XVI. SECT. III.

PART II.

reason, to which, of consequence, they attribute CENT. a great influence in determining the nature, and unfolding the various doctrines of religion.. When their writings are perused with attention, they will be found to attribute more to reason, in this matter, than most other Christian societies. For they frequently insinuate artfully, nay sometimes declare plainly, that the sacred penmen were guilty of several mistakes, from a defect of memory, as well as a want of capacity: that they expressed their sentiments without either perspi cuity or precision, and rendered the plainest things obscure by their pompous and diffuse Asiatic style; and that it was therefore absolutely necessary to employ the lamp of human reason to cast a light upon their doctrine, and to explain it in a manner conformable to truth. It is easy to see what they had in view by maintaining propositions of this kind. They aimed at nothing less than the establishment of the following general rule, viz. That the history of the Jews and of Jesus Christ was indeed to be derived from the books of the Old and New Testament, and that it was not lawful to entertain the least doubt concerning the truth of this history, and the authenticity of these books in general; but that the particular doctrines which they contain, were, nevertheless, to be understood and explained in such a manner as to render them conformable to the dictates of reason. According to this representation of things, it is not the Holy Scripture, which declares clearly and expressly what we are to believe concerning the nature, counsels, and perfections of the Deity; but it is human reason, which shews us the system of religion that we ought to seek in, and deduce from, the divine oracles.

rous conse

XVI. This fundamental principle of Socinian- The dangeism will appear more dangerous and pernicious, when we consider the sense in which the word this princi

L13

quences of

Reason ple

PART II.

CENT. Reason was understood by this sect. The pompous XVI. title of Right Reason was given, by the Socinians, SECT. III. to that measure of intelligence and discernment, or, in other words, to that faculty of comprehending and judging, which we derive from nature. According to this definition, the fundamental rule of the Socinians necessarily supposes, that no doctrine ought to be acknowledged as true in its nature, or divine in its origin, all whose parts are not level to the comprehension of the human understanding; and that, whatever the Holy Scriptures teach concerning the perfections of God, his counsels and decrees, and the way of salvation, must be modified, curtailed, and filed down, in such a manner, by the transforming power of art and argument, as to answer the extent of our limited faculties. Those who adopt this singular rule, must at the same time, grant that the number of religions must be nearly equal to that of individuals. For as there is a great variety in the talents and capacities of different persons, so what will appear difficult an abstruse to one, will seem evident and clear another; and thus the more discerning and penetrating will adopt as divine truth, what the slow and superficial will look upon as unintelligible jargon. This consequence does not at all alarm the Socinians, who suffer their members to explain, in very different ways, many doctrines of the highest importance, and permit every one to follow his particular fancy in composing his theological system, provided they acknowledge, in general, the truth and authenticity of the history of Christ, and adhere to the precepts the Gospel lays down for the regulation of our lives and actions.

The sum

stance of

XVII. In consequence of this leading maxim, and sub- the Socinians either reject without exception, or Socinian change and accommodate to their limited capacities, all those doctrines relating to the nature of

ism.

God

J

t

SECT. III.

PART II.

God and of Jesus Christ, the plan of redemp- CENT. tion, and the eternal rewards and punishments XVI. unfolded in the Gospel, which they either cannot comprehend, or consider as attended with considerable difficulties. The sum of their theology is as follows: "God, who is infinitely more "perfect than man, though of a similar na"ture in some respects, exerted an act of that power by which he governs all things; in consequence of which an extraordinary person was "born of the Virgin Mary. That person was "Jesus Christ, whom God first translated to "heaven by that portion of his divine power, "which is called the Holy Ghost; and having in"structed him fully there in the knowledge of his "will, counsels, and designs, sent him again into "this sublunary world, to promulgate to man"kind a new rule of life, more excellent than that "under which they had formerly lived, to propa' gate divine truth by his ministry, and to con"firm it by his death.

"Those who obey the voice of this Divine "Teacher (and this obedience is in the power "of every one whose will and inclination leads "that way), shall one day be clothed with new "bodies, and inhabit eternally those blessed re"gions, where God himself immediately resides. "Such, on the contrary, as are disobedient and "rebellious, shall undergo most terrible and ex"quisite torments, which shall be succeeded by "annihilation, or the total extinction of their "being."

The whole system of Socinianism, when stripped of the embellishments and commentaries with which it has been loaded and disguised by its doctors, is really reducible to the few propositions now mentioned.

XVIII. The nature and genius of the Socinian The moral theology has an immediate influence upon

L14

the doctrine of moral nians.

the Soci

CENT. moral system of that sect, and naturally leads its XVI. doctors to confine their rules of morality and vir, PART II. tue to the external actions and duties of life. On

SECT. III.

the one hand, they deny the influence of a divine spirit and power upon the minds of men; and on the other, they acknowledge, that no mortal has such an empire over himself as to be able to suppress or extinguish his sinful propensities and cor. rupt desires. Hence they have no conclusion left, but one, and that is, to declare all such true and worthy Christians, whose words and external actions are conformable to the precepts of the Di vine law. It is, at the same time, remarkable, that another branch of their doctrine leads directly to the utmost severity in what relates to life and manners, since they maintain, that the great end of Christ's mission upon earth was to exhibit to mortals a new law, distinguished from all others by its unblemished sanctity and perfection. Hence it is, that a great number of the Socinians have fallen into the fanatical rigour of the ancient Anabaptists, and judged it absolutely unlawful to repel injuries, to take oaths, to inflict capital punishments on malefactors, to oppose the despotic proceedings of tyrannical magistrates, to acquire wealth by honest industry, and other things of that nature. But, in this, there is something extremely singular, and they are here, indeed, inconsistent with themselves. For while, in matters of doctrine, they take the greatest liberty with the expressions of Scripture, and pervert them in a violent manner, to the defence of their peculiar tenets, they proceed quite otherwise, when they come to prescribe rules of conduct from the precepts of the Gospel; for then they understand these precepts literally, and apply them without the least distinction of times, per, sons, and circumstances.

XIX. It

XVI. SECT. III.

XIX. It must carefully be observed, that the CENT. Catechism of Racow, which most people look upon as the great standard of Socinianism, and as an ac- PART II. curate summary of the doctrine of that sect, is, in reality, no more than a collection of the popular The Catetenets of the Socinians, and by no means a just a chism of representation of the secret opinions and sentiments of their doctors [9]. The writings, therefore, of these learned men must be perused with attention, in order to our knowing the hidden reasons and true principles from whence the doctrines of the Catechism are derived. It is observable, besides, that, in this Catechism, many Socinian tenets and institutions, which might have contributed to render the sect still more odious, and to expose its internal constitution too much to public view, are entirely omitted; so that it seems to have been less composed for the use of the Socinians them, selves, than to impose upon strangers, and to mitigate the indignation which the tenets of this community had excited in the minds of many [r]. Hence it never obtained, among the Socinians, the authority of a public confession or rule of faith; and hence the doctors of that sect were authorised to correct and contradict it, or to substitute another form of doctrine in its place. It is also observable, that the most eminent writers and patrons of the Socinians, give no clear or consistent account of the sentiments of that sect in relation

[9] We have an account of the authors of this famous Catechism, and of the various success it met with, in the Commentatio de Catechesi Racoviensi, published by Jo. And. Schmidius, in the year 1707. See also Koechieri Biblioth. Theolog. Symbolica. A new edition of the Catechism itself, with a solid refutation of the doctrine it contains, was published in 8vo at Francfort and Leipsick, in the year 1739, by the learned George Lewis Oeder.

[r] This appears evident enough from their presenting a Latin translation of this Catechism to James I. king of Great Britain, and a German one to the academy of Wittemberg.