dmits, into a plain proof
that the doctrine of the Trinity cannot be such a contradiction as the
Unitarians represented it to be.

The controversy between Priestley and Horsley brings us nearly to the
close of the eighteenth century. There had been a considerable secession
of English clergymen to the Unitarians,[466] and Horsley's masterly
tracts were a very opportune defence of the Catholic doctrine. On one
point he and his adversary thoroughly concurred--viz., that there could
be no medium between making Christ a mere man and owning Him to be in
the highest sense God. Arianism in its various forms had become by this
time well-nigh obsolete in England. It was a happy thing for the Church
that this point had been virtually settled. The alternative was now
clearly set before English Churchmen--'Choose ye whom ye will serve; if
Christ be God, follow him; if not, be prepared to give up all notions of
a creature worship.' The Unitarians at the close of the eighteenth
century all took their stand on this issue. Such rhapsodies as those
which were indulged in by early Socinians as well as Arians were now
unheard. The line of demarcation was strictly drawn between those who
did and those who did not believe in the true Godhead and distinct
personality of the Second and Third Persons of the Blessed Trinity, so
that from henceforth men might know on what ground they were standing.

Here the sketch of this famous controversy, which was certainly a
marked feature of the eighteenth century, may fitly close. But a few
general remarks in conclusion seem requisite.

And first as to the nomenclature. The name claimed by the
anti-Trinitarians has, for want of a better, been perforce adopted in
the foregoing pages. But in calling them Unitarians, we must do so under
protest. The advocates of the Catholic doctrine might with equal
correctness be termed, from one point of view, Unitarians, as they are
from another point of view termed Trinitarians. For they believe in the
Unity of God as firmly as they believe in the Trinity. And they hold
that there is no real contradiction in combining those two subjects of
belief; because the difficulty of reconciling the Trinity with the Unity
of the Godhead in reality proceeds simply from our human and necessary
incapacity to comprehend the nature of the union. Therefore they cannot
for a moment allow to disbelievers in the Trinity the title of
Unitarians, so as to imply that the latter monopolise t