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
that there were some of your auditory strongly infected with Socinianism . I may instance myself and two friends . How many Pharisees you might have beside us I have no means of ascertaining , for I am not in possession of that astonishing secret ( which , alas ! falls only to the lot of the privileged few ) of determining the sincerity and salvability of men .
I have now , Sir , to remonstrate with you on the very serious injustice which you have done to a whole body of professing Christians , who , though they may not be as numerous , are as respectable and , probably , as sincere as that of your own . I presume that you used the term Socinian to denote , not only the avowed followers of Socinus , but those also who
are known by the more correct and appropriate appellation of Unitarian Christians . In this vague sense the term is now generally employed by those who have assumed all piety and religion to themselves . But , Sir , allow me to inform you , that the terms Socinian and
Unitarian are far from being synonymous , and that to employ them to denote oue and the same person is manifestly incorrect . A Unitarian is not a Socinian , inasmuch as he rejects the authority of Socinus as a spiritual leader , together with some of his doctrines . The Unitarian calls no one master in
religion but Christ , arid no one father but his God . He disclaims the term Socinian , because it imposes a human yoke on another ' s disciples whom Christ alone hath made free . Beside , a Unitarian is not a Socinian because he rejects some of the doptrines which Socinus insisted upon as of great importance . I will instance but one—the worship of Christ .
Socinus asserts that Christ is an object of worship—the Unitarian contends that he is not , and in obedience to the teach - ings aud example of Jesus , worships the Father puly . Tt is plain , then , that a Unitarian is not a Socinian ; and when , Sir , you have occasion again to employ tliat term in the pulpit , be candid enough to inform your hearers the sense in which you use ib .
But , Sir , I have now a more serious charge to prefer against you , a charge of misrepresentation and calumny . I would gladly use milder terms , but the claims of truth are paramount , and I must call things by their proper names . You said that " a Socinian is a rejector of the Son of God . " Now , Sir , I ask you for your authority—for the evidence that the Sodman rejects the Son of God . It signifies nothing whether you meant by the term
Untitled Article
Socinian the followers of Socinus or the Unitarians , or both ; I ask you on what evidence you preferred so serious a charge ? Have you read any of the writings of Socinus or of the Unitarians ? Where da you find in them the denial of the sonship of Jesus Christ ? Refer me , Sir , to * the page of some of our acknowledged writers in which that important truth is impugned , or I must tell you , that you are a false accuser of the brethren . I
write not in spleen , hut your charge is an awful one , and demands a bold ancE an honest reply . To call a body of Christians , who , for any thing you know to * the contrary , are as sincere and upright as your own , Pharisees and rejectors of the Son of God , is uncharitable and unjust . It is a matter of fact , Sir , and not of meie opinion , on which lam now animadvertiug . Both the Unitarian and
Socinian profess to believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God , and I ask you , what right you have to deny their sincerity ? * ' Who art thou that judgest another man ' s servant ? To his own master he standeth or falleth . " Consider , Sir , this sober advice , wheuever you have again occasion to speak of Socinians and Socinianism . " Who made thee a ruler and
judge over us ? ' * Yon may say that the Socinian rejects the Son of God , inasmuch as he entertaius different views from yourself relative to his nature and person . But , Sir , this plea , however specious it may appear to those whose eyes are blinded by prejudice , avails you nothing . The
Socinian has as much right to say that you reject the Son of God , as you have to prefer the charge against him . The fact is , neither has a right to the assertion , for it is slanderous and false . Reside , what would he the impression made on the mind of your audience wheu you coupled the Socinian with the Pharisee , Sadducee , and Unbeliever ? Why , they
would evidently infer that the one was as unholy as the other , and , consequently , joiu with you in consigning them to everlasting damnation ! Now , Sir , I appeal to your understanding as a man , and to your conscience as a Christian , whether you have not preferred an awful and unjust charge against your brethren , in asserting that they deny the Son of God ? This denial would be understood
in its worst sense , when you arrayed then ) in company with the proud and hypocritical Pharisee and the sceptical and immoral Sadducee . The severe remarks which you made relative to the conduct and principles of these two ancieut sects , equally applied , according to
Untitled Article
Miscellaneous Correspondence . 343
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1829, page 343, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2572/page/47/
-