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
general remark , applicable to all of them , we may mention , that while they undertake to vindicate the conduct of their brethren , the writers betray a secret consciousness that they are ¦ not treading on sure ground ; for their style of writing , and the summary manner in which they
dismiss the subject , indicate that they themselves regard submission rather as the effect of constraint than as the deliberate result of . well-informed judgment . They more resemble persons in quest of reasons to satisfy their own minds , than persons * fully persuaded * of the propriety of their conduct . " ( P . 53 . )
In concluding this examination , he sums up the whole thus : — " It appears , therefore , that the apology offered for submission to this imposition of a religious formulary , is the assumed fact , that they do not consider the occasion on which it is used as properly religious . They regard marriage , on the contrary , notwithstanding the constrained observance of a solemn rite as the mode of
toleration , to be merely a civil transaction , and submit to that observance solely as a requisition of the civil magistrate , who may appoint any form he pleases . Thus , to justify ourselves from the imputation of abandoning our consistency , compromising our principles , and
surrendering our liberties , by performing a religious action merely because commanded bo do by act of parliament , we are compelled to adopt a plea implicating us in the more serious charge of profaning the name aud trifling with the worship of God . We are , by the confession of our own advocates , placed in the situation called a dilemma . One of
our great principles is , that the magistrate has no right to interfere with religion , by prescribing modes and forms for the regulation of divine service . This , unquestionably , he has done in the case of marriage in England . For , unless we admit that such is the necessary effect of legislative interference with the mode of its celebration , we are compelled to maintain a most untenable position , that the matrimonial service prescribed in the
Book of Common Prayer is not a relir gious form . If we grant this , we must , to vindicate our conformity , abandon the principle for which , at other times , we strenuously contend , that religion is not the magistrate's province ; and that , if he attempts to dictate to conscience by positive enactment , a paramount obligation to the Supreme tribunal forbids compliance with such unwarrantable imposition . But for our quiet submission in this case , what excuse do our advo *
Untitled Article
cates invent ? The same employed by a late Alderman of London to justify his conduct in submitting to the Sacramental Test , —that he regarded his participation of the sacred elements as < merely the performance of a common indifferent action , enjoined by act of parliament to be a qualification for holding
a certain secular office , not as the observance of a religious institution ; The cases are not , perhaps , entirely parallel ; greater amount of evil being unquestionably involved in abusing ; to secular purposes , one of the holy ordinances of the Christian religion ; but both proceed on the same principle—a profanation of solemn worship . The plea resorted to in either case involves the confession of an
offence highly displeasing in the sight of God , mocking him by formal , hypocritical devotions , making a solemn approach into his immediate presence , taking his venerable name upon our lips , not for purposes of worship , with a sincere desire to render homage and service to him , but merely for civil purposes , for our temporal accommodation or secular advantage . We observe a religious rite of human invention in a transaction
entirely civil , or solely regarded as such , considering it sufficient excuse that we are not profaning a ritual institution of God ' s own appointment , although he has repeatedly declared , that worship performed merely in compliance with the traditions or injunctions of men is vain aud criminal , unprofitable to the performer , and offensive to the object
professedly addressed . To insult the Majesty of Heaven may not , indeed , be our fixed intention or deliberate design . In general , probably , Dissenters do not previously consider the solemn nature of the religious act in which they are about to engage , or the precise effect of the words they are about to repeat . We regard the whole service as a ' dead office , ' an
unmeaning ceremony , retained merely in compliance with long-established usage ; that is , according to the apt expression of our great Milton , ' we present God with a set of stale and empty words / But surely it becomes us on all occasions to remember that the Searcher of hearts , who cannot be deceived by specious appearances or plausible pretences , will
not be mocked with impunity . ' ' 1 he times of this ignorance * and inconsideration , God , it may be hoped , has overlooked ; but now , after light has beendiffused in all directions , can we persist in this course without incurring his displeasure ? " ( Pp . 67- * -69 . ) With regard to the conduct which
Untitled Article
556 Miscellaneous Correspondence .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1831, page 556, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2600/page/52/
-