On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
Slackheath 9 May 8 , 1815 . Sir . IF your correspondent of the last month , ( p , 216 ) "A Member of the Established Church , " happens to be unacquainted with Dr . John Taylor ' s Key to the Writings of St . Paul , I beg leave , through the medium of
your Repository , to reeommend it to hi # perusal . To enter upon a ground of argument which seems to me to have been fully explored and cleared , was not my intention . —I am ready to acknowledge that some of my reasons for rejecting the system of Calvin ought not •* to have weight" with
any Christian , who , finding " a doctrine of scripture , correctly understood '* ( as he supposes ) " to be repugnant to his reason , and moral feeling , believes still , that he as a Christian is bound to yield an assent
and to act accordingly . " The obligation appears to rne not merely questionable but impossible ; and for the following reasonsr Christianity which appeals to our reason and moral feelings , for it is addressed to men , cannot oblige to the surrender of them .
The question is not now , whether Calvinism be or be not repugnant to our reason and moral feeling , but whether , admitting for the present , that it is in opposition to both , and is also a doctrine of scripture , correctly understood ( as seems to me ) , 1 as a Christian am bound to receive
it . Since Christianity addresses me os a rational being and a moral subject , and demands to be received by nrift because I have understanding to perceive evidence , and a moral
faculty to feel the obligation of divine authority , it cannot at the same time demand that I receive as a part of it what appears to me contrary to reason , and what is felt by me to be
irreconcileable with my moral nature . This it cannot do , because it cannot bind me in obligations that annul one another , and because the infinitely wise God is not the author of contradiction . The conclusion is , that the
supposed obligation is an impossible one . Again : If the obligation does exist the Christian is prohibited to require any internal evidence that the scriptures of the New Testament are a divine revelation . Let it be
maintained , that , being assured of the truth of the Christian history , as it is recorded in the several books of the
Untitled Article
New Testament , he is obliged tcr a cept as matter of certain inspiration whatever is contained in those books even though parts should be found against which the rational and moraj nature of man must protest ; with what consistency can he require the
internal evidence of harmony between the parts which compose the volume ? ] f it may want the evidence of consistency with the moral character which it asserts of God , why may it not want any and every other internal mark of truth , and divinity , and yet
bind to unbounded assent ? If the Christian by receiving the fact 3 of his religion has incurred such an obligation as is supposed , should he even find contradictory assertions in the books which record those facts , his faith must assent to both . But this
is impossible , and therefore the obligation is impossible . Lastly : Many wise and good men , and excellent Christians have been . of opinion , that the doctrine of transubstantiation is established upon the fair and just interpretation of the scriptures : it should
not therefore seem a very extravagant supposition , that such a doctrine might be deduced by the acknowledged rules of sound interpretation from the language of the New Testament . Let the supposition be made . I am compelled by the strength of historical testimonies to receive the
Christian History - > it is attested by miracles , and I own the hand of God . I also acknowledge that by correct construction of speetch the doctrine of transubstantiation is a doctrine of the Ne \ V Testament . I take bread before the sacerdotal consecration , I
handle and taste it , and have no doubt that it is bread , and bread only . After consecration I do the same , all my senses report it to be as before , bread , and bread only . But scrip ture declares that it is now not bread , but flesh , and the flesh of him who
was crucified , and rose from me dead , and ascended to his Father . Which shall I r ^ ect , for all cannot be received , the scriptures themse V * my interpretation of scripture wmc seems however correct ( I am "PP ° ^ ing ; the case of thousands of Uin tjans ) , or the evidence of >» £ ?\ senses ? If the last , > vhat proof im * I of the truth of the miraculous w ^ —for it is not reasonable , 1 sot think it b not poniible , that rejects
Untitled Article
29 S Testimony of Scripture consistent with that of Reason .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1815, page 298, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1760/page/34/
-