Rational Dissenters in Late Eighteenth-Century England: ‘An Ardent Desire of Truth’

In 1743 John Wesley addressed An Earnest Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion, adding a three-part Farther Appeal in 1745. Noting the contemporary absorption in the relationship between reason and religion, Valerie Smith’s detailed and compelling study explores a group of Dissenters—women as well as men—as committed as Wesley to the dialogue, but whose conclusions persuaded them to move away from Dissenting Orthodoxy into beliefs stigmatized by opponents as heresy or heterodoxy, but increasingly named by themselves as ‘Rational Dissent’—a term embracing Arianism, Socinianism, and explicit Unitarianism. The focus of Dr Smith’s research is the period from 1770 to 1800, and she argues that these years saw increasingly strident antagonism to Rational Dissent, particularly in the wake of the American and French revolutions. This had the effect of clarifying identity in the face of vigorous press and pulpit polemics and occasional mob violence; it also encouraged Orthodox Dissenters to emphasize their contrasting commitment to traditional creeds and formulae. She demonstrates that fidelity to private judgement ensured that Rational Dissenters displayed considerable diversity of opinion, and that taking Richard Price and Joseph Priestley as typical of all is unwarranted. And she affirms that theological convictions, not political principles, were the primary drivers of attitudes to Crown, Church, and State, leading to support for limited monarchy, electoral reform, and the abolition of religious tests. This case is made through a careful and nuanced reading of primary and printed sources, reviewing the works of High Church divines and Orthodox Dissenters, as well as the Rational Dissenters’ endeavours to defend and enunciate their views. It may be noted here that the list in appendix 1 (221–31) of authors attacking Arianism and Socinianism also includes some Evangelicals and Wesleyans—Joseph Benson, John Fletcher, John Newton, and Thomas Scott. Smith also tabulates and analyses subscription lists for books and institutions (appendix 2, 232–58), and develops a biographical register of Rational Dissenters (appendix 3, 259–72). This rich prosopographical material adds depth to the thesis, moving the characterization of Rational Dissent away from a narrow emphasis on Price and Priestley, or definition by polemic, and opening up what Alan Sell called the ‘hinterland theology’ of a much more varied group of individuals, in networks of correspondence and connection reaching from Plymouth to Newcastle, as well as the better-known centres of Manchester, Birmingham, and London. The last section of the book considers the appeal of Rational Dissent, noting attempts—mostly unsuccessful—to reach the poorer and less-educated groups in society. Smith also looks beyond 1800, tracing the eclipse of Arianism and the development of a more assertive Unitarian movement, with regional societies, meetings, and funds. Rational Dissenters in Late Eighteenth-Century England is built upon an impressive body of research, evidenced in the footnotes and in a bibliography that runs to almost fifty pages. Sadly, Valerie Smith did not live to see its publication: her brother, David Hopkins, and her supervisor, Grayson Ditchfield, prepared her material for the press. This fine study will surely justify their hope to offer a suitable memorial to a dedicated and gifted scholar.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.