On this page

• Text (2)

  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

  • 

    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

    of the orthodox faith , are found to have ultimately embraced sentiments congenial with his own , ami he will atiii feel disposed to aid missionary preaching , as conducted by Unitarians in general , as subservient to the best interests of his fallow-men .

    Untitled Article

    the ttftvtt-UsvitaTriati viepf * t £ * AJ extensive conversion , confcictemi » h fectf ai ^ d thai feet argued (<« *™** W # >" if Mr . W , elioofeefe ) on \\\ e evidetoee W ( what , from observation of what ft

    nets done , appears to be Its existing influence , arid farther , of what is tfcfe consequent improbability of any future material effect being li&ely to reimft from it on the present views as to thfc atonement .

    I gave it f I own , s » my idea , ( tbi * undoubtedly , as Mr . W . remarks but 44 the mere opinions of tfiie writer /!) that this alleged want of more general success , was to be attributed to ttfe prevalent distaste to Hie principles df Unitarian preaching on the point of

    redemption ; the rery point , in fo&k , on which the whofc question hfnge * , and as applied to wlrteii exclusively 1 ventured to use the term Sociman , as more aptly or itftelU ^ bry descrip tive of the views of redemption « & $€ f-

    tallied by the Unitarian supporters # f popular preaching , f It is # H ~ -tl& point I conceive the system must fail , J from tlie basis of it appearing to ear--elude the papular idea of the scriptural doctrine of the atonement , i . tfe . ( in other , -and I htfpe plam-ev , words , )

    * May I be permitted to sugg-eit Mw term as aa allowable compromise , in limitation to those advocates for the divine Tin i ty , who do ? &o £ admit the rioore general ly-received views of the atotienf&ni ? f Mr . W . must Istrri itllo ^ me to Ste ^ , withoot the most disfimt i < fea of o ^ ence to

    7 > &r * o > i » , that I cottceive , in cominMi-, yHtb nurabers who have no malignant feeling to gratify in the use of the « ppe > kitldD that the term Sttemian rtill , of -any it&wm use , { unless that of ultra-Unitarijtn be conceded for the purpose , ) more correctly discriminate those principles which , in the

    business of conversion , represent the , new tJhitarian ' vievfs of redemption , especially as so many others , similfiily circtrtnstaniieo , as to ifeeir srehtimeiits on tlhe petsdh bf Qtiri !^ are decided advocates of tfce fcfor * Catholic opinions *> n the atonetnent . :

    J Can any thing- short of jo » # e raididal deficiency , either , of principle or elfecrt , ra tlie new plan , be s « ffici « nt to account for Ih * extraordinary contrast between the almost overwhelming extensioa of the evatWfelicaL

    and the comparatively imperceptible reception of , what I have ventured ta ^ al ^ the uftra-TTnitiirian views , a contract prU-^ uced , it wrill 1 >^ yeniembettrd , Ky no ihtcrcirted itt * ntie ^^ . rtte' ^ 0 v ^ rp <> v ^ rftt | -c 6 troul of ecofcwfcwtittal ttkhhtom * }

    Untitled Article

    twffihaey tf the nav Mi ** tm * ry « ^ ^ ^

    Untitled Article

    Sir , April iO 9 1 & 1 S . ^ 1 E RtATN liY either 1 must , as Mr . \^ Wrigfct as ^ ames , [ p . - 183 J have very vagt ^ iV © ri d ambiguously

    expressed mysfcltf on the subject of the inefficacy of the new missionary preaching , * ibr the purposes of conversion , or , he must have strangely misunderstood rny ideas upon the point in question .

    pin an EtStehttve perusal of Mr . W . ' s reply , he seems to me to have taken tip the « ufcrjectof m ^ better on a rnttch broader and more extended basis tbfrft any thing stated by ib £ , was ever designed at least to view it upon : in fect ^ making my letter a tesft , as it

    were , for discussion of topics irr ^ lavent to the poirft , as fkr m t have introduced it ; foir the leading heads of a large portion of his tetter have deserted the main qu ^ ntion , for an in-^ \ rymi ^ first prirtei plesf which cGulel mi ) y involve us rn an endtetis field < k controversial debate .

    All I eVet proposed in my letter ( which , fey Hie bye ^ appears , 1 think , to have efcetted ra ^ riher more severity than its intention deserved ) , was , in confirmation of a renmatk ^ originates by a precursor ill the > ai % afi * ient in a preceding Nwoiber , t € o assert the apparent inadequacy 6 f iprearchirvg oh

    # In u&ng this desi ^ iia ^ lon I ' oHist iib-« erve , that when Mr . W . and otherfe of bis idea so strenuously 'insist on their own cqustructiou of the term Unitarian , it would seem ( hit tliey were hardly aware how Wnny others , in total opbbsifioh to them '

    Mres on oifidr ^ ointsi amougat ^ ffei ' ent parties thei'e are , ^ eyeii nbi ex c ^ pti tig Wesleiah Methodists for i ^ staiicie !) i ^ ho , while they concur in their Vieivs of the «* i p rimacy of tl » e Father , could fey na collision of sentiment be brought to accede to a « y derog ^ atocy views of I'edemption by the Hood of the Son .

    j- See Moa . Repos . XII . ^ 93 , where the Corre » pondea | : nlhided to ienmi ks , " They ( the UiMtanaHs ) have oaly dxguments "With which to answer ikdsk Who contend that trtietfe % notlriiir ib 0 tfrtoifertitem to tutti tU iaoittkte ^ ifr ^ ^ ^ Hr ^ i they hairc tto J ^ c * io ^ ofece ^

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1818, page 319, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2476/page/31/