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
conceded to the other sects ; some of whose ministers would be obliged to attest the performance of the ceremony with their marks instead of their names . There is no reason why the
solemnization should not take place in every licensed house of worship j though these structures so often change the purposes for which they are employed 5 and are one time dedicated to the worship of the Deity , at another to the consummation of
those vices which he abhors . We trust that the Established Church will always be pre-eminent for the dignity and the . solemnity of its ceremonies : but we should farther think , that the more respectable Dissenters will shudder at the
introduction of a custom , through which they will certainly be disgraced by the practices of their ruder brethren . We think it , however , our duty to add , that the Marriage Act of George II . is a very confused production .
No . IT . Letter from Mr . W . Smith on the above Remarks . To the Editor of the Times . Sir , —I observe in your paper of yesterday some remarks on the
solemnization of marriage , the calm and dispassionate tone of which , while in those who most differ from you it neexl not provoke an angry feeling , seems proportionally better calculated to excite useful discussion on the
subject . In this discussion , however , I do not now propose to engage , but only request to correct that part of your statement , which erroneously represents me as having " given notice in the House of Commons of some
intention to bring forward a motion , " for the purpose of altering the law of the case j and from whence occasion is taken to appeal to what you are pleased to term " my sound discretion " against such a proceeding . Now , whatever may be my opinion , I beg it may be understood , that on the
occasion referred to 9 acting only as the organ of others , I merely presented the petition of a number of Unitarians who conceive themselves to be aggrieved by the existing law , and that 1 did not hold out any pledge , or ( to the best of my recollection ) even hint a design of farther prosecuting the
Untitled Article
business . Allow me , before I conclude , to embrace the opportunit y of making one remark . You say that " in every Christian country marring has been esteemed a religious ceremony and a civil contract united . "
Now , for the argument ' s sake , allowing this to be ever so accurately true , I would wish to ask , whether the most logical and legitimate , as well as the best practical inference from the premises * would not be , that while for the security of social order and of property , descendible or otherwise , the most effectual means should be adopted to render the civil contract firm , indissoluble and easy of judicial proof , the strength and permanence of the moral tie would not be best ensured by leaving the religious ceremony to be performed in the mode most congenial to the religious
sentiments of the persons themselves ; by which their most valuable feelings would inevitably be more deeply interested in the transaction than they can be by the use of a form to which
the parties may unfortunately have annexed the ideas of inexpedience or impropriety ? I am , Sir , Your obedient humble servant .
W . SMITH . JPamdon House , Essex , Sept . IQ . No . III . Remarks of the Times upon the general Subject and upon Mr . Smith ' s Letter .
It seems that Mr . Smith , the member for Norwich , did not give notice of any motion for the purpose of altering the law of the land on the subject of marriage in favour of Socinian or Unitarian Dissenters ; but , " acting as the organ of others , ' simply presented a petition from a number of that body who conceive themselves aggrieved by the existing law . hi ot tnai
conformity with the request honourable gentleman , we hasten to correct our mistake , and have inserted his letter to us in another part of the journal . In that he asks , adop ting our definition of marriage " as a religious ceremony and a civil con tract united , " whether " the most logical and legitimate , as well as the best practical inference would not be , tha while for the security of social order and of property , descendible or other-
Untitled Article
6 lS Marriage Ceremony ' , as it respects Unitarians .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1817, page 612, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2469/page/40/
-