2
10
12
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/ff67356072660d863e0ae6b8c72ccb6d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=icOfttbzCrVQUa%7EV42atdQyYDvDFWNqdGmfyhzI0aO2aa9TXOQxPXNN0vBJJv-AydOFfGu-Y6sTfEUE3uWoDLsm6DjW-fyu4T2HWZ9D%7EghzFBaPkCUp4lrPAS%7Ektk1Zr0abhIQrRfuferboJPcAaOqxMs5K7t4Vq4jriLq5biyC5vqKQyxLax%7Etm1QLM4l%7EyolAqzqz2vp9wYjpPKjhX7BX6OLz9Mx6AQ%7Evt-J7y18mbtGtX-GFLMzrRtHx%7ED9eXvXkteIwP-qGAZTC1hPZxrVsMBVAAjQ140W38%7Ev9MfkLSxNvHa%7EijBMTI3xxab72hyD-Rf-YGhphg9TrrQX623Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
41bb539df3694305f08d7bef68b64250
PDF Text
Text
How and Why lam a Unitarian.
A LECTURE
BY
J. FREDERICK SMITH,
Minister of
the
1 1
u
Elder Yard Chapel,
Chesterfield,
(Late of the Baptist Chapel, George-Street, Hull,')
Delivered
in the
Bowlalley-Lane Chapel, Hull,
On Sunday Evening, April 12th, 1874.
.....
'.
------- J--------
,
I
HULL:
Sold by J. S. Harrison, Bookseller, 48, Eowgate ;
And at the Chapel Vestry.
CHESTERFIELD :
Sold by J. Toplis, “ Courier” Office, High-Street.
1874
Jj’rice Sixpence.
I
�J
�How and Why I am a Unitarian.
A question very analogous to that we have to consider
to-night is, How and Why am I a Christian ? The two
questions are alike in several respects. It is exceedingly
rare that any number of thoughtful persons agree in their
definition of what Christianity is. The name Christian is
an old historic name of very wide and very various signifi
cance. It can be borne by religious people of very dis
similar, or even of opposite,' theological and moral ten
dencies.
It follows from the compass of the name
Christian, that men call themselves Christians for reasons
as various as the senses in which they appropriate the
name. Those amongst them who are not charitably dis
posed, deny to the larger number of their would-be brothers
the right to use the distinction. The charitable con
fess amongst themselves that no definition of Christianity, t
and no classification of the only valid reasons for professing
•it ought to be attempted. Our reasons for being Christians
are very personal as well as our definition of what con
stitutes a Christian. It is not surprising, therefore, to find
that not a few minds prefer greatly to answer the question,
How and Why am I a Christian ? not directly and ex
plicitly, but indirectly and implicitly. They prefer not to
define Christianity or to formulate the reasons of their ad
�4
herence to it: a reply to the question more congenial to
their ideas and feelings would be found by an examination
of some of the living elements of Christianity and of their
own spiritual necessities. They would thus avoid much un
profitable and repulsive historical and dogmatic discussion,
while at the same time they would probably come much
nearer the real heart and true import of the question.
The question proposed by my lecture, How and Why
I am a Unitarian ? appears to me to be in precisely the
same case. We most of us know many senses in which we
are not Unitarians. Some people are Unitarians because
the Bible they think teaches Unitarianism : but certainly I
should be a Unitarian if the Bible had been an earlier
edition of Calvin’s Institutes. Some people are Unitarians
because they hold that the doctrine of the Divine Unity is
the doctrine of the standing or falling church ; yet I am of
those who were I a Manichean or Zoroastrian on this head,
should still class myself with the bearers of the Unitarian
name. Like the word Christian, it is a historic name with
no precise dogmatic import, but on the contrary of a wide
popular meaning, including amongst its bearers men of very
unlike, often of opposite, feelings and views on very im
portant topics. I will ask you, therefore, to permit me to
deal indirectly and implicitly with the question before us
rather than by the method of strict definition and formal
proof. This method will, I believe, enable us to come upon
what are to many amongst us the really valid reasons for
belonging to churches which are commonly described as
Unitarian.
The substance of the answer to the question before us
which I have to return to-night is this : As a religious man
I stand in great need of certain assistance from religious
association ; this assistance is refused by the churches which
are founded upon authority, but is at least to some extent
�5
supplied by the Unitarian or Free Churches which acknow
ledge no higher authority than the individual reason and
conscience.
A man’s religion is that which he most sacredly loves
and seeks: his profoundest desires, his best and most in
vincible tendencies, the deepest springs of his best feelings,
constitute his religion. Now, some amongst us cannot
overcome, and dare not now attempt to overcome, the deep
desire to come into the right relation and attitude towards
all that is not ourselves—God, Man, Nature ; to use and
cultivate fully all that is ourselves—the powers' of our
nature ; and to fulfil the duties that arise from our consti
tution and our relation to things beyond ourselves. The
religious association that will help us to attain this attitude
towards what is without and to use and perfect what is
within, is an association that feeds and sustains our religious
life : it will be our church, even if it renders but imperfect
help.' On the other hand, the association that throws itself
in the way of our deep longing in these respects comes into
collision with our religion, retards and hinders what we count
the highest and holiest attainment.
Let me explain a little more fully the nature of this
deep religious necessity.
Our acquaintance with Nature is at present com
paratively slight; but it is sufficient to call forth admira
tion, wonder, and gladness, mingled with fear and reserve.
Our attitude towards her must be one of reverent enquiry ;
at present we cannot look upon all her ways with satis
faction. At times we could almost worship her, but not
infrequently we are tempted to curse her. Now and here
she is a loving mother to her children ; but then and there
she is a cruel step-mother. We know her at present as a
being half-divine and half-demonic. Our attitude towards
her is a mixture of confidence and dread, while we wait to
�6
know more. The church that condemns this attitude by
authority, in some form or other, not showing us why we
ought to abandon it, cannot help us. We know that we
must respect Nature and study her assiduously ; and we ask
for aid to maintain, in the face of strong temptation to the
contrary, this attitude of respect and enquiry, until fuller
knowledge may exhaust the revelation and sanction a
new at-titude.
Our knowledge of 'Man shares the imperfection of our
knowledge of Nature. Great questions upon which ancient
churches had formal and final dogmas have of late been re
opened, and many of them answered anew, and in the very
teeth of the received authoritative answers. I refer to such
enquiries as those into the origin of man, the unity of man
kind, the mental, moral, and religious endowments of the
various races of mankind, the history of religious and of
moral ideas. The attitude we feel bound to take up in re
ference to Man with such questions as these still open, is
one of profound interest mingled with reserve and eager
enquiry. Not only shall we feel unable to attach any value
to an authoritative dictum as to man’s history and nature,
but we shall feel compelled to reject any one-sided theory
which will not consider all the facts known, and any final
dogma which will not acknowledge that we are at present
but just commencing an acquaintance with the facts. How
could a church assist us in one of the profoundest instincts
of our hearts—to study mankind, if she opposed that study,
either by laying down a theory which rendered it un
necessary, or by condemning some of the established con
clusions of science?
Just as our present knowledge of Nature and of Man
is deficient, so our faith in God waits for completion and
greater strength. At present our faith is sufficient to produce
adoration and trust, but it stands in great need of accessions
,
�7
both to its fulness and vigour. Our theology is our most
precious treasure, but its jewels are yet uncut and its gold
is u,ncoined. We feel rich in possession of it, and would
die rather than resign it, yet we cannot define it. ' Our
attitude towards God is that of profound reverence and
trust, which does not preclude but rather commands earnest
enquiry. How could that church assist us religiously that
requires the acceptance of final views of the nature and
character of God ?
Let us now turn for a moment to those duties that
arise from the possession of personal endowments and the
relation we sustain to God and Nature and each other.
Xhey give rise to great religious necessities which the true
church ought to satisfy to some degree.
As men we are endowed with powers of thought and
feeling, and the means of using them for ourselves and
others have been put within our reach. These are all
talents that must be employed and not left to lie idle.
If we take the intellect, we may observe that one of
the deepest rooted and most ineradicable sins of our nature
is love of ease, which shows itself especially in our dislike
of hard and continuous thinking. Another sin is often
associated with this of intellectual idleness: it is the sin of
indulging ourselves in pleasant theories and beliefs: a fatal
facility in acquiring and tenacity in holding notions that
make u's happy, with the corresponding slowness to receive
any idea that is unpleasant. These two sins together are
the evil genius of the intellect: they are the fruitful source
of moral and mental ruin in innumerable cases. And the
man who is at all alive to the strength of the temptation
that will assail him from this quarter earnestly seeks help
from those who are stronger and more faithful to the God
who gave them reason than he himself is. He seeks a
church that will drive him to think when thought is
�8
wearisome and when it leads to painful results. His
church must be no bulwark of authority for the faint
hearted who are afraid of thought, no retreat for the weary
who are tired of thought, and least of all a. castle of in
dolence for the idle who will not think.
The culture of our emotions is not of less importance
than the culture of our intellects. Our emotions branch
off into several directions. They are directed towards our
fellow creatures who can appreciate and return them,
towards objects of beauty and grandeur, or towards what
is right and noble in conduct. Now, whether they take the
form of affection, or conscience, or taste, they are in all
cases great endowments capable of wide and fruitful cul
ture. All three forms are essential parts of our nature,
neither of them can remain in neglect without serious in
jury to our character and manhood. Whenever one of them
has been allowed to usurp the place of the rest, individuals,
and society have greatly suffered. Conscience must not
frown down the love of beauty; the love of beauty must
not proceed to sacrifice the sanctity and chastity of affec
tion ; nor may affection disregard the rights of conscience
and pleasures of taste. They are all instincts and powers
which the reverent man will fear to slight; they all deliver
a revelation of higher things when their language is under
stood ; their development is the growth of the individual
and the wealth of society. But it is hard to keep the
balance between such closely allied powers quite true ; and
here, as everywhere, the root-evil of idleness bears poisonous
fruit. Who will help us to train and cultivate our emotions
with wisdom and due care ? The church that will recognise
some of them only, that will condemn others, and destroy
the harmony between them by over-estimating more, is not
the church we need. Within ourselves there is enough of this
unwisdom : we seek those who will help us to get rid of it.
�9
'
These powers of intellect and feeling have been put
v into the hands of creatures who can use them for their own
and other’s good. We have endowments, and we must
apply them. This application of them is attended with
great difficulty. It is a difficult matter to know what is
good for ourselves and others ; and when we know, it is
difficult to do. All about us we see men pursuing wrong
courses of action. Much of the benevolent conduct of men
* is weak, twisted, whimsical; it lacks rationality and thorough
usefulness. Still more is our conduct when directed to our
own interests devoid of reasonableness and adaptation : we
are ignorant of what we really want; we are led by impulse
or by custom : our manners and habits, our pursuits add
occupations, our acquaintance and friends, are largely deter
mined by accident and whim. We call aloud to the wise
and strong for help to assist us in attaining right, rational,
and noble conduct. Our church must be composed of souls
that have at least some help to render in this our need.
We now turn from a brief review of some of the
necessities which a church must satisfy to some extent if it
can be a church to us, to enquire which of the churches
around us meets our wants. Now, there is one vital dis
tinction which will divide the whole of the churches around
us into two separate classes, and leave us free to disregard
i the well nigh innumerable minor distinctions amongst them.
This distinction is that of authority or private judgment ;
and it gives us two groups of churches ; on the one hand,
the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Protestant Churches,
and, on the other, the Undogmatic Free Churches. Roman
Catholic and Orthodox Protestants are alike in this, that
they fall back as their last resource upon some authority
outside the individual reason and conscience, either upon a
church or a book. The Undogrqatic Free Churches, whether
called Unitarian,, Free Christian, Theistic, or by no name at
�IO
all, agree in this, that higher than any authority without is
the living, personal judge within. Neglecting the less
fundamental differences that distinguish them, this common
characteristic of Rome and the Reformed Churches justifies
us in classifying them all together so far as regards the
requirements we put upon our church.
All these churches of authority at some stage or other
obstruct enquiry and growth by the introduction of some
authoritative and final doctrine or model : here it may be
a creed, there a book ; here a canonised saint, there a re
ligious founder; but the difference of form makes no
essential difference in the reality: an authoritative dogma
limits enquiry, and an authoritative life limits personal and
social development. The holiest necessity of our nature is
to enquire in all directions until our intellect is satisfied ;
to cultivate and train all our faculties and emotions without
restraint until they find their true rest in perfection and full
activity ; and to pursue any course of conduct whatsoever
that our reason and conscience may command. But these
churches meet us at some critical point of our intellectual
enquiries with dogmas and theories which have ultimately
no other claim to be received than the supposed infallibility
of their propouriders. So far from assisting us to maintain
perfect loyalty to reason and intelligence, and aiding us to
overcome thebesetting sins of idleness and selfish wilfulness
in thinking, they either forbid the exercise of the intellect
upon all subjects, or they concede its unavoidable demands
suspiciously and grudgingly. Not less do they impose
restraints upon the full and free development of human
nature. Their ideal of humanity was conceived in an un
cultivated and decrepid age : it lacks essential elements of
a full, rounded manhood ; many excresences and deformities
cling to it. Their ideal of society is equally imperfect, their
kingdom of heaven becoming every age less adapted for re-
�II
velation upon the earth. Through all history the social
and political instincts of the best citizen have met with ob
structiveness rather than assistance from these churches.
They have assiduously cultivated some of the virtues of
the good citizen, such as submission to authority, content
ment under suffering, but upon other and still more essential
virtues, such as independence, resistance to injustice, love
of enquiry, they have put their bann. And some of the
vices that have weakened society, such as improvidence,
uncharitableness, untruthfulness, have been sometimes in
directly fostered at others. openly sanctioned as divine.
This authoritative and final model of manhood and society
is commonly imposed by these churches either as the in
fallible teaching or the perfect model of life granted to men
at the commencement of our era.
Having an ideal of man and society that descends
from the remote past when both men and society were in
important respects unlike what they now are,, it can hardly
be expected of these churches that they should be able
either to wisely direct or morally strengthen the conduct of
the individual-^vho is seeking counsel and support. They
do not really know what in our day is the one thing need
ful ; nor if they knew would their theory of human nature
permit them to supply the real strength and motive that
are required. The lives that have been formed, and the
conduct that has been directed by them, have not been of
' the type that we can to-day pronounce exemplary. The
lives of priests and ecclesiastics may be taken as indicative
of the real nature and tendency of ecclesiastical character
and aims. These lives are devoted enough, but the devo
tion is to wrong objects, and is not distinguished for its
sanity and fair, strong manliness. The course of conduct
and prevailing characteristics of the chosen saints of all
these churches have been deformed more or less by inhuman
�12
other-worldliness, and want of clear intellectual sanity and
vigour. The lives of St. Augustine, St. Francis of Assisi,
Luther, Calvin, John Wesley, cannot be considered as model
and complete lives by those who know how great Heathen
have lived and what Shakespeare and Goethe have taught.
They are the lives of saints protesting against nature rather
than conforming to her highest requirements. The work
they accomplished needed to be done, but their fitness to
do it rendered them unfit to become models of human
character. Their time was out of joint, and they were
born to set it right: but their ability to do this made them
more unfit than a Hamlet to represent human nature
generally. Without doubt in a sick and despairing age,
their course of conduct and character had great charms for
the hopeless; yet we have more and stronger faith than to
believe that the wants of a diseased period of human life
are the normal wants of mankind, or that the regimen of
sick men should be adopted as the law of their lives by
those who are whole. Memento mori is for some few a
needful sermon, but the greater and more general need of
men is to hear the admonition, Memento vivere !
An enquirer for a church who brings with him such
demands as we have been considering, will not, therefore,
find his church in this first class of authoritative com
munities. He will find that they have determined for him
another attitude towards nature, man, and God, than that
which he holds to be the only true and reverent one ; that
they have laid their bann upon conduct and pursuits which
are to him essential parts of his religion ; that they present i
commands for his obedience and examples for his imitation
which he must deem to lack authority, and to be either
useless or injurious. Turning his face from Catholicism
and Orthodox Protestantism, he will come to the few Free
Undogmatic Churches that are around him, with the hope
�13
of finding there help amidst his struggles after a higher life.
Not that amongst the millions who belong nominally to
these churches of authority, there are not thousands who
are seeking just what he seeks : this he is happy to believe,
and thankful to know personally some of them. It is the
legitimate and prevailing tendency and influence of the
churches only which he must pronounce opposed tawhat
he thinks is best and holiest.
The Undogmatic Free Churches to which we now turn,
have this characteristic in common, that they acknowledge
no external authority as entitled to command the opinions
or the conduct of others. They propose to no one any
final and unalterable views of nature, man, and God; they
set up no absolute 'ideal of manhood, which all men every
where, and in all ages, are tp acknowledge as divine. They
do not map out with unalterable lines the course of any
man’s pilgrimage to heaven.
They know nothing of
eternal plans and schemes of salvation. They rather hold
that the beginning of salvation and holiness is in the
individual’s 'practical recognition of the responsibility that
is laid upon him to think for himself, to shape his own con
duct, and to cultivate any power God has given him. On
this point they all speak with fervour and give no uncertain
sound ; but on the great mass of philosophical and theolo
gical dogmas their opinion is divided and uncertain. They
urge upon men by precept and personal influence that their
holiest duty is to think, and to think earnestly and man
fully ; to make the best use they can of any faculty they
possess, training it to its highest perfection ; and to live
a life as far removed from an ignoble and selfish worldliness
as from the pursuit of irrational and useless projects.
On minor points these churches differ greatly amongst
themselves. They have no common name. They are
called Unitarian, Free'Christian, Theistic; and some of
�14
them have no name at all. In most cases the name is not
a dogmatic description, but merely a .convenient and
customary appellation.. This, I take it, is the case with
the name Unitarian. Our chapels are called Unitarian
Chapels, and our ministers Unitarian Ministers, not be
cause we care particularly whether Trinitarian arithmetic is
correct or incorrect. We found our separation from ortho
dox Christianity upon a principle and not upon a dogma,
that principle being independence of external authority.
Again, these churches have no organisation which
unites them into one ecclesiastical body. They are the
most purely congregational of all congregational churches.
There is not even a common association that unites them
all. This leaves each separate congregation absolutely free
to pursue its own line of thought, and to develope its own
type of character, and follow its own tendencies to action.
They differ in still more important respects. The
position which they assign to the Bible amongst books, and
to Jesus Christ amongst men, are very various. While
they agree in ascribing superiority to the Bible and to Jesus
only to the extent to which their reason is convinced, the
measure of this superiority is of a very varying scale.
Some would rank the Bible above all literatures, while
others put but a low value upon some of its books, and
would not place any of them highest in human literature.
So, too, with respect to Jesus. His character and work are
very variously estimated. To not a few He is a son of
God as no other man has been, while there are others
who consider Him as but one amongst other greatest
religious leaders.
'
Not less undogmatic are these churches with respect
to theology proper, or the doctrine of God. They have no
formulated statement of their faith on this great article.
Each enquirer is left free to form his own ideas of God.
�i5
If his tendencies are towards a pure theism, he will find
fellow believers ; if he shrinks from ascribing human attri
butes to the Infinite, he will find that he is by no means
alone. And whether his religious associates agree with
him in his theology or not, they will urge him to be true to
his own light and proclivities.
Based upon this great principle of free unfettered en
quiry, these churches also leave their members free to cul
tivate their own powers as they deem wise, and to put forth
their energies in whatever direction and to whatever pur
pose they think useful.
The influences of these free
societies may feed the springs of character and activity,
but they do not force the streams to flow in any prescribed
channels. Special ecclesiastical work is not cut out for their
members as the only or chief work of God. They do not
recognise the distinction between the church and the con
gregation, and they dare not call any human avocation or
pursuit unholy and profane. They wish to enable men to
do with all the might of religious fervour whatsoever their
hands find to do. All days are holy days, all work is
worship, all earnest effort is prayer and praise, every
service of our kind is a consecrated ministry, every legiti
mate act of nature is an act of grace. Thus members of
these congregations are left as free'to act for themselves as
to think for themselves; they may form their own ideal of
manhood as well as their own theology; they may choose
any spot on God’s earth as their field of labour, and cul
tivate it with what means and in what manner they think
best. Their religious associates do not command them
what to do, but simply to do what they do well.
Based upon this great principle of individual freedom
and responsibility, and possessing this practical breadth
and divergency of ideas and aims, these churches appear
to me to present religious association in a form which may
�be made really and truly helpful. A small number of souls
possessed with the deep religious desire to stand right with
God, nature, their fellow creatures, and themselves, will not
be hindered by the constitution of such free associations ;
and the one religious bond that binds them together supplies
the positive force which will make them mutually helpful.
The mere fact of association upon such a basis gives im
mense strength to each member of it. The moment I know
that those with whom I meet are possessed with the same
sacred open-minded desire as myself to stand right with
themselves and God, my own desire has acquired a vast
accession of strength and support. The connexion with a
society of men who are seeking the good and the true sus
tains us amidst the temptations of life. And these societies
not only admit but seek out earnest and fearless preachers
of whatever truth has been laid upon their hearts as genuine
and of worth. If a man has anything to say, and can say
it plainly, he will be not only patiently but gladly heard.
Thus the simple but powerful elements of all* helpful
association are. to be found in these churches : they have
the sympathy of the like-minded and the animating and
enlightening word of the speaker. These elements were
the only essential conditions of that little church in
Galilee, of another later at Mecca, and of one earlier than
either on the banks of the Ganges. While the churches of
Buddha, Jesus, and Mohammed, were simple associations of
like-minded men with a speaker at their head, they were
living sources of strength and inspiration to their members ;
when they had hardened into ecclesiastical organisations,
they became the source of bondage and weakness. Their
simplicity was their strength. So is it with these Free
Congregations. They have no organisation beyond the
simplest arrangement for securing a chapel and the few
services connected with it. The whole influence for good.
�17
of the association is to come from the simple source of
personal communion and alliance ‘in devotional acts and
holy desires, and the exhortation of a brother man.
It seems to me that these societies contain constitu
tionally neither too much nor too little to render the assis
tance which we have seen to be requisite. Of course I know
well that many of them fall miserably short of what they
ought to be. Some of them are untrue to the name they bear
and the very principles upon which they are founded. But
the fault lies in the particular exceptions themselves, not in
the principles upon which they were established ; and the
generality of them are, I believe, in fact, as well as in name,
vehicles of vast moral and religious assistance to those who
are connected with them. And, what is of great importance,
these churches are so constituted, that they are capable of
adaptation to new needs and of indefinite improvement.
They can be made whatever the members who compose
them desire to make them. Everything about them is flexi
ble and expansive. Their past history has been one of steady
but continuous change and progress. They have gone on
to find out gradually the depth and compass of their great
fundamental principle of personal freedom and responsi
bility ; they have gone on gradually to widen their con
ceptions of man’s true attitude towards the great facts and
mysteries around him ; they have gone on gradually to
learn that in conduct sanctity is allied to sanity, that human
righteousness is a sweet and noble reasonableness, that one
mission of. the Messiah was to cast out the legions of *
irrational and whimsical demons that twisted the minds
and perplexed the imaginations of religious people.
Here or nowhere, it appears to me, we have the •
lost church restored. In the middle ages men fabled
that God’s church had been lost-—sunk into the depths
of the sea, vanished from the worldly eye within the gloom
�i8
of impenetrable forests. The spiritual ear could indeed be
surprised by the long lost sounds of holy hymns and chants
coming up from mid ocean or stealing from the depths of
holy woods ; but to the outward worldly eye, the sacred
edifice was lost. Personally, I must confess, that that fable
has long been truth to me. The outward church of God
has been lost. But for the inward ear of the spiritual man
there is still audible here and there, far away from ecclesias
tical splendour and carnality, the sweet, tones of bell and
organ and choir, telling us that still the house of God is
with us, that wherever two or three are gathered together
in His name, He is in the midst of them to bless them.
Only He cannot be with any of us unless we are true to
ourselves and the light He has given us!
KIRK, PRINTER, CHAPEL-LANE, HULL.
���
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
How and why I am a Unitarian: a lecture
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Smith, J. Frederick
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 16 p. ; 22 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Inscription on front page: With J.F.S.s kind regards. Delivered in the Bowlalley Lane Chapel, Hull, on Sunday evening, April 12th, 1874. Printed by Kirk, Hull. Bookseller's J.S. Harrison Hull; J. Toplis, Chesterfield.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1904
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5373
Subject
The topic of the resource
Unitarianism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (How and why I am a Unitarian: a lecture), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Unitarianism
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/085160cc70ab4cf863f38d624920b2c9.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=mgBUwcinfL5%7EWLbCM6QfwZ5oXl3h8hE8GLpw3XY3AsME8r2SZl4BJ4J-tr9FN8ZcD8ZtyqCu-%7ExlbNbvKAa3zimCLMEpPyoUJDqrlrs8yK%7EwuZ1h%7EgzdZnZHV320BIPi1dr2ccPHdDlgS3nYJp9xa%7EjsxqjE8ezrBoXOnZnA4NLWfC3-HnWCCj5GgGxw-fRIyjXpcpJkvu03Effk7RRagWIyRxcdwgKymEFsEZjk39i-4gOBT0cqlYvbPXtErQ7rqDaGJ1s7tbCBY7N57SanN6S-83t6%7EqDV83g%7EmxCU0RF6aHtLrCEzJspYUwh4hCGQ-666PrMh-1hQJnufs4DTAA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
7ca6ed011ba3fa607c7bdc359a45cc1e
PDF Text
Text
c;S'-k>3
SUNDAY LECTURE SOCIETY,
ST. GEORGE’S HALL, LANGHAM PLACE.
SUNDAY AFTERNOON, OCTOBER 30th, 1881,
at
FOUR,
o’clock
precisely
LECTURE
ON
:
4
'
“ THE HEART OF SHELLEY,”
BY
MONCURE D. CONWAY, M.A.
SYLLABUS.
Shelley among the Professors.
“ Mad Shelley.”
“ Expelled for Atheism.”
The new Ahasuerus.
The Lover.
The Father.
The Poet.
Shelley’s Prometheus.
Shelley’s Christ.
The Secret of Shelley.
The Lecture on Sunday, November 6th, 1881, will be by JAMES GOW.
Esq., M.A., Cantab., on “Alexander the Great.”
Payment at the Door
ONE SHILLING (Reserved Seats) SIXPENCE ;-and ONE PENNY.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Sunday Lecture Society, St. George's Hall, Langham Place : Syllabus
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Sunday Lecture Society
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 1 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Cassell & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1904
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5703
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lectures
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Sunday Lecture Society, St. George's Hall, Langham Place : Syllabus), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Church Services
Conway Tracts
Lectures
Moncure Conway