« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
tends to unite in brotherly kindness, persons of the most adverse belief; whilst the practical assertion of the superiority of faith over charity, has a tendency to promote bigotry, bitterness, and hatred.
It is true that amongst the Unitarians may be found individuals who do dishonour to their distinguishing principle,-a pre-eminent regard to goodness as the great end of all religion,-by treating the doctrines of the New Church in the spirit of mere creed-professors and virtual solifidians : so also, as already observed, persons of a like narrow spirit, sometimes number themselves with the members of the New Church. But bodies are not responsible for the dishonour done to their professed principles by unwise, or false friends, who are, in fact, the most dangerous of enemies. · But possibly some readers, having been early associated with those religious denominations which are accustomed to call Unitarians “ unbelievers,” may feel disposed to exclaim, “What! are we to call persons Christians, who call our Lord a mere man ?” To this it is answered, that if the term “ Christians” means right interpreters of the Word, Unitarians have an equal right, on this ground, to deny that we are Christians; since we both regard each other as wrong and not right interpreters of Scripture; but is this a sufficient ground for our denying each other to be Christians ? I venture to affirm that it is not. We both stand on the broad basis of fellow-citizens,—fellow-men,-We both call ourselves Christians. We both offer the same evidence to each other in support of our claim, and in proof of our title to be mutually recognized as such; that is, we both declare our reverence for, and belief in the Christian Scriptures. Under such circumstances, a just view of our immutable, fundamental civil relation, forbids us to call the Unitarians Christians,—that is, professing Christians -Christians, in fact, according to the necessary definition of impartial persons, of those who are not themselves Christians, and who alone can be considered as without bias; we cannot, with any shew even of common sense, 'refuse to call them Christians (not according to a theological definition, but) according to the dictionary sense of the term, which is the universal sense of it, with men of every religion, and every nation. We are not justified in saying they are not Christians, because they certainly are so in this legitimate sense of the term. We are not entitled to deny them to be Christians, because we are not prepared to recognize them as right interpreters of Scripture. On this ground, it appears to me, that no New Churchman can refuse to call a Unitarian a Christian, without setting at nought the edifying and beautiful truth, which declares the immutable obligation of ALL to act upon the basis of civil good, and to yield to all citizens a like measure to that which we expect from them. We expect Unitarians to regard us as Christians, because we profess belief in the Scriptures; if we refuse to regard them as such, according to their demand on the same ground, we are clearly guilty of infringing the Golden Rule. · It has been my happiness to number as amongst the most upright and generous members of the New Church, some individuals who once held the Unitarian doctrine; and I venture to hope, that at no very distant period, the sincere and practical admiration of moral principle amongst Unitarians, and the pre-eminent regard to it, as that which chiefly finds favour with God, which they prosess to cherish, will dispose them to a much more general reception of the New Church doctrines than has yet taken place, or than might, at the first view, be expected from the antagonism of their belief to ours, concerning the Person of the Lord. Indeed, I have heard, from Unitarian lips, sentiments approximating to those of the New Church, of reverence to the Lord as “the impersonation of Deity, and the delegated possessor and exerciser of all the divine attributes," which virtually gave to Him more honour, more of real Deity, than Tripersonalists can give Him on their principles, because the idea of Divinity thus attributed was more real and tangible than theirs; it approached, in fact, nearer to the New Church idea of the Lord's Deity than theirs.
Allow me now to present, as affording illustration and proof of my preceding remarks, soine extracts from a discourse delivered during the present year, by a Unitarian minister, the Rev. Noah Jones, of Derby, on the occasion of the death of a member of his church, the eminently generous and much lamented Joseph Strutt, Esq. the well known donor to the town of its much admired “ Arboretum.”
“ Man is not created for enjoyment, but for duty. Human life, with all its varied circumstances, is not a mere gift, but a trust. And under the light of the Christian dispensation, Christian requirements are the conditions of that trust. We stand before the judgment-seat of Christ. The standard of morals, at which we are bound to aim, is, the mind that was in Jesus Christ : the character, which we must strive to realize, is unfolded in the precepts and life of Christ; draws its holiest inspirations from his spirit; and gains immortal strength by the contemplation of his faultless excellence, and faith in his triumphant goodness.
“ Every person, however low his condition, narrow his sphere, or mean his gifts, not only may be, but IS doing something to impede the movements, and retard the progress of society; or to help forward the general improvement. No human being, in civilized life, is so insignificant or isolated, that he has no influence,-no power, either to injure, or to bless mankind.
“ We are too apt to think that influence is the peculiar privilege of highly gifted minds, of distinguished rank, of worldly wealth, of extraordinary character; that power belongs only to parties whose favoured position gives them the influence which wealth commands, or who can embody their influence in legal enactments, and public institutions; or who, by eminent talents and exemplary virtue, can exercise a strong persuasive infiuence over others. But this is a great and pernicious error. Great, for it is utterly inconsistent with the essential character of human life; and pernicious, because it robs society of its due, and deprives the great multitude of men of the satisfaction arising from a sense of their just position in God's family. "No man liveth to himself.' We are all living for good or evil to others, as well as to ourselves. To do good is a glorious privilege ; and is it restricted to only one class, and that necessarily a very limited one ? * * Nay, 'no man liveth to himself,' and the life of the poorest member of society may be rich in its blessed influence on his fellows. Every good thought, every kind feeling, the gentJest tone of pity, is a contribution to the sum of human happiness. There is no power so great as the power of goodness, and its work is the MOST HONOURABLE, when its opportunities are fewest, and its ability the most contracted.
“No man liveth to himself. From the centre of every living soul, there is constantly radiating an atmosphere of moral influence, good or evil, salutary or pestilential, spreading itself through the whole community. No one can live to himself. Kindred and friends, neighbours and acquaintances, fellow-citizens and fellow-men, we all, 80 long as we live, by the manner in which we fulfil or neglect the duties of our place in this department of God's moral government, impart a portion of our own life's character to others, by the influence which is thus exerted over their minds, and hearts, and lives. Husbands and wives, parents and children, brothers and sisters, masters and servants, friends and neighbours, ministers of religion and private Christians, we are none of us living to ourselves, inasmuch as we are either doing, or not doing, our duty to one another, and thereby either immediately or indirectly, promoting or retarding, the general good.
“No man dieth to himself. Life is not a mere gift, but a sacred trust. It is bestowed not for mere enjoyment, but for use. Responsibility is involved in its application and results. The law of retribution is ceaselessly at work. Death is truly only one amongst the many circumstances of human existence. I say human existence, because, when no longer mortal, we shall still be human beings. The same intellectually, morally, and spiritually, as we are now : the same in our faculties and affections : the same in our relations to the Bestower of our trust, — whether we live, or die, we are the Lord's.
“In the great law of retribution as it is written in the moral constitution of man, and announced in the Gospel, there is nothing vindictive, nothing arbitrary ; whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.' Such is THE LAW. Conduct and its consequences; character and its results; sin and misery; holiness and happiness; are united in bonds firm as the throne of God; and lasting as eternity. When God laid the foundations of the earth, he laid the foundations of virtue too. The carnal mind is enmity against God.' The immoral and profane are out of harmony with the mind of God, which is perfect TRUTH; the will of God, which is perfect LOVE; and the government of God, which is perfect ORDER. No peace can be there. The pure and upright, the just and generous mind, is in unison with God's own spirit, co-operating with the Eternal Wisdom and Goodness, and is made a partaker of the Divine Nature. * For whosoever dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in him, and with God is
the fountain of life. They who in holy thought, devout feeling, and willing obedience to his good and perfect will, live with God on earth, when they have laid aside the frailties of mortality, are prepared to gather the fruits of holiness, in their full maturity, from the tree of life; and to drink more freely of the waters of the river of life.
“ There is retribution in every period of our existence; but its full development awaits us when, in the light of the spiritual world, the character impressed upon our spiritual nature shall be clearly revealed; when the moral sentiment shall be quickened to its true life; and conscience shall arise with fresh power, to perform her divinely appointed task. Then every good affection, and every holy habit, will be as ministering angels to speak peace to the obedient soul, and all the selfish passions, and craving appetites, will gather up their strength to torment the sinful; and all minds, according to their several states and prevailing habits, will know for themselves, what the Apostle meant when he said, 'tribulation upon every soul of man that doeth evil;' but glory, honour, and peace to every man that worketh good.”
Many other passages might be extracted from this discourse, which would afford much profit and pleasure to our readers. Such are the edifying sentiments of (I trust I may say, for I feel that I ought to say) our Unitarian brother. I am thankful for the perusal of them, and I trust we shall all derive improvement from the stimulus they afford to proceed in the path of duty.
Extracts from the Life and Correspondence of DR. ARNOLD, late Head
Master of Rugby School, and Professor of History in the University of Oxford. By H. P. STANLEY, A. M. London: B. Fellowes, Ludgate-street, 1844.
To the Editor of the Intellectual Repository. DEAR SIR,
Whilst the New Church silently and slowly works its way, to all appearance unnoticed and unknown, it is cheering to find some of the “truly good and great” who, in the dispensations of an all-wise Providence, have been suffered to remain without its pale, imbued with some little portion of its sentiments and spirit. Influenced by this feeling, I have been induced to make the following extracts from the life of the late Dr. Arnold, which cannot, I think, fail to be interesting to your readers. Apart from the influence which Dr. Arnold possessed, both at Rugby and amongst the more intelligent portion of our countrymen, his views on religious subjects, as well as on the state of mankind in general, are well worthy of observation, as the workings of a pious and good mind, unenlightened by the doctrines of the New Church. • To the Rev. F. C. Blackstone he thus writes on the state of the times:
“Rugby, October 25th, 1831. “I believe that the day of the Lord is coming,' that is, the termination of one of the great alwvec of the human race-whether the final one of all or not, that I
believe no created being knows or can know. Society in Europe seems going on fast for a revolution, out of which Christ's Church will emerge in a new position, purified, I trust, and strengthened by the destruction of various earthly and evil mixtures that have corrupted it.” To the Rev. J. Tucker he thus writes, in allusion to the same subject:
· February, 1833. (Speaking of his departure from England, as a missionary, he says):
“ Meantime, in a temporal point of view, you are going from what bids fair, I fear, to deserve the name of a city of destruction. The state of Europe is, indeed, fearful, and that of England I verily think worst of all. What is coming none can foresee, but every symptom is alarming; above all, the extraordinary dearth of men PROFESSING to act in the fear of God, and not being fanatics : as parties, the high churchmen, the evangelicals, and the dissenters, seem to me almost equally bad, and how many good men can be found who do not belong to one of them !" To the Rev. T. E. Tyler he writes :
Rugby, June 10th, 1832. “ Above all, be afraid of teaching NOTHING; it is vain now to say that questions of religion and politics are above the understanding of the poorer classes; so they may be, but they are not above their misunderstanding, and they will think and talk about them, so that they had best be taught to think and talk rightly. Phrases which did well enough formerly, now only excite a sneer. It does not do to talk to the operatives about our pure and apostolical church,' and 'our glorious constitution. They have no respect for either ; but we must take higher ground, and show that our object is not so much to preserve particular institutions, as to uphold eternal principles, which are in great danger of falling into disrepute, because of the vices of the institutions which profess to exemplify them. The church, as it now stands, no human power
To William Smith, Esq., formerly M.P. for Norwich, (in answer to a letter on the subject of one of Dr. Arnold's pamphlets, particularly objecting to his making it essential to those included in his scheme of comprehension, that they should address Christ as an object of worship,) he writes as follows:
Rugby, March 9th, 1833. “For my own part, considering one great object of God's revealing himself in the person of Christ, to be the furnishing us with an object of worship which we could at once love and understand; or in other words, the supplying safely and wholesomely that want in human nature which has shown itself in false religions, in 'making gods after our own devices,' it does seem to me to be forfeiting the peculiar benefits thus offered, if we persist to attempt to approach to God in his own incomprehensible essence, which, as no man hath seen, nor can see, so no man can conceive it. And whilst I am most ready to allow the provoking and most ill-judged language, in which the truth, as I hold it to be, respecting God, has been expressed by Trinitarians, so, on the other hand, I am inclined to think that Unitarians have deceived themselves, by fancying that they could understand the notion of one God, any better than that of GoD IN CHRIST; whereas it seems to me that it is only of GOD IN CHRIST that I can, in my