St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-11-05
WHAT IS UNITARIANISM?
Rev. w. j. Lhamon Speaks Abont
the Orthodox Minister'S,

At the Church of Christ yesterday
morning Rev. w. j. Lhamon preached
on the subject of ''Unitarianism.'
The orthodox ministers of our city,
said he, have recently given Unitarian
Ism some notoriety. AS a phase of re-
ligiouS life it is worthy of some study.
Unitarianism was originally reaction
from TrinitarianiSm. Trinitarianism
represents a patriStic and medieval
dogma fastened on the church in the
midst of a scare about certain doctrines
called heresies. Perhaps if the heresieS
had received majority vote they would
have been the orthodox dogmas of the
centuries, and the Trinitarians of the
Fourth century would have worn
through history the brand of heresy as
the Arians are doing. TrinitarianiSm
''orthodox churches" Practically it is
taught in the theological Seminaries
and forgotten in the pulpits and the
pews. The Trinitarians of the present
day have for the most part gotten over
it. They go along like good christian
spirited souls, as indeed most of them
are, and have forgotten their old all
ment till you remind them of it.
The Unitarianism, however, of Chan
ming and his school is not that that we
find around US. There are Unitarians
and Unitarians. There is right wing
and left wing. In other words these
better spirits have been driven out by
the radicaliSm and ratiOnalism and prac-
tical infidelity of the left wing. Of this
party Theodore Parker and O. 3. Froth-
ingham are representatives. A few
years ago Mr.. rockingham, as reported
ia the papers at the time, quit preach
ing because he did not like his company.
Around hiln there gathered rationalists,
esthetic doubters, cultured infidels.
free-thinkers, humanitarians, and that
whole class of hOpeleSsly misfitted NOR
tails, who, if they ever prayed and fash
Toned their words according to their
faith, would say: SO God, if there is a
God, save my soul. if have one" Out
of such company rockingham could
not build a permanent church. or even
harmonious esthetie society, and he
frankly confessed it and gave up the
attempt. If loyalty to Christ as Lord,
and love to Him as Savior are necessary
factors of our Christian faith, then a
good deal of the UHitarianism of the
present day is inidelity under a mask.
Unitarianlsm is negative; it has de
generated to mere eSthetieiSm; it is a
ssmoral dandyism" that makes for
righteousness, but has no certainty of
getting there.
AS to Mr.. Simmons university lee
ture: though am member of what
the papers call the ''Orthodox Preach
ers' Meeting" l am beginning to won
der why we make SO much ado about
that lecture. Surely there is much to
commend in it, and [ heartily agree
Mr.. i,,h &c har H Of
chronological theories" But perhaps
Mr.. Simmons has no more ground for
his insinuations about the whole story
than the orthodox people have for the
dogmas he so much dislikeS. AS to
wearing the name of Christ, and belong
ing to the church of Christ, Mr.. Sim
mons simply stuItifies himself. If
man has the spirit IF Christ he will not
be slow to seek the name and the
church of Christ. But we can not very
much blame him for his position on that
point if he gets it by induction. for he
evidently sees Christian-spirited people
all around wearing every other magma
BILE name than that of Christ. If
we orthodox people are wise
we will0 simple cease to rave,
and learn TO make good use
of the thrusts our Unitarian friends see
fit to give us. To come back more di-
rectly to the subject; if Unitarianism
is a reaction from Trintarianism, per
hapS they are both extremes, and that
one has as good right to exist as the
other, and that neither is to be finally
accepted. Our text holds the medium
ground, and expresses the one certain,
saving truth: Il believe that Thou art
the Christ, the Son of God that should
come into the world"