SOCINIANS. 



repugnant to thofe that have been generally entertained by 

 pcrfons called Calvinifts. Nothing, he fays, can be more 

 incompatible with each other, than a free pardon and fatis- 

 faftion. He adds, no man of judgment and piety ought to 

 entertain the idea of a fatisfaftion for fin ; fince it plainly 

 does very much derogate from the power and authority, or 

 goodnefs and mercy of God ; and though a propitiation be 

 not the fame thing as a fatisfaftion, and though God never 

 refrained from the punifltment of fin, on account of any 

 real fatisfadlion given him, yet it is certain, that in remit- 

 ting the punifliment of our fins by Jefus Chrilt no propitia- 

 tion intervened ; but God hath, from his free will, exhibited 

 himfelf fo propitious to us in Chriit, as not to exaft the 

 punifhment of our fins, though he might julUy have done it. 

 However, he allows not only that the death of Chrill, and 

 the pouring out of his blood for us, was an offering and 

 facrilice to God, but that this facrifice may be faid to have 

 been offered up for our fins in order to their being forgiven ; 

 yet he apprehended, that this facrifice, as far as it was ex- 

 piatory, was offerod by Chrift, not on the crofs, but in 

 heaven itfelf, after his refurreftion. To which purpofe he 

 obferves, that Chrift did not obtain eternal redemption for 

 us before he entered into the holy place, and tliere affamed 

 the priefV.iood ; and without a prielthood no expiatory offer- 

 ing could be made. 



Socini'.s does alfo exprefsly deny the diftinft perfonality 

 of the Holy Ghoft, underllanding by the Holy Spirit a 

 divine energy or influence. 



With refpcA to the nature and ftate of man, Socinus 

 thought, that the progenitor of our race was mortal, i. e. 

 liable to death, by reafon of his frame, and incapable of 

 exemption, without an exertion of the divine favour and 

 influence, which was not granted to him at creation ; and, 

 therefore, when the apoftle afferts, that by fin death entered 

 into the world, he meant not natural mortality, but the ne- 

 ceflity of dying, or eternal death. To this purpofe he ex- 

 plains himfelf: Adam, if he had not finned, might have 

 been preferved from death by the kindnefs of God, though 

 naturally mortal; or, if he had died, have been rellored to 

 life, and made immortal. By his fin he did, as it were, re- 

 fufe to give himfelf and his pollerity this blefling ; and, 

 therefore, unlefs the favour of God be renewed to us, we 

 muft all die, and remain in the ffate of the dead. As to 

 the nature of the human foul, it feems to have been the 

 opinion of Socinus, that, after this life, it doth not fo fubfill 

 of itfelf, without the body, as to be capable of any reward 

 or punifhment, or any fenfations at all. To the queftion, 

 whether the firft man had any original righteoufnefs before 

 he finned \ Socinus replies, that if by original righteoufnefs 

 be meant fuch a condition that he could not fin, this cer- 

 tainly was not the ftate of Adam, as it is clear he did fin. 

 But if original righteoufnefs confilled in this, that his reafon 

 had the abfolute rule over his appetites and fenfes, and in- 

 variably directed them, then the opinion of thofe who afcribe 

 it to Adam is fupported by no argument : hence it fliould 

 feem from Adam's fall, tiiat there was no perfeft harmony 

 between them ; and that his appetites and fenfes had the 

 dominion over his reafon. If it be afked, fays Socinus, 

 whether there is original fin ? he anfwers, this is the fame as 

 the inquiry, whether men, when they are born, becanfe tney 

 derive their origin from Adam, have, on account of his fall, 

 contrafted any guilt or punifhment, or are obnoxious to 

 either ? Therefore, fince the confent of the will muft con- 

 ftitute guilt, and there can be no punifhment without ante- 

 cedent guilt, it feems not at all poffible that either of thefe 

 fhould pertain to a man when he is born, as he neither has, 

 nor could have before, any ufe of hie own will. If by ori- 



ginal fin be underftood certain innate deCres, or evil oon- 

 cupifcence in man, and a pronenefs to fin, this opinion So- 

 cinus denies, and labours to refute ; concluding upon the 

 whole, that there is no fuch thing as original fin, i. e. a taint 

 or pravity in confequence of the fin of the firft roan, necef- 

 farily produced, or by any means inflifted on the human 

 race ; and that no other evil neceffarily flows to all his pof- 

 terity from that firft tfanfgreffion, than by fome means or 

 other the iieceffity of dying ; not indeed through the in- 

 fluence of that tranfgreflion, but becaufe man, being na- 

 turally mortal, was on that account left by God to his own 

 natural mortality, and what was natural became ncceflary 

 as a punifhment on the offender ; confequently, they who 

 were born of him muft be born in the fame circumftances, 

 for he was deprived of nothing he naturally had or could 

 have. From reafoning on this fubjeft, Socinus concludes^ 

 that there is a freedom of will in man, and that the powers 

 of man are not fo few and feeble, but that he m2y, with the 

 afTiftancc of God, obey the divine law by the right ufe and 

 application of his powers. Divine affiftance he confiders as 

 external and internal ; and the latter, he fays, is twofold : 

 the one, when God bv fome means imprefleth on the heart 

 what he hath promiied to them that obey him ; and the 

 other, when he inftrufts and illuminates the mind rightly to 

 difcern his will, in thofe inftances which cannot be exprefsly 

 contained in his written word : however, this internal affift- 

 ance belongs onlv to thofe who have made good ufe of the 

 external. The doftrine of predellination Socinus abfolutely 

 denies, and he endeavours to account for the prefcience of 

 the Deity, without admitting that notion of his decrees, 

 which fome divines have adopted. On the head of juftifi- 

 cation, Socinus obferves, that God out of his mere mercy 

 juflifies us, i. e. pronounces us righteous, and grants us for- 

 givenefs of fins, and eternal life ; but he requireth from us, 

 before this be done, that we believe in Chrift, /'. e. confide 

 in and obey him ; and our good works, or the obedience we 

 render to Chrilt, though not the efficient or meritorious 

 caufe, are the fine qua non, or indifpenfable pre-requifite of 

 our juftification before God, and eternal falvation. But if 

 any Ihould deviate from this obedience, by falling into fin, 

 and continuing therein, they ceafe to be jutlified ; never- 

 thelefs, by repentance and amendment of life, they may be 

 juftified again : but this fecond repentance, he fays, is not 

 in our power, God granting an ability for it to whom he 

 pleafeth. 



Socinus denied the perpetuity of baptifm, as an ordinance 

 in tiie church, alleging that it was not prefcribed for thofe 

 who in any other way have publicly given their names to 

 Chrift, or from their earlieft years have been educated in the 

 Chriltian difcipline ; or if it is to be retained in thefe days, 

 he apprehends it fhould be retained principally on account 

 of thofe who have been converted from other religions to the 

 Chriftian. He farther thought, that, in order to the right 

 adminiftration of baptifm, it is previoufly neceflary that the 

 baptized perfon fhould be a believer, and he, therefore, 

 reckoned the practice of infant baptifm unfcriptural and 

 erroneous. 



After this compendious abftraft of the chief theological 

 ' fentiments of Socinus, it is proper to obferve, that, accord- 

 ing to the ufual manner of fpeaking, all are denominated 

 Socinians, whofe opinions bear a certain affinity to the 

 fyftem of Socinus : but, in a ftrift and proper fenfe, they 

 only are deemed the members of this feft, who embrace 

 wholly, or with few exceptions, the form of theological 

 doftrine, which Socinus either drew up himfelf, or received 

 from his uncle, and delivered to the Unitarian brethren, or 

 Socinians, in Poland and Tranfylvania. Their fentiments 



are 





