On this page
-
Text (3)
-
Untitled Article
-
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
PARLIAMENTARY . HOUSE OF LORDS , May 4 , 1824 , Unitarians * Marriage Bill . The Marquis of Lansdowne moved the order of the day for the House to go luto a Committee on this Bill .
The Bishop of Chester rose to oppose the motion . In justice to his own feelings , in justice to the supporters of this measure , he was bound to declare , after giving the subject his most anxious , long and painful consideration , that his pre-• « « . » . . ¦ « « that which
sent opinion was the same as Jie had formerly had the honour to state to their Lordships . Again must he contend that the Unitarians had no ground , on the score of religions conscience , to object to the marriage ceremony of the Church of England . No Unitarian could
conscientiously object to the betrothing clause on account of words which they themselves used on other occasions . It was a mockery in them to contend that they had any ground to reject those words in the marriage ceremony which were
the same as they used in baptism . If any Noble Lord could shew that the Unitarians had any just grounds on the score of religious conscience , to reject the marriage ceremony , he , for one , should have very different feelings towards them , and would vote in their favour . He
admitted fully , however , that the blessing did distinctly recognize-, in explicit terms , the doctrine of the Trinity . But was not this the declaration of the
ministernot an act in which the party joined ? The Church of England would be wanting to its own dignity and character , were it not to take every proper opportunity to declare and maintain those doctrines
it believed to be the true doctrines of Christ . If the framexs of our Liturgy had considered all the circumstances under which the Unitarians were now found , they could not have more fairly met the scruples of others , without compromising the dignity and character of the
Church , than is now done by the mode in which this doctrine is recognized , without requiring any assent from the parties . He knew not why the Unitarians objected t <> comply with the established law and customs of their country . They had an example for dointr . so in the Apostle of
the Gentiles , and even in our blessed Lord himself , who , though lie objected and protested against the doctrines and discipline of the Sanhedrim , and the accustomed warship of the Temple , conformed to the institutions of his country . We have seen only concession following
Untitled Article
concession ; , and- ' -demand rismg * on demand ; and , if this point be conceded to the Unitarians , other concessions will be required , and other demands will follow . Our Church was tolerant in principle and practice , but toleration had its limits .
The privilege was conceded to all , to worship God according to their conscience , but the Church was not to be called on to renounce its opinions , or to gife up its doctrines . The Church of England was not one sect arnong others—it was the Established Church of this realm ,
with rights and privileges established for a long course of years , one of which was , that the marriage ceremony should only be performed in some of the churches or chapels of the Church of England ; Unless some strong reasons could be urged for it » she ought not to be called on to abandon her rights and privileges . If
one stone were taken away from the building after another , it would at length disappear altogether . He entreated their Lordships not to give up the doctrines and discipline of the Church , of which they were the hereditary guardians , and under which this country had attained her present proud pre-eminence . The interest of the Church was interwoven
with the best interests of the State , and he trusted their Lordships would not invade either the liberty or privileges of the Church . He would therefore move that their Lordships should resolve themselves into a Committee on that day three months , as an amendment to the Noble Marquis ' s motion .
The Bishop of Exeter said , if he thought the proposed measure were a violation of the doctrines or privileges of the Church , he would not support it ; but feeling that it was not , feeling that there was uo danger in the concession , and feeliiig also that the Church of England would be relieved , by ceasing to compel those who did not believe iu her doctrines
to join in her service , he thought the Bill , with proper amendments , might be made satisfactory to all parties , and would therefore vote for the Committee . In that Committee he should have some amendments to propose , unless he were prevented by some Noble Lord more competent to the task . The object , of his amendments would be to assimilate the
present Bill as much as possible , in civil principle , to the Bill of last Session , providing against clandestine marriages , and making some provisions for punishing those who were instrumental in carrying them into effect . He should also propose another clause , to enable the Unitarians to keep the registers of their own marriages : with amendments of this description , he thought the Bill would be beno
Untitled Article
Intelligence ^ ParUamen iury t Un itarians * Marriage Bilh 305
Untitled Article
VOL . XIX . 2 K
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1824, page 305, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2524/page/49/
-