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
of Christianity : however , that he regarded them as its fundamental doctrines , is far from being : true ; since he takes great pains to illustrate the agreement of Christians , of all
denominations * with respect to the essentials of the gospel , and the information which it Was intended principally to communicate , aud which is most interesting to us as sinful and dying- creatures . *
It is not our design to canvass the reasoning which he employs for the support of his theological opinions . The inconclusiveness of it is pointed out with much candour and modesty , as well as with perspicuity and force , in a paper , under the signature
Davtdes , in the Theological Repository . ^ We shall only remark that Dr . Price , in defending his qualified A nanism , laid stress on metaphysical arguments derived from Butlers Analogy . Now such arguments are of no authority / when the question is concerning the
sense of scripture . It may be possible we grant , on assuming certain doctrines as the doctrines of the New Testament , to prove that our hypotheses are not inconsistent with present appearances , &c * and even that they best explain them : yet who will
affirm that this is the legitimate method of interpreting the records of Revelation ? The Analogy of Meligion , &c . deserves high praise and a repeated and diligent perusaJ : that division of it , nevertheless , which treats
of the evidences of Judaism and Christianity , is more solid and valuable than the part which relates to doctrines ; inasmuch as in the former , facts universally admitted are the basis of
the superstructure—while in the otlier , it is first presumed that some human speculations are the truths of the gospel , and then it is attempted to represent their conformity with the state of man and the course of nature . This
famous work of Bishop Butler therefore is not equally suited to the young student as to a person who has long been in the habit of discriminating between ** things which differ . " He
who does not read it with caution , will be in danger of viewing the evidence of the popular faith as the same with that of the miracles , the death and the resurrection t > f Christ :
al-* Sermon ivr . at the beginning * jj f Vol . vi . 225—349 . 37 . f
Untitled Article
though the cases are really and widelv different . y We are astonished that Dr . Price should speak of our Lord ' s interposi ~ tion . The language , like the sentiment , is grossly unscriptural : nor can we reconcile it with the declarations that the Father sent the Son to be the
Saviour of the world , % and that Jesus is the servant ^ of the most high God Interposition implies independence on the part of him who interposes . And can this idea be compatible with any just faith in that Infinite Spirit from whom the chain of causes and effects proceeds ? We are not speakin g , let it be remembered , of what men
denominate interposition , as witnessed or exemplified by themselves ( the nature and the limits of this being clearh understood ) , but of the interposition of man or angel with God . We humbly protest , moreover , against the statement that any such doctrine h
sanctioned by the writings of the evangelists and apostles . Were the notion pursued to its due extent , the consequences would be most revolting . The interposition , or interference , of the Son , would cause us to lose sight of the free and perfect mercy of the Father .
" Dr . Priestley , the strenuous advocate of Socinianism , " says Mr . M . ( Ill , 112 ) , " was among ' the first to notice the Sermons of Dr . Price , who , from liis high regard and respect for the author , "was induced to insert a short reply to some of his principal objections in an Appendix to the second
edition . Another zealous opponent he found in his friend Mr . Lindsey , whose arg-uments appear to have succeeded no better in convincing' liim than those of Dr . Priestley . Of the g * ood intentions of both
he deservedly entertained the hig hest opinion 5 but he always felt hurt at their assuming to themselves and their sect exclu-Cj 1 * 1 sively , the appellation of Unitarians ( which belongs equally to Jews and Mahometans ) , and treating- with so much contumely the opinions of those who differed from them .
We deny that these excellent men treated with contumely the op inions which they controverted : we deny that Dr . Priestley was the advocate of Socivvianism ; aud to his works and to those of Mr . Lindsey we appeal in proof of the correctness of the denial . Contumely is unmerited and violent
t 1 John iv . 14 . Isa . xlih 1 . Matt . xii . 18 . Acto * -
Untitled Article
* S 4 Review . —Morgan ' s Life of Price .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Sept. 2, 1815, page 584, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1764/page/52/
-