Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub
[blocks in formation]

THE first and most important subject to which we direct the attention of our readers, is the distress that still continues to prevail to such a melancholy extent among the poor. If we have hitherto abstained from noticing this painful topic, in the pages of the Irish Unitarian Magazine, it was not from want of deep sympathy for the sad condition to which so many poor people are reduced, but because our readers have access to other, and more frequent means of information, respecting the progress and extent of the famine. Our friends, we are gratified to know, did not wait for the voice of any monitor, save that of their own hearts, to urge them forward to generous efforts on behalf of their distressed fellow-creatures. It gives us unfeigned pleasure to mark the benevolent spirit which is working, in almost every locality, and among all sects and parties. Indeed, one of the most delightful and attractive features in this general movement, is, (with a few unimportant exceptions) its freedom from sectarianism. The unhallowed spirit of party, which has hitherto so pervaded and poisoned society, in this land, seems now to have become utterly distasteful, and people of different religious denominations have set about provoking one another,—not to hatred and recrimination,—but to love and good works. How cheering it is, to see Christians of all parties, forgetting, even for a time, their petty distinctions, and coming forth to assist and encourage each other in the "labours of love,” to which, as disciples of one Master, they are now invited. We believe that the present severe visitation will not have befallen us in vain, should it produce no other result than that of bringing good people of all parties face to face; of breaking down the brazen walls of mistrust and exclusion, with which priests have, very generally, succeeded in building them up from one another; and of teaching them their duties and responsibilities, not so much as members of this or that sect, as the followers of "Him who went about doing good."

L

We sincerely hope, that when the present calamity shall have passed away, the fell spirit of intolerance shall have disappeared also; and that those who now venture forth from their several lines of demarcation, to take sweet counsel together, will continue to go hand in hand, in every effort for the real, practical improvement of society. We have had of late, a most cheering instance of Union for the welfare of all classes and parties, in the great meeting of Landed Proprietors, held, not long since, at Dublin. Influential persons of all shades of politics and religion concurred in the necessity of forgetting past hostility, and of co-operating with one another. One resolution passed at the meeting was introduced by the humiliating, yet noble acknowledgment, that "their own divisions had been the leading causes of their own misfortunes.” "We pray Divine Providence," they say in conclusion, "to bless our efforts in the cause of our afflicted country, to promote that feeling of united exertion and selfreliance which can alone raise us to our proper place in the great empire to which we belong." This speaks well for the future peace and prosperity of our native land. It is time that her children should bethink themselves of their past follies and sins,—it is time that religious rancour and political hostility should be alike forgotten, and that we should begin to live and act together as members of one great family. The doctrine of human brotherhood will henceforth be felt and better appreciated, even in Ireland; and most sincerely do we unite in the prayer, that Divine Providence may bless the efforts of all whose object is peace and good-will among men.

It is true, there are certain small manifestations of bigotry to be noted, which are, in themselves, perfectly contemptible. They serve to show, however, that a portion of the "old leaven" remains. There are some parties so void of common sense and religious principle, as to affirm that the famine in Ireland is a judgment from heaven on these countries, in consequence of the Maynooth Grant! Thus, they represent God as punishing the poor Irish peasantry for an act with which they had no concern! Among religious bigots, there is a restless anxiety to discover and proclaim what they call judgments, on nations and individuals. They are not abashed even by the rebuke of the Redeemer when he says to them-"I tell you, NAY.” We read, also, of a society that has been recently organized to make converts to the Established Church among those who are famishing with hunger. The operations of this society will be mainly plied among the Catholic population, but we suppose they will be directed against other communities, as opportunity may offer. But let the members of this society take good heed to what they do. They are acting on a most objectionable principle, and no good can come of such false zeal. If they succeed in making "one proselyte," under

such circumstances, he will be tenfold worse than before, we care not how wicked or ignorant he may have formerly been. Bread is very important to a hungry man. But man does not live by bread alone; it may be earned too dearly if obtained at the expense of principle, or by making shipwreck of a good conscience. So, let this Evangelical Society look ahead!

There is another Protestant Association got up in Belfast for the purpose of affording relief solely through the instrumentality of Clergymen of the Established Church. This looks like a lingering sectarianism. Why can they not co-operate with others who are as good men and true as themselves? Perhaps the members of this latter society are influenced by no sectarian motives. If so, they do themselves injustice, for their herding together as members of one sect appears unfavourably, and many will be inclined to say to them— "Wherefore, when thou doest thine alms do not sound a trumpet before thee," do not take any undue or unnecessary means to attract particular attention to your good actions. In connexion with these remarks, we cannot deny ourselves the gratification of inserting the following letter from Dr. E. Tighe Gregory, a distinguished minister in the Establishment:

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN WHIG.

Paget Priory, Kilcock, January 30, 1847.

SIR,In the correspondence which has been published in the Liverpool Journal, between Dr. M'Carron and Rev. Hugh M'Neile, the name of your townsman, Dr. Drew, having been mentioned as hailing the present distress as a means of "conversion," I feel a pleasure, more than I can express, in responding to the sentiment; and trust, that the coalition of sects and parties, which the famine-fever has created, will be the means, under divine Providence, of ploughing up the last seeds of bigotry and intolerance, and re-establishing peace on earth, good will towards men."-It is a glorious opportunity for the amalgamation of sects and parties, and, I venture to hope, will not be neglected. Disunion, disgracing Christianity, has been the bane of our common country; but neither the bigot in religion or politics, can withstand the voice of God, proclaiming, that the veil of the temple is rent in twain, and love is fulfilling of the law.-Yours, truly,

66

E. TIGHE GREGORY, D.D. LL.D.

Viceregal Chaplain, and Rector and Vicar of Kilmore, Meath.

A SCOTCHMAN'S APOLOGY FOR RENOUNCING TRINITARIANISM, AND RESUMING THE OPPOSITE AND ANCIENT FAITH, THAT “THERE IS BUT ONE GOD THE FATHER."

To the Editor of the Irish Unitarian Magazine.

(Continued from page 51.)

THE next work of importance that I met with on the subject, was Dr. Samuel Clarke's Scripture-Doctrine of the Trinity. It is the work of a master mind, which I studied very carefully; and though

this writer never made me fully a convert to all his views, yet his book certainly had a most powerful effect upon me, so as completely to break up my former Trinitarianism. It proved to me this, so as to satisfy me of it finally, beyond any doubt, that the Primitive Church, whatever it was, was not Trinitarian or Orthodox in the modern sense. By an immense mass of quotations from writers of the second and third centuries, he clearly proves the great leading church-authorities of that period to have been of the New Platonic or Alexandrian system, which we now call Arian. There are innumerable authorities to prove this besides Clarke; but he was the first to satisfy me of it. Trinitarianism is a system that was only partially introduced into the church at first, and then grew up in it gradually, taking several hundred years to complete it. The germ or pattern of it was borrowed from paganism, brought into the church and engrafted upon the simple primitive Christianity of the New Testament, such as we still find exhibited in what is now called the Apostles' Creed. Any one who candidly compares this with the so-called Athanasian, or finished Trinitarian Creed, whether he own it or not, must see the infinite difference between the two, and that it is as impossible to reconcile the two as to make Christ accord with Belial. Can we believe that the Apostles themselves were high Trinitarians, while their immediate disciples, such as Clement and Polycarp, dwindled at once into simple Unitarians; and that their disciples again recovered a step, and rose a little higher and nearer the apostles than their masters, so as to be Arians; and that they again had disciples who, in their turn, recovered a step, and rose a little higher and nearer the apostles than their masters, until at last, in the fourth and following centuries, they fully recovered, and not till then recovered, the true original standard of high apostolic Trinitarianism? or, in other words, are we to believe that the church, while advancing in the downward career of gross superstition and corruption, and sinking into the darkness of Popery, was at the same time rising precisely in the same degree in the brightness and sunshine of pure apostolic orthodoxy, so as to have then only reached the zenith of orthodoxy, when sunk to well nigh the nadir in superstition? This is impossible to be true; yet this, I saw, and was compelled to see, must be part of my creed, if I believed the history of the church, and believed in Trinitarianism at the same time.

Thus, thank God, I was enabled to escape from Egypt, and was freed from the house of bondage, though still I had long to wander in the wilderness before reaching Canaan. I had not yet returned to the simple faith of my youth, even that simple ancient faith which my infancy had been taught to lisp in the Apostles' Creed. The return to that was only to be attained after a painful labour and retracing of my steps for many years. There were still many things

in Scripture which I had hard making-up my mind about-many passages naturally obscure and hard to be understood, and rendered tenfold more so by the prejudices and false glosses of Trinitarianism. It is the very life of this system to seize upon whatever is any way difficult, obscure, or ambiguous in Scripture, and fasten upon it its own arbitrary gloss or fanciful hypothesis, and then to twist and screw all the rest-all the plain and most obvious tenor of Scripture into conformity with this. Thus, if Moses once represents God as speaking like a monarch, in the plural number, and addressing his council of Angels-"Let us make man : "*this must be seized on and alleged as a positive proof that God is a plural being of three persons, none more or less; and though there be twenty thousand instances in which God is mentioned in the singular number, yet these twenty thousand must be twisted and screwed to nothing, to make way for an arbitrary hypothesis, fastened upon one singular ambiguous instance; or if there be more such instances, they are not above seven to match with TWENTY THOUSAND, and to match too with the perfectly unambiguous and positive testimony of the apostle that "to us there is but One God, the Father," and of Christ himself, that the Father is "the only true God," even "the only true God," in contradistinction to the Son himself, who is but the messenger of that God (1 Cor. viii. 6; John xvii. 3). It is just such kind of argument that forms the staple of the whole system of Trinitarianism.

I may now mention the principal works which I perused before attaining to full satisfaction and peace of mind in this matter. In addition to those afore-mentioned, I read Emyln's Tracts, Price's Sermons, Mitchel of Newry's Sermons, Yeats's Vindication of Unitarianism, Whitby's Last Thoughts, Rammohun Roy's Tracts, Worcester on the Atonement, Christie on the Divine Unity, Forrest's Account of the Origin of Trinitarian Theology, Carpenter's Unitarianism the Doctrine of the Gospel, Wakefield's Enquiry into Early Opinions, Norton's Statement of Reasons, Wilson's Illustrations of Unitarianism, Wilson's Concessions of Trinitarians, Johns on the Proem to John's Gospel, Beard's Historical and Artistic Illustrations of the Trinity.

Now, without meaning any disparagement to the rest, of this last I must say, that it has been to me the crowning work of the whole in settling my mind about the whole matter. It has been of especial service to me in removing my remaining doubts about certain critical passages of the New Testament which I had long been taught to regard as the stronghold of the popular system. It clears up these passages, and takes away the ground from under the popular system

Gen. i. 26; compare 1 Tim. v. 21; Rev. i. 4.

« ПредишнаНапред »