On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
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
sitting in judgment on the sentiments cither of individuals or congregations composing this union . If , therefore , we must have a distinguishing name , we ivould prefer a name descriptive
of a union similar to that just mentioned , than one which professes only to recognise some peculiar sentiments of belief , which sentiments are controverted by many who profess to be followers of the same Lord and Master .
But the principal objection which we liave to change the name by wliich we have hitherto been known , is the following ; and this , we think , is become of more importance , from some observations of the Lord Chancellor
<* fi the Wolverhampton Case . There &te * in this part of the country , numerous small congregations of Dissenters , which could now do little of themselves towards supporting a minister among * them , were it not for the pious liberality pf some formerly
belonging to those places , who have left them considerable bequests either in money or land . In the legal instruments confirming these pious donations , most , if not all of them * expressly state , that they are for the use of the respective congregations
therein mentioned , belonging to the Presbyterian denomination of Dissenters . Now if such congregations ( and these include the majority of congregations in Lancashire and Cheshire ^ scout the name of Presbyterians , what right have they to the
benefactions thus bequeathed them ? Has not . the Lord Chancellor said , in the Wolverhampton Case , he will not permit benefactions left for any particular purpose , to be applied to another ? If , then , we disclaim the name of Presbyterian , can we legally claim the funds left to this denomination of
Dissenters ? It may be said , after all , that we are not Presbyterians , because we have not the same form of churchgovernment which our ancestors had a ceutury ago . True ; but we still profess to be their descendants , and call ourselves by the same name : and
its we are wot tolerated by the laws of the land as Presbyterian Dissenters , but as Protestant Dissenters , we have a right to make what regulations we please in our church-government * so toug as we do not renounce the itathc ; and , in my opinion , may legally claim all the emoluments belonging to the
Untitled Article
places of which we are in possession * These observations trill also apply to the Presbyterian Fund in Loft don , the trustees of which might fairly eiiough withhold their exhibitions from those who had denounced the
name . These considerations have induced many of the Dissenting ministers , in this part of the country , and Mr , Johns in particular , to oppose changing the name by which we have been long known . By adhefittg t € > the old distinctive name , we conceive
we do not deceive any , respecting © at religibus sentiments * The Presbyterian Dissenters have , for many years past , been the advocates of fre ^ inquiry , and this has led to a more general coincidence of opinion on the controverted points of religion , than
has probably subsisted at any former period ; and this is well known to be , generally speaking , strictly Unitarian , according to the meaning of those who wish this term to be substituted as our distinctive appellation * But of
the utility of this we are not at present generally convinced ; and , therfefotfe , prefer retaining the name by which we have always been known a& Dissenters , and by which we are < 3 e * ig * nated in most of the trust-deed *
belonging to our different places of worship . In offering these remarks in reply to what some of your Correspondents have urged on the subject , I do not wish to take the subject out of M > . Johns ' s hands , who is so
weAl able to defend himself , and to give a Sufficient reason for any thing which he esjpouses ; my principal motive is , that , a& the opposition to the change of the name lifts not beet that of an individual only , so the blame , if any , attached to this opposition , ought not to belong to any individual in particular . B . R . DAVIS .
Untitled Article
506 An Apology fot the Peace Society .
Untitled Article
Sir , April 7 , 1918 . r 11 HLE uniform candour With which . JL communication * of every desicHp - tion have bfefcn received in Hie MwMvtitfy Repository , induces me to submit to y otir consideration a paper , t h * <* fe $ « ct
of which * it i& hoped , yon vrtli approve , notvtith » tandiugtliehicidtrtt » l , though plain nidtefetktotf of * *****!* of reiigidtts belief , esfterttkiBy dl « temvt from you * ttw * i . It wm ttritt ** to reply id tin emy > entitled * Itefttftfltfe
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1818, page 506, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2479/page/34/
-