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 Christ . How much more than a name is the profession which leaves all this ambiguity ! Now , this list of topics on which Christians differ , is precisely your Correspondent ' s list of
those on which they agree . These are our common Christianity ! And why are they not our common Islamisixk ? For , with the exception of one point , the redemption that is in Jesus Christ , on which no Calvinist or
Armiman will allow that he has more than a verbal agreement with us , they are subjects on which the Mahometan is under no uncertainty . " I am no advocate for restricting the name of Christian to a party $ let all who claim it , have it in peace . But to
talk of its representing a common faith , of unrivalled importance , and then to give a list of topics on which it communicates nothing , and discriminates nothing , is as much like ** quackery" as any thing which has been detected in the New Unitarians .
Your Correspondent is , I think , under no great obligation to the late worthy Bishop for the loau of his very correct statement , and very laudable indignation , on the present subject . They are articles , too , which he seems to have more ability to lend than necessity to borrow .
The New Unitarians inculcate " a system of ethics drawn from the German drama ! " This is gratifying intelligence , as it was apprehended that their sermons were so stuffed with
controversy as to leave no room for any morality at all . And as the Old Unitarians argue , when they support Cal virus tic missions , &c . that a corrupt religion is better than no religion , why should not a corrupt morality be better than no morality ? How
uncharitable of them , thinking the morality of the Gospel a good thing , to contend " that there is nothing good besides ! " How improper to use language " producing irritation , " when by gentle and gradual means these
German moralists might be brought to the English and Gospel standard ; aadL Ithough " this , from the nature of the thing , must be a process requiring time , moder ^ t ipn and caution /' tt is a task 00 that ajccpunt so much the more suited to the Old
UnitariEuiJBu % Your Correspondent is doubtless a good judge of the source and ataodard
Untitled Article
of our morality ; for his rapid transitions from what irresistibly produces ' laughter to what exeites a very opposite emotion , shew an intimate acquaintance with the German drama , and a happy imitation of its structure .
Such is the connexion of the foregoing charge with that of indifference to the moral character of proselytes , palliating " licentiousness both in principles and practice , " &c . a charge which , to use the softest applicable word in the dictionary , is as unfounded as the other is ridiculous . Unitarian
congregations and societies will not suffer by a comparison with those of any other denomination . In their individual associations there is generally ( I imagine , universally , ) a power , by written law or allowed practice , to
exclude from their lists any improper persons who may have volunteered their names and subscriptions — a power which your Correspondent on inquiry will find , as I hope and be * lieve , has not lain dormant when
immorality called for its exercise . I have always been disgusted with that cant of candour which talks of the momentous topics on which the Christian world is divided as " speculative opinions , " subjects of doubtful disputation , " < c matters about which
its votaries have always disagreed , and will probably always disagree , " and " opinions merely speculative . " What is the object of this mock liberality ? Or is the w-wterin good earnest ? Does he really mean to assert that there is only an unimportant and speculative difference between his system and
that which , by his own account of it , leads its professors to deny his " claim to the appellation of Christian ; " " indisposes them to set a proper value on moral qualities and distinctions ;" makes them not likely to furnish their pupils * minds " with aqy very correct or vivid ideas of moral truth and
beauty ; " makes them " from prin ^ ciple intolerant j " ;> and consists of 44 absurdity and intolerance , " of " rubbish and defilements ?** Separation fro u * a communion is justifiable on the ground of practical differences , but not on that of merely speculative differences . As those of the Old Uniof
tarjea with ^» sure former description * wd with Trinitarians , of the latter , he should , I ttnnk , prefer their worship , and not <) es * rjt thole v * h *
Untitled Article
336 Mr . Fox in Reply to An Old Unitarian .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1817, page 336, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2465/page/16/
-