requires no aid from the civil magistrate; that places of worship can be built, and salaries of teachers provided, without any tax enforced by law. Let any person, whom you think qualified, teach and exhort others, whether he be in holy orders, as it is called, or not; and if they be qualified to teach, they are certainly qualified to administer all the ordinances of the gospel; baptism and the Lord's Supper. I know of no exclusive right that any men, or body of men, have to this privilege.

But call no man master upon earth, not even Mr. Wesley, for one is our Master, even Christ, as one is our Father, or the Author of our being, even God. Keep your minds open to the investigation of truth, and get from every quarter as much light and knowledge as you can. As you are, I rejoice in your success and increasing numbers; but I certainly should rejoice much more if to your just zeal you could, laying aside your prejudices, add more knowledge and more charity.

I am, my Christian brethren,
Your sincere well-wisher,

Birmingham, June 1, 1791.

J. PRIESTLEY.

No. XV.

Phila

PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION OF THE "APPEAL TO THE SERIOUS AND CANDID PROFESSORS OF CHRISTIANITY." delphia, 1794.*

(See Vol. II. p. 383.)

PERCEIVING in this country some symptoms of an alarm that has been taken at my religious principles, as an Unitarian Christian, and being persuaded that it has arisen from nothing but an ignorance of their nature and tendency, I have thought proper to reprint a small tract, of which more than fifty thousand have been disposed of in England,† but which does not appear to be known here. It contains a short account of whatever can be thought most dangerous in the Unitarian principles, together with the reasons on which they are founded; and when they are attentively considered, I am persuaded that, if they do not give satisfaction to the candid and impartial with respect to their truth, they will with respect to their

innocence.

Since all persons must, I think, agree in maintaining that opinions are of no consequence but as they influence the practice, what danger can reasonably be apprehended from any system of religion

* For a copy of this Preface, which I could not, after every inquiry in my power, procure in England, I have been indebted to the friendly communications of Mr. Taylor, of Philadelphia.

+ See Vol. II. p. 432; XXI. pp. 5, 7, notes.

which contains the doctrines of the being, the perfections, and providence of God, the divine missions of Moses and of Jesus, and a state of righteous retribution after death, which all Unitarians hold? Compared with these great articles, nothing besides can be of much practical importance; for these are the doctrines that most eminently lead to a good life and conversation, to form the good man and the good citizen, the man who will be exemplary in every relation of life.

It is, however, of secondary and of considerable importance that religion appear reasonable to thinking men; otherwise they will, without any farther examination, reject the whole. And on this account the Unitarian Christian presumes that his system has great advantages over every other form of Christianity, and therefore that the real friends of it are under considerable obligation to him: for at the same time that, with other Christians, he believes every thing that has the least favourable aspect on moral conduct, he holds nothing at which the reason that God has given to man can justly revolt, such as the doctrines of Transubstantiation and of the Trinity, which men have been required to believe, though they could not undertand them, and with respect to which it is said that reason must be sacrificed to faith.

Such doctrines as these, together with those of vicarious suffering, arbitrary election and reprobation, and eternal torments,* will not long be retained in this age of free inquiry: and surely the most orthodox Christian, as he will think himself, if he be a friend to virtue, would choose that a person should believe only as much as an Unitarian does, rather than have no religion at all; and this, if he know any thing of the world, he must be sensible will be the only alternative with thousands.

No person, however, who professes a regard to truth, will take umbrage at the freest discussion of any theoretical principles, for this must be favourable to truth; and happily in this truly free country, civil government does not interfere with the business of religion, so that free inquiry will meet with no obstruction to its producing its natural and happy effect. May the God of truth, by this and every other means, lead us into all truth. Every man may be supposed sincere in adopting this prayer; for how can it be the interest of any man to maintain an error?

THOUGH the government of England, in strict alliance with an established church, be very unfriendly to free inquiry, yet what we call liberality has made greater progress in that country than it appears to have done in this. At the request of a numerous body of members of the Church of England I once preached, though not in a consecrated place, immediately after the clergyman had read the service of the church. The very first congregation to which I preached after the riots in Birmingham, and this at the unanimous request of the minister and people, was one of Calvinistic Baptists; and, at my proposal, my own congregation at Birmingham once requested Mr. Berington, a Roman Catholic priest, to preach + At Amersham.

* See Vol. II. p. 64, note.

in my pulpit.* All Christians have topics with respect to which they are agreed, and on these they can enlarge, to the edification of other Christians, without introducing any thing that could give them the least offence, which every man who wishes to do good will endeavour to avoid.

Time, however, is requisite to produce every effect; and true liberality among those who differ from one another is a plant of slow growth, as every thing else of much value is: but I doubt not that, some time hence, the same amiable liberality and generous confidence that prevails among the different sects of Christians in England will prevail here, and in a still higher degree. Nothing on my part shall be wanting to bring about so desirable an end. I owe much, and hope to owe more, to this happy country; and every thing I can in any respect do for it in return, will ever be due from me to it.

PHILADELPHIA, June 30, 1794.†

No. XVI.

PREFACE TO THE "ORIGINALITY AND SUPERIOR EXCELLENCE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTIONS DEMONSTRATED." Northumberland,

1803.

(See Vol. XI. p. 15.)

THIS tract consists of some observations with which I conclude my "notes" on the five books of Moses, being intended to exhibit in one view the principal circumstances in which his institutions differ from those of the Egyptians, and other Heathen nations, from which it will appear that they could not have been derived from them. I print them in the form of a pamphlet, that it may fall into the hands of those who will not be possessed of so large a work as the "Notes on all the Books of Scripture." And the prejudices of many against the institutions of Moses, for want of properly attending to them, are so great, including even some Christians, that I wish to do every thing in my power towards removing them. To me the evidence of the divine mission of Moses is as convincing as that of Jesus; and the two systems of Judaism and Christianity are so connected, that it is impossible to reject the one

* See Vol. XV. p. 235, note; XX. pp. 517-521.

+ Dr. Priestley had very lately arrived from New York, where he landed June 4. To the "General View of Arguments for the Unity of God," &c., he prefixed the following Advertisement:

"In writing this small piece I have two objects; one is a cheap and extensive circulation, and the other to serve as a guide to those persons who may wish to preserve upon their minds a just idea of the place and value of any particular argument in a miscellaneous controversy, and to enable them to judge how far any particular advantage in argumentation affects the merits of the question in debate." Dr. Priestley to Mr. Lindsey, "June 24, 1794. I am printing an edition of my Appeal and Trial of Elwall. Part of the impression will be sent to New York, where things are in as great forwardness as here. I shall enclose the preface.”

and retain the other, though Dr. Geddes* and others pretend to do this. His objections I have endeavoured to obviate in the course of my "Notes;"t but I thought that the best method of doing this would be to exhibit in one view all the principal points of difference between the institutions of Moses and those of Heathen nations, that their difference and superiority may be the more manifest.

It will be equally evident from the same view that these institutions are superior to any thing that could have been devised by Moses himself: for allowing him to have learned all that he possibly could in Egypt and Arabia, it is obvious to ask where could he have acquired more wisdom than the Egyptians or Arabians were possessed of. His narrative, which is written with the greatest simplicity, shews that his mental powers were by no means extraordinary; and according to his account, the nation at the head of which he was placed, was conducted in such a manner as no person of even common understanding in that situation, and with no other resources than he could naturally command, would have conducted them.

In Egypt the Israelites were a completely enslaved nation: the Egyptians derived much emolument from their labour: and being a warlike nation, they would, no doubt, take the most effectual methods to keep their slaves under. In what manner then were they emancipated? According to Moses it was by an extraordinary interposition of Divine power; end this being admitted, it cannot be denied that all the facts are easily accounted for: but unbelievers will not admit the miracles. Let us, then, see whether the general facts, which all must allow, can be accounted for without them.

The narrative of Moses is so particular, that it must be allowed by every attentive reader to have been written at the time of the transactions, and therefore the general facts must be admitted, or there can be no dependence on the truth of any history whatever. Now a nation of slaves could not have been emancipated, and have left the country of their masters, without some power superior to theirs but the Israelites had no such power, nor had they the assistance of any foreign power, nor was force made use of. There was no fighting, or contest of any kind. What then could have so overawed their powerful masters, as to induce them to let their slaves go in peace? Nothing, surely, but such a train of awful and miraculous events as Moses describes.

When, however, the consternation into which the Egyptians had been thrown, and during which the Israelites were allowed to depart, was abated, they were pursued, and by an armed force which it was not in their power to withstand. How, then, did this nation of slaves, encumbered, as they must have been, with all their cattle, and property of every kind, and who did not expect any opposition, escape? Still there was no battle, nor were the Israelites prepared to make any resistance. Moses says that all this great host by which they were pursued perished in the Red Sea, which + See ibid. pp. 8, 41,

* See Vol. XI. p. 40, note.

was divided to make them a passage; and I cannot imagine any other way by which their deliverance at that time, and the events that immediately followed, can be rationally accounted for. They were not pursued after they had crossed that narrow sea, and they continued a whole year within a very few days' march of Egypt, and yet unmolested by their former masters.

That such a man as Moses should continue at the head of this most refractory nation is a circumstance not a little extraordinary, as he seems to have been destitute of all the talents that are generally the most requisite for such a situation. He was neither an orator nor a warrior. In Egypt his brother Aaron spake for him, and in the engagement with the Amalekites Joshua commanded, while he was praying at a distance.

Let us now consider in what manner this Moses, supposed to be so very wise and politic, proceeded after he had got his nation fairly out of Egypt. He had at least two millions of people to feed, and to provide a new settlement for. In these circumstances there was no time to lose. The multitude must be fed, and the wilderness could not supply them: and yet they continued forty years where a common caravan could not have subsisted a week. According to Moses they were fed by miracle; and I do not see how it could possibly have been done in any other way. Except the more fertile part of Arabia, which was already occupied, they were surrounded by warlike and powerful nations, and some of them they must dislodge. But were they prepared for such an attempt, or did they form an alliance with some of them to assist them in the conquest of others? No; feeble as they were, they depended upon themselves only. Inferior, however, as they were in point of strength, there seems to have been no chance of their success in the desperate circumstances in which they were but by a sudden invasion, before the people invaded had time to make preparation to oppose them. But this was not done. They continued forty years in this unsettled state, and in this time all the neighbouring nations had time to prepare to repel them whenever they should attempt an invasion. It is also to be considered that at this time Moses was fourscore years old, and he would naturally wish to see his nation settled before his death.

That the Israelites bore their situation with great impatience is sufficiently evident. Many times would they have preferred returning to their bondage in Egypt. By what power, then, were they restrained so long in a state so inconvenient and irksome to them? Though they were no match for the warlike inhabitants of Canaan, they might, to all appearance, have overpowered the Edomites, the Moabites, or the Ammonites. But these nations they never molested, though they were by no means friendly to them. They even went round the whole of the country of the Edomites, rather than force a passage through any part of it; and yet after this forty years of wandering they found no difficulty in conquering and extirpating the Amorites, and all the inhabitants of Canaan, though it does not appear that they were then any better prepared to make the attack than when they came out of Egypt. The narrative of Moses explains all this to the greatest satisfaction;