On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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

    iiil ^ ln tan t ^ iitt ^ pit e ^ Ie of arrogance and persecbtitfn ? Tlie charge which this writer levels agairist tlieGenevese clergy 9 of hiding their religious sentiments , is the state

    one which has so long been tftarfe against Unitarians in general , but with no more justice or fairness than it can be urged upon Trinitarians and Calyinists . Because we do not press

    what we do not believe , or rather , because we press only what we believe , we are charged with concealment and evasion . On this principle , every orthodox sermon , which waves the subject of the . real presence and other Catholic absurdities , is dishonest and evasive . If , in order to satisfy our

    revilers ,, ive adopt the very expressions of Scripture , andi other phrases , which thej ^ psist upon , putting into our moi ^ hs , then t ]\ e complaint is , that ive ^ fiix to the words a different sense from theirs .. As if our sense is not as

    rational , authentic and conscientious as theirs , and as if all nien can be expected to agree in the precise meaning of difficult ancient Jewish phraseology . Wli ^ t Mr . Smith stigmatizes Qftjndinjr religious sentiments , might , with more candour and freedom from

    sectarian , influence , be truly denbrniji ^ ted , an attempt at union and charitable copipreftension . The Very instance which he gives , ( though mistakenly )> y way of reproach , ) oh the ptlier side of the leaf , is a laudable

    instance of it . He has there shewn th < i , t Arians , and Socinians , and English ' Unitarians ., and Antisupernaturalists , when tfiey have no longer a liope of cohvjncinff each other , and see nothing but clanger and disoojd

    from protracting to an interminable extent tljeir metaphysical disputes , c <* h , for the salce of broad practical , wholesome results , and the ' enjoyment ot moral ana religious harmony , unite jn bue general phrase , and confess ,

    ttibiigh without interpreting" , or pretending tp interpret , the proposition in one uniform light , that * ' Jesus was a Pivine Beinij . " Mr . Smith cothp lains that this sentence is ^ capable p f a variet y of interpretations . ' And what sentence is hot ? What creed

    has not been variously interpreted ? l ake his own favourite do ^ rna , which he calls the leading doctrine Qf the tlefornjatioa and of Scripture— " Salvation and holiness by grace through

    Untitled Article

    fiith in af Divine Bfejfcan 5 fer . Dqes not Mr . Sfnftd Sn ' o \ v tnaf Unitarian Christians believe every word and letter of it as much as h £ ddes ? Never was a more slippery , fluctuating unsettled , proposition , uttered than this which the writer sets up as a standard .

    Does Mr . S . himself suppose that he and his contemporary brethren understand and maintain it in exactly the same point of viesv , with the saiiie emphasis , and in the same relations , that Luther and Ms contemporaries

    did ? Oile would think that our Replier haH put forth alt hte skill and strength to select a sentence which should adroitly cover over the numerous varieties of ojiinitifts among the orthodox . Who can tell vvhat the old

    Genevese really believed from such a vague representation ? Let uie attempt tb convince Mr . Smith of a piece of unfairness , which , in common with mbdern Calvinists ,

    lie suffers himself tb comniit , in consequence of not tiidking a due discrimination with respect to certain fact ^ and terms . The most glorious period in human history is perhaps the Reformation . Whatever formed an

    efficient portion of it , ought undoubtedly to share in its glory . Oalvinists , by perseveringly denominating certain articles of theiV belief doctrines of the Re formation ] , have succeeded in in-Vesting such articles with a factitious splendour , Tborrowed from that event ,

    but- which certainly belongs not to them . The peculiar notions entertained by many of tlie Reformers respecting the Trinity , Justification , Faith , and other abstract religious subjects , did not move forward tie Reformation one step . Probably the actors in that event believed , to a man ,

    in witches , and most of them in astrology and the Ptolemaic system . Would it be correct , therefore , to call these last , the doctrines of the Reformation ? * Fhe mere circumstance that they held a set b ' f private opinions

    apart from their character as Reformers , is of no sort of consequence . The point is , Was the Reformation set on foot , or carried on , or completed , for the sake of particularly establishing what Caivinists would now call its doctrin es ?

    Was not the establishment of those doctrines rather an Accidental and subordinate result ? An'd was not the main object of tlmt great struggle to

    Untitled Article

    322 Critical Synopsis of the Monthly Repository for June , 1824 .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1825, page 322, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2537/page/2/