

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 



Doci 



maintained 

 by 7.uin- 



(tlr.n. 



The Soci- 

 Unbcraj. 



FerfMixri- greater appearance of reason, " that the body and blood 

 '' **? of Christ were not really present in the eucharist ; and 

 "V"' that the bread and wine were no more than external 

 signs or symbol*, intended to excite in the minds of 

 Christi.. :vi!ce ol' the sufferings and death 



of the divine Saviour, and of the U-nefits which result 

 from his heavenly int> the names of 



Luther and /uingliux. as leaders in this mysterious con 

 troversy, we must not t'.iil to mention that of the cele- 

 brated Calvin. This last reformer was not a whit be- 

 hind the greatest of his cotemporarics in activity and 

 real. He maintained, however, a doctrine apparently 

 intermediate betwe< -i that of I.uther and the opinion of 

 /uingliiis ; though it is not to be denied, that, upon 

 .bject. he expressed himself with such an extra- 

 ordinary diversity, and even ambiguity of phrase, as 

 renders it difficult or impossible to ascertain what his 

 real sentiments were. Upon the whole, the opinion of 

 C'alvin seems to have been, that Christ was " xpirilua/ly 

 present " in the eucharist ; or, in other words, that as 

 our blessed Saviour, according to the promise which 

 he made to his disciples, is present with them, when- 

 ever two or three of them are met together, so he is 

 more immediately and effectually present, when they 

 approach him in the solemn service of the Supper. 



About the middle and towards the close of the six- 

 teenth century, the heresy of the Socinians began to 

 appear in different parts of Europe, and especially in 

 Poland. This heresy derives its name from its chief 

 patrons, I.ivlius and Faustus Socinus : the former, a 

 man of considerable learning as well as aeuteness ; the 

 latter, distinguished by his resolution and his prudence. 

 The heresy in question may be regarded as an exten- 

 sion of the Arian doctrine, respecting the nature and the 

 person of Christ, his inherent dignity, and the wor- 

 ship which is paid to him. Arius, indeed, went no far- 

 ther than maintaining, that there was a time hid in the 

 depths of eternity, when the Son of God did not exist; 

 ^ocinus and his followers contended, that he had no ex- 

 istence at all, previous to his miraculous conception in 

 the womb of the virgin. Arius regarded our Saviour 

 as the creator of the visible world ; Socinus acknow- 

 ledged him only as a messenger from heaven, and a 

 true prophet In a word, the Polish sectaries main- 

 tained, that Christ, in his nature or essence, was a 

 man, and nothing more, (iJ/iXe; ctyf^vrot ) ; but, with a 

 strange inconsistency, they allowed that he was pro- 

 duced by extraordinary and heavenly generation ; and 

 that it was incumbent on all Christians to address him 

 as an object of worship. They denied the plenary in- 

 spiration of the sacred books, and rejected the person- 

 ality of the Holy Ghost. The tenets of the Socinians 

 are fully set forth in the Racovian catechism ; and their 

 interpretations of Scripture are to be found at large in 

 the complete collection of their writings, entitled, the 

 B:bli<thiC:i Fralrum Polunorum. " The ancient cate- 

 chism," says Mosheim, " which was no more than a 

 rude and incoherent sketch, was laid aside, and a new 

 form of doctrine was drawn up by Soeinus himself. 

 This form was corrected by some, augmented by others, 

 and revised by all the Socinian doctors of any note ; 

 and. having thus acquired a competent degree of accu- 

 racy and perfection was published under the title of 

 the " Catechism of Racow," and is still considered as 

 the Cotifati'm of Failh of the whole sect." 



In later times, a certain modification of the Socini- 

 an doctrine was proposed by Dr Priestley, and repre- 

 sented, in his numerous writings, as the only doctrine 

 Contained in the sacred books. More daring thai; the 



first p-iinnn of the cause, the modern heresiarch de- RcclctUtti- 

 dares tli.it .le-us Christ i- a man in c\n-y scir-e of the ' ' Uutory. 

 word, born of Joseph and Mary, in the way of ordi- """" 



nary generation ; that he was put to death, as sonic of ^"edi 

 the a|xtlcs and early Christians were, in consequence K V . 

 of the hatred and the power of his enemies ; and tluit 

 he is to be distinguished from the primitive pre.ichers 

 of our religion, only by the circumstances of rising 

 from the dead, and of presiding at the gener ,1 jn.! :- 

 ment. l)r Priestley likewise contended, and with per- 

 fect consistency, th.it every act of worship addressed 

 to Jesus is an act of idolatry ; disregarding, as it ap- 

 pears, the prayer of the holy martyr Stephi n. when 

 expiring under the fury of his perMCOfcjn. In con- 

 junction with their predecessors, the patrons of the 

 new doctrine deny the plenary inspiration of the sa- 

 cred writings ; tind out, with a discernment not very 

 Citsily communicated to their disciples, what passages 

 we are to reject, and what portions we are hound to re- 

 ceive ; and even venture to affirm, without awe or con- 

 cern, that they have detected the great apostle of the 

 Gentiles " in reasoning inconclusively." The modern 

 system, too, is coupled with certain philosophical and 

 recondite speculations, about the materiality of the hu- 

 man soul, and the necessity of moral actions ; and, 

 when its parts are taken together, or put into juxtapo- 

 sition, it forms, beyond all question, the most extra- 

 ordinary phenomenon which the theology of the eigh- 

 teenth century can produce. The antagonists of Dr 

 Priestley, were, Dr Price, in the philosophical depart- 

 ment, and Dr Horsley, bishop of St Asaph, in the 

 critical and historical ; and the htter, in particular, is 

 understood to have established the primitive or Xicene 

 faith, with singular and tremendous ability, and with 

 triumphant suec 



The third and last heresy which we shall mention, is Arminian- 

 that which derives its name from Arminius. It is mere- um. 

 ly a less repulsive form of the doctrine proposed in the 

 fifth century by Pelagius, a man once famous in the 

 estimation of the learned, but now so far moved from 

 his place, and clouded in the lustre of his reputation, 

 that no country of Europe contends with our native 

 island, for the honour of his birth. He is the father of 

 the sect denominated Pelagians. Arrainius, whom we 

 have just mentioned as adopting, with some variety, 

 the tenets of this sect, was the disciple of Beza, and 

 professor of divinity at Leyden. In a controversial 

 point of view, he is to be considered as the antagonist 

 of Calvin ; and he is justly recorded as the first who 

 attacked the theology of Geneva with any measure 

 of success. The tenets of Arminius were solemnly 

 condemned in a synod, which met at Dort in the 

 year 16)8. They are usually called the ' five Armi- 

 nian points ;" and the doctrine contained in them is 

 expressed in the following propositions. The Armi- 

 nian sectaries hold, 1. That God, from all eternity, has 

 determined to bestow salvation on those only, with re- 

 gard to whom he has foreseen, that they will persevere 

 unto the end in their faith in Christ Jesus ; and to in- 

 flict everlasting punishments upon those who shall con- 

 tinue in their unbelief, and resist unto the end his di- 

 vine succours ; so that election is conditional, and re- 

 probation, in like manner, the result of foreseen infide- 

 lity and persevering wickedness. 2. That Jesus Christ, 

 by his sufferings and death, has made an atonement for 

 the sins of all mankind in general, and of every indivi- 

 dual in particular : but that none, excepting those who 

 believe in him, can be partakers of this divine benefit. 

 3. TUat truefaHh cannot proceed from the exercise of 



