illustrations are entirely Calvinistical. This essay is not very methodical. It contains, however, a great many acute observations, and sarcastic remarks upon the systems of those who have adopted the generally current notions respecting natural religion. The author repeatedly and solemnly declares, that he attacks doctrines and not men—that he has no quarrel with any man, nor means to hurt any one. The metaphysical arguments in favour of his side of the question, as well as what may not improperly be called the historical proofs, he has left to others, esteeming such kind of evidence as of small value in regard to settling the point at issue. His object is to prove from the Scriptures, that the knowledge of God comes not by nature, innate ideas, intuition, reason, &c. but only by Revelation. But we must refer to the treatise itself, it being impossible in this place to give even an abridgment of his reasoning. It may be observed, however, that he exposes in the most unreserved language, and denies, that the merely holding that there is a first, original, unoriginated cause of all things, &c. is the same with the knowledge of God, whose character and works are revealed in Scripture.
In the course of the same year, 1769, he addressed a letter on the "Eternal Generation of the Son of God," to Messrs Smith and Ferrier. These two gentlemen had been clergymen in the church of Scotland. They published their reasons of separation from the established church. They had adopted all the sentiments of Mr Glass, who was a most strict independent, and both of them died in the Glassite communion. The late Dr Dalgliesh of Peebles had, about the time of their leaving the church, published a new theory respecting the sonship of Christ, and what is not a little singular, it had the merit of originality, and had never before occurred to any theologian. He held the tri-personality of Deity, but denied the eternal Sonship of the second person of the Godhead, and was of opinion that this filiation only took place when the divine nature was united to the human, in the person of Christ, Immanuel, God with us. Novel as this doctrine was, all the Scottish Independents, with a very few exceptions, embraced it. The difference between Dalgliesh and the Arians consists in this, that the second person of the Trinity, according to him, is God, equal with the Father, whilst the latter maintain in a certain sense his supreme exaltation, yet they consider him as subordinate to the Father. Mr Barclay's letter states very clearly the Scriptural arguments usually adduced in favour of the eternal generation of the Son of God. It is written with great moderation, and in an excellent spirit.
In 1771, he published a letter, "On the Assurance of Faith," addressed to a gentleman who was a member of Mr Cudworth's congregation in London. Cudworth was the person who made a distinguished figure in defending the celebrated Mr Hervey against the acrimonious attack of Mr Robert Sandeman, who was a Glassite. Excepting in some peculiar forms of expression, Cudworth's views of the assurance of faith did not materially differ from Mr Barclay's. There appeared also in the same year, "A Letter on Prayer," addressed to an Independent congregation in Scotland.
The Rev. Anthony Dow, minister of Fettercairn, died in 1772. The presbytery of Fordoun seized this opportunity of gratifying their spleen; they prohibited Mr Barclay from preaching in the kirk of Fettercairn, and used all their influence to prevent him from being employed, not only within their bounds, which lie in what is called the Mearns, but they studied to defame him in all quarters. The clergy of the neighbouring district, that is, in Angus, were much more friendly. They were ready to admit him into their pulpits, and he generally preached every Lord's day, during the subsequent autumn, winter, and spring. Multitudes from all parts of the country crowded to hear him.
