BIBLE DIGEST - Number
49 August
1994 (Revised December 2001)
THE
DEVELOPMENT OF BIBLICAL UNITARIANISM
In Europe, England and America
By Allon Maxwell
|
RECOGNISING UNITARIANS
TODAY We use the term
"Unitarians" to describe those who reject the doctrine of the Trinity,
in favour of belief in God as a one person only. However, to avoid confusion we
also need to define the difference between two sorts of Unitarianism. In this paper we
are mainly concerned with Biblical Unitarianism, and we use that term to avoid
confusion with the other stream, which we will call Rationalist Unitarianism. Historically, they
both began as virtually almost identical in theology and practice. In past times all
Unitarians appealed to the Scriptures, interpreted by reason. However, in the
19th century, the Rationalist Unitarians began to lay rather more emphasis on
human "reason" and personal experience, than on belief based on an inspired
Bible. Most contemporary
Rationalist Unitarians now follow this line. They can usually be identified by
the use of the word "Unitarian", in naming their churches. Today, amongst the
Rationalists it is no longer essential to believe in a personal God, the Virgin
Birth, miracles, or the inspiration of the Bible. For some, absolute standards
of morality are rejected and left to individual "conscience". Many are
"Universalist" in their expectation of salvation. What began as a Christian
movement, is no longer entitled to that description. Biblical Unitarians,
on the other hand, have survived as Bible centred groups, maintaining a determined
stand for faith in the One True God, His Virgin born Son, and the truth of the
Bible. The Biblical Unitarians
do not reject reason, but they do accept the authority of the Scriptures as the
sole source of revelation about God. Although their theology
is Unitarian, in the older sense of the word, many are careful about using the
word at all, lest they be confused with the Rationalists and Universalists. In this article
we shall concentrate our attention on the Biblical Unitarians. DEFINING BIBLICAL
UNITARIAN THEOLOGY Biblical Unitarian
belief can be briefly summarised as follows:- *
That the Father alone is the One True
God. *
That Jesus Christ is the human son
of The One True God, (but NOT God the Son) *
That Jesus was miraculously begotten
of a virgin mother by the power of the One True God. *
That before His begettal Jesus did
not exist in personal form, either as part of the Trinitarian God, or as the Arian
spirit being. *
That Jesus began his existence, (as
all other men do), at his birth, when the Word spoken by God was fulfilled. *
That Jesus was not the two natured
"God-Man" of the Trinitarian creeds, but was born with only one nature,
(human). *
That as a man, Jesus was made (created)
exactly like all other men, mortal, subject to temptation, capable of sin, and
needing to learn obedience. *
That the source of His perfect obedience
was not in some inherent "hybrid divinity", but in His perfect love
for the one true God, His Father. *
That the Holy Spirit is not the third
person of the Trinitarian Creeds, but the divine presence and power of God, through
which He works to achieve His purpose in His creation. *
That God (the Father) alone has immortality. *
That mankind does not possess inherent
immortality, or an "immortal soul". *
That the human race is mortal, and
that death is a sleep in which no part of the human personality survives the death
of the body. *
That for all men, (including Jesus),
immortality is a conditional gift, imparted at the resurrection of the body, and
reserved only for those who believe and obey God. All reject infant
baptism and most, (but not all), practise Believer's Baptism. ORIGIN Unitarian theology
is not new. It dates back to the beginning of time. The God who created
the world is defined by Moses as ONE. There is no other. (Deuteronomy 6:4) The writers of the
New Testament were also Unitarians. Jesus Himself confirmed the Unitarian theology
of Moses, when he directed attention to the worship of the same ONE LORD. (Mark 12:29-30). Belief in Jesus
as a subordinate being, distinct from God, continued to be the majority opinion
until well into the third century. The doctrine of the Trinity, as we know it,
did not exist. SUPPRESSION Belief in a Jesus
who had no real humanity but was a pre-existent spirit who merely assumed the
appearance of a man, surfaced towards the end of the first century. It was this
heresy which motivated the Apostle John to write his Gospel and his three epistles,
repudiating the teachers as "antichrists" and labelling the doctrine
itself as "the spirit of antichrist". (1 John
2:18 & 1 John 4:3) However, despite
John's rejection, the doctrine of a pre-existent Jesus continued to invade the
Church, gradually changing its form, until eventually, in the 4th century, Jesus
was elevated to a place in a "Tri-une" Godhead. In the theological jargon
of the "scholars", this new Jesus is said to have "impersonal human
nature", without actually being a human person! Attended by political
intrigue and much bloodshed, the doctrine of the Trinity became the compulsory
majority opinion. By Imperial decree it was enforced under threat of death. Although the initial
suppression was primarily directed against Arians, other "heretics",
including Unitarians, also found themselves under threat. For more than a thousand
years, evil men in the Trinitarian mainstream used this evil law to justify the
murder of "heretics". Both Arianism and Unitarianism were effectively
suppressed. It is doubtful whether
Unitarian teaching was ever quenched totally, for the true light is never overcome
by darkness, (John 1:5). And darkness is
certainly the proper Biblical label for the murderous hatred in which the majority
sought to destroy all opposition, (1 John 2:8-11 & 1
John 3:13) , thinking that they did God service! (John 16:2) (20th century "Cult Busters"
beware!) However Unitarianism
does not surface again to any major degree in the visible history of the church,
until the 16th century. This is perhaps understandable. In the face of potential
martyrdom, most Unitarian believers would have kept a fairly low profile! Possibly
also, the relatively few who might have existed, were lost sight of in the broader
general persecutions by the mainstream church against other "heretics".
It was the custom to burn the writings of "heretics" and to erase their
memory from the record, as far as possible. Whatever the facts, this writer does
not have access to enough of the history to do more than speculate, (perhaps a
little wishfully), about this period. MODERN DEVELOPMENT
- THE ROOTS Modern Unitarianism
has its roots amongst the some of the early Anabaptists, in Holland, Poland and
Transylvania, in the 16th century. Michael Servetus.
(1511?-1553) The Spaniard, Michael
Servetus appears to have been the first well documented Unitarian of the 16th
century. After attending the coronation of Emperor Charles V at Bologna in 1530,
he became distressed by Papal ostentation and the Emperor's deference to the worldly
Pope. Contact with reformation leaders in France and Switzerland, led him further
away from Catholicism. Following personal study of the Scriptures, he rejected
the doctrine of the Trinity and published his book, "Errors of the Trinity",
in 1531, attracting the condemnation of Catholics and Protestants alike. After about 1546
he fell out with Calvin, incurring the latter's determined and open animosity. In 1553, in Lyon,
he published another major work against the Trinity. He was taken by the Inquisition,
but escaped to Geneva, where he was arrested by the Reformers. At Calvin's instigation
he was burnt, a martyred victim of the darkness of spirit in which Calvin and
his followers walked. (1 John 4:20) Adam Pastor
(born c.1511) Rudolph Martens
was a former Flemish Catholic priest who changed his name to Adam Pastor when
he became an Anabaptist in 1533. A contemporary with
Menno Simmons, he was ordained by Simmons and Dirk Phillips, as an evangelist,
in 1542. He worked closely with Simmons until 1547, when they fell out over Pastor's
teaching that Jesus did not exist in any personal form before his conception
and was to be considered divine only in the sense that God dwelt in Him. In 1548,
after a couple of unsuccessful attempts at reconciliation, he was finally excommunicated
by Simmons, for his Unitarian belief. Pastor is thought
by some reputable historians to be the Flemish Anabaptist visitor to Poland, who
went by the name Spiritus. Whether or not this
identification is accurate, Spiritus is the one who is credited with the introduction
of Unitarian theology to Poland, in 1546. Lalius
Socinus (1525-1562) Socinus was an Italian.
He was studying Greek and Hebrew in Zurich, when Servetus was burnt. The circumstances
attracted his attention to the doctrine of the Trinity, which, after study, he
came to reject. He was disinherited
by his father for his views, and following his father's death, his share of his
father's estate was seized by the Inquisition. He spent the rest of his life in
exile, in Zurich. After his death,
his theological views survived and his papers were inherited by his nephew, Faustus
Socinus, who became perhaps the most famous of the Unitarian pioneers. Faustus Socinus
(1539-1604) Faustus Socinus
was the nephew of Lalius Socinus. By 1559 he had been
denounced by the Inquisition and forced to flee into exile. In Zurich, in 1562,
he acquired his uncle's papers. Shortly afterwards,
in Lyon, he wrote his first work, in which Christ is described as "divine
by office rather than by nature". In 1563, by giving
outward submission to the Catholic Church, he managed to return to Italy, where
he remained for 12 years. Forced to leave
Italy again, he eventually settled in Cracow, Poland, in 1579, where he became
a leading figure amongst the already established Polish Brethren. There he commenced
the work of revising the Racovian Catechism, but died
before it was completed. The Polish Brethren In the 16th and
17th centuries, Unitarian Theology flourished in Poland, where for a time it gained
some degree of political ascendancy. A university was established, from which
graduates carried the Unitarian teaching throughout Europe, (though not with highly
visible success). However, in a resurgence
of Catholicism, fierce persecution resulted in virtual extinction of the Polish
Unitarian movement. Somewhere around 1638, the university was destroyed. By 1660
a decree was passed by which Unitarians were required to dispose of all property
and leave the Kingdom within three years. Many capitulated to the Roman Church.
However many thousands left their homes and sought asylum in exile. They were
scattered far and wide throughout Europe, taking their radical theology with them. Many travelled to
Hungary, Transylvania, Prussia, Silesia and Moravia. In Prussia especially, they
were received and permitted to establish churches for Unitarian worship. Others found refuge
in Holland where, prevented by the authorities from obtaining separate places
of worship, they were eventually absorbed amongst the officially tolerated Trinitarian
Anabaptist groups. Others fled to England,
where the seeds of Unitarianism had been growing, at times, quietly, and at others,
under fierce persecution, for a century or more. Here they found a haven, though
less than secure. They were helped by the congregations formed through the influence
of John Biddle. (see below). The Transylvanian
Church The parallel development
of Unitarianism in Poland's close neighbour, Transylvania, did not experience
anything like the same persecutions. It was protected by the State, by legislation
enacted in 1571. In Romania and Hungary this Church has survived to the present
time, without succumbing to the rationalist influences experienced in other lands. The Influence of
the Racovian Catechism The Racovian Catechism
is the Confession of Faith of the Polish Brethren. It was first published in Poland,
around 1575, and is one of their best known writings. A revision was published
in the Polish language, in 1605. This enlarged and annotated edition was begun
by Faustus Socinus and Peter Statorius Junior, who both
died before finishing the work. It was completed by others after their deaths. Over the following
couple of centuries, the 1609 Latin version and other subsequent Latin editions
were widely circulated and read by scholars in other countries. It was also translated
into many other languages, including Dutch, German and English, making it available
to the common people of those countries. Without doubt, this
document has been, either directly, or indirectly, one of the major influences
in the re-emergence of Unitarian theology as a significant movement. DEVELOPMENT IN ENGLAND The 16th Century In England there
are vague, but less than certain, references to denial of the Trinity, as far
back as 1327, and 1401, when two were burned under this accusation. There are
other pointers in the 15th century, which are also less than certain. However, it was
in the 16th century England, that Anti-Trinitarian teaching made a definite appearance,
in parallel with developments on the Continent. Amongst the Dutch
Anabaptists who fled to England in 1535, many came under suspicion, Some were
found who denied the Trinity, and forced to recant. An English priest,
John Assheton, was tried before the king in 1548, admitting denial of the Trinity.
However he also recanted, for fear of the stake. Around the same
time a number of others were also tried and forced to recant under threat of death. Other Anti-Trinitarians
who refused to renounce their faith were burnt or imprisoned. It is not easy to
be certain just how much of this Anti-Trinitarian sentiment was Arian, and how
much was Unitarian. The Authorities
who persecuted them were not always aware of the differences and tended to be
indiscriminate in grouping all "heretics" who denied the Trinity, as
either Arian or Anabaptist. The 17th Century It was in the 17th
century, that Unitarianism made a clearly identifiable appearance in England.
The Racovian Catechism and the writings of Faustus Socinus penetrated the religious
world of England to such an extent that "Socinianism" began to be used
as an epithet to label those "heretics" who agreed with them. Socinianism
came to a painful birth in England in the face of determined animosity. In 1648, official
opposition reached its worst expression when the Presbyterian majority in Parliament
passed the notorious "Ordinance for Punishing Heresies and Blasphemies". This evil law was
directed principally against Anti-Trinitarians, practitioners of Believer's Baptism,
(and rejectors of Infant Baptism), Pacifists, and Arminian. Seven specific "heresies"
were punishable by death, "without benefit of Clergy". Sixteen less
serious "errors" were to be punished by imprisonment. However the law
was not popular with the Parliamentary minority. It caused much controversy, and
in the midst of other political unrest of the Cromwellian era, it became dormant.
In 1651-2 Cromwell, who favoured religious tolerance, secured the passage of his
"Act of Oblivion", which set free many accused of various crimes, including
heresy. In 1653, when Cromwell became Protector, he pledged himself to guarantee
religious freedom to all. However, Cromwell was not really either diligent or
successful in fulfilling this pledge, and the "defenders of the Faith"
still managed to prosecute "heretics" for some time afterwards. In 1662, the bigoted
anti-Puritan Parliament passed the "Act of Uniformity", which was aimed
against non-conformists of all kinds. However public opinion
gradually forced change. Eventually, in 1689, the "Religious Toleration Act"
gave relief to dissenters of all kinds, and the worst religious persecutions began
to abate. (It should be noted
here, in fairness, that not all religious persecution in England, was directed
solely against Anti-Trinitarians. Other non-conformists of all kinds suffered
in parallel. It was the same
17th century religious intolerance which drove the Pilgrim Fathers to seek freedom
from persecution in a new land. In the 25 year period
before the Religious Toleration Act, some 8000 non-conformists are said to have
died in prison and 60,000 suffered in other ways through fines and loss of property. (Such was the "love"
inspired by the "Christ" of the Established Church!) The Unitarians quickly
took advantage of any increasing freedom. By 1672 a member of Parliament was complaining
that Socinian books were selling as openly as the Bible. However, it is one
thing to pass laws about toleration. It is quite a different thing to change men's
hearts to practise it. In 1693 the author
of a small anti-Trinitarian tract was fined Ł500 by Parliament and the pamphlet
burned by the hangman. In 1697 an eighteen
year old medical student at Edinburgh University was tried for blasphemy and heresy
under a long dormant Scottish law, after making some unguarded remarks about the
Trinity, in the hearing of fellow students. At the trial he was denied the right
to legal representation. He admitted the offence, professed a deep and sincere
repentance, and pleaded for mercy. They hanged him anyway. This case was the
last execution for heresy in Great Britain. Around this time
the name "Unitarian" began to be used by its adherents, in an endeavour
to escape the stigma associated with "Socinianism". John Biddle
(1615-1662) John Biddle is not
the only name deserving of mention. There were many others who stood with him
in the struggle against the opposition of the established Church, who cannot be
mentioned in the space of this article. However, Biddle
is probably the best known amongst the pioneers, as the one who laboured long
and hard and patiently, in the face of severe persecution from the bigots who
would tolerate no divergence from the Trinitarian position, and who sought by
all possible means to destroy him. Biddle was a scholar
of no mean ability. At the age of 26 he became Headmaster of Crypt Grammar School
which was attached to the Cathedral at Gloucester. In pursuance of his duties
of teaching his students the Catechism of the Church of England, he immersed himself
in study of the Bible. A few years later
he knew the whole English New Testament by heart, and most of it in Greek. (although
he did confess to being a little shaky in the Greek after the early chapters of
the Revelation!) He also came to
reject the doctrine of the Trinity. However it would seem that Biddle never managed
to become completely Biblical Unitarian in the terms defined on page 1 of this
article. Note
(Updated 19/12/2001): According
to the historian, Earl Morse Wilbur, Biddle's tract of 1647 - “12 Arguments Drawn
Out of Scripture” - refuted the doctrine of the Trinity but claimed that the Holy
Spirit is an intelligent person, distinct from God. This point is not reflected
specifically in Biddle's “Twofold Catechism”, which is a later work. (1654) I
do not personally have access to a full copy of the 1647 tract. However Ruth McHaffie,
a sister in the faith from Scotland, recently sent me a photocopy of a page from
the preface to this tract, which contains part of a letter written by Biddle
to a Member of Parliament, from whom he hoped to win support. It reads as follows: “As for
my opinion touching the Holy Spirit, it is thus: I believe the holy Spirit
to be the chief of all ministering spirits, peculiarly sent out from heaven to
minister on their behalf that shall inherit salvation; and I do place him, both
according to the Scripture, and the Primitive Christians, and by name Justin
Martyr in his Apologie, in the third rank after God
and Christ, giving him a pre-eminence above all the rest of the heavenly host.
So that as there is one principal spirit amongst the evil angels, known in the
Scripture by the name of Satan, or the (a) Adversary, or (b) the
unclean spirit, or (c) the evil spirit of God, or (d) the Spirit
of God, or (e) the Spirit by way of eminence: even so is there one principal
Spirit...there is, I say, one principal spirit amongst the good Angels, called
by the name of the (a) Advocate [sic], or (b) the holy Spirit, or
(c) the good Spirit of God, or (d) the Spirit of God, or (e) the
Spirit, by way of eminence. This opinion of mine is attested by the whole
tenour of the Scripture .... By his own testimony
he reached this conclusion without having read any of the literature of the Socinians.
He did however become well acquainted with it in later years. By 1644 he was sharing
his new faith with others and was promptly called before the magistrates to answer
charges of heresy. He escaped on this
occasion by writing a confession of faith under pressure, which at the second
attempt, was allowed to pass, (and left him with an uneasy conscience). He subsequently
wrote a much more explicit article in which there could be no mistake about his
beliefs. This article was intended for use by friends, but one of them betrayed
him to the Magistrate. He was again briefly imprisoned but was released on the
security of a friend pending a hearing before Parliament. Six months later
in 1646, he was called to London where the Parliament referred his case to an
Assembly of Divines for consideration. The case dragged on without resolution
and he spent the next 5 years confined to the Gatehouse at Westminster. He continued
to write in prison. While there he actually put into print, for public consumption,
the private article which had brought him before the Parliament! Naturally this caused
an uproar, and the pamphlet was seized and burnt by the hangman. However demand
for it was so great that it was reprinted before the end of the year. These events led
to a call for Biddle's death, and this was one of the major factors which led
to the hurried enactment of the 1648 "Ordinance for Punishing Heresies and
Blasphemies" mentioned above. However Cromwell's "Act of Oblivion",
(also mentioned above), worked to his advantage, and in 1652 he was released from
prison. That same year an
English translation of the Racovian Catechism appeared, which has been ascribed
by some, to Biddle. Over the next two
years Biddle wrote prolifically, as well as translating several works by Polish
Socinian authors. In 1654 he produced
his own "Twofold Catechism". When this book was drawn to the attention
of Parliament, he was again imprisoned, this time in Newgate,
and his book was burnt by the hangman. However Parliament was dissolved before
his case was resolved. Only
two copies of the catechism are known to have survived. A retype made from a photocopy
of one of the two surviving copies, is available on the Internet at:: https://allonmaxwell.com/biddle/000start.htm Six months after
his arrest the charges were abandoned, and he was again released. Freedom was short-lived.
Less than a month later he was again arrested on the capital charge of Blasphemy
and Heresy. The 1648 Ordinance against Heresies, which had been thought to be
dormant and replaced by Cromwell's pledge of religious freedom, was used against
him. This time he again
escaped the death sentence but was banished to St Mary's Castle in the Scilly
Isles, where he remained in prison until 1658. After his release
he returned to London, where he remained free for a further four years, though
in ill health for much of the time. In 1662, he and
several friends were arrested while holding a Bible Class at his home and imprisoned
without bail. At first no suitable charges could be found, but eventually a way
was found to impose a fine which Biddle could not pay. Five weeks later he fell
ill with "prison fever", and was released, but died two days later at
the age of 47. Biddle left no denomination
to bear his name. The small band of immediate followers disappears from history
shortly after his death. However there can
be little doubt that all of us today, who hold Abrahamic faith in the One God,
owe this man a great debt. The influence of his teachings has long survived his
death. Biddle did not aim
to be merely a reformer of Christian doctrine. For Biddle, religion without a
moral dimension was no religion at all. He was not concerned with doctrine as
an end in itself, but as a foundation for the holiness of character to which it
should lead. Unlike many others
engaged in controversy, he was not by nature quarrelsome or opinionated, but modest
and self-effacing. He was tolerant of others who differed. His personal character
was beyond reproach. His reputation indicates that he lived what he preached. In the 20th century
also, this remains the principal goal of true Biblical Unitarianism, for all who
follow Jesus in worshipping His Father as the ONLY TRUE GOD. The 18th Century The early part of
the 18th century is notable as a time when Arian teaching invaded the English
Churches, leading to much debate and upheaval. Leading Quakers also argued against
the Trinity as unscriptural and confusing. These controversies
probably gave helpful cover for the rise of Unitarianism. Indeed for many Unitarians,
Arian doctrine was an initial stepping stone by which they arrived at their final
belief. By the end of the
century many Unitarians had seceded from the Church of England and established
independent congregations. In the 17th century,
Baptists had gradually increased in numbers. By the later years of the 18th century
they included a significant number of congregations who adopted Unitarian theology
but retained the Baptist name. In 1770 the orthodox Trinitarian Baptists withdrew
from the Unitarians and formed a separate association. The Baptist Unitarians
continued to retain their Baptist identity, retaining both the name and other
Baptist distinctives. The 19th Century The Baptist Unitarians
mentioned in the previous paragraph, persisted well into the 19th century, maintaining
an identity separate from the Unitarians. The Unitarian historian,
Wilbur, mentions some fifty congregations who existed in 1826. Gradually, however,
many of them began to merge with the other Unitarians, forsaking their Baptist
identity. The final step in
releasing Anti-Trinitarians from all threat of legal consequences came in 1813
when the "Trinity Act" was passed. This Act officially repealed long
dormant laws and their associated severe penalties, aimed against Anti-Trinitarians. However, although
persecution was now reduced to the social level rather than the physical, Unitarians
continued to face vilification and decidedly unfriendly opposition. (Familiar
story! Even in the 1990s this can still be the case.) The publicity afforded
by those who attacked them openly, the liberty to engage in public debate and
the freedom to publish and distribute their writings, all worked to advance their
cause. A vast body of supporting literature developed. Thus the Unitarians continued
to grow in numbers, at first as independent churches During the course
of the century the many different independent streams in the movement gradually
coalesced and formed a Unitarian association. The secession of
Unitarians and the formation of independent congregations brought other problems
with it, of a less worthy kind. When churches divide
or secede, there are inevitable questions about who owns the real estate and the
money in the bank! Covetousness rears its head. There were, at times
protracted bitter legal battles to resolve these disputes, in which neither party
was distinguished for willingness to suffer themselves to be defrauded. (1 Corinthians 6:7) For both parties
doctrinal correctness about God was certainly on the agenda. Sadly, it seems that
radical obedience to the Sermon on the Mount was another matter, when put to the
test! Covetousness won the day. In the 19th century
there were also other regrettable developments. For many, increasing freedom of
religion was accompanied by an increasing tendency to wander from their Racovian
heritage. The results have not always been Biblical Christianity. The Rationalist
Unitarians began to adopt liberal and humanist views, rejecting the Bible where
it did not fit with their own human "reason" and human "experience". For Biblical Unitarians
the differences are irreconcilable and cooperation impossible. Biblical Unitarians
began to emerge in new ways, under different names, and walking a separate road. However, much of
this new growth of Biblical Unitarianism in England, just mentioned, actually
has its origin in America. After the following
short discussion of the influence of the Racovian Catechism on the developments
in England, just described above, the scene must now shift from England, across
the ocean to America. THE RACOVIAN CATECHISM
IN ENGLAND The Racovian Catechism
edition of 1609 was dedicated to the English King, James the First. The 1651 edition
was actually printed in London. Both of these Latin
editions must have been widely distributed in England, since they aroused concern
and fierce opposition from the authorities of their respective times. Both were
ordered collected and burnt, the first by the King, and the second by Parliament. The English translation
of 1652, (which has been attributed by some historians to John Biddle), made it
available to a much wider audience amongst those who could not read Latin. There
was clearly much interest by the English public of the time, in Racovian anti-Trinitarian
teaching about the nature of God. The 1818 English
Translation, by Thomas Rees, was well known in its day, both in England and America. Its doctrines are
reflected in an abundance of Unitarian writings of the 18th and 19th centuries,
in England and America. It would scarcely
seem possible in the religious climate of the time, for serious students of religion
not to hear about Unitarians and their radical theology. Whether directly through
the Racovian Catechism itself, or indirectly through other related influences,
many, on both sides of the Atlantic, did come to hear about the One True God,
re-evaluate their faith and as a result, reject the Doctrine of the Trinity. UNITARIANISM IN
AMERICA In America, the
development of Unitarian theology does not seem to have experienced the same degree
of direct Socinian influence from Europe, as that found in England. Nevertheless
developments in England were closely followed in America. Communication flowed
both ways between serious students of religion. It was inevitable that what was
happening in England would also find its way across the Atlantic. Thus the Arian controversy
which began in England at the beginning of the 18th century, also found its way
to America at around the same time. And, just as in England, many found their
way to Unitarian theology after beginning with Arianism. There were complaints
from Orthodox Trinitarian ministers of Arian influences at work, as early as 1654. By 1750 sermons
were being preached and articles written against Arian teaching. By the last decade
of the century, independent Unitarian congregations were coming into existence. Early in the 19th
century, between 40 and 50 Presbyterian ministers were dismissed for denying the
Trinity. In 1815, the first Unitarian theological college was established. In
1840, a survey established that 135 out of 544 Congregational churches in Massachusetts
were Unitarian. There is no doubt,
from some of their writings, that much of this Unitarian stream began with complete
dependence on the Bible as the source of their anti-Trinitarian theology. However, just as
in England, 19th century Unitarians began to follow the same Rationalist path
to humanism and liberalism. Thus they earned for themselves the distinction drawn
at the start of this article, between themselves and the BIBLICAL Unitarians. Now we must turn
the clock back a little, to consider another interesting development at the end
of the 18th century. OUTSIDE THE UNITARIAN
MAINSTREAM The few incidents
recorded above, have been selected from a much wider historical record, to illustrate
the steady infiltration of Unitarian teaching in the American religious scene. Eventually this
movement began to organise and assume the status of a denomination with the name,
"Unitarian". However, Unitarianism was only one of a number of the highly
visible elements in the general religious ferment of the times. In parallel with
the development of Unitarianism, others also were becoming dissatisfied with the
strict Calvinism imported from England by the Pilgrim Fathers. In 18th century
America, amongst those who had fled to America to escape religious persecution,
it was still possible to be publicly whipped to death for opposing Calvinistic
orthodoxy. So much for “freedom”! The general religious
upheaval of the times was not confined to Arians and Unitarians. The awful
Calvinistic doctrine of unconditional election and predestination was being challenged
by Arminian teaching of freewill. Infant baptism was being rejected in favour
of believer's baptism. Events in Europe triggered wide interest in end-time prophecy
and the coming Kingdom of God on earth. Sabbath keepers were making their mark,
rejecting conventional Sunday worship. "Weird" and extreme heretical
fringe groups were appearing. In some areas the
Revival fires were burning, causing deep concern amongst others who could not
accept the accompanying emotional excesses. There were also
many who were simply searching for a religious freedom denied them by conventional
orthodoxy. In their search
for a faith more suited to the needs of the common people, these were rejecting
the creeds and the divided state of organised religion, in favour of a simpler
Biblical, non-creedal, New Testament faith and practice. Out of this melting
pot came a number of new groups who although their theology was Unitarian, went
by other names and remained apart from the main Unitarian movement. James O'Kelly In 1793 James O'Kelly,
of North Carolina, and some other ministers withdrew from the "Wesleyite" Episcopal Methodist Church. At first they
called themselves Republican Methodists. In the following year, (1794), they dropped
the denominational name and began to call themselves "Christians only, with
no head but Christ and no creed but the Bible". This movement was
especially strong in Virginia and North Carolina, but also spread to other Southern
and Western States. I have not found
much direct information about the beliefs of this group. They are mentioned here
because of their later loose association with the other Unitarian groups mentioned
below. Presumably, at the very least, they saw no problems about such association.
More likely, they probably agreed in some measure. Elias Smith
(1769-1849) Elias Smith was
originally a Particular Baptist, but at the beginning of the 19th century, he
became upset with the rigid Calvinism of that group. This led ultimately to rejection
of the entire system, and a resolution to follow the Bible only. Together with Abner
Jones, a Particular Baptist physician from Hartland, Vermont, he began to establish
independent "Christian" Churches, mainly in New England. Although Smith himself
was an Arian, the movement came to be largely Unitarian, also adopting the doctrine
of Conditional Immortality. Barton W. Stone
(1772-1844) Stone was originally
a Kentucky Presbyterian Preacher. In 1803, affected by the Kentucky Revival, he
and five other ministers left the Kentucky Synod. At first they formed an association
under the name of "The Springfield Presbytery". In 1804 they abandoned
that denominational name and became simply "Christians". Under the leadership
of Stone and the "success" of his Revivalist methods the movement grew
rapidly, mainly in Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, and Tennessee. As well as turning
away from Calvinism, the churches under Stone's leadership had also rejected the
doctrine of the Trinity and were largely Unitarian. Their communion table was
"open". After a short time they also adopted the practice of believer's
baptism. The Christian Connection In 1815, representatives
of the Stone movement travelled East, where they met with leaders of the O'Kelly
and Smith groups. There, after discussions,
they joined hands and agreed to work together in a loose relationship. Although
not an official body, this informal alliance of the three groups came to be known
as the "Christian Connection". Alexander Campbell
and the Disciples In 1807 Thomas Campbell,
a Presbyterian minister, migrated to America, where he began to initiate a program
for Christian unity. In 1809 his son
Alexander and the rest of the family followed him from England. Alexander was
soon the undisputed leader of the movement. In 1812 the movement
accepted Believer's Baptism as a key doctrine and shortly afterwards joined temporarily
with the Baptist association. However this was apparently a fairly precarious
union and eventually, following a number of disagreements, the connection was
severed in 1830. Shortly afterwards
they began to call themselves Disciples. It seems unlikely
that there was any significant Unitarian presence amongst the Disciples at first.
However that was soon to change. The Campbellites
and the Christian Connection Barton Stone and
Alexander Campbell first met in 1824, but it was not until 1832 that the two groups
formally agreed to unite. It was, on the face of it, an unlikely development! Stone was a Revivalist,
given to use of the emotional techniques that characterised Revivalism. Campbell
rejected emotionalism, favouring a much more disciplined and rational approach. Stone rejected the
Trinity. Campbell, although at times given to the use of "unorthodox language"
about the Trinity, seems to have been in other respects a "normal" Trinitarian. These differences
between them were certainly recognised by both and discussed between them. Somehow,
they managed to satisfy each other, ..... although just how they did that is not
at all clear. It does seem likely, from Stone's remarks several years later, that
in the interests of "unity", he and Campbell simply agreed not to ask
each other awkward questions! The aim of both was tolerance, not doctrinal argument. The end result was
that some 7000 largely Unitarian Stonites joined with
about half that number of mainly Trinitarian Campbellites. Two years later
in 1834, a young English migrant, Dr. John Thomas, was converted and baptised
by the Campbellites. It seems almost certain that it was amongst them that he
learned his Unitarian theology. More about this later. This strong Unitarian
presence amongst the early Disciples, seems to be an aspect of Campbellite history
which is perhaps just a little embarrassing to his Trinitarian spiritual descendants.
It has been mainly ignored, or else glossed over, in the "official"
histories to which I have been able to gain access. However the several
contemporary sources quoted by the Unitarian historian, Earl Morse Wilbur, indicate
that it was a fact well known at the time. For the Stonites, the merger seems to have resulted, eventually, in
the complete submergence of their Unitarian theology. Today, amongst the
Churches of Christ who are the spiritual descendants of the Disciples, it would
not be tolerated at all! The Christian Church The Smith-O'Kelly
Eastern section of Christian Connection did not join with the Stonites in the merger with the Campbellites, to any great
extent. In the main, they held back. For a time they
maintained their separate Unitarian presence. Then about 1837, there were suggestions
of merger between the Unitarian association and what remained of the Christian
Connection, in order to establish a new liberal theological school. It was discussed
but never consummated. Ultimately they
again adopted a denominational identity, calling themselves the Christian Church.
Still later, in 1931, they merged with the part of the Congregational Church,
adopting the name Congregational Christian Church. Another merger followed in
1957, this time with the Evangelical and Reformed Church, to produce the United
Church of Christ. Just like the Stonites, the final result seems to have been the extinction
of their Unitarian theology. At the same time,
their once powerful witness to simple nondenominational Christianity without formal
creeds, has also been lost. THE SPIRITUAL "SPIN-OFF" Although those who
followed the path of merger were eventually completely absorbed, losing all distinctive
theological identity in the process, there were other developments which are of
interest to many of us who clearly owe our 20th century theological heritage to
the developments reported in this paper. Out of the Campbellite
movement came Dr. John Thomas, founder of the Christadelphians. Out of the same
movement came Benjamin Wilson, translator of the Emphatic Diaglott, who was originally
baptised by John Thomas, but who was a leader amongst those who became the Church
of God of the Abrahamic Faith. Out of the Christian
Connection came Joseph Marsh, another forefather of the Church of God of the Abrahamic
Faith. There is no doubt
of the commonality of origin of the Christadelphians and the Church of God. The
three men just named above, knew each other well. (and between John Thomas and
the other two, divisive warfare developed much too well!) Without attempting to
apportion blame or record the details of the disagreements which led them to walk
separate paths, we simply note the role they played in the parallel development
of the two remarkably similar Churches to which many of us now owe our own Spiritual
heritage. However it is perhaps
much too simplistic to attribute to any of these three, the sole responsibility
for the developments associated with their names. There were certainly others
whose names are less well known. In the U.S.A. there
seem to have been a number of individuals, as well as independent and isolated
groups, who were probably never part of either the Christian Connection, or the
Campbellites. Some may have held back from association from the beginning. Others
may have been dissatisfied and left afterwards. For some it may have been the
constraint of geography. The fact is that
from amongst all of the religious turmoil of the times, men of like minds about
their faith in the One True God, did gravitate to one another and these two Churches
did emerge, complete with their unique doctrine. BIBLICAL UNITARIANISM
IN THE 1990S This paper is NOT
intended as a record of "Apostolic Succession"! Nor is it a claim
that the Polish Brethren would have accepted us all (or we them) without at least
some questions. There are important differences on other matters. It is, however,
the product of several years of searching for the "Spiritual Roots"
from which came my own faith in the ONE LORD of Moses ..... who is also the God
and Father of Jesus. In particular, it
answers to some degree at least, my long held question about where the early founders
of the Christadelphians and the Church of God, learnt their unique Unitarian theology. Of course they did
find it in the Bible, but whether directly or indirectly, it also seems to stem
from the influence of the Polish Brethren and their Racovian Catechism. It may be that these
19th century men in America never heard of the document itself. However, it would
have been virtually impossible for any of them not to have encountered the Unitarian
controversy of their day. That can certainly be traced, at least indirectly, to
Racovian influences. There is a similarity of language in their writings which
seems beyond the limits of mere coincidence. Instead of rejecting it they have
searched the scriptures and believed. Their spiritual
descendants exist today. I count myself amongst the many who owe their spiritual
heritage to the work of these men, from the 16th century, down to our own time. BIBLIOGRAPHY This supplement
to Bible Digest Number 49 lists the various sources in which I found the
condensed history contained in that paper. Much of it is now out of print and
probably hard to locate, especially the sources mentioned for the history of
the Disciples of Christ. In particular, I express my thanks to Don Prout, who
kindly lent me most of those references which deal specifically with the
history of the Disciples, from his own personal collection. Update November
2001 A supplementary
list has been appended which includes new sources found since the original
paper was written in 1994. SOURCES
CONSULTED UP TO 1994
NEW SOURCES
FOUND AND CONSULTED SINCE 1994 (This
section added November/December 2001)
A
year 2001 retype of this document is available Online at:
Note -- this is long out of print and was prohibitively
expensive second hand -- but the local Public Library was able to arrange an
Inter-library loan from the State Public Library of Victoria. Books 6 & 7 of
“The Errors of the Trinity”, were found online at in 2001 but are no longer
available at this site: http://members.aol.com/Servetus85/BookVI.htm A new search in 2024
found all books in this pdf:
Footnote 1. The two books by Ruth McHaffie contain a devastating
exposure of a very large number of serious inaccuracies in Alan Eyre's two
books. Ruth's conclusions indicate the need for great care about using Alan's
works as source material for serious history study. Note
- September 2002 This
is a slightly revised copy of the original paper written in August 1994. A
note has been added on page 5 to reflect some updated information about the belief
of John Biddle regarding the Holy Spirit. Another note has been added to point
to the URL for Biddle's Catechism on the Internet. There
have been a few relatively minor changes to editorial detail which do not affect
the history. |