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
submit a remark to two of your Correspondents , in the Repository for this month , upon the subject of the Lord's Supper . N . N ., p * 241 , has this observation , ** By comparing' what he ( the apostle Paul ) has received * with Luke ' s gospel ,
it will be found that it was front the history of the ministry of Jesus , written by Luke , his fellow-traveller , he had received it . " Is the apostle Paul or N . N . the most competent authority to decide from what source the
information was derived ? The apostle ' s declaration is , ** For I have received from the Lord that which I delivered also unto you . " To your Correspondent W . H ., p . 255 , I take the liberty to offer a paraphrase of the apostle ' s language , which appears to me more consistent with the whole account of this institution , than
he has adopted . 1 Cor , xi . £ 0 : " When , therefore , ye come together into one place , it is not to eat the Lords ' Supper ; " i . e . when you assemble together as a Christian Church , in your usual place
of worship , you do not distinguish a simple religious rite , commemorative of the death of Christ , appointed to be observed by Christian societies , from an ordinary meal , taken in your separate houses , to satisfy your hunger . This is an abuse of a Christian
ordinance , and deserves my reproof . To shew the propriety of this rebuke , the apostle recapitulates the institution of this rite , which was not introduced by Christ till after the Supper was ended ; ver . 23—26 . Then , ver . 27 , * ' Whoever shall partake of the bread and wine unworthily ; " i . e . € C in a manner unsuitable to the nature and
design of the institution , by confounding the Lord ' s Supper with a common meal , or an idol feast , " is guilty of profaning the commemoration of the death of Christ * I take the further liberty to question , if misapprehension on the part of those to whom a communication of a
fact is made , invalidates the testimony of the person making such communication ? This argument appears to be assumed by W . H- at the close of the f irst paragraph of his letter . Should he pursue , as he intimates , h is inquiry , I recommend these remarks to his candid attention . T \ G .
Untitled Article
Jeremy Sentham on the danger of Penal Laws in Matters of Religion . [ Translated from Trait 4 s de Legislationf Vol . III . Chap , xviii . ] EV ERY article of faith is necessarily hurtful , as soon as the
legislator puts in activity penal and coercive motives to favour its adoption . The persons whom it is wished to influence , may be considered as forming three classes : those who are already of the same opinion with the
legislator ; those who reject this opinion ; and those who neither adopt nor reject it . For the conformists , the coercive law is unnecessary ; for the non-conformists , it is equally useless , because it cannot fulfil its object .
When a man has formed his opinion , is it in the power of penalties to make him change it ? The very question is an insult to good sense . Penalties will rather produce a contrary effect . They will serve rather to confirm an
opinion than to shake it ; partly because to employ constraint is a tacit avowal that arguments are wanting , and partly because the having recourse to violent measures , produces an aversion to the opinions which it is wished in this manner to sustain .
All that can be obtained by penalties is , to engage , not a belief , but a declaration of belief . Those who from a conviction , or a sense of honour , refuse this declaration submit to the greatest of evils , to persecution . For , what is called persecution , is an evil which is not
compensated by any advantage ; it is an unmixed evil ; and this administered by the hand of the magistrate , is pre- < cisely the same in nature , though much greater in degree , than if it came by that of an ordinary malefactor . Those who , less firm and less generous , give
way to menaces , and to the immediate danger which presses them , escape by a false declaration ; but this momentary pain avoided , is converted , if they have any scruples , into the pains of conscience , and into the pains of
contempt on the part of society , which will accuse of baseness these hypocritical retractions . In this state of things , what is the consequence ? One part of the people , for the sake of self-complacency , accustoms itself to despising the opinions of the other
Untitled Article
S 60 On the danger of Penal Laws in Matters of Religion .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1818, page 360, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2477/page/16/
-