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

    them ? Is it , that you may keep one side well with the world , with the uninitiated , with mere moralists by

    nature , while you shew the other to the lovers of mystery and hugeness ? From Calvin down to Dr . Smith , there has reigned this everlasting shuffle in their school , this vain attempt to reconcile common sense with

    contracted and obstinate principles of interpretation . But it cannot be . Our matter-of-fact world will never swallow nor care any thing about the tremendous Calvinistic dogma of Justification by Faith , unless it be frittered down to pure morality , and then they will receive , not the dogma , but

    the morality . Dr . Smith may depend upon it that this is all he can get by covering over the subject with a wordy plausibility . Men are not going to have their moral sense violated so easily ; or if they do , they will choose to go the whole length , and rush at once into the mental slavery or mental reservation of the Romish

    Church . I should regard the doctrine in question , if it could possibly be believed , as a worse mystery than that of the Trinity , because it is less purely speculative and arithmetical ; it touches upon morals ; it would tend to overthrow the whole system of good practice , and would destroy all confidence between man and man .

    IVIany of its supporters pretend to lift their eyes in abhorrence at Antinomians ; but that sect are the only consistent and true believers in the doctrine , and it will sooner or later be acknowledged , that there is no medium , no alternative between

    Arminianism and Antinomianism . To these remarks the answer will be , that I do not understand the doctrine of Justification by Faith , and I shall be pointed to the intricate explanations

    which make it intelligible and innocent , reducing it , after all , to a sort of Justification by Works . But why adopt and persist in a phraseology , which is liable to be misinterpreted and misunderstood ? The substance

    of your religion , I skould hope , will not evaporate with the language which clothes it . What does the long extract from Hooker prove ? If any one can follow the thread of it , and analyse its meaning through a cloud of misty fi gures and vain distinctions , he will

    Untitled Article

    see that there is no explanation at all , but a confused repetition of the very doctrine to be explained , and strangely mingled up at the same time with a

    metaphorical resolutioa of it into simple morality . fS Faith is the only hand which putteth oa Christ unto Justification , and Christ the only garment , whichy being so put on , covereth the shame of our defiled

    natures , hideth the imperfection of our works , preserveth us blameless in the sight of God , " &c . &c . Now to infuse any meaning into this passage , and not to rest satisfied , dazzled and delighted with its mere mysticainess , how is Christ a garment ? And is

    there any other true way of covering our shame , hiding our iinperfection , &c , than the love and practice of that personal holiness and universal virtue which Christ prescribed ? Is it not a dangerous matter to hold out to men ' s imaginations the idea that there is

    such a kind of a thing as a garment , somewhere or other , they know not where , but separate from their personal holiness and exertions , which shall huddle up and muffle over their sins ? Surely , it is not for such

    writings that Hooker has been immortalized by the epithet judicious * By the way , Mr . Smith can revere and quote the authority of the Anglican Church , when it suits his purpose . I supposed him not to be so flexible a * Dissenter .

    Mr . Bakewell ' s concluding' Re * marks . Mr . Bakewell , on several accounts , deserves the fervent gratitude and lasting respect of the Unitariaa public , for conducting , as he has done , the present controversy . Our first matter of gratification is , that we have found so able a defender of so good a cause . Mr . Bakjewell has turned to

    admirable account the opportunities which he had enjoyed for information on the topics in dispute . Nor is this all . He has proved himself a match for his opponent , who must be

    acknowledged on all hands as a controversialist of no ordinary lubricity . — Even on . theological ground , where we might have had most reason to expect that our hero would be foiled ,

    * Was it for his doctrinal , or for his ecclesiastico-political writings , that the Anglican Church have generally crowned him with this laurel ?

    Untitled Article

    Critical Synopsis of the Monthly Repository ' for December , 1824 . 11

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1826, page 11, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2544/page/11/