with scholastic terms nor subtile discussions; but C EN T. it nevertheless breathes, in several places, the

XVI. SECT. III.

spirit PART II.

be

binczyck, which he undoubtedly derived from Turobin, a town in the Palatinate of Chelm, in Little, or Red Russia, which was the place of his nativity. The author of this Catechism was the famous George Schoman, as has been evidently proved from a piece entitled, Schomanni Testamentum (2), and other circumstances, by Jo. Adam Mullerus, in his Dissert. De Unitariorum Carachesi et Confessione omnium (3). The Preface, which is composed in the name of the whole congregation, begins with the following salutation: "To all those who thirst after eternal salvation, the little and afflicted flock in Poland, which is baptized in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, sendeth greeting: praving most earnestly that grace and peace may shed upon them by the one supreme God and Father, through his only begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified" (4). After this general salutation, the Prefacers give an account of the reasons that engaged them to compose and publish this Confession. The principal of these reasons was, the reproaches and aspersions that were cast upon the Anabaptists, in several places; from which we learn, that, at this time, the denomination of Anabaptists was given to those, who, in after times, were called Socinians. The rest of this Preface is em ployed in beseeching the reader to be firmly persuaded, that the designs of the congregation are pious and upright, to read with attention, that he may judge with discernment, and "abandoning the doctrine of Babylon, and the conduct and conversation of Sodom, to take refuge in the ark of Noah," i. e. among the Unitarian Brethren.

In the beginning of the Catechism itself, the whole doctrine of Christianity is reduced to six points. The first relates to the Nature of God, and his son Jesus Christ; the second to Justification; the third to Discipline; the fourth to Prayer; the fifth to Baptism; and the sixth to the Lord's Supper. These six points are explained at length, in the following manner: Each point is defined and unfolded, in general terms, in one question and answer, and is afterwards subdivided into its several branches in various questions and answers, in which its different parts are illustrated, and confirmed by texts of Scripture. From

(2) This testament is published by Sandius in his Bibliotheca Anti-Trin. p. 51.

(3) The Dissertation of Mollerus is to be found in a collection of pieces published by Bartholomæus under the following title: "Fortgezten nutzlichen Ammerckungen von allerhand Materien," part. xxi. p. 758.

(4) Omnibus salutem æternam fitientibus, gratiam ac pacem ab uno illo altissimo Deo patre, per unigenitum ejus filium, Dominum nostrum, Jesum Christum crucifixum, ex animo precatur coetus exiguus et afflictus per Po Joniam, in nomine ejusdem Jesu Christi Nazareni baptizatus.

XVI.

CEN T.spirit of Socinianism, and that even in those parts of it which its authors look upon as most import

SECT. III.

PART II.

ant

From this it appears, at first sight, that the primitive state of
Socinianism was a state of real infancy and weakness,that its doc-
tors were, by no means distinguished by the depth or accuracy
of their theological knowledge, and that they instructed their
flock in a superficial manner, by giving them only some vague
notions of certain leading doctrines and precepts of religion. In
their definition of the Nature of God, with which this Catechism
begins, the authors discover immediately their sentiments concern-
ing Jesus Christ, by declaring that he together with all other
things, is subject to the Supreme Creator of the universe. It
may also be observed, as a proof of the ignorance or negligence
of these authors, that, in illustrating the nature and perfections
of the Deity, they make not the least mention of his infinity,
his omniscience, his immensity, his eternity, his omnipotence,
his omnipresence, his spirituality, nor of those other perfections
of the divine nature that surpass the comprehension of finite
minds. Instead of this they characterize the Supreme Being
only by his wisdom, his immortality, his goodness, and un-
bounded dominion and empire ever the creatures.
By this
it would seem, that, even in this early period of Socinian-
ism, the rulers of that sect had adopted it as a maxim,
that nothing incomprehensible or mysterious was to be admit
ted into their religious system.-Their erroneous notion con-
cerning Jesus Christ is expressed in the following terms: "Our
mediator before the throne of God is a man who was formerly
promised to our fathers by the prophets, and in these latter
days was born of the seed of David, and whom God the Father
has made Lord and Christ, that is, the most perfect prophet,
the most holy priest, and the most triumphant king, by whom
he created the new world (5), by whom he has sent peace upon
earth, restored all things and reconciled them to himself; and
by whom also he has bestowed eternal life upon his elect; to
the end that, after the supreme God, we should believe in him,
adore and invoke him, hear his voice, imitate his example, and
find in him rest to our souls" (6). It is here worthy of note,

that

(<) This expression is remarkable; for these doctors maintained, that these declarations of Scripture, which represent the world as formed by Christ, do not relate to the visible world, but to the restoration of mankind to virtue and happiness by the Son of God. They invented this interpretation to prevent their being obliged to acknowledge the divine glory and creating power of Christ.

(6) Est homo, mediator noster apud Deure, patribus olim per prophetas promissus, et ultimis tandem temporibus ex Davidis semine natus, quem Deus pater fecit Dominum et Christum, hoc est, perfectissimum prophetam, sanctis raum, sacerdotem, invictissimum regem, per quem mundurm creavit, omnia restauravit, secum reconciliavit, pacificavit, et vitam æternam clectis suis donavit: ut in illum, post Deum altissimum, credamus, ilJum adoremus, invocemus, audiamus, pro modulo nostro imitamur, et, in illo, requiem animabus nostris inveniamus.

XVI.

ant and fundamental. Nor will this appear sur-CENT. prising to those who consider, that the papers of SECT. III.

LELIUS PART II.

"The

that although they call Christ a most holy priest, and justify this
title by citations from Scripture, yet they no where explain the
nature of that priesthood, which they attribute to him.-With
respect to the Holy Ghost, they plainly deny his being a divine
person, and represent him as nothing more than a divine quali-
ty, or virtue, as appears from the following passage:
Holy Ghost is the energy or perfection of God, whose fulness
God the Father bestowed upon his only begotten Son, our
Lord, that we, becoming his adopted children, might receive
of his fulness" (7).-They express their sentiments concerning
Justification in the ensuing terms: "Justification consists in the
remission of all our past sins, through the mere grace and mer-
cy of God, in and by our Lord Jesus Christ, without our me-
rits and works, and in consequence of a lively faith, as also in
the certain hope of life eternal, and the true and unfeigned a-
mendment of our lives and conversations, through the assistance
of the divine Spirit, to the glory of God the Father, and the e-
dification of our neighbours" (8). As by this inaccurate de-
finition justification comprehends in it amendment and obedience,
so in the explication of this point our authors break in upon the
following one, which relates to Discipline, and lay down a short
summary of moral doctrine, which is contained in a few precepts,
and expressed for the most part in the language of Scripture.
There is this peculiarity in their moral injunctions, that they
prohibit the taking of oaths and the repelling of injuries. As
to what regards Ecclesiastical Discipline, they define it thus :
Ecclesiastical discipline consists in calling frequently to the
remembrance of every individual, the duties that are incumbent
upon them in admonishing, first privately, and afterwards, if
this be ineffectual, in a public manner before the whole congre-
gation, such as have sinned openly against God, or offended their
neighbour; and, lastly, in excluding from the communion of
the church the obstinate and impenitent, that, being thus cover-
ed with shame, they may be led to repentance, or, if they remain
unconverted, may be damned eternally" (9). By their further
explication

(7) Spiritos sanctus est virtus Dei, cujus plenitudinem dedit Deus pater filio suo unigenito, Domino nostro, ut ex ejus plenitudine nos adoptivi acciperemus.

(8) Justificatio est ex mera gratia, per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, sine operibus et meritis nostris, omnium 'præteritorum peccatorium no trorum in viva fide remissio, vitæque æternæ indubitata expectatio et auxilio spiritus Dei vitæ nostræ non simulata, sed vera correctio, ad gloriam Dei patris nostri et ædificationem proximorum nostrorum.

(9) Disciplina ecclesiastica est officii singulorum frequens commemora, tio et peccantiam contra Deum vel proximum primum privata, deinde etiam publica, coram toto cœtu, commonefactio, denique pertinacium a communione sanctorum alienatio, ut pudore suffusi convertantur, aut, si iề polint, æternum damnentur.

CENT. LELIUS SOCINUS, which he undoubtedly left SECT. III. behind him in Poland, were in the hands of many; PART II. and that, by the perusal of them, the Arians, who

XVI.

had formerly the upper hand in the community of the Unitarians, were engaged to change their sentiments concerning the nature and mediation of CHRIST.

explication of the point relating to ecclessiastical discipline, we 'see how imperfect and incomplete their notions of that matter were. For they treat in the first place, concerning the government of the church and its ministers, whom they divide into bishops, deacons, elders, and widows. After this they enumerate, at length, the duties of husbands and wives, old and young, parents and children, masters and servants, citizens and magi. strates, poor and rich; and conclude with what relates to the admonishing of offenders, and their exclusion from the communion of the church, in case of obstinate im penitence. Their sentiments concerning Prayer, are, generally speaking, sound and rational. But in their notion of Baptism, they differ from other Christian churches in this, that they make it to consist in immersion or dipping, and emersion or rising again out of the water, and maintain that it ought not to be administered to any but adult persons." Baptism, say they, is the immersion into water, and the emersion of one who believes in the gospel, and is truly penitent, performed in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or in the name of Jesus Christ alone; by which solemn act the person baptized publicly acknowledgeth, that he is cleansed from all his sins, through the mercy of God the Father, by the blood of Christ, and the operation of the Holy Spirit, to the end that, being ingrafted into the body of Christ, he may mortify the old Adam, and be transformed into the image of the new and heavenly Adam, in the firm assurance of eternal life after the resurrection." (10). The last point handled in this performance is the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, of which the authors give an explication that will be readily adopted by those who embrace the doctrine of Zuingle on that head. At the end of this curious Catechism there is a piece entitled, "Oeconomia Christiana, seu Pastoratus Domesticus," which contain a short instruction to heads of families, shewing them how they ought to proceed in order to maintain and increase in their houses a spirit of piety; in which also their devotion

(10) Baptismus est hominis Evangelio credentis et pænitentiam agentis in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, vel in nomine Jesu Christi in' aquam immersio et emersio, qua publice profitetur, se gratia Dei Patris, in sanguine Christi, opera Spiritus Sancti, ab omnibus peccatis ablutum esse, ut, in corpus Christi insertus, mortificet veterem Adamum et transformetur in Adamum illum cœlestum, certus, se post resurrectionem consequuturum esse vitam æternam

XVI.

CHRIST [a]. It is true, indeed, that the denomina-C EN T tion of Socinian was not as yet known. Those SECT. III. who were afterwards distinguished by this title, PART II. passed in Poland, at the time of which we now speak, under the name of Anabaptists, because they admitted to baptism adult persons only, and also rebaptized those that joined them from other Christian churches [b].

XI. The

devotion is assisted by forms of prayer, composed for morning, evening, and other occasions.

The copy of this Catechism, which is now before me, was given, in the year 1680, by Martin Chelmius, one of the most eminent and zealous Socinian doctors, to Mr Christopher Heiligmier, as appears by a long inscription, written by the donor, at the end of the book. In this inscription Chelmius promises his friend other productions of the same kind, provided he receives the present one kindly, and concludes with these words of St Paul; God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the strong.

[a] This appears evidently from the following passage in Schoman's Testamentum (published by Sandius, in his Biblioth. Anti-Trin.) p. 194, 195.. "Sub id fere témpus (A. 1566.) ex rhapsodiis Lælii Socini quidam fratres didicerunt, Dei filium non esse secundam Trinitatis personam, patri coëssentialem et coæqualem, sed hominum Jesum Christum, ex Spiritu Sancto conceptum, ex Virgine Maria natum, crucifixum, et resuscitatum a quibus nos commoniti, sacras literas perscrutari, persuasi sumus." These words shew plainly, that the Unitarians, or Pinczovians, as they were sometimes called, had, before their separation from the Reformed church in the year 1565, believed in a Trinity of some kind or other; and had not gone so far as totally to divest Jesus Christ of his divinity. Schoman, now cited, was a doctor of great authority in this sect; and he tells us, himself, that, at the diet of Petricow, in the year 1565, he defended the unity of God the Father against the Reformed, who maintained the existence of a threefold Deity. We learn nevertheless from himself, that it was not till the year 1566, that a perusal of the papers of Lælius Socinus had engaged him to change his sentiments, and to deny the divine personality of Christ. What then are we to conclude from hence? The conclusion is plainly this: that, before the year last mentioned, he and his Pinczovian flock were not Socinians, but Arians only.

[6] This the Unitarians acknowledge, in the Preface of their Catechism, as we have observed above; and it is con

firmed