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. |