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
myself read the New Testament with care , and found it to consist principa lly of confirmation and illustration of Natural Religion , which , I am persuaded , men in general , being properly educated , are capable of understanding and justly appreciating ; I deem it a libel on human nature to
assert that mankind are incapable of judging for themselves , and that they must and ought to depend , for their religious ideas , on any dictatorial governor , whether ecclesiastical or civil . Ms , Cogan , adverting to my profession of attachment both to Natural
Religion and to Christianity , the latter of which , I have said , I venily believe to be true , the former , I certainly know to be so / ' imagines that he has discovered some difference of
opinion on this subject , between me and the author of a book , entitled Apeleutherus ; who , in speaking of a particular article of religious belief , says that certainty is entirely out of the question . And , as it is well known to Mr . Cogan , and to my
friends in general , that the author of that book and myself , are , in reality , one and the same person , I must , of course , be sorry and ashamed , if there should be found to be any material difference between us . But I hope that a few words of explanation will
shew , that the supposed difference is rather in appearance than in reality ; ^ nd will satisfy both Mr . Cogan and another of your correspondents , whose signature is B , that they have both misunderstood my meaning . When I spoke of Natural Religion as certainly
true , I should have thought it quite obvious that I was considering its general or abstract character , and not inquiring into the particulars of which it might be supposed to consist . And , undoubtedly , as a general [ position it
may be safely affirmed , that whatever can be proved to be a principle of Natural Religion must he true ; because the witnesses of this religion- — the heavens which declare the glory of God—the firmament which sheweth
his handy work—day unto day which uttereth , speech —night unto night which sheweth knowledge—cannot for a moment be imagined to bear false testimony . But , witl ^ regard to the supposed particulars of this religion , the case is different . In considering
Untitled Article
t ? iem , thQ question arises , What j ^ the testimony that these witnesses give , and to what extent does it go > And , in some cases , the answer to this ' question may not be so clear and satisfactory as we could wish ;
probability may be the utmost that we can obt&iii- ^~ eertemtyp m sucfi cases , may be entirely out of the question . With regard to Supernatural Religion , I have no hesitation in affirming , that it is ^ always ^ m , some degree , dependent upon things which are in their
own nature fallacious 5 and , therefore , whether it be cqi ^ sidetred in the abstract , or in the detail of g ^ y ^ particular revelation , certainty must be always entirely out of the question * It may still , however , possess a high degree of probability , and be entitled 9
to be < c verily believed ? If , there ^ fore , Mr * Locke , in the passages quoted by Mr . Cogan , has really given Natural Religion " an advantage over the Bible , " it was no great * faulty * and Mr . Cogan need not be very anxious to clear himself from the
suspicion of being the accomplice of that illustrious man . Notwithstanding nay declaration of attachment both to natural and supernatural revelation , with , however , an undisguised preference of the
authority oi the former , I caunot admit the congratulatory statement of Mr . Cogan , that I have " the good for ~ tune to possess two religions . " On the contrary , I am decidedly of opinion that there never was or can be
more than one true and acceptable religion ; which , as it has been well observed by my late learned and amiable friend , the Rev . Charles Bulk ley , 4 t being originally founded in the
perfections of God , and the nature of man , must of necessity , in every period of time and under every particular dispensation of it , be fundamentally and essentially the same . "
I now take leave of this controversy , regretting that it has been my painful duty to appear in opposition to the opinions of a gentleman whose
personal character I so highly esteem ; and , thanking you , Sir , for permitting me to occupy so much space in the pages of your valuable Miscellany . WILLIAM STURCH .
Untitled Article
< 22 # Mr y . Sturch in Reply M $ & < & £ * & * PP Nal&ral Religtoii .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1824, page 222, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2523/page/30/
-