1603. ] 
fend or to attack opinions, but merely to 
exhibit the Varietates Cantabrigia. 
XCV.—-ARIANS, SOCINIANS, NECESSA- 
RIANS, MATERIALSSTS, &c. 
The Arians are fo called from’ Arius, 
a Prefbyter! of Alexandria, in the fourth 
century. ‘Their doé¢trine is, that there is 
but one God, who is alone unbegotten, 
and that he begat his only fon Jelus 
Chrift, before eternal ages, by whom he 
made the ages and the world. 
They coniidered Chrit as the arft- begot- 
ten, and the only begotten fon of God, 
betore all creation, and formation of 
worlds, either vifible or invifible, eo 
Taons KiiCEwWS Kas Onperoupyias ogwprsing TE xas 
SOpaTou, TO GewTOV Kat provoY Te Gee yevynea 5 
thefe are Eufebius’s words. This was 
their capital doctrine. Of the Holy 
Ghoft they believed, that he proceeded 
from the Father and the Son, but was not 
co-eterna] with the Father, nor equal with 
the Son. Thefe doéirines, which are 
fometimes called the Eufebian, from Eu- 
febius, ftand oppofed to that of a Tri- 
nity in Unity, or the Athanafian doctrine, 
which is, that there are three Perfons in 
the Godhead, all unbegotten, and a]] un- 
created, God the Father, God the Son, 
and God the Holy Ghoft, and that thefe 
three are but one God. This latter, as 
every body knows, is the doctrine of the 
Church of England. 
The Socimians are fo called from Soci- 
nus, a learned Pole, who flourifhed in the 
r6th century ; they maintam that God is 
but one in the ftricteft fenfe of the word, 
tpfa Unitas; and that Jefus Chrift, though 
fent into the world for an extraordinary 
purpole, as a great prophet, was yet but 
a mere man, merus homo. Socinus’s wri- 
tings, together with thofe of his bre- 
thren, containing a body of Scripture 
Criticifms, are publifhed under the form 
of Opera Fratrum Polonorum. ‘They 
oppofe both the Arian, and Trinitarian 
hy pothefis. The Neceffarian holds, that 
“‘ man is a neceflary agent, ail his actions 
being determined by the caufes that pre- 
ceded them, fo that not one paft action 
could not have poffibly come to pals, nor 
one future action can poffibly not come 
to pals, or be otherwile, than it fhall be.” 
This definition is made by the late inge- 
nious Mr. Anthony Collins, who explains 
and vindicates the doctrine in his Philofo- 
phical Inquiry concerning Human Liberty. 
‘The Materialiits fuppofe, that man is 
not a complex being, compofed of two 
diftinct fubftances, body and fpirit, but 
of one fubftance, body, or fmatter ; mind 
keing, according to them, the effect of a 
Cantabrigiana. 
“419 
particular organization of matter. Dr. 
Hartley, formerly fellow of Jefus college, 
isthe great modern authority on thefe two 
laft doctrines. 
XCVI.—SIR ISAAC NEWTON. 
This prince of philofophers was chofen 
fellow of Trinity college im 1665, and 
was afterwards appointed Lucafian pro- 
feflor of mathematics in the univerfity. 
Mathematics, therefore, was his profeffion, 
but he poffefled a fondnefs for theology. 
The unity of God was the foundation 
of Newton’s theology. This idea he 
brought with him to the explication of 
the Chriftian dofrines. He became, there- 
fore, an Unitarian in the firicteft fenfe of 
the word, a Secinian. 
The pains which he took to prove 
1 John, v.7, THE THREE HEAVENLY 
WITNESSES, as the text is called,a ipu- 
rious paflage, would naturally lead Tri 
nitarians to fuppofe, that he, at leaft, was 
not orthodox. But Bifhop Horfley, whe 
firt publifhed, in an edition of Newiton’s 
Works, his two poithumous letters, in 
which that text is oppofed, denies thas 
Newton was a Socinian: but here bifnop 
Horfley is certainly miftaken. 
A perfon of ftriét probity and refpeéta- 
bility, who lived on terms of the greateit 
intimacy with Sir Haac, which Horfley 
could not do, affures us, that he quas a So~ 
cinian and expreffed his fears, that Dr. 
Clarke, who had embraced the Arian by- 
pothefis; would injure the caufe of Chrif. 
tianity. The perfon here alluded to was 
Mr. Hopton Haynes, author of a mifcel 
Janeous work, under the title of, The 
Scripture Account of the Attributes and 
Worthip of God, and of the Charaéer 
and Offices of Jefus.Chrift.. Haynes was 
aflay-mafter of the mint, at the time that 
Newton was warden, 
Newton was alf>, in his private judg- 
ment, a Baptift, though not praétically fo; 
this he declared to a man of veracity, his 
deputy Lucafian-profeifor,, Mr. William 
Whifton, as may be feen in Whifton’s 
Memoirs, written by himfelf. 
Newton, therefore, though not an open 
oppugner of the church, was a filent dii- 
fentient ; a philofopher, who had a creed 
of his own, with which he did not perplex 
-the Univerfity. 
XCVII.—MR. WILLIAM WHISTON. 
Mr. William Whifton was Fellow of 
Clare Hall, deputy Lucafian Profeflor of 
Mathematics, while Newton heid tie of- 
fice, and his fucceffor in the Profeffor’s 
chair. He wroteon all fubjects, mathe- 
matics, aftronomy,chronology, hiftory, and 
theology. He allo tranflated Jofephus’s 
x Hiftorys 
