to freeze and to reflect the lustre of the sun which still shines on them, though set with regard to us. This would make the system palmed on the historian of creation uniform and brilliant; and though, from its brit |