On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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

    ( iM * against them teridlflg only to prove , um their use has been less hitherto , tjian it might have been , owing to the narrow principles on which they have been framed ; considerations which , in my op inion , do not 6 tfcweigh the objections stated by Dr . Balguy to having none at all

    But satisfied as I should be for myself , with a subscription of some sort , and probably not a very general one neither , I cannot cotnply with th&t required of me to the present articles and liturgy ,

    for ^ he following reasons : First , after bestowing all the pains which I am able to give , in informing myself what is the-true scripture doctrine of the trinity , the only conclusion I have been able to arrive at is , that I

    see no sufficient proof of the Athauasian , and rather incline to the Arian

    hypothesis . Secondly , I am clear that the very dangerous doctrine that uribaptized children are subject to the penalties of sin , is asserted in the ninth article , and still more strongly in the service for the public baptism of infants ; and that it is not taught in the Bible / ;

    Thirdly , 1 cannot help thinking , notwithstanding what has been written by I ) r . Tucker , arid others , " upon the subject , that the seventeenth article does teach absolute predestination ; a doctrine likewise not found in the Bible , and of a still move destructive tendency than that of original sin . These arc my principal

    objections : I have others to many parts of the service , but do not mention them , partly because they are to things generally complained of , and which will probably be removed whenever a revision takes place ; and partly because I do not know how far , had they ; been the only ones , they would have led nte to think < rfa separation .

    This separation I do now think mysejf authorized to ; because , believing the doctrines themselves to be erroneous , I am not satisfied with any reasons that I have seen given for continuing to s \ ibscribe them under such a persuasion . I cannot be thoroughly satisfied , that either the words in which it is drawn , or the

    king ' s declaration , justify me , who think "With Arminius on the subject , in subscribi ng the seventeenth article ; the n » ore , as it is a subject , which , in my opinion , is to be disputed upon , and the obvioua sense of die article preached against * whenever opportunity offers

    Untitled Article

    If the plea ibade for subscribing this one could avail me , I have ho - sticri ptea for subscribing the articles relative ^ t § the trinity , or continuing to reaidj the parts of the liturgy relative either > tf *

    them , or the doctrine of original sin . These were not subjects of dispute f &t the time the articles were dra ^ rj ^ and of course no salvo was made for them , except the general one of the sixth

    article . But surely Dr . Waterland very fully confuted Dr . ClarkeV ideaa on this , subject , in his case of Arian Subscriptions ; and if he had not , the author of the Confessional has unanswerably proved , that , if the sixth article had been designed to justify those , who , willingly

    binding themselves to support the opinions of the majority , propagate opinions different from theirs , it might have justified the Roman Catholics , ; it might have justified the first seditious and mad disgracers of Protestanism , whereas , against both these the articles are well

    known to have beep made . Neither Dr-Powell ' s plea in favour of first subscript tions , nor Mr . Hey ' s considerations ott obsolete ordinances , can be of service to » me , wKo , at this time of life , am hot at liberty to subscribe upon authority , arid whose objections both to articles and

    liturgy are too extensive to find a solution ? in the doctrine of obsolete ordinances . Finally , 1 can neither submit to acquiesce in silence , after having rniade my objections known , nor take upon me to alter the service of th $ church , as long as I continue to prpfess myself a minister

    of it . The latter , besides its being of dangerous example , I rather think niy voluntary promise to use the established liturgy precludes me from . With thfc former 1 could only have been satisfied ^ upon the supposition that the things complained of were indifferent , or , as they have been thought to be by many

    good men , of / little importance ,:, but as I should in that case have thought . it my duty to have waited for a change by public authority , Without expressing any disapprobation , public or private ; so

    being" of a very different opinion , 'that is , believing firmly that some of the qbq oxr ious doctrines strike at the root of aty religion , natural as well as revealed , and that nothing is of' little importance , whkh the Deists and Methodists can

    make so formidable use of , as they a * e known to do of the subscription of $ hos $ amongst us , who subscribe what they profess not to believe 5 under these ch >

    Untitled Article

    Dr . Maty ^ s Reasons for Dissent . 443

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Sept. 2, 1810, page 443, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2408/page/19/