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 notice TWo very remarkable attempts were made to restrain the progress of Arian sentiments among the Dissenters . One of their ministers at Nottingham refused to receive one of the members of his congregation to communion , because he would not declare his belief in the personal deity of Christ . At Kidderminster , a
member of the congregation presented to Mr . Statham , who had been invited to be their minister , three articles , on the doctrines of the Trinity , Original Sia , and the Atonement , expressed in the strongest terms of Cal vinisra , and
required Mr . Statham t . o sign them , as the condition of his being chos&i the minister of that chapel . Mr . Bourne , the minister at Birmingham , wrote two letters concerning this transaction to another member of the
congregation at Kidderminster . In the first , written before he had seen the articles * he strongly , but very justly , reprobates the imposing of any articles upon ' ministers of the gospel . " What , " says the indignant writer , " must a man be made a slave to
articles and creeds , and perhaps a hypocrite , by subscribing to articles , which he does not believe , before he is fit to preach the gospeJ ? Must one man thus make another his father and master in religion in opposition to the express command of Jesus ? The only
proper sphere for the activity of these intposers of articles is the spiritual courts , especially that of the inqftitsition , wiiose conduct can be justified on any principles , on which these imposero can justify theirs . The
ignoraneeof the man ' s ^ onduefc vies with his insolence . By it , he gives up the main principle of Dissent , . of Protestanti&m ^ nd of Christianity , the right of private judgment and the sufficiency of the Scriptures in matters t > f ifaitfcu " In the second letter , Mr . Bourae , wb ©
had then seen the articles , not only repeats his severe rebukes against sfll attempts to impose human , twseriffrtoral articles upon the consciences of w » e « but brings forward maaay plain argu meats to shew from the Scriptures the falsity of three particular articles , ** nd especially of the doctriae t » f the 1
Tri nity- " If , ' « aye he , " Je » ue be in < w * y intelligible ^ genae , and to his whole person the Son of God , he ^ cannot fee thewjune ( Jod with tiae Father ; it the Father be groa * er than the 8 m , m » t
Untitled Article
than a part of the Son only , he caimot be co-equal with the Father ; if there were some things , as Jesus himself says there were ? of which the Son was ignorant , he cannot be God . " With the result of this attempt to restrain freedom of opinion among the
Dissenters , I am not acquainted . About the end of the reign of George II ., Me Seddon , of Manchester , Jed the way , in avowing the belief in the simple humanity of Jesus , from the pulpit . This gave great offence to many
members of the congregation , "and they desired Mr . Mottershead , his co-pastor and father-in-law , to speak to him on the subject . After a day ' s private conference , Mr . Mottershead declared , that , so far from having been able to couvince Mr . Seddon that he was
wrong , he had himself been very nearly convinced that Mr . Seddon was right . The beginning of the present reign was distinguished by very auspicious omens of the ground which the principles of liberality were gain * ing , and which has gradually produced such great and important extensions of religious liberty .
In the year 1766 , an attempt was made by the Corporation of London , to increase very much the degree of persecution which the Dissenters suffered from the Test and Corporation Acts . By those acts all conscientious Dissenters are excluded from all offices
of trust and profit in the country . The city of London passed a bye ^ law , that anyperson refusing to accept , the office of sheriff in that borough should be fined 500 ^ ., and they then proceeded to elect various Dissenters and Catholics , who could not serve in that office without
incurring the pena / Hies of outlawry by the Test Act . Mr . Allen Evaiis , a Dissenter , ' having been appointed sherH £ resisted the claim or t ? he city to the fine of & ®< M . for » his refusing to accept itbe -oUice . T * he cause was
carriedsuccessively through all the Courts , all of whicti , except those immediately under the influence of the ^ Corporation of London , decided in favour © F the Utosenrters . The trial was finally terminated in the House of Lords , which si
unaoimGusly con ^ rmed the deci on of the inferior Courts , that the Dissenters tumid not be made liable to any fine or punishment whatever , for declhringto serve in those offices , from Which the Test and Corporation A cts
Untitled Article
Brief History of the DisseMerv front ike Revolution . 455
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1817, page 455, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2467/page/7/
-