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
Homertony Sir , February \ 2 , V& 25 . T > a demand from any of your correspondents , but especially to one from Mr . Gibson , ( p . 17 , ) I am happv to pay respectful attention .
You and he will excuse my expressing myself more in the dogmatic form than is at all agreeable to me . 'I know no other way of avoiding difftiseness : and , if I were-to introduce arguments and illustrations *™^ letter would swell to a v ^ y dnconveirienfesi ^ e ^ i ><> . d ^
When , in thedReaia ^ ksiiwhich you did me the favour of inserting ltpon the Statemeiiftsi of M * Ghenevifere ^ I touched upon the subject of tiusTiEi ^ cation , ijb aev ^ p occurred to me that it was oieedfak to define the term and to g ^ ard it ; against isuch a confu sion of ideas ^ as Mr ; BakewelL manifested
in his Reply . ( Mon . liepos . > VoL XIX . p . 663 . ) Notwithstanding our unhappy differences , I certainly should not have expected that a well-instructed Unitarian , or indeed any man but moderately acquainted with the theory of
religion , could have so egregiously stumbled in subjects of such easy distinction as the nature , grounds and objects of Justification on the one hand * and Sanctification ( or the dispositions and actions of universal holiness ) on the other .
Mr . Gibson suggests that " a simple affirmative or negative may suffice " for a reply to his four questions . In this I am sorry that I cannot entirely agree with him . His first and last cannot , I conceive , be answered without some explication of terms . I will , however , give the shortest answers
that I can devise to each of the questions ; and I trust you will allow me space for a few remarks to explain and guard against misapprehension . Quest . 1 . " Is the justification of a sinner in the sight of God determined by the unchangeable obligations of universal virtue ?"
Ans . 1 he justification of a sinner in the sight of God is determined upon the principles of strict equity , in relation to the moral government of God and all the obligations of accountable beings : and it is a blessing gratuitously bestowed upon sinful men , in that mode and under all those circumstances which arc , and ever will be , the most effectual to the promo-
Untitled Article
tion of their personal holiness , in every possible respect . Obs . I use the term personal holiness , as the most accurate and comprehensive ; and understanding by it
p . sincere , habitual and circumspect observance of all the inward principles and all the outward rules of piety towards God , virtue in the government of our passions and the employment of our faculties , and morality in relation toiour fellow-creatures .
tii ^ watf . ift- " Will those persons who most habitually attend to the obligations df Universal wirttie , and who acquire -most personal holiness , be the justified bfcfose God >"
Q » tf »* y 3 Jo « Will any such persons be excluded from the justification before 4 jt&& }" iAns . .- ' NO ; - ' - J ' ' "r' : Quest . A > " Will those persons who
have less habitually attended to the obligations of universal virtue , and who have less personal holiness , be preferred and equally justified before God ? " ' .
Arts . The term Justification expresses not a disposition or quality of mind which might exist in various degrees , but a state or relation of man , as an accountable being , with respect to God as the righteous and holy Governor of the moral
universe-It therefore does not admit of degrees : it either is or is not . We may > distinguish between the act and the state of Justification . ( 1 . ) The act of Justification is the judicial decision of the Supreme Moral Ruler , by which he pardons the
sins of those who are the subjects of this blessing , and regards them with complacency as persons upon whom it is equitable , right and well-pleasing to all the Divine perfections , to bestow the enjoyment of * perfect and eternal happiness ^ a species of happiness of which holiness is the chief and
essential part . ( 2 . ) The state of Justification is that condition , standing or relation of a sinful human being , in respect of the perfect moral government of God , which denominates him pardoned and accepted to the favour of the righteous Deity . This is not the opportunity for adducing proofs in support of this
Untitled Article
Dr . J . Pye Smith * s Reply to Mr . Gibson ' s Questions . 77
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1825, page 77, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2533/page/13/
-