White gives of himself at this interesting period, was published during his temporary reconciliation to the Church of England. In the preface to his last work, which has appeared since his entire and hearty adoption and open avowal of Unitarian sentiments, he expresses himself in quite a different strain.

"My doubts of the truth of the established views began with the systematic and devout study of the Scriptures, which I undertook in 1814, when, free from the literary engagements which, in the service of England as well as of my native country, had occupied me during the four preceding years, I removed to Oxford, for the exclusive purpose of devoting myself to theology. In the year 1818, (as it may be distinctly proved by the journals I kept at that time, and which are still in my possession,) I arrived at the Unitarian view of Christianity; but the perfect obscurity in which I was living, and the consideration that I had not then published any thing, except in Spanish, appeared to me a sufficient ground for not making a public avowal of my conviction. Having, till about 1824, continued in that state, and, in spite of difficulties, resulting from the notion of Orthodoxy, faithfully attached to Christianity, a revival of my early mental habits, and of those devotional sentiments which are inseparably connected with the idea of intellectual surrender to some church, induced me again to acquiesce in the established doctrines, not from conviction, not by the discovery of sounder proofs than those which I had found insufficient, but chiefly by the power of that sympathy which tends to assimilation with those we love and respect." Heresy and Orthodoxy, p. vi.

In 1817 he published at Oxford a small volume under the following title: "Preparatory Observations on the Study of Religion. By a Clergyman of the Church of England." We have not seen it. His "Letters from Spain" appeared in 1822; a work replete with interest, and containing more authentic and valuable information respecting the private, domestic, and religious condition of his countrymen than any other in our language. In 1825, while the Catholic question was pending in England, he sent out his "Evidence against Catholicism," and "The Poor Man's Preservative against Popery." Both these works bear marks of the author's inability entirely to forget the cruel wrongs, personal, domestic, and civil, which he had suffered from his unnatural Mother Church. Accordingly he does not evince, as it seems to us, a disposition to make sufficient allowance for the degraded intellectual and social condition of those countries where Catholic

abuses have manifested themselves under the worst forms, or for the fact that, as the countries in question, in the gradual progress of civilization, have elevated themselves in the scale of morals, refinement, and civil freedom, though still continuing Catholic, many of these abuses have disappeared. On the other hand, however, we have abundant cause to admire the fulness of his information and experience as here displayed, which has enabled him, in more than one instance, to convict Mr. Charles Butler, the most candid and plausible, if not the ablest, of the Catholic advocates, either of wilful disingenuousness, or palpable and unaccountable misapprehension. It also gives us pleasure to add, that the tendency of his works against the Catholics is not to awaken acrimony of feeling on either side. He readily concedes that there have been and are among them some of the brightest examples of the Christian. character; and, though deeming it neither expedient nor safe to trust political power to any considerable extent even with conscientious and devout Catholics, he still would have them protected, both by law and public opinion, in the right to worship God according to their own convictions of truth and duty. The ground he takes is this: that it is only under governments which are materially modified and controlled by the element of Protestantism in some form or other, that Catholics themselves can properly be said to be free; that the Catholics themselves. in England, for example, are now freer and more independent, religiously as well as politically, than they would be, were the Papal ascendency to be reëstablished there, as it exists in Italy and Spain.

His temporary reconciliation to the English establishment in 1824, though it secured to him, while it lasted, the confidence and society of many esteemed friends, could not and did not afford the hoped-for repose of mind. His return to Unitarianism, as the only consistent, Scriptural, and entirely practicable doctrine, ought properly to be dated, it would seem, from 1829; the events of that year doing not a little to open his eyes to the true character of a church to which, unhappily, he was bound by so many adventitious associations. For a time he still conformed, taking refuge as a last resort in a modification of the Sabellian theory; but all would not do. "The devout contrivance," he says, "would not bear examination; Sabellianism is only Unitarianism disguised in words." The rest of the story he shall tell himself.

"In this state, however, I passed five or six years; but the return to the clear and definite Unitarianism in which I had formerly been, was as easy as it was natural. An almost accidental (if the result had been to make me a Trinitarian, most people would call it providential) correspondence with a gentleman, (then personally unknown to me, and whom subsequently I have seen but once,) who had some years ago resigned his preferment to profess himself a Unitarian, took place during part of last summer and part of the ensuing winter. This was the occasion of my becoming aware of the flimsiness of the veil, which had long somewhat concealed from me the real state of my religious belief. This flimsy veil once torn, I had no difficult theological questions to examine; they had all been settled before. Whether I was to continue apparently a member of the Establishment, was a point on which I could not hesitate a moment. For the greatest part of more than twenty years I had employed all my powers, in a manner hardly justifiable except on enthusiastic principles, with the object of continuing in the Church. My only excuse for this, must be found in the religious habits which I deeply imbibed in youth. I do not absolutely reproach myself for having so long indulged the disinterested sympathies which made me linger in connexion with the Church, when my understanding had fully rejected her principal doctrines at all events, I derive from that fact the satisfaction of being assured, that, far from having embraced Unitarianism in haste, the only fault of which I cannot clear myself is, that of reluctance and dilatoriness to follow my conviction in its favor." Ibid. pp. viii., ix.

We hope that all those who hailed our author's rejection of Catholic superstitions, and his subsequent adoption of the Orthodoxy of the Church of England, as signal manifestations of the force of truth on a fair, inquisitive, and able mind, may be willing to see, and have manliness enough to acknowledge the coöperation of the same causes in his conviction and avowal of Unitarian sentiments. To those who, instead of this, are ready to blame him for what they will denominate an unpopular and imprudent step, wholly destructive of his authority and influence with the public, he replies:

"I commit my past services in the cause of Truth (whatever they may be) to the care of that Providence, which, if in fact I have been useful, must have employed me, though a humble instrument. Of consequences we are very incompetent judges: on principles alone can we depend with confidence and certainty. If the consideration of usefulness could be allowed in my case, SPAIN, my native country, would long, long since have had my services. But

dissembling, whether in deference to Transubstantiation or the Athanasian Creed, is equally hateful to me.

66

Yet, why any real good of which I may have been the occasion should be destroyed by a fresh proof of my love of honesty and fair dealing, is what I cannot conceive. If any thing could invalidate or weaken the force of my testimony in regard to the corruptions of Popery, it would be my SILENCE in favor of what I deem other corruptions. The great Chillingworth would have added weight to his unrivalled works, if he had not permitted his subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles to remain in full force, when neither his judgment could approve of it, nor his natural honesty conceal his change. As to myself, I have not enjoyed any of the temporal advantages of Orthodoxy; and it is well attested, that, at a time when I might conscientiously have taken preferment, I solemnly resolved never to accept it. But, having subscribed to the Articles for the mere purpose of qualifying myself for the occasional performance of clerical duties, I feel bound modestly to recall that subscription before my death; and to declare, that I am satisfactorily convinced, not only that the DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY is not Scriptural, but also that the whole Patristical theology, which makes up the greatest part of the Thirty-nine Articles, consists of groundless speculations, which could never have obtained currency among Christians, without the aid of a false philosophy. I profess Christianity as a UNITARIAN; acknowledging ONE GOD IN ONE PERSON, and Jesus of Nazareth as my guide to His Father and my Father, His God and my God." Ibid. pp. iv., v.

It will be recollected, that in an extract from one of Mr. White's earlier publications, we gave the suspicions he entertained respecting the practical influences of Unitarianism and Unitarian worship, when from obvious causes he knew nothing about the matter. For the benefit of those who entertain similar suspicions, though convinced that in speculation the argument from Scripture as well as reason is on the side of the Unitarians, we give the following statements of our author, made since he has been in a condition to speak from actual experience.

"I trust I may still venture to add a few words respecting what I have experienced and observed since I fairly and honestly began to act in full conformity with my conviction. Having never before been in any Dissenting place of worship whatever, and conceiving from what I had heard, that the absence of a regular Liturgy in all, and that of real devotion in those of Unitarians, made them quite offensive to persons accustomed to the Church service, I strongly feared I should be obliged to follow Milton's example,

and abstain from public worship. Wishing, however, to satisfy myself by personal observation, I went, soon after my arrival in this town of Liverpool, to one of the Unitarian chapels. The effect which the service produced upon me was recorded in my private journal as soon as I returned to my lodgings; but the passage is too long to be inserted here. Suffice it to declare, as I do in the most solemn manner, that I never enjoyed a more devout and sublime impression than I received there. My almost constantly repeated attendance has not weakened the effect of the truly sublime Unitarian worship with which I have become acquainted. I have since attended divine worship in another chapel of the same denomination; and the original impression has been confirmed. Sunday, which owing to the constant struggle of my mind at church, and the frequent internal rejection of passages in the Liturgy, was formerly to me a day of pain and suffering, is now one of enjoyment. The admirable combination of beautiful hymns, with prayers no less beautiful, and a sermon in which I have hitherto never failed to find instruction and support to my religious feelings, all contribute to make me enjoy the service of the Lord's Day. I must add, that I have never joined congregations in which attention and devotion were more visible in all, including the numerous charity children who attend the service. It is a great misfortune, that the spirit of Orthodoxy stands like 'a great gulf fixed' between Churchmen and Unitarians. Could impartial good men 'come and see,' though they might remain attached to their opinions, they would be certainly delivered from a multitude of most uncharitable prejudices." — Ibid. pp. x., xi.

We have left ourselves space to speak but very briefly of our author's two last works. His "Second Travels of an Irish Gentleman in Search of a Religion" is the best and most satisfactory answer which has appeared as yet to the sophistry and pedantry of Mr. Moore's noted defence of the Catholics, published a few years since under a similar title. Parts even of the fictitious narrative, though this is obviously a secondary matter with the writer, are sustained with great interest and spirit; and on this account, as well as for the judgment and discrimination with which the work abounds, we recommend it to all, and to those particularly who think to settle theological questions by an appeal to the Fathers, or who are apt to take alarm at the alleged infidel tendencies of Protestantism. We had marked several striking passages for quotation; but must content ourselves with giving the two following, the first of which is taken from a conversation between the "Irish Gentleman" and his Mentor, Mr. Fitzgerald. The latter says:

VOL. XX. 3D S. VOL. II. NO. I.

17