Unitarianism | Page 2

steadily resisted all attempts so to fix the
meaning of 'Unitarianism' as to exclude further growth of opinion.
Consequently there is always room for variety of opinion among them;
and every statement of their principles and teachings must be taken as a
sort of average estimated from a survey more or less extended.
Thus the significance of Unitarianism as a feature of modern religious
development cannot be grasped apart from its history as a movement of
thought. Nowhere is it more necessary than here to reflect that to know
what a thing is we must know what it has been and consider what its
future naturally involves.
Secondly, amid all the varieties of thought referred to, complicated as
they are by the eager advance of some and the clinging to survivals by
others, there are two notes to be found undeniably, if unequally,
characteristic of Unitarianism. It is both rationalist and mystical. If the
historian seems more attentive to the former than to the latter, this must
not be taken as indicating their relative importance. Obviously, it is
easier to record controversies than to unfold the wealth of profound
conceptions. Perhaps we may fairly suggest the true state of the case by

the mere juxtaposition of such earlier names as Socinus, Bidle, and
Locke, with those of Channing, Emerson, and Martineau; or by a
reference to the earlier Unitarian hymns in contrast with those of the
later stages.
SOME TERMS EXPLAINED
A brief explanation at the outset may help the reader to follow more
intelligently the history of Unitarianism. As is well known, the chief
issue between Trinitarians and Unitarians arises in connection with the
relation of Jesus Christ to God, questions concerning the Holy Spirit
being usually less discussed. There are consequential issues also,
bearing upon man's nature, atonement, salvation, and other subjects,
but these call for no remark here. In its full statement, as given for
instance in the 'Athanasian Creed,' the Trinitarian dogma presents the
conception of Three 'Persons' in One God--Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit--'Persons' with different: functions, but all equal and co-eternal.
The Eastern (Greek Orthodox) Church differs from the Western
(Roman Catholic) in holding that the Third Person 'proceeds' from the
Father alone; the Western adds--'and from the Son' (filioque). The full
dogma as given in the 'Athanasian Creed' is not thought to be earlier
than the fifth century; debates as to the 'two natures' in Christ, and the
'two wills,' and other abstruse points involved in the dogma, continued
for centuries still. At an earlier period discussion was carried on as to
whether the Son were of the 'same substance' (homo-ousion) or 'similar
substance' (homoi-ousion) with the Father. The latter view was held by
Arius and his party at the Council of Nicaea, A.D. 325. Athanasius held
the former view, which in time, but only after many years of
controversial strife and actual warfare, became established as orthodox.
The Arians regarded the Son, as a subordinate being, though still divine.
Another variety of opinion was put forth by Sabellius (c. 250 A.D.),
who took the different Persons to be so many diverse modes or
manifestations of the One God. This Sabellian idea, though officially
condemned, has been often held in later times. Socinianism, so far as
regards the personality and rank of Christ, differed from Arianism,
which maintained his pre-existence, though not eternal; the Socinian
doctrine being that the man Jesus was raised by God's approving

benignity to 'divine' rank, and that he thus became a fit object of
Christian 'worship.' The Humanitarian view, finally, presented Jesus as
a 'mere man,' i.e. a being not essentially different in his nature from the
rest of humankind. Modern Unitarianism, however, usually avoids this
kind of phrase; 'all minds,' said Channing, 'are of one family.'

THE EARLIER MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND
I. THE UNITARIAN MARTYRS
The rise of any considerable body of opinion opposed to the cardinal
dogma of orthodoxy was preceded in England by a very strongly
marked effort to secure liberty of thought, and a corresponding plea for
a broadly comprehensive religious fellowship. The culmination of this
effort, is reached, for the period first, to be reviewed, in the writings of
John Locke (1632-1704). This celebrated man, by his powerful
arguments for religious toleration and his defence of the
'reasonableness' of the Christian religion, exerted an influence of the
most important kind. But we must reach him by the path of his
predecessors in the same line. The principles of liberty of thought and
the broadest religious fellowship are warmly espoused by Unitarians,
and they look upon all who have advanced these principles as in spirit
related to them, however different their respective theological
conclusions may have been.
At the time of the Reformation a great deal of speculation broke forth
on points hitherto closed by