in the cenfure of making a multiplicity of gods, or in any danger of introducing more objects of worship. They therefore call themselves unitarians, and think themfelves perfectly clear of the charge of giving any countenance to idolatry. Indeed, this is an accufation to which the Athanafian's themselves plead not guilty. I think, however, that it applies not only to them, but even to the Arians, and therefore, that ftrictly speaking, the latter are no more entitled to the appellation of unitarians than the former. My reasons for this are the following:

1. If greatness of power be a foundation. on which to apply the title of GOD, they who believe that Chrift made the world, and that he constantly preferves and governs it, must certainly confider him as enjoying a very high rank in the fcale of divinity, whatever reason they may have to decline giving him the title of God. They must allow that he is a much greater being, or God, than Apollo, or even Jupiter, was ever supposed to be. His derivation from another, and a greater God, is no reason why

he

he fhould not likewife be confidered as a God. The polytheism of the heathens did not confist in making two or more equal and independent gods, but in having one fupreme God, and the reft fubordinate, which is the very thing that the Arians hold.

We have no idea of any power greater than that of creation, which the Arians afcribe to Chrift, especially if by creation be meant creation out of nothing; and the Arians do not now fay that the Father first produced matter, and that then the Son formed it into worlds, &c. a notion indeed, advanced, as will be feen, by Philo and Methodius among the ancients, but too ridiculous to be retained by any; fo that whatever he meant by creation, the Arians afcribe it to Chrift.

2. Upon the principle which is adopted by many Arians, we must acknowledge not only two Gods, but gods without number. According to fome, Chrift made this folar fyftem only. There muft, therefore, have been other beings, of equal rank with him, to whom the creation, or formation, of the other systems was affigned; and obferva

tion

tion fhows, that there are millions and millions of fyftems. The probability is, that they fill the whole extent of infinite fpace. Here, then, are infinitely more, as well as infinitely greater gods, than the heathens ever thought of.

But I would obferve, that the modern Arians, in afcribing to Chrift the formation. of the whole folar fyftem, afcribe more to him than the ancient Arians did; for they did not suppose that he made any thing more than this world, because they had no knowledge of any other. Had the ancients had any proper idea of the extent of the folar fyftem; had they believed that it contained as many worlds as there are primary and secondary planets belonging to it, all of which might stand in as much need of the interpofition of their maker as that which we inhabit, they would, probably, have been staggered at the thought of giving fuch an extenfive power and agency to any one created being; much lefs is it probable that they would at once have gone fo far as the generality of modern Arians, who fuppofe that Chrift made the whole universe. That

would have been to give him fo much power, and fo extensive an agency, that the Supreme Father would not have been missed, if, after the production of fuch a Son, he had himself either remained an inactive fpectator in the universe, or even retired out of existence. For why might not the power of felf-fubfiftence be imparted to another as well as that of creating out of nothing.

3. If we confider the train of reasoning by which we infer that there is only one God, it will be found, that, according to the Arian hypothefis, Chrift himself may be that one God. We are led to the idea of God by inquiring into the cause of what we fee; and the being which is able to produce all that we fee, or know, we call God. We cannot, by the light of nature, go any farther; and the reason why we fay that there is only one God, is, that we see fuch marks of uniformity in the whole fyftem, and fuch a mutual relation of all the parts to each other, that we cannot think that one part was contrived or executed by one being, and another part by another being. Whoever it was that made the

plants,

plants, for inftance, must also have made the animals that feed upon them. Whatever being made, and superintends, the land, must also have made, and muft fuperintend the water, &c. We alfo cannot fuppofe that the earth, had one author, and the moon another, or indeed any part of the folar fyftem. And for the fame reason that the whole folar fyftem had one author, all the other fyftems, which have any relation to it (and the probability is that the whole univerfe is one connected system) had the fame author. There can be no reafon, therefore, why any perfons fhould stop at fuppofing that Christ made the solar system only. For the fame reason that his province includes this fyftem, it ought to include all the universe, which is giving him an abfolute omniprefence, as well as omnipotence; and I fhall then leave others to dif tinguish between this being, and that God whom they would place above him. For my own part, I fee no room for any thing. above him. Imagination itself cannot make any difference between them. If, therefore, the Arian principle be purfued to its pro

per